San Mateo City Council
June 15, 2026

The Applicant intends to designate 15 percent of the Project’s 153-unit base project (23 units) for Very Low income households as defined by State law and an additional 5 percent of the base project (8 units) for Moderate income households.

IV. Density Bonus Law
A. Eligibility for State Density Bonus Law Benefits
Because 15 percent of the Project’s 153-unit base project will be reserved for Very Low income households, the Project is eligible for a 50 percent density bonus, incentives/concessions, waivers or reductions of development standards, and specified parking standards pursuant to the State Density Bonus Law (“DBL”). (See Gov. Code, § 65915(b)(1)(B), (f)(2), (p).) Because an additional 5% of the base project will be Moderate income units, pursuant to California Government Code 65915(v)(1)(B), the Project is entitled to an additional 20 percent bonus for a total of a 70 percent bonus (261 units).The Project requests, a 51 percent density bonus, for a total of 232 units.

B. Waivers Under the State Density Bonus Law
The Project is entitled to unlimited waivers or reductions of development standards that will have the effect of physically precluding the construction of a development. (Gov. Code, § 65915(e)(1).) A “development standard” is defined broadly as “a site or construction condition, including, but not limited to, a height limitation, a setback requirement, a floor area ratio, an onsite open-space requirement, a minimum lot area per unit requirement, or a parking ratio that applies to a residential development pursuant to any ordinance, general plan element, specific plan, charter, or other local condition, law, policy, resolution, or regulation that is adopted by the local government or that is enacted by the local government’s electorate exercising its local initiative or referendum power, whether that power is derived from the California Constitution, statute, or the charter or ordinances of the local government.” (Gov. Code, § 65915(o)(2).) Government Code Section 65915(e)(1) provides, in part, that “in no case may a city, county, or city and county apply any development standard that will have the effect of physically precluding the construction of a development meeting the criteria of subdivision (b) at the densities or with the concessions or incentives permitted by this section.” The courts have broadly interpreted the right to waivers. (See Wollmer v. City of Berkeley (2011) 193 Cal.App.4th 1329, 1346–1347 [“Standards may be waived that physically preclude construction of a housing development meeting the requirements for a density bonus, period. [] The statute does not say that what must be precluded is a project with no amenities, or that amenities may not be the reason a waiver is needed.”)
“[A] city must offer a waiver or reduction of development standards that would have the effect of physically precluding the construction of a development at the density, or with 690 of 1101
Joanna Winter
May 18, 2026

the requested incentives, permitted by the Density Bonus Law. [] For example, if a city ordinance imposes a building height limitation, a city must waive that limitation for a development that is eligible for a density bonus if imposing the height limit would physically preclude construction of the proposed building with the requested incentives and at the density allowed by the Density Bonus Law. There are no financial criteria for granting a waiver.” (Bankers Hill 150 v. City of San Diego (2022) 74 Cal.App.5th 755, 770.) A city is strictly limited in denying requested waivers to circumstances where the waiver would have a specific, adverse impact on health or safety for which there is no feasible method to mitigate; or the waiver would have an adverse impact on any real property that is listed in the California Register of Historical Resources; or if granting the waiver would be contrary to state or federal law. (Gov. Code, § 65915(e).) Importantly, “none involves a determination that the Project could theoretically be redesigned to achieve the same density without the requested waivers.” (California Department of Housing and Community Development (“HCD”) November 12, 2024 Notice of Potential Violation to the City of Jurupa Valley.) As summarized by HCD, “appellate courts have established (and continue to affirm) that local agencies cannot lawfully redesign a qualifying SDBL project on the theory that if the project were configured differently, it would not need the requested incentives/ concessions and waivers. (Wollmer v. City of Berkeley, (2011) 193 Cal.App.4th 1329, 1346-47.) The City must consider the Project as proposed, inclusive of any requested concessions and waivers.” (HCD January 10, 2023 Letter of Technical Assistance to City of Oceanside.) HCD further explained:
… project applicants need not consider various alternatives that might be plausible on the site without concessions, incentives, or waivers. As the applicant provided reasonable documentation to establish eligibility for the waivers requested—in that it qualified for a density bonus and could not build the project as designed without them— the City must waive the development standards requested pursuant to Government Code section 65915, subdivision (e).
(HCD January 20, 2022 Notice of Violation to the City of Encinitas) [emphasis added].) While an applicant may be required to provide a basic explanation as to why a project is eligible to receive a waiver, an agency cannot require preparation of a supporting report or study. (HCD Notice of Violation to City of Encinitas, dated Mar. 25, 2021, at pp. 3–4 [“The Legislature was clear that no additional studies, reports, or analysis were to be required.”]; see Assembly Bill (“AB”) 1287, effective January 1, 2024 [amending Gov. Code § 65915(a)(2) to remove “incentives or concessions” and “waivers or reductions of development standards” from the list of items for which a local government may request reasonable documentation].) It is the City’s burden to demonstrate that the requested waivers should be denied. (Gov. Code § 65915(d)(4).)
691 of 1101
Joanna Winter
May 18, 2026

The Applicant requests waivers for the Project of the following development standards that would physically preclude construction of the Project at the proposed density, for the reasons set forth below. None of these waivers would have a specific, adverse impact on health or safety for which there is no feasible method to mitigate, have an adverse impact on any real property that is listed in the California Register of Historical Resource, or be contrary to state or federal law. The Applicant reserves the right to request additional waivers during processing of the formal development application for the Project.

GP and Zoning
Standard Requirement Proposed
Building Height
(Building Height is per
General Plan
§ 27.24.055)
This standard requires a 6 story
maximum height.

The project proposes 7 stories. This
exceeds the maximum height of 6
stories. A reduction in the number of
stories would result in the loss of units.

Front Yard Setback

27.22.070
The standard requires a minimum
15’ setback and buildings greater
than 3 stories require minimum
setback ½ the height of building.

The Project requests a waiver for a 9.5’
setback to property line. Increasing the
front setback would decrease the size
of the building and result in the loss of
units.

Side Yard Setback

27.22.080
The standard requires a minimum
setback of ½ height of building and
maximum required setback 25’.

The Project requests:

West side: 0’ proposed to subterranean
garage, 6.5’ to vertical building.

East Side: 4.5’ from subterranean
basement, 9.5’ to vertical building.

Increasing the side yard setback would
decrease the size of the building and
result in the loss of units.

Rear Yard Setback

27.22.090
The standard requires a minimum
setback of ½ height of building and
maximum required setback 25’.

The Project requests a 9.5’ setback to
property line on north side. Increasing
the rear yard setback would reduce the
size of the building and result in the
loss of units.

Open Space
Dimensions

27.22.100(b)
This standard requires at least 200
square feet of open space per
bedroom for the first bedroom in
each dwelling unit and 100 square
feet of open space for each
additional bedroom.

The Project requests a waiver of this
standard. The proposed balconies are
smaller than this standard and meeting
this standard would require decreasing
the size of the building and would
result in the loss of units.
692 of 1101
Joanna Winter
May 18, 2026

Standard Requirement Proposed
Open Space
Dimensions

27.22.100(c)
The required open space for each
ground floor dwelling unit must
have a minimum dimension 10' in
any direction
The Project requests a waiver of this
standard. The building includes ground
floor patios and balconies with
dimensions less than 10’. Increasing
the dimensions to 10’ or greater would
require decreasing the size of the
building and would result in the loss of
units.

Open Space
Dimensions

27.22.100(d)
This standard requires that
balconies be no less than 100
square feet with no dimension less
than 6’.

The building includes balconies that are
smaller than 100 SF and with
dimensions less than 6’. Increasing the
balcony dimensions to 6’ or greater and
balcony size to at least 100 SF would
require decreasing the size of the
building and would result in the loss of
units.

Parking Standard
3’ Clear
The City’s parking standards
require 3’ clear at the end of a
dead end aisle.

The Project provides approximately 2’
at the end of dead-end aisles. Providing
3’ at dead end aisles would require
increasing the size of the structured
parking which would intrude into, and
result in the loss of, residential units.

Parking Standard
Ramp
Drawing set 3.1.194 requires that
garage ramps be 24’ wide and 28’
wall to wall.

The Project requests a waiver for a 22’
wide garage ramp. Widening the ramp
to meet this standard would require an
additional approximately 6.5’ to 7’ feet
of ramp width, which would intrude
into, and result in the loss of, first and
second floor units.

Parking Standard
Width
Drawing set 3.1.191 requires that
standard parking stalls have a
width of 9’ and compact parking
stalls have a width of 8’.

The Project requests a waiver from the
9’ stall width standard. The majority of
the stalls are 8’ 6” with some as narrow
as 8’. Widening those stalls would
require increasing the size of the
structured parking which would intrude
into, and result in the loss of, residential
units
693 of 1101
Joanna Winter
May 18, 2026

Objective Design Standards
Standard Requirement Proposed
ODS 4.1.4 – Massing
Breaks - Generally
This standard generally requires
that buildings over 60’ in length
follow the rules of thirds in which
the structure is divided into at
least 3 primary masses
The building is not broken into 3
horizontal masses to avoid the loss of
units. On the east elevation (Elkhorn
Court) the building is broken into two
horizontal masses as breaking it into
more than two would result in a loss of
units because three masses would
require pushing the building farther
from the setback to create the dictated
articulation. The north frontage is one
horizontal mass, breaking it into more
than one would result in a loss of units
due to requiring the building to jog in
to create the mass break. The west
elevation is broken into two masses,
breaking it into three would result in a
reduction in the number of units as
creating a mass break would require a
portion of the building to move farther
from the property line.

ODS 4.1.6 (B) (1) –
Massing Breaks –
Mid-Rise Buildings –
Horizontal Wall Plane
Breaks
This standard generally requires a
5’ long 2’ wall plane offset every
20-40 feet of horizontal building
length.

The Project includes sections of
horizontal building length that exceed
this standard. Including a 2’ horizontal
offset would require moving a portion
of the building further away from the
property line, resulting in a loss of
units.

ODS 4.1.6 (B) (2) –
Massing Breaks –
Mid-Rise Buildings –
Vertical Wall Plane
Breaks
This standard generally requires
wall depth changes of the wall
plane along the height of all
building facades through use of
roof cornices on the top floor,
minimum five (5) foot step backs
or projections between the base
and body of the building, a change
in building material or color
between the base and body of the
building characterized by a twelve
(12) inch minimum offset from the
The Applicant requests a waiver for the
top floor of the building along Elkhorn
Court to be stepped back 7.5’. Stepping
the building back further would require
moving the wall of the top story away
from the street, resulting in the loss of
units.
694 of 1101
Joanna Winter
May 18, 2026

Standard Requirement Proposed
surrounding building wall, or a
minimum ten (10)-foot stepback
immediately above the building
base for the top floor along all
building facades facing a right-ofway.

ODS 4.2.2 - Entries
This standard generally requires
that residential entries be located
18-42” above or below the grade
of the adjacent residential
sidewalk.

The building has three (3) residential
entries on W. 20th Ave. The finished
floors of these first-floor units have
been increased to an elevation 24’
above mean sea level (MSL), while the
amenity areas at the southeast corner
are at 21’ MSL. The slope of the street
is such that while the furthest east of
these three units will be 18” or greater
in height above grade which complies
with the standard, the two
westernmost units will be 16.5” and
12” above grade. The Applicant
requests a waiver from this standard for
these two units because raising their
finished floor level to meet this
standard would result in the loss of
these units due to deficient ceiling
heights.

C. Incentives or Concessions Under the State Density Bonus Law The Project is entitled to at least three incentives or concessions because it provides 15 percent of the total units for very low income households. (Gov. Code, § 65915(d)(2)(C).) The Applicant is not requesting any concessions at this time but reserve the right to do so during processing of the development application.

D. Parking
Because the Project is located within one-half mile of a major transit stop, there is no minimum vehicle parking requirement under AB 2097. (Gov. Code, § 65863.2.) Therefore, the Project does not need to avail itself of the reduced parking ratios permitted under Gov. Code, § 65915(p) for its proposed 279 parking spaces.
695 of 1101
Joanna Winter
May 18, 2026

V. Conclusion
The Applicant looks forward to working with the City to provide much needed housing, including affordable housing, to the community pursuant to critical state laws that are designed to facilitate housing production.

Sincerely,
Cox, Castle & Nicholson LLP
Christian H. Cebrian
cc: Elaine Breeze
Richard Norris
109262\18785335v8
696 of 1101
220 W. 20th Avenue Residential
Development
Draft Transportation Analysis
Prepared for:

SummerHill Apartment Communities
February 18, 2026
Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc.

Hexagon Office: 100 Century Center Court, Suite 501
San Jose, CA 95112
Phone: 408.971.6100
Hexagon Job Number: 25OZ09
Client Name: SummerHill Apartment Communities
697 of 1101
220 W. 20th Avenue Residential Development TIA February 18, 2026 Table of Contents
Executive Summary............................................................................................................................... iii

1. Introduction...................................................................................................................................1

2. Existing Transportation Conditions..............................................................................................10

3. Opening Year Conditions ............................................................................................................18

4. Cumulative Conditions ................................................................................................................25

5. Other Transportation Issues........................................................................................................30

6. C/CAG Checklist.........................................................................................................................43 Appendices
Appendix A Traffic Counts
Appendix B Intersection Level of Service Calculations
Appendix C Volume Sheets
Appendix D Signal Warrant Analysis
Appendix E Garage Turning Templates
Appendix F San Mateo County C/CAG Checklist Worksheet
List of Tables
Table ES 1 Intersection Level of Service Summary..............................................................................v Table 1 Signalized Intersection Level of Service Definitions Based on Average Control Delay.......7 Table 2 Unsignalized Intersection Level of Service Definitions Based on Average Delay ...............7 Table 3 Existing Transit Services .................................................................................................11 Table 4 Existing Intersection Levels of Service.............................................................................15 Table 5 Project Trip Generation Estimates ...................................................................................21 Table 6 Opening Year Plus Project Intersection Levels of Service ...............................................24 Table 7 Cumulative Intersection Levels of Service .......................................................................28 Table 8 Intersection Queuing Analysis .........................................................................................31 Table 9 Bicycle Parking Requirements.........................................................................................41 Table 10 C/CAG TDM Checklist.....................................................................................................44 List of Figures
Figure 1 Site Location and Study Intersections................................................................................2 Figure 2 Proposed Site Plan............................................................................................................3 Figure 3 Existing Transit Services .................................................................................................12 Figure 4 Existing Bicycle Facilities.................................................................................................14 Figure 5 Existing Traffic Volumes and Lane Configurations...........................................................17 Figure 6 Opening Year Traffic Volumes.........................................................................................19 Figure 7 Project Trip Distribution and Trip Assignment..................................................................22 Figure 8 Opening Year Plus Project Traffic Volumes.....................................................................23 Figure 9 Cumulative No Project Traffic Volumes ...........................................................................26 Figure 10 Cumulative Plus Project Traffic Volumes .........................................................................27 Figure 11A Parking Garage Plans .....................................................................................................34 Figure 11B Parking Garage Plans .....................................................................................................35 Figure 12 Emergency Vehicle Access .............................................................................................39 698 of 1101
220 W. 20th Avenue Residential Development TIA February 18, 2026 P a g e | iii
Executive Summary
This report presents the results of the transportation impact analysis (TIA) conducted for the residential development proposed at 220 W. 20th Avenue in San Mateo, California. The 1.54-acre site is located on the northwest corner of W. 20th Avenue and Elkhorn Court intersection. There is an existing residential development, The Lark, to the north of the site. The project would share an existing 23-footwide common area with The Lark on the west side of the project site which contains a 20-foot-wide Emergency Vehicle Access Easement for emergency access to both properties.

The project proposes demolishing the existing office building on site and construct a 5-7 story apartment building with a total of 232 dwelling units. Of the 232 dwelling units, 31 units would be affordable units for very low-income housing. The project would provide a total of 279 parking spaces:
270 vehicular parking spaces in a secure gated garage for residents and 9 guest parking spaces. The project would provide 254 long-term bicycle parking spaces in two secure bicycle rooms and 16 shortterm bicycle parking spaces around the building. Vehicular access to the site is provided by a two-way driveway on Elkhorn Court.

This purpose of this study is to identify the potential transportation impacts related to the proposed development and to satisfy the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the City of San Mateo and the City/County Association of Governments of San Mateo County (C/CAG).

C/CAG administers the County’s Congestion Management Program (CMP). This study includes a vehicle miles traveled (VMT) evaluation per CEQA and local transportation analysis (LTA).

VMT Analysis
CEQA requires that all new development projects be analyzed for vehicle miles traveled (VMT). The VMT for the project is analyzed according to the City of San Mateo adopted VMT guidelines using the C/CAG VMT Estimation Tool. The City’s guidelines provide VMT thresholds, baselines, and criteria to evaluate VMT impacts for new development projects. The guidelines also provide screening criteria to determine whether a project would have a less than significant effect on VMT and would be exempt from CEQA analysis.

The City’s VMT guidelines state that if a project is located in a High Quality Transit Area (HQTA), it is not expected to create a significant VMT impact and is screened out of detailed VMT analysis. To meet this criteria, the project must be within 0.5 miles of a high-quality transit stop or rail station, have a floor area ratio greater than 0.75, not replace affordable residential, not provide more parking than required (if the jurisdiction requires the project to supply parking), and be consistent with the applicable Metropolitan Transportation Commission’s (MTC) Sustainable Communities Strategy.

The project is located within 0.5 miles of the Hayward Park Caltrain station. The project has a floor area ratio of approximately 5.3, demolishes an existing office building and does not replace affordable 699 of 1101
220 W. 20th Avenue Residential Development TIA February 18, 2026 P a g e | iv
residential units, is not required to provide parking, and is consistent with the Sustainable Communities Strategy. Therefore, the project meets the City’s VMT screening criteria and does not require detailed VMT analysis.

Project Trip Estimates
The Institute of Transportation Engineers’ (ITE) Trip Generation Manual, 12th Edition, was used to estimate the vehicle trips that would be generated by the project. After applying the appropriate ITE trip generation rates and applicable trip credits from the existing land use, the proposed project is estimated to generate 995 net new daily trips, with 60 trips (20 inbound and 40 outbound) during the AM peak hour and 48 trips (34 inbound and 14 outbound) during the PM peak hour.

Intersection Level of Service Analysis
The results of the intersection level of service analysis show that all study intersections would operate at an acceptable level of service with and without the addition of project trips under existing and opening year conditions (see Table ES-1). Under cumulative conditions, the Alameda de las Pulgas/W. 20th Avenue and El Camino Real/W. 20th Avenue intersections would operate with unacceptable delays and level of service during at least one peak hour. However, the project would not increase the average delay by 4 seconds or more and therefore would not create an adverse effect.

In addition, the Elkhorn Court/Pioneer Court and W. 20th Avenue intersection is expected to degrade from an acceptable level of service from E to unacceptable level of service F under cumulative plus project conditions during the AM peak hour. However, the intersection would not meet the signal warrant analysis, and therefore, the project would not have an adverse effect on the intersection.

Other Transportation Issues
The proposed site plan shows generally adequate site access and on-site circulation. The project should consider the following recommendation resulting from the site plan review:

Recommendations
• The project should coordinate with the City of San Mateo to get approval of the 24-foot-wide driveway where 20 foot is the maximum permitted based on the City’s Zoning Code Section

27.64.025.
• The project should assign parking spaces to ensure that residents do not drive down the aisle without knowing that a parking space is available to provide adequate circulation within the parking garage.
• The project should provide mirrors at the circular ramps to warn opposing vehicles approaching the ramp.
• The applicant should coordinate with the City on a waiver to allow for narrower end stalls than required by City Parking Standard Drawing 3.1.191.
700 of 1101
220 W. 20th Avenue Residential Development TIA February 18, 2026 P a g e | v
Table ES 1
Intersection Level of Service Summary
# Intersection Pk Hr Control
Avg.

Delay LOS
Avg.

Delay LOS
Avg.

Delay LOS
Incr. in
Avg.

Delay
Signal
Warrant
Met?
Avg.

Delay LOS
Avg.

Delay LOS
Incr. in
Avg.

Delay
Signal
Warrant
Met?
AM 26.7 C 26.8 C 27.0 C 0.2 -- 49.3 D 50.0 D 0.7 --
PM 28.7 C 28.8 C 29.1 C 0.3 -- 36.1 D 36.5 D 0.4 --
AM 26.1 D 26.7 D 35.2 E >4.0 No 41.9 E 67.9 F >4.0 No
PM 25.4 D 26.1 D 30.2 D >4.0 No 36.1 E 44.4 E >4.0 No
AM 30.6 C 31.0 C 32.2 C 1.2 -- 51.6 D 53.0 D 1.4 --
PM 36.6 D 37.0 D 37.5 D 0.5 -- 73.6 E 76.2 E 2.6 --
AM 8.6 A 8.6 A 8.8 A 0.2 -- 8.6 A 8.8 A 0.2 --
PM 8.6 A 8.6 A 8.7 A 0.1 -- 8.6 A 8.7 A 0.1 --
Bold indicates a substandard level of service.

Existing Opening Year Opening Year + Project Cumulative Cumulative + Project 1 Alameda de las Pulgas
& W 20th Avenue
Signal
2 Elkhorn Court/Pioneer
Court & W 20th Avenue
TWSC
Notes
For TWSC intersections, delay represents worst approach delay and LOS represents worst approach LOS. 3 El Camino Real & W
20th Avenue
Signal
4 Elkhorn Court & Project
Driveway
TWSC
701 of 1101
220 W. 20th Avenue Residential Development TIA February 18, 2026 P a g e | 1

1. Introduction
This report presents the results of the transportation impact analysis (TIA) conducted for the residential development proposed at 220 W. 20th Avenue in San Mateo, California (see Figure 1). The 1.54-acre site is located on the northwest corner of W. 20th Avenue and Elkhorn Court intersection. There is an existing residential development, The Lark, to the north of the site. The project would share an existing 23-foot-wide common area with The Lark on the west side of the project site which contains a 20-footwide Emergency Vehicle Access Easement for emergency access to both properties.

The project proposes demolishing the existing office building on site and construct a 5-7 story apartment building with a total of 232 dwelling units. Of the 232 dwelling units, 31 units would be affordable units for very low-income housing. The project would provide a total of 279 parking spaces:
270 vehicular parking spaces in a secure gated garage for residents and 9 guest parking spaces. The project would provide 254 long-term bicycle parking spaces in two secure bicycle rooms and 16 shortterm bicycle parking spaces around the building. Vehicular access to the site is provided by a two-way driveway on Elkhorn Court. The site plan is shown in Figure 2.

Scope of Study
This purpose of this study is to identify the potential transportation impacts related to the proposed development and to satisfy the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the City of San Mateo and the City/County Association of Governments of San Mateo County (C/CAG).

The C/CAG administers the San Mateo County Congestion Management Program (CMP), which requires non-residential and multi-family residential projects generating more than 100 daily trips to complete the C/CAG checklist. This study includes a vehicle miles traveled (VMT) evaluation per CEQA and local transportation analysis (LTA) per the City’s Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines.

Vehicle Miles Traveled Analysis
The City of San Mateo’s Vehicle Miles Travelled (VMT) Policy establishes procedures for determining project impacts on VMT based on project description, characteristics, and/or location. The City’s VMT methodology also includes screening criteria that are used to identify types, characteristics, and/or locations of projects that would not exceed the CEQA thresholds of significance. If a project or a component of a mixed-use project meets the screening criteria, it is then presumed that the project or the component would result in a less-than-significant VMT impact and a VMT analysis is not required.

For a project that does not meet the screening criteria, a project’s VMT impact is determined by comparing the project VMT to the appropriate thresholds of significance based on the type of development.
702 of 1101
San
Mateo
Peninsula Golf
and Country Club
82 92
1 2
4 3
Elkhorn
Ct
Pioneer Ct
E 25th Ave
17th Ave
Bovet Rd
Concar Dr
Maple St
Edinburgh St
Borel Ave
Barneson Ave
22nd Ave
W 20th Ave
Alameda de Las Pulgas
S Delaware St
El Camino Real
El Camino Real
Palm Ave
220 W. 20th Avenue Residential Development
Figure 1
Site Location and Study Intersections
Hayward Park
Caltrain
Station
X = Study Intersection
= Site Location
LEGEND
Junipero Serra
High School
Borel
Middle
School
San Mateo
City Hall
703 of 1101
220 W. 20th Avenue Residential Development
Figure 2
Proposed Site Plan
704 of 1101
220 W. 20th Avenue Residential Development TIA February 18, 2026 P a g e | 4
The San Mateo VMT Policy contains the following screening criteria for developments that are expected to cause a less-than-significant transportation impact under CEQA and are not required to prepare further VMT analysis:

1. Small Projects: Any development that would generate fewer than 110 daily vehicle trips.

2. Affordable Housing: Projects comprised of 100 percent affordable housing units.

3. Local-Serving Retail and Public Facilities: Retail commercial projects comprised of stores of up to 50,000 gross square feet and local-serving public facilities like police, fire stations, public utilities, and neighborhood parks.

4. Affordable Housing: Projects comprised of 100 percent affordable housing units.

5. High Quality Transit Area (HQTA): Projects that are located in a high‐quality transit area (HQTA) would not require a detailed VMT analysis. Currently, only Caltrain stations in the City are qualified as high‐quality transit. The presumption to exempt a project from a detailed VMT analysis does not apply if the project:
• has a floor area ratio (FAR) of less than 0.75;
• includes more parking for use by residents, customers, or employees of the project than required by the jurisdiction (if the jurisdiction requires the project to supply parking); • is inconsistent with the applicable Metropolitan Transportation Commission’s (MTC) Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS), as determined by the City; or • replaces affordable residential units with a smaller number of moderate‐ or high‐income residential units.

6. Project Located in Low VMT Area: Residential and employment projects that are proposed in areas that generate VMT below adopted City thresholds.

7. Consistency with RTP/ SCS: Projects inconsistent with the MTC Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS) do not qualify for screening out of a detailed VMT analysis.

The project is located within a half mile of the Hayward Park Caltrain station. As shown in Figure 1, this is within the City’s HQTA. Furthermore, the project proposes a floor area ratio greater than 0.75, does not replace affordable residential units, is not applicable to the City’s parking requirements, and is consistent with the Sustainable Communities Strategy. Therefore, the project meets the City’s VMT screening criteria and does not require detailed VMT analysis.

Local Transportation Analysis (LTA)
In addition to a VMT analysis, the City requires all projects to measure intersection operations to provide improvements or address project related operational deficiencies through a Local Transportation Analysis (LTA). The LTA also includes an evaluation of the project’s effect on transit, bicycle, and pedestrian access and a review of site access and circulation, and a parking analysis.

This study analyzes the traffic effects of the project on the key intersections in the vicinity of the site during the weekday AM and PM peak hours of traffic. The weekday AM peak hour is generally between 7:00 and 9:00 AM and the weekday PM peak hour is generally between 4:00 and 6:00 PM. On a typical weekday (Tuesday through Thursday) these periods are when the most congested traffic generally occurs.

This study includes an analysis of the weekday peak-hour traffic conditions of three intersections, as listed below, in accordance with the City’s TA guidelines. 705 of 1101
220 W. 20th Avenue Residential Development TIA February 18, 2026 P a g e | 5
Study Intersections

1. Alameda de las Pulgas and W. 20th Avenue

2. Elkhorn Court and W. 20th Avenue

3. El Camino Real and W. 20th Avenue

4. Elkhorn Court and Project Driveway
Intersection traffic conditions were evaluated for the following scenarios:

Existing Conditions. Existing AM and PM peak-hour traffic volumes were obtained from new turning-movement counts conducted on September 11, 2025. Traffic counts are included in Appendix A.

Opening Year Conditions. Opening year conditions represent existing volumes plus projected volumes from approved developments that have not yet been constructed and occupied.

Approved project information was obtained from the City of San Mateo website.

Opening Year Plus Project Conditions. Opening year plus project conditions were estimated by adding to the opening year traffic volumes the new traffic estimated to be generated by the project. Intersection effects associated with the development will be evaluated relative to opening conditions.

Cumulative No Project Conditions. Cumulative traffic volumes represent traffic volumes and roadway conditions projected at the City’s General Plan Buildout. The City’s recently adopted General Plan did not produce intersection volume forecasts. Therefore, cumulative traffic volumes were developed using the latest citywide travel demand model.

Cumulative Plus Project Conditions. Cumulative plus project traffic volumes were estimated by adding to the cumulative traffic volumes the new traffic generated by the project. Intersection effects associated with the development will be evaluated relative to cumulative conditions.

Other Transportation Issues
The study includes an evaluation of potential operational deficiencies related to transit services and a review of site access, on-site circulation, effects on pedestrian, bicycle, and transit facilities, and parking.

Intersection Operations Analysis Methodology
This section presents the methods used to determine traffic conditions at the study intersections. It includes descriptions of the data requirements, the analysis methodologies, and the applicable level of service standards.

Data Requirements
The data required for the analysis was obtained from traffic counts conducted on September 11, 2025, the City of San Mateo, and field observations. The following data was collected:
• Existing traffic volumes
• Lane geometries
• Signal timing and phasing
• List of approved developments
• Cumulative Volume Forecasts from Travel Demand Model
706 of 1101
220 W. 20th Avenue Residential Development TIA February 18, 2026 P a g e | 6
Intersection Level of Service Analysis Methodologies and Standards Traffic conditions at the study intersections were evaluated using level of service (LOS). Level of service is a qualitative description of operating conditions ranging from LOS A, or free-flow conditions with little or no delay, to LOS F, or jammed conditions with excessive delays. This study utilizes Synchro software to determine intersection levels of service based on the latest HCM methodology.

Signalized Intersections
For signalized intersections, the level of service method evaluates intersection operations on the basis of average control delay time for all vehicles at the intersection based on the methodology typically described in the most recent edition of the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM), which would be the 7th Edition. However, Synchro’s HCM 7th Edition is not able to properly evaluate intersection lane geometries that are present at the study intersections. This report is thus evaluated using the HCM 2000 to report the average delay and level of service. Table 1 presents the level of service definitions for signalized intersections.

The City of San Mateo’s level of service standard for signalized intersections is LOS mid-D (average delay of 45 seconds).

Unsignalized Intersections
Level of service analysis at unsignalized intersections is generally used to determine the need for modifications in the type of intersection control (i.e., all-way stop or signalization). As part of the evaluation, traffic volumes, delays and traffic signal warrants are evaluated to determine if the existing intersection control is appropriate.

For unsignalized intersections, level of service depends on the average delay experienced by vehicles on the stop-controlled approaches. For side street stop-controlled intersections (two-way or Tintersections), operations are defined by the average control delay experienced by vehicles entering the intersection from the stop-controlled approaches on minor streets or from left-turn approaches on major streets. The level of service is reported based on the average delay for the worst approach. The level of service definitions for unsignalized intersections is shown in Table 2.

The City of San Mateo’s level of service standard for unsignalized intersections is LOS E. 707 of 1101
220 W. 20th Avenue Residential Development TIA February 18, 2026 P a g e | 7
Table 1
Signalized Intersection Level of Service Definitions Based on Average Control Delay Table 2
Unsignalized Intersection Level of Service Definitions Based on Average Delay Level of
Service Description
Average Control
Delay per Vehicle
(sec.)
A
Signal progression is extremely favorable and most vehicles arrive during the green phase.

Many vehicles do not stop at all. Short cycle lengths may tend to contribute to low delay values.

10.0 or less
B
Operations characterized by good progression and/or short cycle lengths. More vehicles stop than with LOS A, causing higher levels of delay. 10.1 to 20.0 C
Higher delays may result from fair progression and/or longer cycle length. Individual cycle failures may begin to appear at this level. Cycle failure occurs when a given green phase does not serve queued vehicles, and overflows occur. The number of vehicles stopping is significant at this level, though many still pass through the intersection without stopping.

20.1 to 35.0
D
The influence of congestion becomes more noticeable. Longer delays may result from some combination of unfavorable progression, long cycle lengths, and high v/c ratios. Many vehicles stop, and the proportion of vehicles not stopping declines. Individual cycle failures are noticeable.

35.1 to 55.0
E
This is considered to be the limit of acceptable delay. These high delay values generally indicate poor progression, long cycle lengths, and high v/c ratios. Individual cycle failures are frequent.

55.1 to 80.0
F
This level of delay is considered unacceptable to most drivers, often occurs with oversaturation, that is, when arrival flow rates exceed the capacity of lane groups. It may also occur at high v/c ratios with many individual cycle failures. Poor progression and long cycle lengths may also contribute significantly to high delay levels. greater than 80.0
Source: Transportation Research Board, 2000 Highway Capacity Manual (Washington, D.C., 2000), p.10-16 A Little or no traffic delay 10.0 or less
B Short traffic delays 10.1 to 15.0
C Average traffic delays 15.1 to 25.0
D Long traffic delays 25.1 to 35.0
E Very long traffic delays 35.1 to 50.0
F Extreme traffic delays greater than 50.0
Source: Transportation Research Board, 2000 Highway Capacity Manual (Washington, D.C., 2000) p17-2.

Level of Service Description Average Delay Per Vehicle (Sec.) 708 of 1101
220 W. 20th Avenue Residential Development TIA February 18, 2026 P a g e | 8
Intersection Vehicle Queuing Analysis
The analysis of intersection operations was supplemented with a vehicle queuing analysis at intersections where the project would add a substantial number of trips to the left-turn movements or stop-controlled approaches. The vehicle queuing analysis is used to determine the appropriate storage lengths for the high demand turn lanes where the project would add a substantial number of trips.

An evaluation of vehicle queuing was conducted using the Synchro software. The basis of the analysis is as follows: (1) the Synchro software is used to estimate the 95th percentile maximum number of queued vehicles; (2) the estimated maximum number of vehicles in the queue is translated into a queue length, assuming 25 feet per vehicle; and (3) the estimated maximum queue length is compared to the available storage capacity.

For signalized intersections, the 95th percentile queue length value indicates that during the peak hour, a queue of this length or less would occur on 95 percent of the signal cycles, or a queue length larger than the 95th percentile queue would only occur on 5 percent of the signal cycles (about 3 cycles during the peak hour for a signal with a 60-second cycle length). Thus, turn pocket storage designs based on the 95th percentile queue length would ensure that storage space would be exceeded only 5 percent of the time for a signalized movement.

Definition of Adverse Intersection Operational Effects
Although measures of congestion such as delay and level of service are no longer used to identify significant impacts under CEQA, a local transportation analysis was conducted to evaluate the project’s consistency with the level of service standards set forth in the City’s guidelines and to identify feasible improvements to remedy deficiencies. Adverse operational effects at study intersections are based on the City of San Mateo standards.

Signalized Intersections
An adverse traffic operations issue is identified by the City for signalized intersections if the addition of traffic generated by the proposed projects results in one of the following for either peak hour:

1. The level of service at the intersection drops below its respective level of service standard (LOS mid-D or better) when project traffic is added, or

2. An intersection that operates below its level of service standard under no-project conditions experiences an increase in average delay of four (4) or more seconds when project traffic is added.

Unsignalized Intersections
An adverse traffic operations issue is identified by the City for unsignalized intersections if the addition of traffic generated by the proposed project results in one of the following for either peak hour:

1. The addition of project traffic causes the average intersection delay for all-way stop-controlled or the worst approach for side-street stop-controlled intersections to degrade to LOS F, or

2. An intersection that operates below its level of service standard under no-project conditions experiences an increase in average delay of four (4) or more seconds when project traffic is added.

If the operations of an unsignalized intersection become deficient based on LOS then an adverse effect would occur when: (1) an unsignalized intersection with project traffic is forecast to operate at unacceptable LOS, and (2) if it meets the peak hour signal warrants for existing intersections, and the daily warrants for planned intersections under the California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices 709 of 1101
220 W. 20th Avenue Residential Development TIA February 18, 2026 P a g e | 9
(CA MUTCD). If a project is near a school or downtown area with substantial pedestrian activity then City may require additional warrants to be evaluated such as pedestrian, accident history, etc.

Report Organization
This report has a total of six chapters. Chapter 2 describes the existing roadway network, transit service, bicycle and pedestrian facilities, and intersection levels of service. Chapter 3 presents the intersection levels of service under opening year conditions (existing conditions with the addition of traffic from approved developments), the method used to estimate project traffic, and the resulting intersection levels of service under opening year plus project conditions. Chapter 4 presents the intersection levels of service under cumulative conditions and the method used to estimate cumulative volumes, and the resulting levels of service under cumulative plus project conditions. Chapter 5 presents the analysis of other transportation-related issues, including intersection queuing, site access and circulation, parking, and effects to pedestrian, bicycle, and transit facilities. Chapter 6 presents the C/CAG TDM checklist.
710 of 1101
220 W. 20th Avenue Residential Development TIA February 18, 2026 P a g e | 10

2. Existing Transportation Conditions
This chapter describes the existing conditions for transportation facilities in the vicinity of the site, including the roadway network, transit services, pedestrian and bicycle facilities, and traffic operations at the study intersections.

Existing Roadway Network
Regional access to the project site is provided via State Route 92 (SR 92) and El Camino Real (also known as SR 82). Local access to the site is provided via Alameda de las Pulgas, W. 20th Avenue, and Elkhorn Court/Pioneer Court. These facilities are described below.

SR 92 is an east-west highway with four lanes in the vicinity of the site. It is designated as a freeway per the City of San Mateo General Plan 2040. SR 92 extends from Half Moon Bay to Hayward where it transitions to SR 238. Access to and from the site is provided via interchanges at Alameda de las Pulgas and El Camino Real.

El Camino Real (SR 82) is a north-south highway with four to six lanes in the vicinity of the site. It is designated as a principal arterial per the City of San Mateo General Plan 2040. SR 82 extends from San Francisco to San Jose. El Camino Real has a posted speed limit of 35 miles per hour (mph). On street parking is permitted south of 21st Avenue on the west side and south of 22nd Avenue on the east side. Sidewalks are present on both sides of the street.

Alameda de las Pulgas is a north-south minor arterial per the City’s General Plan. Alameda de las Pulgas is a four-lane street with a posted speed limit of 30 mph. Street parking is prohibited north of The Carey School. Continuous sidewalks are present on both sides of the street. The street is designated as a Class III bike route marked with sharrow pavement markings for most of the street on both sides. Between Madera Drive and 24th Avenue, a bike lane exists on the west side of the street.

W. 20th Avenue is an east-west minor arterial per the City’s General Plan. W. 20th Avenue is a twolane street with a posted 25 mph speed limit. Street parking is permitted on both sides of the street west of Elkhorn Court/Pioneer Court and on the south side of the street east of Elkhorn Court/Pioneer Court. Continuous sidewalks are present on both sides of the street. W. 20th Avenue provides access to and from the project via Elkhorn Court.

Elkhorn Court is a north-south local street per the City’s General Plan. Elkhorn Court/Pioneer Court is a two-lane street with no posted speed limit that ends in a cul-de-sac at both ends of the street. Street parking is permitted on both sides of the street. Continuous sidewalks are present on both sides of the street. Elkhorn Court provides direct access to the project site. 711 of 1101
220 W. 20th Avenue Residential Development TIA February 18, 2026 P a g e | 11
Existing Transit Services
Existing public transit services in the study area are provided by SamTrans and Caltrain. SamTrans operates bus routes in San Mateo County and Caltrain provides commuter transit across the Bay Area from San Francisco to Gilroy. Public transit options in the vicinity of the site are shown in Figure 3 and Table 3.

SamTrans Bus Service
Route ECR provides daily service between the Daly City BART station and the Palo Alto Transit Center. The weekday headway during peak periods is 15 minutes. The closest bus stop to the project site is located on El Camino Real at W. 20th Avenue, approximately 965 feet from the project site.

Route 294 provides daily service between Hillsdale and Half Moon Bay. The weekday headway during peak periods is 60 minutes. The closest bus stop to the project site is located on Alameda de las Pulgas at W. 20th Avenue, approximately 2,340 feet from the project site.

Late-Night Routes
Route 397 (OWL) is a daily late-night route that provides service between San Francisco and the Palo Alto Transit Center. In the project vicinity, it travels primarily along El Camino Real. The route only runs during the early AM hours, from 1:00 AM to 6:50 AM. The closest bus stop to the project site is located on El Camino Real at W. 20th Avenue, approximately 965 feet from the project site.

Caltrain Commuter Rail
Caltrain provides regional rail service between San Francisco and San Jose, with limited peak-direction service to Gilroy during commute hours. The Hayward Park Station is located at Leslie Street and Gum Street, approximately ½ mile from the project site. The Hayward Caltrain Station is served by local-stop trains. On weekdays northbound service operates from San Mateo Station starting at 5:30 AM and running until 12:17 AM, with southbound service operating from 5:25 AM to 12:35 AM. Local trains arrive and depart every 30 minutes all day in both directions on weekdays and weekends.

Table 3
Existing Transit Services
Headways1
Route Route Description (minutes)
Bus Routes
Route ECR Daly City BART - Palo Alto
Transit Center
4:00 AM - 2:00 AM
(next day) 15 El Camino Real at W. 20th Avenue 845
Route 294 Hillsdale - Half Moon Bay 5:30 AM - 10:01 PM 60 Alameda de las Pulgas at W. 20th Avenue 2,475
Late-Night Route
Route 397 OWL San Francisco - Palo Alto
Transit Center
El Camino Real at W. 20th
Avenue 845
Train Services
Caltrain Gilroy - San Francisco 5:25 AM - 12:35 AM
(next day) 15 Hayward Park Caltrain Station 2,045
Notes:
1:00 AM - 6:50 AM
(does not operate during peak
hours)
Weekday Hours
of Operation Nearby Bus Stops
Walking Distance
from Nearest Stop to
Project Site (feet)

1. Headways during weekday peak periods as of August 2025. 712 of 1101
ECR
397
ECR
397
294
294
294
San
Mateo
Peninsula Golf
and Country Club
82 92
Elkhorn
Ct
Pioneer Ct
E 25th Ave
17th Ave
Bovet Rd
Concar Dr
Maple St
Edinburgh St
Borel Ave
Barneson Ave
22nd Ave
W 20th Ave
Alameda de Las Pulgas
S Delaware St
El Camino Real
El Camino Real
Palm Ave
220 W. 20th Avenue Residential Development
Figure 3
Existing Transit Services
Hayward Park
Caltrain
Station
= Site Location
LEGEND
Junipero Serra
High School
Borel
Middle
School
San Mateo
City Hall
ECR,
397
294
294
ECR,
397
= SamTrans Routes serving South County
= SamTrans School-oriented Routes
= SamTrans Routes Connecting to
BART and Caltrain Stations
= Nearby Bus Stop XX
713 of 1101
220 W. 20th Avenue Residential Development TIA February 18, 2026 P a g e | 13
Existing Pedestrian Facilities
Pedestrian facilities consist of sidewalks and crosswalks. Sidewalks are present on all streets in the nearby project area. Crosswalks with pedestrian signal heads and push buttons are provided at all signalized intersections surrounding the site. Crosswalks exist along all legs of the El Camino Real/W. 20th Avenue and Alameda de las Pulgas/W. 20th Avenue signalized intersections. Crosswalks also exist at the following intersections along W. 20th Avenue:
• West and south legs at La Salle Drive,
• West, south, and east legs at Chukker Street, and
• West and south legs at Isabelle Avenue
Within a typical walking distance, one-half mile or 10 minutes, continuous pedestrian facilities are present between the project and points of interest like the San Mateo City Hall, Junipero Serra High School, the Carey School, retail and restaurants along El Camino Real, and the Hayward Park Caltrain station.

Existing Bicycle Facilities
The bicycle facilities that exist within a half mile of the project site (see Figure 4) include striped bike lanes (Class II bikeway) and shared bike routes (Class III bikeway). Bike lanes are lanes on roadways designated for use by bicycles with special lane markings, pavement legends, and signage. Bike routes are streets with signage and/or pavement markings where bicyclists share a travel lane with motorists.

Bike facilities in the project area are described below:

Bike Lane (Class II)
• Alameda de las Pulgas from Madera Drive to 24th Avenue on the west side • Palm Avenue from 9th Avenue to 17th Avenue
Bike Route (Class III)
• Alameda de las Pulgas from Crystal Springs Road to La Casa Avenue • Palm Avenue from 17th Avenue/Bovet Road to 25th Avenue • Bovet Road/17th Avenue from Borel Avenue to Palm Avenue • Borel Avenue from Edin burgh Street to Bovet Road/Maple Street 714 of 1101
San
Mateo
Peninsula Golf
and Country Club
82 92
Elkhorn
Ct
Pioneer Ct
E 25th Ave
17th Ave
Bovet Rd
Concar Dr
Maple St
Edinburgh St
Borel Ave
Barneson Ave
22nd Ave
W 20th Ave
Alameda de Las Pulgas
S Delaware St
El Camino Real
El Camino Real
Palm Ave
220 W. 20th Avenue Residential Development
Figure 4
Existing Bicycle Facilities
Hayward Park
Caltrain
Station
= Site Location
LEGEND
Junipero Serra
High School
Borel
Middle
School
San Mateo
City Hall
= Existing Bike Lanes (Class II Bikeway)
= Existing Bike Routes (Class III Bikeway)
715 of 1101
220 W. 20th Avenue Residential Development TIA February 18, 2026 P a g e | 15
Existing Lane Configurations and Traffic Volumes
The existing lane configurations at the study intersections were obtained from observations in the field.

Existing peak-hour intersection volumes were obtained from turning movement counts collected on September 11, 2025, when nearby schools were in session, during typical peak traffic hours between 7:00 and 9:00 AM and between 4:00 and 6:00 PM. Existing lane configurations and existing peak hour volumes are shown in Figure 5. Traffic counts are present in Appendix A.

Existing Intersection Levels of Service
The results of the intersection level of service analysis show that all of the study intersections are currently operating at acceptable levels of service (see Table 4). The intersection levels of service calculation sheets are included in Appendix C.

The LOS analysis is based on the peak one-hour of traffic volumes. To account for general hourly fluctuation in traffic volumes, Synchro’s default peak hour factor (PHF) of 0.92 is used. Since all the study intersections are located in close proximity to schools, using the actual PHF reported from the turning movement counts in the analysis would represent studying the peak 15-minutes of school traffic conditions instead of an hourly condition.

Table 4
Existing Intersection Levels of Service
Observed Existing Traffic Conditions
Traffic conditions were observed in September 2025 to identify any existing operational deficiencies and to confirm the accuracy of calculated levels of service. The purpose of this effort was (1) to identify any existing traffic problems that may not be directly related to intersection level of service, and (2) to identify any locations where the level of service analysis does not accurately reflect existing traffic conditions.
# Intersection Pk Hr Control
Avg.

Delay LOS
AM 26.7 C
PM 28.7 C
AM 26.1 D
PM 25.4 D
AM 30.6 C
PM 36.6 D
AM 8.6 A
PM 8.6 A
Existing
1 Alameda de las Pulgas & W 20th Avenue Signal
2 Elkhorn Court/Pioneer Court & W 20th Avenue TWSC
Notes
For TWSC intersections, delay represents worst approach delay and LOS represents worst approach LOS.
3 El Camino Real & W 20th Avenue Signal
4 Elkhorn Court & Project Driveway TWSC
716 of 1101
220 W. 20th Avenue Residential Development TIA February 18, 2026 P a g e | 16
Alameda de las Pulgas and W. 20th Avenue
During the AM peak hour, the northbound traffic was occasionally heavy, requiring two cycles for vehicles to clear in the rightmost lane. Occasionally, the northbound queue from the SR 92 intersection reached the study intersection. However, it often cleared before the northbound and eastbound movements turned green.

During the PM peak hour, the northbound queue from SR 92 intersection occasionally reached the intersection. This would cause traffic for the northbound, eastbound left-turn, and westbound right-turn lanes to slow down. However, the queue would clear and allow all vehicles through during the next cycle. The southbound left-turn queue occasionally exceeded the pocket but the queue was typically able to clear within one cycle.

El Camino Real and W. 20th Avenue
During the AM peak hour, the northbound left-turn queue often exceeded the storage lane. However, typically all vehicles were able to clear within one cycle and did not affect the northbound through vehicles. The southbound rightmost lane often had more vehicles than the other lanes, with most vehicles making a right turn at 20th Avenue. This occasionally required two cycles to clear.

During the PM peak hour, the eastbound queue often reached the downstream intersection. However, the queue was often able to clear the intersection within one cycle. Occasionally, some vehicles at the end of the queue would require another cycle to clear the intersection. 717 of 1101
San
Mateo
82 92
1 2
4 3
Elkhorn
Ct
Pioneer Ct
17th Ave
Bovet Rd
Concar Dr
Maple St
Edinburgh St
Borel Ave
22nd Ave
W 20th Ave
Alameda de Las Pulgas
S Dela
ware St
El Camino Real El Camino Real
Palm Ave
220 W. 20th Avenue Residential Development
Figure 5
Existing Traffic Volumes and Lane Configurations
Hayward Park
Caltrain
Station
X
= Signalized Intersection
= Stop Controlled Intersection
= Study Intersection
= Site Location
LEGEND
STOP
Junipero Serra
High School
Borel
Middle
School
San Mateo
City Hall
= AM(PM) Peak-Hour
Traffic Volumes
XX(XX)
W 20th
Ave
W 20th
Ave
Dwy
Alameda
W 20th
Ave
de lasPulgas
Elkhorn
Ct
El
CaminoReal
Pioneer
Ct
Project
Dwy
Elkhorn
Ct
1 2
3 4
STOP
STOP
STOP
W 20th
Ave
Elkhorn
Ct
Pioneer
Ct
W 20th
Ave
El
CaminoReal
Dwy
Alameda
W 20th
Ave
de lasPulgas
Project
Dwy
Elkhorn
Ct
3 2
1 4
32(11)
677(470)
57(103)
97(10)385(529)357(355)
42(46)
18(3)
190(178)
21(131)
39(35)
5(12)
2(23)
12(65)
10(9)0(1)57(49)
45(38)
411(230)
53(38)
9(13)
327(429)
11(14)
151(119)
1165(1428)
18(21)
308(189)856(968)72(101)
36(39)
37(45)
98(154)
321(419)
21(41)
85(140)
9(9)
53(42)
63(53)
4(6)
718 of 1101
220 W. 20th Avenue Residential Development TIA February 18, 2026 P a g e | 18

3. Opening Year Conditions
This chapter presents opening year traffic conditions, which are defined as conditions just prior to completion of the project. Traffic volumes for opening year conditions comprise volumes from existing traffic counts plus traffic generated by approved but not yet constructed developments in the vicinity of the site. This chapter describes the method for determining generated trips, the procedure used to determine opening year traffic volumes, and the resulting traffic conditions.

Roadway Network Under Opening Year Conditions
The transportation network under opening year conditions (without and with project) is assumed to be the same as the roadway network under existing conditions.

Opening Year Traffic Volumes
Opening Year AM and PM peak-hour traffic volumes (see Figure 6) were estimated by adding to existing traffic volumes the trips generated by nearby approved but not yet completed or occupied projects. The added traffic from approved but not yet constructed developments was based on the list of approved projects obtained from the City of San Mateo website. Hexagon considered both the location and size of the approved developments in order to eliminate those that were too far away or too small to affect traffic conditions at the selected study intersections. The following projects were included:
• 1919 O’Farrell Street
• Bay Meadows Phase II Extension (Buildings 2 and 3)
The 1919 O’Farrell Street project is proposed to have 87 multi-family dwelling units within 7 floors. The trips were estimated using the ITE Trip Generation Manual, 12th Edition, Multifamily Housing (MidRise) (Land Use Code 221) trip generation rates. There are estimated to be 16 AM trips and 14 PM peak hour trips. The trip distribution for the nearby streets was assumed to be similar to the project’s trip distribution, as described in the next section.

The Bay Meadows Phase II Extension project is part of the larger Bay Meadows Development mixeduse project. Most of the Bay Meadows buildings have been built, except for Buildings 2 and 3. Building 2 will consist of 15,500 square feet (s.f.) of office use, 14,800 s.f. of retail, and 88 dwelling units.

Building 3 will consist of 12,900 s.f. of office use, 12,400 s.f. of retail, and 76 dwelling units. Thus, Buildings 2 and 3 are estimated to have 126 AM and 192 PM peak hour trips, based on the project’s traffic study. The traffic in the project area was assumed using the estimated trips for Buildings 2 and 3 and the same distribution as the Bay Meadows Phase II project. Peak-hour traffic volumes for all intersections and study scenarios are tabulated in Appendix B. 719 of 1101
Hayward Park
Caltrain
Station
X = Study Intersection
= Site Location
LEGEND
XX(XX) = AM(PM) Peak-Hour Traffic Volumes
Junipero Serra
High School
Borel
Middle
School
San Mateo
City Hall
San
Mateo
Peninsula Golf
and Country Club
82 92
1 2
4 3
Elkhorn
Ct
Pioneer Ct
17th Ave
Bovet Rd
Concar Dr
Maple St
Edinburgh St
Borel Ave
22nd Ave
W 20th Ave
Alameda de Las Pulgas
S Dela
ware St
El Camino Real El Camino Real
Palm Ave
Barneson Ave
220 W. 20th Avenue Residential Development
Figure 6
Opening Year Traffic Volumes
W 20th
Ave
W 20th
Ave
Dwy
Alameda
W 20th
Ave
de lasPulgas
Elkhorn
Ct
El
CaminoReal
Pioneer
Ct
Project
Dwy
Elkhorn
Ct
1 2
3 4 32(11) 677(470) 57(103) 97(10) 385(529) 359(358)
42(46)
18(3)
193(180)
21(131)
39(35)
5(12)
2(23)
12(65)
10(9)
0(1)
57(49)
45(38)
416(238)
53(38)
9(13)
335(434)
11(14)
153(122)
1170(1436)
18(21)
311(194)
859(974)
72(101)
36(39)
37(45)
98(154)
326(422)
21(41)
88(143)
9(9)
53(42)
63(53)
4(6)
720 of 1101
220 W. 20th Avenue Residential Development TIA February 18, 2026 P a g e | 20
Project Trip Estimates
The magnitude of traffic produced by the new development and the locations where that traffic would appear were estimated using a three-step process: (1) trip generation, (2) trip distribution, and (3) trip assignment. In determining project trip generation, the magnitude of traffic entering and exiting the site is estimated for the AM and PM peak hours. As part of the project trip distribution, an estimate is made of the directions to and from which the projects trips would travel. In the project trip assignment, the project trips are assigned to specific streets and intersections. These procedures are described below.

Trip Generation
Through empirical research, data have been collected that show trip generation rates for many types of land uses. The research is compiled in the ITE Trip Generation Manual, 12th Edition. The magnitude of traffic added to the roadway system by a particular development is estimated by multiplying the applicable trip generation rates by the size of the development.

The ITE rates for Multifamily Housing (Mid-Rise) (Close to Rail Transit) (Land Use Code 221) were used. This category refers to apartments and condominiums located within the same building that have between four to ten stories and are within 0.5 mile of a transit station.

Based on this trip rate, the project is estimated to generate a gross of 1,102 daily trips with 74 trips (29 inbound and 45 outbound) during the AM peak hour and 67 trips (44 inbound and 23 outbound) during the PM peak hour.

Existing Trip Credit
The existing building on site would be demolished. AM and PM peak hour-trip credits were based on driveway counts at the existing driveways on Elkhorn Court and W. 20th Avenue conducted on September 11, 2025. Daily trips were estimated using a ratio of daily trips to peak hour trips between the existing average office AM and PM peak hour trips and ITE rates for General Office (Land Use Code 710). The counts showed that the existing development on site generated 14 trips (9 inbound and 5 outbound) during the AM peak hour and 19 trips (10 inbound and 9 outbound) during the PM peak hour.

Net Project Trips
After subtracting the existing trips that would be removed, the project is estimated to generate 995 net new daily trips, with 60 trips (20 inbound and 40 outbound) during the AM peak hour and 48 trips (34 inbound and 14 outbound) during the PM peak hour (see Table 5).

Trip Distribution and Assignment
The trip distribution pattern for the proposed residential development was estimated based on traffic patterns on the surrounding roadway system and on the locations of complementary land uses. The peak-hour trips associated with the project site were added to the roadway network in accordance with the distribution pattern discussed above, the roadway network connections, freeway access points, and the location of the project driveway.

Figure 7 shows the project trip distribution and trip assignment at the study intersections. A tabular summary of project traffic at each study intersection is contained in Appendix B. 721 of 1101
220 W. 20th Avenue Residential Development TIA February 18, 2026 P a g e | 21
Table 5
Project Trip Generation Estimates
Opening Year Plus Project Traffic Volumes
Project trips, as represented in the above project trip assignment, were added to opening year traffic volumes to obtain opening year plus project traffic volumes (see Figure 8).

Land Use Size Variable Avg.Daily
Rate
Daily
Trips
Avg.

Rate In Out Total Avg. Rate In Out Total
Proposed Land Use
Multifamily Housing1 232 d.u. 4.75 1,102 0.32 29 45 74 0.29 44 23 67 Existing Land Use
Existing Office Building2 107 9 5 14 10 9 19
Net Project Trips 995 20 40 60 34 14 48
SOURCE: ITE Trip Generation Manual, 12th Edition 2025
d.u. = dwelling units
1 2 Existing AM and PM peak hour trips were collected from traffic counts conducted on September 11, 2025. Daily trips were estimated using a ratio of ITE daily trips to ITE peak-hour trips for General Office (Land Use 710).

AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Trips Trips
ITE rates for Multifamily Housing (Mid-Rise) (Close to Rail Transit) (Land Use 221) are used. Mid-rise multifamily housing includes apartments and condominiums located in a building that has between four and ten foors of living space. 722 of 1101 Hayward Park
Caltrain
Station
X
= Trip Distribution
= Study Intersection
= Site Location
LEGEND
XX%
XX(XX) = AM(PM) Peak-Hour Trips
XX(XX) = Gross AM(PM) Peak-Hour Trips
Junipero Serra
High School
Borel
Middle
School
San Mateo
City Hall
San
Mateo
Peninsula Golf
and Country Club
82 92
1 2
4 3
Elkhorn C lkhorn Ct
Borel Ave Borel Ave
Pioneer Ct
17th Ave
Bovet Rd
Concar Dr
22nd Ave
W 20th Ave
Alameda de Las Pulgas
S Dela
ware St
El Camino Real El Camino Real
Palm Ave
15%
15%
5%
5%
25%
35%
29(44)
45(23)
29(44)
45(23)
220 W. 20th Avenue Residential Development
Figure 7
Project Trip Distribution and Trip Assignment
W 20th
Ave
W 20th
Ave
Dwy
Alameda
W 20th
Ave
de lasPulgas
Elkhorn
Ct
El
CaminoReal
Pioneer
Ct
Project
Dwy
Elkhorn
Ct
1 2
3 4 1(2) 2(4)
2(1)
5(1)
3(5)
14(24)
27(10)
6(2)
9(4)33(13)
17(29)
5(8)
See Gross Project
Driveway Trips
723 of 1101
Hayward Park
Caltrain
Station
X = Study Intersection
= Site Location
LEGEND
XX(XX) = AM(PM) Peak-Hour Traffic Volumes
Junipero Serra
High School
Borel
Middle
School
San Mateo
City Hall
San
Mateo
Peninsula Golf
and Country Club
82 92
1 2
4 3
Elkhorn
Ct
Pioneer Ct
17th Ave
Bovet Rd
Concar Dr
Maple St
Edinburgh St
Borel Ave
22nd Ave
W 20th Ave
Alameda de Las Pulgas
S Dela
ware St
El Camino Real El Camino Real
Palm Ave
Barneson Ave
220 W. 20th Avenue Residential Development
Figure 8
Opening Year Plus Project Traffic Volumes
W 20th
Ave
W 20th
Ave
Dwy
Alameda
W 20th
Ave
de lasPulgas
Elkhorn
Ct
El
CaminoReal
Pioneer
Ct
Project
Dwy
Elkhorn
Ct
1 2
3 4 32(11) 677(470) 58(105) 97(10) 385(529) 361(362)
44(47)
18(3)
198(181)
21(131)
39(35)
5(12)
2(23)
12(65)
19(13)0(1)90(62)
45(38)
416(238)
70(67)
14(21)
335(434)
11(14)
156(127)
1170(1436)
18(21)
325(218)859(974)72(101)
36(39)
37(45)
98(154)
353(432)
21(41)
94(145)
29(44)53(42)
63(53)
45(23)
724 of 1101
220 W. 20th Avenue Residential Development TIA February 18, 2026 P a g e | 24
Intersection Levels of Service
The results of the intersection level of service analysis (see Table 6) show that all study intersections would operate at acceptable levels during both the AM and PM peak hours of traffic under opening year and opening year plus project conditions. The intersection level of service calculation sheets for the project are included in Appendix C.

Table 6
Opening Year Plus Project Intersection Levels of Service # Intersection Pk Hr Control
Avg.

Delay LOS
Avg.

Delay LOS
Incr. in
Avg.

Delay
Signal
Warrant
Met?
AM 26.8 C 27.0 C 0.2 --
PM 28.8 C 29.1 C 0.3 --
AM 26.7 D 35.2 E >4.0 No
PM 26.1 D 30.2 D >4.0 No
AM 31.0 C 32.2 C 1.2 --
PM 37.0 D 37.5 D 0.5 --
AM 8.6 A 8.8 A 0.2 --
PM 8.6 A 8.7 A 0.1 --
1 Alameda de las Pulgas
& W 20th Avenue
Signal
2 Elkhorn Court/Pioneer
Court & W 20th Avenue
TWSC
Opening Year Opening Year + Project
Notes
For TWSC intersections, delay represents worst approach delay and LOS represents worst approach LOS. 3 El Camino Real & W
20th Avenue
Signal
4 Elkhorn Court & Project
Driveway
TWSC
725 of 1101
220 W. 20th Avenue Residential Development TIA February 18, 2026 P a g e | 25

4. Cumulative Conditions
This chapter describes the roadway traffic operations under cumulative no project conditions and cumulative plus project conditions. Cumulative traffic volumes reflect traffic volumes assuming buildout of the City’s General Plan. The chapter includes the procedures used to determine cumulative traffic volumes and a description of the resulting traffic conditions and any adverse effects caused by the project.

Roadway Network under Cumulative Conditions
The roadway network under cumulative conditions was assumed to be the same as existing and opening year conditions.

Cumulative Traffic Volumes
Cumulative traffic volumes were developed using the latest citywide travel demand model, in consultation with City’s modelling on-call consultation Kittelson & Associates. As a conservative measure, cumulative condition volumes were assumed to not include the traffic associated with the addition of the project. Cumulative no project traffic volumes are shown in Figure 9.

For cumulative plus project traffic volumes, the trips generated by the project (see Chapter 3) were then added to the cumulative no project traffic volumes to yield cumulative plus project traffic volumes (see Figure 10). A tabular summary of pending trips and cumulative traffic volumes at each study intersection is contained in Appendix B.
726 of 1101
Hayward Park
Caltrain
Station
X = Study Intersection
= Site Location
LEGEND
XX(XX) = AM(PM) Peak-Hour Traffic Volumes
Junipero Serra
High School
Borel
Middle
School
San Mateo
City Hall
San
Mateo
Peninsula Golf
and Country Club
82 92
1 2
4 3
Elkhorn
Ct
Pioneer Ct
17th Ave
Bovet Rd
Concar Dr
Maple St
Edinburgh St
Borel Ave
22nd Ave
W 20th Ave
Alameda de Las Pulgas
S Dela
ware St
El Camino Real El Camino Real
Palm Ave
Barneson Ave
220 W. 20th Avenue Residential Development
Figure 9
Cumulative No Project Traffic Volumes
W 20th
Ave
W 20th
Ave
Dwy
Alameda
W 20th
Ave
de lasPulgas
Elkhorn
Ct
El
CaminoReal
Pioneer
Ct
Project
Dwy
Elkhorn
Ct
1 2
3 4 47(17) 838(537) 57(157) 97(10) 437(730) 530(414)
84(99)
38(10)
193(180)
21(131)
39(50)
10(40)
2(23)
12(65)
10(9)
0(1)
57(49)
45(38)
444(304)
53(38)
9(13)
512(521)
11(14)
186(161)
1908(1832)
107(21)
311(233)
1304(1519)
72(155)
36(50)
39(72)
167(166)
380(422)
200(73)
88(233)
9(9)
53(42)
63(53)
4(6)
727 of 1101
Hayward Park
Caltrain
Station
X = Study Intersection
= Site Location
LEGEND
XX(XX) = AM(PM) Peak-Hour Traffic Volumes
Junipero Serra
High School
Borel
Middle
School
San Mateo
City Hall
San
Mateo
Peninsula Golf
and Country Club
82 92
1 2
4 3
Elkhorn
Ct
Pioneer Ct
17th Ave
Bovet Rd
Concar Dr
Maple St
Edinburgh St
Borel Ave
22nd Ave
W 20th Ave
Alameda de Las Pulgas
S Dela
ware St
El Camino Real El Camino Real
Palm Ave
Barneson Ave
220 W. 20th Avenue Residential Development
Figure 10
Cumulative Plus Project Traffic Volumes
W 20th
Ave
W 20th
Ave
Dwy
Alameda
W 20th
Ave
de lasPulgas
Elkhorn
Ct
El
CaminoReal
Pioneer
Ct
Project
Dwy
Elkhorn
Ct
1 2
3 4 47(17) 838(537) 58(159) 97(10) 437(730) 532(418)
86(100)
38(10)
198(181)
21(131)
39(50)
10(40)
2(23)
12(65)
19(13)
0(1)
90(62)
45(38)
444(304)
70(67)
14(21)
512(521)
11(14)
189(166)
1908(1832)
107(21)
325(257)
1304(1519)
72(155)
36(50)
39(72)
167(166)
407(432)
200(73)
94(235)
29(44)
53(42)
63(53)
45(23)
728 of 1101
220 W. 20th Avenue Residential Development TIA February 18, 2026 P a g e | 28
Cumulative Intersection Levels of Service
The results of the intersection level of service analysis show that all intersections except for the Elkhorn Court/Project Driveway intersection would operate under an unacceptable level of service during one of the peak hours under cumulative and cumulative plus project conditions (see Table 7). The level of service calculation sheets are included in Appendix C.

Because the City’s level of service standard is a mid-level D with an average delay of 45 seconds, the Alameda de las Pulgas/W. 20th Avenue and the El Camino Real/W. 20th Avenue intersections are considered to operate at an unacceptable level of service D during the AM peak hour under cumulative and cumulative plus project conditions. The El Camino Real/W. 20th Avenue intersection would also operate at an unacceptable level of service E during the PM peak hour under cumulative and cumulative plus project conditions. However, the project is not expected to create an adverse effect on either intersection during either peak hour as the increase in average delay is less than 4 seconds.

The Elkhorn Court/Pioneer Court and W. 20th Avenue intersection is expected to degrade from an acceptable level of service from E to unacceptable level of service F under cumulative plus project conditions during the AM peak hour. However, as described further below, the intersection would not meet the signal warrant analysis, and therefore, the project would not have an adverse effect on the intersection.

Table 7
Cumulative Intersection Levels of Service
Signal Warrant Analysis
The need for signalization of an unsignalized intersection is assessed based on the Peak Hour Volume Warrant (Warrant 3) described in the California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices for Streets and Highways (CA MUTCD), Part 4, Highway Traffic Signals, 2014. This method makes no evaluation of intersection level of service, but simply provides an indication of whether vehicular peak hour traffic volumes are, or would be, sufficient to justify the installation of a traffic signal. Intersections that meet the peak hour warrant are subject to further analysis before determining that a traffic signal is # Intersection Pk Hr Control
Avg.

Delay LOS
Signal
Warrant
Met?
Avg.

Delay LOS
Incr. in
Avg.

Delay
Signal
Warrant
Met?
AM 49.3 D -- 50.0 D 0.7 --
PM 36.1 D -- 36.5 D 0.4 --
AM 41.9 E No 67.9 F >4.0 No
PM 36.1 E No 44.4 E >4.0 No
AM 51.6 D -- 53.0 D 1.4 --
PM 73.6 E -- 76.2 E 2.6 --
AM 8.6 A -- 8.8 A 0.2 --
PM 8.6 A -- 8.7 A 0.1 --
Bold indicates a substandard level of service.

Notes
For TWSC intersections, delay represents worst approach delay and LOS represents worst approach LOS. 3 El Camino Real & W
20th Avenue
Signal
4 Elkhorn Court & Project
Driveway
TWSC
1 Alameda de las Pulgas
& W 20th Avenue
Signal
2 Elkhorn Court/Pioneer
Court & W 20th Avenue
TWSC
Cumulative Cumulative + Project
729 of 1101
220 W. 20th Avenue Residential Development TIA February 18, 2026 P a g e | 29
necessary. Peak-hour traffic signal warrant checks were conducted for the Elkhorn Court/Pioneer Court and W. 20th Avenue intersection.

The results indicate that the projected traffic volumes at the Elkhorn Court/Pioneer Court and W. 20th Avenue intersection would not meet the thresholds that warrant signalization during both the AM and PM peak hours under all scenarios. The traffic signal warrant calculations are included in Appendix D. 730 of 1101
220 W. 20th Avenue Residential Development TIA February 18, 2026 P a g e | 30

5. Other Transportation Issues
This chapter presents other transportation issues associated with the project, including:
• Vehicle queuing analysis
• Site access and circulation
• Effects on pedestrians, bicycles, and transit facilities • Parking
The analyses in this chapter are based on the City’s Transportation Study Guidelines and professional judgment in accordance with the standards and methods employed by the traffic engineering community. Although operational issues are not considered CEQA impacts, they do describe traffic conditions that are relevant to describing the project environment.

Vehicle Queuing Analysis
The analysis of intersection levels of service was supplemented with a vehicle queuing analysis for leftturn lanes at intersections where the project would add a substantial number of left turns. This analysis provides a basis for estimating future storage requirements at the intersections under existing, opening year, cumulative, and project conditions. Vehicle queues were estimated using Synchro, as described in Chapter 1. Synchro reports the queue length (feet per lane); however, it is assumed that one vehicle queued is approximately 25 feet. Therefore, to be conservative, the queue lengths were increased to a factor of 25 to account for each vehicle. The following left-turn movements were evaluated, and the results of the queueing analysis are summarized in Table 8:
• Eastbound lane at W. 20th Avenue to Elkhorn Court
• Southbound lane from Elkhorn Court to W. 20th Avenue
• Eastbound lanes at El Camino Real and W. 20th Avenue
The queuing analysis indicates that the project would not cause queuing deficiencies for any of the studied movements.
731 of 1101
220 W. 20th Avenue Residential Development TIA February 18, 2026 P a g e | 31
Table 8
Intersection Queuing Analysis
Elkhorn Court and W. 20th Avenue
Along eastbound W. 20th Avenue at Elkhorn Court, there is approximately 75 feet between the intersection and the first driveway approaching the intersection. Under existing and future conditions,

AM PM AM PM AM PM AM PM
Existing
95th %. Queue1 (veh/ln) 2 2 1 1 12 16 11 14
95th %. Queue (ft/ln) 50 50 25 25 300 400 275 350
Storage (ft/ln) 200 200 75 75 650 650 650 650
Adequate (Y/N) Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y
Opening Year
95th %. Queue1 (veh/ln) 2 2 1 1 12 17 11 14
95th %. Queue (ft/ln) 50 50 25 25 300 425 275 350
Storage (ft./ ln.) 200 200 75 75 650 650 650 650
Adequate (Y/N) Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y
Opening Year Plus Project
95th %. Queue1 (veh/ln) 3 2 1 1 13 17 12 15
95th %. Queue (ft/ln) 75 50 25 25 325 425 300 375
Storage (ft/ln) 200 200 75 75 650 650 650 650
Adequate (Y/N) Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y
Cumulative
95th %. Queue1 (veh/ln) 2 2 1 1 21 24 20 19
95th %. Queue (ft/ln) 50 50 25 25 525 600 500 475
Storage (ft/ln) 200 200 75 75 650 650 650 650
Adequate (Y/N) Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y
Cumulative Plus Project
95th %. Queue1 (veh/ln) 5 3 1 1 22 24 22 19
95th %. Queue (ft/ln) 125 75 25 25 550 600 550 475
Storage (ft/ln) 200 200 75 75 650 650 650 650
Adequate (Y/N) Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y
Notes:
1 Synchro reports the queue length. Assume 25 feet per vehicle queued. 2 Synchro reports the queue length per lane.
3 4
5 EBL Lane
Storage length is measured from the limit line to the existing/proposed driveway for 220 W 20th Avenue.

Storage length is measured from the limit line to the Elkhorn Court/Pioneer Court intersection, where the lanes change from one lane to two lanes.

Storage length is measured from the intersection to the existing driveway.

Analysis Scenario
EBL/T/R Lane
Elkhorn Ct & W 20th Ave
EBL/T/R Lane5 SBL/T/R Lane4
SB = Southbound, EB = Eastbound, L/T/R = Left/Through/Right movement El Camino Real & W 20th Ave2,3
732 of 1101
220 W. 20th Avenue Residential Development TIA February 18, 2026 P a g e | 32
the eastbound movement has one lane for all movements. To determine if the project would require an eastbound left-turn lane, the 95th percentile queue for the eastbound movement was analyzed.

With the project, the eastbound left-turn movement would have 14 AM peak hour trips and 21 PM peak hour trips under opening year plus project and cumulative plus project conditions. This calculates to one trip every 2 to 4 minutes. Based on the Synchro queuing analysis, the eastbound movement queue is calculated to be minimal, with one vehicle queued, as shown in Table 8. With the upstream signal at El Camino Real, the eastbound left-turn vehicles would be able to find gaps within the westbound traffic to make the turn. Furthermore, the eastbound movement has an approximately 20-foot-wide travel lane, which would allow eastbound through vehicles to go around a vehicle waiting to turn left. With the short reported queue, any eastbound left-turn trips along W. 20th Avenue at Elkhorn Court would not cause long delays for the eastbound through traffic. As shown in the Appendix (see Synchro LOS analysis for this intersection), the eastbound approach delay is expected to be less than one second on average, and therefore, would not require an eastbound left-turn pocket with the project.

Site Access and Circulation
A review of the project site plan was performed to determine if adequate site access and on-site circulation would be provided and to identify any access or circulation issues that should be improved.

This review is based on the site plan dated December 17, 2025 (see Figure 2 in Chapter 1).

Vehicular Site Access
Vehicular site access would be provided via a two-way, 24-foot-wide driveway to enter the parking garage. The driveway would be on Elkhorn Court, approximately 200 feet north of W. 20th Avenue. The total width of the driveway would be 43 feet, to allow for trash to be wheeled out onto the curb just north of the garage entrance.

Based on the City’s Zoning Code Section 27.64.025, driveways serving three or more parking spaces must be a minimum of 12 feet wide and residential driveways must not exceed 20 lineal feet in width.

The proposed 24-foot-wide driveway exceeds the 20 feet maximum for residential driveways accessing three or more parking spaces. However, the City allows wider driveways if approved by the Zoning Administrator and Director of Public Works.

Recommendation: The project should coordinate with the City of San Mateo to get approval of the 24-foot-wide driveway.

The City’s Objective Design Standards (ODS) for Multi-Family and Residential Mixed-Use Projects provide guidelines for residential development. For developments that front more than one street, driveways and entrances to parking facilities shall be located on the secondary street frontage, side street, or alley. The project fronts W. 20th Avenue and Elkhorn Court. The project driveway is on Elkhorn Court, which is a local street per General Plan definitions. Thus, the project driveway location is consistent with city guidelines.

Traffic Operations at the Project Driveway
Traffic operations at the project driveway on Elkhorn Court were evaluated to identify whether there would be vehicle queuing issues. The trips that would occur at the project driveway are 74 trips (29 inbound and 45 outbound) during the AM peak hour and 67 trips (44 inbound and 23 outbound) during the PM peak hour.

All trips are expected to make a left turn into the driveway and a right turn out of the driveway. Traffic along Elkhorn Court is low. Therefore, vehicles making a left-turn into the driveway are expected to experience minimal delay, given that the project driveway is near the end of the cul-de-sac, and is not expected to affect traffic flow on northbound Elkhorn Court. Therefore, no operational issues related to 733 of 1101
220 W. 20th Avenue Residential Development TIA February 18, 2026 P a g e | 33
vehicle queueing and/or vehicle delay are expected to occur at the driveway. Some minor on-site vehicle queuing could occur due to a combination of the inherent unpredictability of vehicle arrivals at the driveway and the random occurrence of gaps in traffic along Elkhorn Court. However, given the estimated AM outbound trips at the driveway, there would be approximately one vehicle every 80 seconds, the probability of two or more outbound vehicles exiting the site at the same time would be low. The maximum queue is not expected to affect the on-site circulation.

Sight Distance at Project Driveway
The project driveways should be free and clear of any obstructions to provide adequate sight distance, thereby ensuring that exiting vehicles can see pedestrians on the sidewalk and vehicles and bicycles traveling on Elkhorn Court. Providing the appropriate sight distance reduces the likelihood of a collision at a driveway and provides drivers with the ability to locate sufficient gaps in traffic and exit a driveway.

Any landscaping and signage should be located in such a way to ensure an unobstructed view for drivers exiting the site. The minimum acceptable sight distance often considered is the Caltrans stopping sight distance.

The speed limit on Elkhorn Court is assumed to be 25 mph. According to the Caltrans sight distance standards, the stopping sight distance for a 25-mph roadway is 200 feet (based on a design speed of 30 mph). The driveway is just south of the end of the cul-de-sac. Because of the driveway location, all vehicles are expected to make a right turn out of the project driveway onto Elkhorn Court. The end of the cul-de-sac has two driveways. However, exiting vehicles from the project driveway would be able to clearly see the vehicles exiting out of the adjacent driveway. On-street parking would be removed between the project driveway and the existing driveway to the north. Thus, adequate sight distance would be provided.

According to the site plan, landscaping and street trees would be added along the project frontage on Elkhorn Court. Landscaping near the driveways would be 2 to 3 feet high at maturity and trees near the driveway would have a high canopy of at least 8 feet high. The landscaping features shown on the site plan are not expected to obstruct the vision of exiting drivers. Therefore, the sight distances at the project driveways would be adequate.

Corner Visibility at Elkhorn Court and W. 20th Avenue
The project site fronts the northwest corner of the Elkhorn Court/W. 20th Avenue intersection. The buildings need to be located and designed in such a way that the intersection corner is free and clear of any obstructions to optimize corner visibility. Any landscaping and signage within the safety visibility triangle at the intersection corner should be no taller than 3 feet and in such a way to ensure an unobstructed view for drivers on the street.

The landscape plan shows landscaping and street trees would be added along Elkhorn Court and W. 20th Avenue. The landscaping provided at the corner would be less than 3 feet tall within 35 feet from the corner, which would maintain the required sight distance. The type and location of the street trees would be determined by the City of San Mateo at the implementation stage. Note that street trees have a high canopy and would not obstruct the view of drivers.

Vehicle On-Site Circulation
On-site vehicular circulation was reviewed in accordance with the City of San Mateo Zoning Code and generally accepted traffic engineering standards. The driveway would lead to the parking garage (see Figure 11).
734 of 1101
220 W. 20th Avenue Residential Development
Figure 11A
Parking Garage Plans
735 of 1101
220 W. 20th Avenue Residential Development
Figure 11B
Parking Garage Plans
LEVEL B1 - PARKING PLAN
736 of 1101
220 W. 20th Avenue Residential Development TIA February 18, 2026 P a g e | 36
Typically, adequate stacking space for two inbound vehicles (approximately 40 to 50 feet) should be provided between the sidewalk and any entry gates, on-site drive aisles, or on-site perpendicular parking spaces. This prevents vehicles from queuing onto the sidewalk or the street. The driveway provides access to two drive aisles, and there would be one residential gate along each drive aisle, approximately 100 feet directly west of the driveway and 130 feet into the garage, down first north/south drive aisle. Thus, the garage would have space for at least four vehicles queued within the garage before blocking the sidewalk. Given that there would be a maximum of 44 inbound trips during the PM peak hour, which calculates to about one inbound trip every one to two minutes, the probability of more than four inbound vehicles entering the site at the same time and queuing onto the street would be low, and therefore, it is unlikely that inbound vehicles would block the sidewalk. Therefore, inbound vehicles are not expected to cause queuing issues on the street.

On-site vehicle circulation was also evaluated to identify whether there would be dead-end aisles within the parking garage (see Figure 11). Dead-end aisles are undesirable because drivers can enter the aisle, and upon discovering that there is no available parking, must back out or conduct three-point turns. The garage plan shows at least one dead-end aisle within each floor of the garage. Most of the dead-end aisles do not have the City’s required minimum of 3 feet between the edge of the parking space and the wall, except level B1. However, all the dead-end aisles are within the residential parking areas, which are gated. Thus, the project should assign parking spaces to ensure that residents do not drive down the aisle without knowing that a parking space is available. In addition, there would be 6 tandem parking spaces in the southwest section of Level B1. All tandem parking spaces should be assigned to one unit per tandem stall.

Recommendation: The project should assign parking spaces to ensure that residents do not drive down the aisle without knowing that a parking space is available. All tandem parking spaces should be assigned to one unit per tandem stall.

The project would provide 90-degree parking stalls throughout the parking garage. The City’s standard minimum width for two-way drive aisles is 24 feet wide where 90-degree parking is provided. This allows sufficient room for vehicles to back out of the parking spaces. According to the site plan, the drive aisles throughout the parking garage measure 24 feet wide. Thus, adequate access to all parking stalls would be provided throughout the site.

The site would also provide 22.5-foot-wide ramps within the garage. Typically, the City requires a 28- foot-wide wall-to-wall garage ramp for two-way traffic. Passenger vehicle turning templates were checked for all three levels of the garage ramps (see Appendix E). Vehicles would not need to encroach into the opposing travel lane on the ramps. However, at the turns, the vehicle making the inside turn would need to start in the opposing lane. This would occur inside a drive aisle, not on the ramp. There would be sufficient visibility for vehicles to see each other and negotiate. The template was checked using the 2018 AASHTO Passenger Vehicle, which measures 19 feet in length. It should be noted that the AASHTO passenger vehicle represents a large SUV. Typical passenger vehicles have smaller dimensions and would not need to encroach into the opposing lane to make turns. With the recommendation below, it is expected that the garage circulation would operate acceptably.

Based on the City’s standard details for garage ramps, ramp slope should be 18% or less. The garage plans indicate the proposed ramps would have slopes between 10% and 14%. Thus, the garage ramp slopes meet city standards.

Recommendation: The project should provide mirrors at the circular ramps to warn opposing vehicles approaching the ramp.

Parking Stalls
The proposed dimensions of standard stalls are 18 feet long and 8.5 to 9 feet wide. The proposed dimensions of compact stalls are 17 feet long and 8.5 feet wide. 737 of 1101
220 W. 20th Avenue Residential Development TIA February 18, 2026 P a g e | 37
Based on the City’s standard details for parking, standard stalls should be a minimum of 18 feet long and 8.5 feet wide and compact stalls should be a minimum of 17 feet long and 8 feet wide. Thus, the proposed standard and compact parking stalls meet the City minimum requirements.

The City also requires end stalls (next to a wall) to be at least 9 feet wide if at least one stall exists between the two ends. Two adjacent end stalls are required to be 10 feet wide. The end stalls proposed by the project vary from 8.5 feet to 9 feet wide, including adjacent end stalls.

Recommendation: The applicant should coordinate with the City on a waiver to allow for narrower end stalls than required by City Parking Standard Drawing 3.1.191.

Access to Mechanial Parking System
As shown on the site plan, the project would install three Klaus Parkboard Mechanized Pallet systems in the northeast and southwest sections of parking level 2 to provide 21 mechanical stalls for residents.

The northeast section of mechanical stalls would provide 16 parking spaces within two systems (9 spaces within one system and 7 spaces within another system). The southwest section of lifts would provide 5 parking spaces. In order to move vehicles within the system, there would be one empty space in the front row. The proposed mechanical parking system moves the vehicles transversely. Thus, an open space along the front row allows vehicles in the back row to get in and out. Vehicles accessing a mechanical stall in the back row may need to wait in the drive aisle for the machine to move the vehicles in the front row out of the way. Because the mechanical parking would only be provided for a small number of vehicles (21 out of 279), the probability of more than one inbound vehicle accessing the mechanical stalls at the same time would be low, and any vehicles accessing the mechanical stalls would have a short wait, if any.

Passenger Loading
The site plan shows a passenger loading zone along W. 20th Avenue, near the Elkhorn Court intersection, which would provide convenient passenger loading for people going to and from the site using Uber/Lyft or other rideshare apps (e.g. Scoop, Grab).

Truck Access and Circulation
The project site plan was reviewed for truck access including delivery and moving trucks, garbage trucks, and emergency vehicles, as described below.

General Loading Operations
The City of San Mateo requires multi-family residential projects of 50 or more units to provide one onsite loading space that is a minimum of 10 feet wide and 25 feet long per City of San Mateo Section

27.64.390. However, on-site loading may be modified to on-street loading if the loading space is located at least 50 feet from any intersection and provides convenient access to building entrances without impeding use of the sidewalk or local traffic circulation. Thus, the project would be required to provide one loading space to serve the residential use. The project proposes one off-site loading zone along the curb that would be 8 feet wide and 37 feet long, approximately 40 feet south of the driveway and 160 feet from the intersection at Elkhorn Court and W. 20th Avenue. The loading zone would be directly in front of the building entry to the leasing office, which provides convenient loading for deliveries, mail, and overall loading operations. The loading zone would be protruding into the southbound travel lane by approximately 4 feet. However, the loading area would be concrete and the gutter would be relocated to the inside of the loading zone, which would differentiate the loading zone from the travel lane.

Garbage Collection Operations
The site plan indicates a trash room in the northeast corner on the ground floor of the garage along the Elkhorn Court project frontage. It is presumed that employees would wheel trash bins out from the trash 738 of 1101
220 W. 20th Avenue Residential Development TIA February 18, 2026 P a g e | 38
room to the trash staging area along Elkhorn Court, and garbage collection activities would occur on Elkhorn Court. Elkhorn Court north of the proposed project is a dead-end, thus there is no throughtraffic on the street. Thus it is expected that garbage collection activities will not negatively impact local traffic operations.

Emergency Vehicle Access
Per the 2022 California Fire Code Section D106, multi-family residential projects having more than 100 dwelling units should have two separate and approved fire apparatus access roads. The project site fronts Elkhorn Court to the east and W. 20th Avenue to the south, which are proposed as fire access (aerial access) roads. There is also an existing emergency vehicle access (EVA) lane on the west side of the building that connects to the existing EVA for The Lark property to the north of the project site and an exterior fire department walkway on the north side of the building.

Per the City’s Zoning Code Section 14.10.14, where buildings or portions of buildings have floors used for human occupancy located more than 30 feet above the access road, the minimum unobstructed width is 26 feet for aerial fire apparatus access. At least one of the required access roads meeting this requirement should be located within a minimum of 15 feet and maximum of 30 feet from the building and parallel to one entire side of the building. Both Elkhorn Court and W 20th Avenue have a minimum unobstructed width of 26 feet and are within 15 to 30 feet of the building (see Figure 12). Thus, the project meets city requirements for aerial access roads.

The existing EVA along the west side of the property is along the entire building length, which is greater than 150 feet long. The EVA connects around The Lark and to the cul-de-sac on Elkhorn Court, and thus, would not require a turnaround space.

Pedestrian, Bicycle, and Transit Facility Assessment
The following describes the pedestrian, bicycle, and transit facilities that serve the site and evaluates whether appropriate bicycle and pedestrian access and transit service are provided between the site and nearby destinations.

Pedestrian Operations
Pedestrian access to the project site is provided via sidewalks on Elkhorn Court and W. 20th Avenue.

The sidewalk along Elkhorn Court are proposed to be 5 feet wide with 7.5 feet of landscaping between the sidewalk and the curb, and the sidewalk along W. 20th Avenue would be 5 feet wide with 4.5 feet of landscaping between the sidewalk and curb. This would improve pedestrian comfort compared to the 5- foot-attached sidewalks currently in place along both streets. The building entrance for the residents is located on the east side of the building, accessible via Elkhorn Court. Ground floor units along W. 20th Avenue have entrances that open onto the sidewalk along W. 20th Avenue.

Within 0.5 mile of the project site, curb ramps are present at all signalized intersections. Some corners do not meet current ADA curb ramp designs, as they do not have truncated domes. Truncated domes are the standard design requirement for detectable warnings which enable people with visual disabilities to determine the boundary between the sidewalk and the street.

Pedestrian facilities in the study area consist of sidewalks and crosswalks. A complete network of sidewalks is present along all of the surrounding streets. Crosswalks with pedestrian signal heads are located at all of the signalized intersections in the project vicinity. 739 of 1101
220 W. 20th Avenue Residential Development
Figure 12
Emergency Vehicle Access
740 of 1101
220 W. 20th Avenue Residential Development TIA February 18, 2026 P a g e | 40
Bicycle Operations
Bikes can access the project site via Elkhorn Court. The project provides long-term bicycle storage for residents in two bicycle storage rooms: one located on the ground floor at the northeast corner of the building, and one located at the southwest corner of the building in the below-grade level of the garage which is accessed from Elkhorn Court. From the garage entrance, cyclists would use the vehicle ramp to access the lower level of the garage where the storage room is located. The bicycle room is located next to a staircase to access the residential floors.

The 2020 Bicycle Master Plan identified several bicycle improvements in San Mateo. The bike route on Borel Avenue between Edinburgh Street and Bovet Road has already been completed. Along the project frontage, there is a proposed Class II bike lane on W. 20th Avenue.

Additionally, the plan lists the following facilities in the project vicinity as proposed improvements:
• Class II bike lane on Alameda de las Pulgas between Crystal Springs Road and 26th Avenue • Class II bike lane on W. 20th Avenue between Alameda de las Pulgas and El Camino Real • Class II bike lane on Palm Avenue between South Boulevard and 25th Avenue • Class III bike route on O’Farrell Street north of W. 20th Avenue • Class III bike route on Isabella Avenue
• Class III bike route on 22nd Avenue between Isabella Avenue and Hacienda Street • Class III bike route on Hacienda Street between 22nd Avenue and 39th Avenue • Class III bike route on E. 20th Avenue between El Camino Real and Palm Avenue • Class III bike route on Barneson Avenue between Ashwood Court and South Boulevard • Class IV shared use path across SR 92 connecting O’Farrell Street to Bovet Road • Separated bike lane on Bovet Road between Borel Avenue and El Camino Real The project would not conflict with any of the planned bicycle facilities in the area.

Transit Operations
The project site is serviced by SamTrans route 294, 397, and ECR. The nearest bus stops to the project site are located at the intersection of El Camino Real and W 20th Avenue, approximately 930 feet from the project site, which serves routes 397 and ECR. The site is located within a half mile of the Hayward Park Caltrain station, which provides transit connection to Caltrain.

It is expected that the project would generate some transit trips to get to the employment areas or to other destinations. Based on the 2023 San Mateo County Commuter Survey Results, 15% of respondents opted for transit as their mode of transportation, which would result in 9 new riders during the AM and PM peak hours (15 percent of 60 net AM peak hour trips). Given that there are two existing bus routes during the peak hours (routes 294 and 397) with 5 buses running in the project vicinity within one hour, there would be an average increase of two riders per bus. The increase in transit ridership is assumed to be accommodated by the existing bus service as well as the Caltrain service in the area.

Parking
Vehicle Parking
Per CEQA, rail stops are considered major transit stops. California Assembly Bill 2097 (AB 2097) prohibits public agencies from imposing or enforcing any minimum vehicular parking requirement on developments located within one-half mile of a major transit stop. The project is located within one-half mile of the Hayward Park Caltrain station, thus per AB 2097 the project is not required to provide minimum parking per City of San Mateo guidelines. While AB 2097 removes minimum parking 741 of 1101
220 W. 20th Avenue Residential Development TIA February 18, 2026 P a g e | 41
requirements from new developments near major transit stops, parking should still be assessed based on market needs.

The project proposes a total of 279 parking spaces (270 residential parking spaces and 9 visitor parking spaces). Based on the ITE Parking Generation, 6th Edition, the average parking demand is 0.68 space per room/dwelling unit for Multifamily Housing – 1 Bedroom (Mid-Rise) (Land Use 218) and 0.78 space per room for Multifamily Housing – 2+ Bedroom (Mid-Rise) (Land Use 221) with no nearby rail transit.

Thus, the maximum parking demand would be 231 parking spaces (107 spaces for one-bedroom units and 124 spaces for 2+ bedroom units). Thus, the proposed number of parking spaces is expected to exceed the parking demand, based on ITE.

Based on the Americas with Disability Act (ADA) Standards for Accessible Design, parking facilities with 201 to 300 parking spaces should include at least 7 ADA parking spaces, with at least one van accessible space. The site plan shows 10 ADA spaces within levels 1 and 2 of the parking garage, including one van accessible space.

Bicycle Parking
The bicycle parking requirements for the project were calculated based on the City of San Mateo Zoning Code Section 27.64.262 which requires that bicycle parking shall be provided for all new development projects. A summary of bicycle parking requirements is shown in Table 9.

Table 9
Bicycle Parking Requirements
Long-Term Bicycle Parking
The long-term bicycle parking requirements are based on the number of units and number of bedrooms per unit. For projects located outside of the downtown area, one-bedroom units require 1 long-term bicycle parking space per unit, two-bedroom units require 1.25 bicycle parking spaces per unit, and three- or more bedroom units (or any dwelling unit over 1,400 s.f. of floor area) require 1.5 long-term parking spaces per unit. Thus, the project would require a total of 254 long-term bicycle parking spaces (158 spaces for one-bedroom units, 79 spaces for two-bedroom units, and 17 spaces for threebedroom units).

Land Use Size Unit
# of Spaces
Required2
# of Spaces
Required2
One-bedroom 158 d.u. 1.00 per unit 158 0.05 per unit 8
Two-bedroom 63 d.u. 1.25 per unit 79 0.10 per unit 6
Three-bedroom 11 d.u. 1.50 per unit 17 0.15 per unit 2
TOTAL 254 16
PROPOSED 254 16
d.u.=dwelling unit;
Notes:

2. Per City code, if after calculating the number of required bicycle parking spaces a quotient is obtained containing a fraction of one-half or more, an additional space shall be required;if such fraction is less than one-half it may be disregarded.

1. Requirements per City of San Mateo Zoning Code requirements for developments outside of the Downtown Area.

Proposed Project
Space Requirement1 Space Requirement1
Long-Term Bicycle Parking Spaces Short-Term Bicycle Parking Spaces 742 of 1101
220 W. 20th Avenue Residential Development TIA February 18, 2026 P a g e | 42
The project proposes 254 long-term bicycle parking spaces for the residential units in one secure bicycle storage room in level B1 of the garage and one secure bicycle storage room on the ground floor. Thus, the project exceeds the city’s requirements for long-term bicycle parking.

Short-Term Bicycle Parking
Short-term bicycle parking requirements are based on the number of units and number of bedrooms per unit. For projects located outside of the downtown area, one-bedroom units require 0.05 short-term spaces per unit, two-bedroom units require 0.10 short-term spaces per unit, and three- or more bedroom units (or any dwelling unit over 1,400 s.f. of floor area) require 0.15 short-term bicycle parking spaces per unit. Thus, the project would require a total of 16 short-term bicycle parking spaces (8 spaces for the one-bedroom units, 6 spaces for the two-bedroom units, and 2 spaces for the threebedroom units).

The project proposes 16 short-term bicycle parking spaces, which meets the city’s requirements for short-term bicycle parking. Per City code, short-term bicycle parking must be along project frontage and within 50 feet of the main entrance to the building or up to 100 feet where existing conditions do not allow placement within 50 feet. The site plan shows 5 bike racks in front of the proposed lounge and 3 bike racks in front of the proposed co-work space.
743 of 1101
220 W. 20th Avenue Residential Development TIA February 18, 2026 P a g e | 43

6. C/CAG Checklist
The City of San Mateo does not require a transportation demand management (TDM) plan for projects that result in a net increase of fewer than 100 PM peak hour trips. However, C/CAG requires a TDM Checklist for new developments and projects involving a change of use within the County. The C/CAG vehicle trip reduction target differs depending upon the project size, use, and distance to “high quality” transit. Because the project proposes greater than 50 units and is expected to generate greater than 500 daily vehicle trips, the project would be classified as a large residential project. Transit oriented developments (TOD) are located within one-half mile of “high-quality” transit. The project site is within one half mile of the Hayward Park Caltrain Station. Therefore, the project qualifies as a transit-oriented development (TOD). The vehicle trip reduction target for large residential TOD projects is 25 percent.

To accomplish the reduction goal, C/CAG provides a list of potential transportation demand management (TDM) measures, some of which are required and some of which are optional. Each measure has an associated point value and reduction percentage. Based on the C/CAG TDM policy, the project must first fulfill all required measures prior to selecting a sufficient number of additional recommended measures to achieve the minimum 25 percent trip reduction.

As shown in Table 10, the project is expected to reduce trips by 26 percent with the required and recommended TDM measures. This would satisfy the C/CAG trip reduction requirements. The C/CAG Checklist worksheet is presented in Appendix F.
744 of 1101
220 W. 20th Avenue Residential Development TIA February 18, 2026 P a g e | 44
Table 10
C/CAG TDM Checklist
TDM Measure
Estimated Trip
Reduction
Measure Required for All Sites
M2 Orientation, Education, Promotional Programs and/or Materials 1.0% M3 TDM Coordinator/Contact Person 0.5%
M4 Actively participate in Commute.org or TMA Equivalent 5.0% M6 Transit or Rideshareing Passes/Subsidies 10.0%
M8 Secure Bicycle Storage 1.0%
M9 Design Streets to Encourage Bike/Ped Access 1.0%
Measure Recommended Measures
M10 Delivery Amenities 1.0%
M11 Family-supportive Amenities 3.0%
M24 Bike Repair Station 0.5%
M26 Pedestrian Oriented Uses and Amenities on Ground Floor 3.0%

26.0%
Notes:

Source: C/CAG TDM Checklist for Large Residential Projects 745 of 1101
220 W. 20th Avenue Residential Development
Transportation Analysis
Technical Appendices
February 18, 2026
746 of 1101
Appendix A
Traffic Counts
747 of 1101
www.idaxdata.com
Date:

Peak Hour Count Period:

Peak Hour:

HV% PHF
EB 2% 0.43
WB 0% 0.63
NB 1% 0.86
SB 1% 0.82
TOTAL 1% 0.85
Peak Hour Count Summaries

UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT
7:45 AM 0 5 5 2 0 6 2 45 3 8 182 13 0 145 76 26 518 0
8:00 AM 0 5 31 2 0 12 6 81 4 3 145 23 1 114 114 27 568 0 8:15 AM 0 8 2 0 0 18 8 43 2 10 196 14 9 40 110 23 483 0 8:30 AM 0 3 1 1 0 6 2 21 0 2 154 7 3 45 85 21 351 1,920 0 21 39 5 0 42 18 190 9 23 677 57 13 344 385 97 1,920
0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 1 1 1 7 0 20
- 5% 0% 0% - 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1% 2% 8% 0% 2% 0% 1%

EB WB NB SB EB WB NB SB E W N S
7:45 AM 0 0 1 1 0 0 3 1 0 0 1 3
8:00 AM 0 0 4 3 0 0 1 1 0 4 0 5
8:15 AM 1 0 2 5 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 2
8:30 AM 0 0 3 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1
Peak Hour 1 0 10 9 20 0 1 5 2 8 2 4 2 11 19
2 8 0 4
3 2
2 4 4
7 2 9
Bicycles Pedestrians (Crossing Leg)
Total Total Total
Interval
Start
Heavy Vehicle Totals
Note: For complete count summary (all intervals), see following pages. ** Heavy Vehicle Classifications include FHWA Classes 4-13. ** Count Summaries include heavy vehicles, but exclude bicycles in overall count.

Rolling
Hour
Total Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
Peak Hour
Interval
Start
Driveway W 20th Ave Alameda de las Pulgas Alameda de las Pulgas 15-min
Total
7:45 AM to 8:45 AM
9/11/2025
7:00 AM to 9:00 AM
0 0
0 0
02 03
2 0
1 0
2 11
4 2
N
Alameda de las Pulgas
W 20th Ave
W 20th Ave
Alameda de
las Pulgas
DrivewayAlameda de
las Pulgas
TEV: 1,920
PHF: 0.8451
97 385
344
839
901
13 190
18 42
250
440
0 57
677
23 441
766
9 5
39 21
65 138 0
Garrett Strang
(415) 444-6376 [email protected]
748 of 1101
www.idaxdata.com
Count Summaries - All Vehicles

UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT
7:00 AM 0 1 0 0 0 2 0 18 0 1 88 5 0 33 50 27 225 0
7:15 AM 0 5 0 2 0 3 1 21 0 2 96 4 2 37 54 14 241 0
7:30 AM 0 2 0 1 0 2 3 18 0 3 145 8 2 55 67 21 327 0
7:45 AM 0 5 5 2 0 6 2 45 3 8 182 13 0 145 76 26 518 1,311 8:00 AM 0 5 31 2 0 12 6 81 4 3 145 23 1 114 114 27 568 1,654 8:15 AM 0 8 2 0 0 18 8 43 2 10 196 14 9 40 110 23 483 1,896 8:30 AM 0 3 1 1 0 6 2 21 0 2 154 7 3 45 85 21 351 1,920 8:45 AM 0 6 0 2 0 3 1 21 0 4 110 9 3 46 88 11 304 1,706 Count Total 0 35 39 10 0 52 23 268 9 33 1,116 83 20 515 644 170 3,017 0 21 39 5 0 42 18 190 9 23 677 57 13 344 385 97 1,920
0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 1 1 1 7 0 20
- 5% 0% 0% - 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1% 2% 8% 0% 2% 0% 1%

EB WB NB SB EB WB NB SB E W N S
7:00 AM 0 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0
7:15 AM 0 0 3 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
7:30 AM 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 2 2 0 4
7:45 AM 0 0 1 1 0 0 3 1 0 0 1 3
8:00 AM 0 0 4 3 0 0 1 1 0 4 0 5
8:15 AM 1 0 2 5 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 2
8:30 AM 0 0 3 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1
8:45 AM 0 0 3 7 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 3
Count Total 1 1 19 23 0 1 5 2 7 7 2 18
Peak Hour 1 0 10 9 0 1 5 2 2 4 2 11
44 8 34
20 8 19
3 2 2
10 0 5
7 2 9
8 0 4
3 0 8
2 4 4
3 0 2
8 0 0
Interval
Start
Heavy Vehicle Totals Bicycles Pedestrians (Crossing Leg) Total Total Total
Rolling
Hour
Total Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
Interval
Start
Driveway W 20th Ave Alameda de las Pulgas Alameda de las Pulgas 15-min
Total
Garrett Strang
(415) 444-6376 [email protected]
749 of 1101
www.idaxdata.com
Count Summaries - Heavy Vehicles

UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT
7:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 1 0 3 0
7:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 0 1 4 0 8 0
7:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 3 0
7:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 2 16
8:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 1 0 0 3 0 7 20
8:15 AM 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 1 1 3 0 8 20
8:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 3 20
8:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 7 0 10 28
Count Total 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 17 2 1 2 20 0 44
Pk Hr Heavy 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 1 1 1 7 0 20
Count Summaries - Bikes

UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT
7:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
7:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
7:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
7:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 0 1 0 0 4 4
8:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 2 6
8:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6
8:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 8
8:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4
Count Total 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 3 2 0 2 0 0 8
Pk Hr Bike 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 3 2 0 2 0 0 8
15-min
Total
Rolling
Hour
Total Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
Rolling
Hour
Total Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
Interval
Start
Driveway W 20th Ave Alameda de las Pulgas Alameda de las Pulgas Interval
Start
Driveway W 20th Ave Alameda de las Pulgas Alameda de las Pulgas 15-min
Total
Garrett Strang
(415) 444-6376 [email protected]
750 of 1101
www.idaxdata.com
Date:

Peak Hour Count Period:

Peak Hour:

HV% PHF
EB 1% 0.77
WB 0% 0.68
NB 0% 0.44
SB 0% 0.80
TOTAL 1% 0.73
Peak Hour Count Summaries

UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT
7:45 AM 0 0 79 0 0 2 148 13 0 0 0 1 0 8 0 1 252 0
8:00 AM 0 0 113 0 0 8 160 19 0 0 0 1 0 17 0 1 319 0
8:15 AM 0 5 87 4 0 16 51 9 0 1 0 3 0 16 0 3 195 0
8:30 AM 0 4 48 7 0 19 52 12 0 1 0 7 0 16 0 5 171 937
0 9 327 11 0 45 411 53 0 2 0 12 0 57 0 10 937
0 0 4 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5
- 0% 1% 0% - 0% 0% 0% - 0% - 0% - 0% - 0% 1%

EB WB NB SB EB WB NB SB E W N S
7:45 AM 1 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 2 6
8:00 AM 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 5 1
8:15 AM 2 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 2 0
8:30 AM 1 0 0 0 1 2 0 2 0 0 2 0
Peak Hour 4 1 0 0 5 1 8 0 2 11 0 0 11 7 18
2 2 1 2
1 5
1 4 8
1 1 6
Bicycles Pedestrians (Crossing Leg)
Total Total Total
Interval
Start
Heavy Vehicle Totals
Note: For complete count summary (all intervals), see following pages. ** Heavy Vehicle Classifications include FHWA Classes 4-13. ** Count Summaries include heavy vehicles, but exclude bicycles in overall count.

Rolling
Hour
Total Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
Peak Hour
Interval
Start
W 20th Ave W 20th Ave Pioneer Ct Elkhorn Ct
15-min
Total
7:45 AM to 8:45 AM
9/11/2025
7:00 AM to 9:00 AM
0 1
0 0
02 00
0 1
7 0
11 7
0 0
N
Elkhorn Ct
W 20th Ave
W 20th Ave
Pioneer Ct
W 20th Ave Elkhorn Ct
TEV: 937
PHF: 0.7343
10 0
57 67
62 0
53 411
45 509
396
0 12
2 0
56 14
0 11
327
9 347
423 0
Garrett Strang
(415) 444-6376 [email protected]
751 of 1101
www.idaxdata.com
Count Summaries - All Vehicles

UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT
7:00 AM 0 1 21 1 0 1 28 3 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 1 59 0
7:15 AM 0 1 20 1 0 2 32 4 0 1 0 1 0 8 0 5 75 0
7:30 AM 0 0 27 0 0 3 47 6 0 0 0 1 0 6 0 5 95 0
7:45 AM 0 0 79 0 0 2 148 13 0 0 0 1 0 8 0 1 252 481
8:00 AM 0 0 113 0 0 8 160 19 0 0 0 1 0 17 0 1 319 741
8:15 AM 0 5 87 4 0 16 51 9 0 1 0 3 0 16 0 3 195 861
8:30 AM 0 4 48 7 0 19 52 12 0 1 0 7 0 16 0 5 171 937
8:45 AM 0 1 44 11 0 18 45 12 0 2 0 12 0 21 0 1 167 852
Count Total 0 12 439 24 0 69 563 78 0 5 0 26 0 95 0 22 1,333 0 9 327 11 0 45 411 53 0 2 0 12 0 57 0 10 937
0 0 4 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5
- 0% 1% 0% - 0% 0% 0% - 0% - 0% - 0% - 0% 1%

EB WB NB SB EB WB NB SB E W N S
7:00 AM 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0
7:15 AM 2 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0
7:30 AM 2 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 5 2
7:45 AM 1 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 2 6
8:00 AM 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 5 1
8:15 AM 2 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 2 0
8:30 AM 1 0 0 0 1 2 0 2 0 0 2 0
8:45 AM 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 2 1
Count Total 9 3 1 0 3 8 0 2 0 1 21 10
Peak Hour 4 1 0 0 1 8 0 2 0 0 11 7
13 13 32
5 11 18
1 5 2
0 1 4
1 1 6
2 1 2
3 1 7
1 4 8
1 0 2
4 0 1
Interval
Start
Heavy Vehicle Totals Bicycles Pedestrians (Crossing Leg) Total Total Total
Rolling
Hour
Total Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
Interval
Start
W 20th Ave W 20th Ave Pioneer Ct Elkhorn Ct
15-min
Total
Garrett Strang
(415) 444-6376 [email protected]
752 of 1101
www.idaxdata.com
Count Summaries - Heavy Vehicles

UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT
7:00 AM 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0
7:15 AM 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 4 0
7:30 AM 0 0 2 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0
7:45 AM 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 9
8:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 9
8:15 AM 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 7
8:30 AM 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 5
8:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4
Count Total 0 0 8 1 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 13
Pk Hr Heavy 0 0 4 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5
Count Summaries - Bikes

UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT
7:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
7:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
7:30 AM 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0
7:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 5
8:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 6
8:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 7
8:30 AM 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 5 11
8:45 AM 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 8
Count Total 0 0 3 0 0 0 7 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 13
Pk Hr Bike 0 0 1 0 0 0 7 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 11
15-min
Total
Rolling
Hour
Total Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
Rolling
Hour
Total Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
Interval
Start
W 20th Ave W 20th Ave Pioneer Ct Elkhorn Ct
Interval
Start
W 20th Ave W 20th Ave Pioneer Ct Elkhorn Ct
15-min
Total
Garrett Strang
(415) 444-6376 [email protected]
753 of 1101
www.idaxdata.com
Date:

Peak Hour Count Period:

Peak Hour:

HV% PHF
EB 1% 0.81
WB 5% 0.86
NB 4% 0.93
SB 3% 0.93
TOTAL 3% 0.92
Peak Hour Count Summaries

UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT
7:45 AM 0 79 3 15 0 5 9 21 0 53 300 5 2 13 190 91 786 0 8:00 AM 0 105 5 22 0 15 16 19 0 48 296 5 1 14 206 111 863 0 8:15 AM 0 89 7 27 0 8 7 34 0 25 296 7 1 20 221 48 790 0 8:30 AM 0 48 6 21 0 8 5 24 3 22 273 1 4 17 239 58 729 3,168 0 321 21 85 0 36 37 98 3 148 1,165 18 8 64 856 308 3,168 0 2 0 2 0 2 0 6 1 0 49 0 0 2 28 1 93
- 1% 0% 2% - 6% 0% 6% 33% 0% 4% 0% 0% 3% 3% 0% 3%

EB WB NB SB EB WB NB SB E W N S
7:45 AM 1 1 11 8 0 6 0 0 1 0 3 2
8:00 AM 0 4 7 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 1
8:15 AM 2 0 19 12 0 2 2 0 5 0 3 2
8:30 AM 1 3 13 6 1 1 1 0 1 2 3 4
Peak Hour 4 8 50 31 93 1 9 3 0 13 7 2 15 9 33
10 33 4 10
23 3
21 6 6
16 0 7
Bicycles Pedestrians (Crossing Leg)
Total Total Total
Interval
Start
Heavy Vehicle Totals
Note: For complete count summary (all intervals), see following pages. ** Heavy Vehicle Classifications include FHWA Classes 4-13. ** Count Summaries include heavy vehicles, but exclude bicycles in overall count.

Rolling
Hour
Total Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
Peak Hour
Interval
Start
W 20th Ave W 20th Ave El Camino Real El Camino Real
15-min
Total
7:45 AM to 8:45 AM
9/11/2025
7:00 AM to 9:00 AM
0 1
0 0
00 02
1 0
9 0
15 9
2 7
N
El Camino Real
W 20th Ave
W 20th Ave
El Camino
Real
W 20th AveEl Camino
Real
TEV: 3,168
PHF: 0.9177
308
856
64 1,236
1,592
8 98
37 36
171
103
0 18
1,165
148
980
1,334
3 85
21 321
427
493 0
Garrett Strang
(415) 444-6376 [email protected]
754 of 1101
www.idaxdata.com
Count Summaries - All Vehicles

UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT
7:00 AM 0 21 1 8 0 1 3 13 1 5 114 0 1 8 87 30 293 0
7:15 AM 1 18 1 6 0 2 4 13 1 8 168 0 1 12 125 21 381 0
7:30 AM 0 28 2 6 0 4 3 17 0 12 181 0 2 10 163 48 476 0
7:45 AM 0 79 3 15 0 5 9 21 0 53 300 5 2 13 190 91 786 1,936 8:00 AM 0 105 5 22 0 15 16 19 0 48 296 5 1 14 206 111 863 2,506 8:15 AM 0 89 7 27 0 8 7 34 0 25 296 7 1 20 221 48 790 2,915 8:30 AM 0 48 6 21 0 8 5 24 3 22 273 1 4 17 239 58 729 3,168 8:45 AM 0 16 4 22 0 7 7 63 0 19 252 7 5 12 214 52 680 3,062 Count Total 1 404 29 127 0 50 54 204 5 192 1,880 25 17 106 1,445 459 4,998 0 321 21 85 0 36 37 98 3 148 1,165 18 8 64 856 308 3,168 0 2 0 2 0 2 0 6 1 0 49 0 0 2 28 1 93
- 1% 0% 2% - 6% 0% 6% 33% 0% 4% 0% 0% 3% 3% 0% 3%

EB WB NB SB EB WB NB SB E W N S
7:00 AM 1 1 5 7 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1
7:15 AM 0 2 16 10 0 0 1 1 4 3 3 0
7:30 AM 4 4 4 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1
7:45 AM 1 1 11 8 0 6 0 0 1 0 3 2
8:00 AM 0 4 7 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 1
8:15 AM 2 0 19 12 0 2 2 0 5 0 3 2
8:30 AM 1 3 13 6 1 1 1 0 1 2 3 4
8:45 AM 2 0 7 6 1 0 0 0 3 0 1 2
Count Total 11 15 82 56 3 9 4 1 14 6 21 13
Peak Hour 4 8 50 31 1 9 3 0 7 2 15 9
164 17 54
93 13 33
23 3 10
15 1 6
16 0 7
33 4 10
14 1 2
21 6 6
14 0 3
28 2 10
Interval
Start
Heavy Vehicle Totals Bicycles Pedestrians (Crossing Leg) Total Total Total
Rolling
Hour
Total Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
Interval
Start
W 20th Ave W 20th Ave El Camino Real El Camino Real
15-min
Total
Garrett Strang
(415) 444-6376 [email protected]
755 of 1101
www.idaxdata.com
Count Summaries - Heavy Vehicles

UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT
7:00 AM 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 5 0 0 1 5 1 14 0
7:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 16 0 0 0 9 1 28 0
7:30 AM 0 1 0 3 0 1 0 3 0 0 4 0 0 0 2 0 14 0
7:45 AM 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 11 0 0 1 7 0 21 77
8:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 0 0 7 0 0 0 4 1 16 79
8:15 AM 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 19 0 0 1 11 0 33 84
8:30 AM 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 2 1 0 12 0 0 0 6 0 23 93
8:45 AM 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 0 0 0 4 2 15 87
Count Total 0 4 0 7 0 3 0 12 1 0 81 0 0 3 48 5 164
Pk Hr Heavy 0 2 0 2 0 2 0 6 1 0 49 0 0 2 28 1 93
Count Summaries - Bikes

UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT
7:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
7:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 2 0
7:30 AM 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0
7:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 9
8:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9
8:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 4 11
8:30 AM 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 3 13
8:45 AM 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 8
Count Total 0 0 3 0 0 0 9 0 0 0 3 1 0 0 0 1 17
Pk Hr Bike 0 0 1 0 0 0 9 0 0 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 13
15-min
Total
Rolling
Hour
Total Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
Rolling
Hour
Total Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
Interval
Start
W 20th Ave W 20th Ave El Camino Real El Camino Real
Interval
Start
W 20th Ave W 20th Ave El Camino Real El Camino Real
15-min
Total
Garrett Strang
(415) 444-6376 [email protected]
756 of 1101
www.idaxdata.com
Date:

Peak Hour Count Period:

Peak Hour:

HV% PHF
EB 0% 0.67
WB 0% 0.75
NB 1% 0.93
SB 1% 0.95
TOTAL 0% 0.89
Peak Hour Count Summaries

UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT
4:45 PM 0 31 7 3 0 10 1 30 2 2 106 21 3 81 134 3 434 0
5:00 PM 0 49 12 5 0 16 1 59 2 1 119 27 6 91 135 3 526 0 5:15 PM 0 26 7 2 0 12 1 41 1 1 121 34 5 87 128 2 468 0
5:30 PM 0 25 9 2 0 8 0 48 0 2 124 21 3 79 132 2 455 1,883 0 131 35 12 0 46 3 178 5 6 470 103 17 338 529 10 1,883
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 0 1 4 0 8
- 0% 0% 0% - 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1% 0% 0% 1% 0% 0%

EB WB NB SB EB WB NB SB E W N S
4:45 PM 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0
5:00 PM 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0
5:15 PM 0 0 0 2 0 3 1 1 2 0 0 0
5:30 PM 0 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0
Peak Hour 0 0 3 5 8 0 3 2 1 6 5 0 1 0 6
2 2 5 2
3 0
1 1 1
2 0 1
Bicycles Pedestrians (Crossing Leg)
Total Total Total
Interval
Start
Heavy Vehicle Totals
Note: For complete count summary (all intervals), see following pages. ** Heavy Vehicle Classifications include FHWA Classes 4-13. ** Count Summaries include heavy vehicles, but exclude bicycles in overall count.

Rolling
Hour
Total Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
Peak Hour
Interval
Start
Driveway W 20th Ave Alameda de las Pulgas Alameda de las Pulgas 15-min
Total
4:45 PM to 5:45 PM
9/11/2025
4:00 PM to 6:00 PM
0 0
0 0
10 02
0 1
0 2
1 0
0 5
N
Alameda de las Pulgas
W 20th Ave
W 20th Ave
Alameda de
las Pulgas
DrivewayAlameda de
las Pulgas
TEV: 1,883
PHF: 0.8950
10 529
338
894
796
17 178
3 46
227
476
0 470103
6 592
584
5 12
35 131
178
19 0
Garrett Strang
(415) 444-6376 [email protected]
757 of 1101
www.idaxdata.com
Count Summaries - All Vehicles

UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT
4:00 PM 0 25 6 1 0 11 0 43 0 3 110 26 2 40 103 8 378 0
4:15 PM 0 20 4 1 0 5 1 43 0 3 120 22 5 41 118 6 389 0
4:30 PM 0 30 3 2 0 6 0 32 0 3 138 25 0 50 105 4 398 0
4:45 PM 0 31 7 3 0 10 1 30 2 2 106 21 3 81 134 3 434 1,599 5:00 PM 0 49 12 5 0 16 1 59 2 1 119 27 6 91 135 3 526 1,747 5:15 PM 0 26 7 2 0 12 1 41 1 1 121 34 5 87 128 2 468 1,826 5:30 PM 0 25 9 2 0 8 0 48 0 2 124 21 3 79 132 2 455 1,883 5:45 PM 0 18 2 1 0 12 0 39 0 2 98 27 0 78 126 1 404 1,853 Count Total 0 224 50 17 0 80 4 335 5 17 936 203 24 547 981 29 3,452 0 131 35 12 0 46 3 178 5 6 470 103 17 338 529 10 1,883
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 0 1 4 0 8
- 0% 0% 0% - 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1% 0% 0% 1% 0% 0%

EB WB NB SB EB WB NB SB E W N S
4:00 PM 0 0 1 1 2 0 0 0 1 0 3 3
4:15 PM 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 0
4:30 PM 0 0 4 0 0 1 2 0 0 0 1 0
4:45 PM 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0
5:00 PM 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0
5:15 PM 0 0 0 2 0 3 1 1 2 0 0 0
5:30 PM 0 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0
5:45 PM 0 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0
Count Total 0 0 9 8 3 5 4 2 8 1 7 3
Peak Hour 0 0 3 5 0 3 2 1 5 0 1 0
17 14 19
8 6 6
3 0 2
3 0 2
2 0 1
2 5 2
4 3 1
1 1 1
2 2 7
0 3 3
Interval
Start
Heavy Vehicle Totals Bicycles Pedestrians (Crossing Leg) Total Total Total
Rolling
Hour
Total Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
Interval
Start
Driveway W 20th Ave Alameda de las Pulgas Alameda de las Pulgas 15-min
Total
Garrett Strang
(415) 444-6376 [email protected]
758 of 1101
www.idaxdata.com
Count Summaries - Heavy Vehicles

UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT
4:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 2 0
4:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 1 0 0 0 0 4 0
4:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 7
5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 2 7
5:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 2 9
5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 1 0 3 8
5:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 3 10
Count Total 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 3 0 3 5 0 17
Pk Hr Heavy 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 0 1 4 0 8
Count Summaries - Bikes

UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT
4:00 PM 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0
4:15 PM 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 3 0
4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 3 0
4:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 9
5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7
5:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 5 9
5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6
5:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5
Count Total 0 0 3 0 0 2 0 3 0 0 3 1 0 1 1 0 14
Pk Hr Bike 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 1 0 0 2 0 0 0 1 0 6
15-min
Total
Rolling
Hour
Total Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
Rolling
Hour
Total Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
Interval
Start
Driveway W 20th Ave Alameda de las Pulgas Alameda de las Pulgas Interval
Start
Driveway W 20th Ave Alameda de las Pulgas Alameda de las Pulgas 15-min
Total
Garrett Strang
(415) 444-6376 [email protected]
759 of 1101
www.idaxdata.com
Date:

Peak Hour Count Period:

Peak Hour:

HV% PHF
EB 1% 0.86
WB 0% 0.79
NB 0% 0.76
SB 0% 0.70
TOTAL 0% 0.86
Peak Hour Count Summaries

UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT
5:00 PM 0 3 125 4 0 4 80 13 0 3 0 11 0 15 1 5 264 0
5:15 PM 0 4 110 5 0 7 43 14 0 4 0 16 0 11 0 1 215 0
5:30 PM 0 1 96 2 0 13 48 5 0 8 0 17 0 11 0 3 204 0
5:45 PM 0 5 98 3 0 14 59 6 0 8 0 21 0 12 0 0 226 909
0 13 429 14 0 38 230 38 0 23 0 65 0 49 1 9 909
0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3
- 0% 1% 0% - 0% 0% 0% - 0% - 0% - 0% 0% 0% 0%

EB WB NB SB EB WB NB SB E W N S
5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 8 2
5:15 PM 2 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 8 2
5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 1
5:45 PM 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 6 4
Peak Hour 3 0 0 0 3 3 3 0 0 6 1 2 23 9 35
11 0 1 3
1 2
0 2 10
2 1 11
Bicycles Pedestrians (Crossing Leg)
Total Total Total
Interval
Start
Heavy Vehicle Totals
Note: For complete count summary (all intervals), see following pages. ** Heavy Vehicle Classifications include FHWA Classes 4-13. ** Count Summaries include heavy vehicles, but exclude bicycles in overall count.

Rolling
Hour
Total Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
Peak Hour
Interval
Start
W 20th Ave W 20th Ave Pioneer Ct Elkhorn Ct
15-min
Total
5:00 PM to 6:00 PM
9/11/2025
4:00 PM to 6:00 PM
0 3
0 0
00 00
0 0
3 0
23 9
2 1
N
Elkhorn Ct
W 20th Ave
W 20th Ave
Pioneer Ct
W 20th Ave Elkhorn Ct
TEV: 909
PHF: 0.8608
9 1
49 59
51 0
38 230
38 306
543
0 65
0 23
53 88
0 14
429
13 456
262 0
Garrett Strang
(415) 444-6376 [email protected]
760 of 1101
www.idaxdata.com
Count Summaries - All Vehicles

UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT
4:00 PM 0 2 64 2 0 0 44 6 0 1 0 5 0 12 0 3 139 0
4:15 PM 0 3 73 1 0 2 51 7 0 8 0 7 0 2 0 5 159 0
4:30 PM 0 3 81 0 0 1 34 8 0 1 0 5 0 4 0 1 138 0
4:45 PM 0 9 97 0 0 3 56 19 0 5 0 5 0 9 0 2 205 641
5:00 PM 0 3 125 4 0 4 80 13 0 3 0 11 0 15 1 5 264 766
5:15 PM 0 4 110 5 0 7 43 14 0 4 0 16 0 11 0 1 215 822
5:30 PM 0 1 96 2 0 13 48 5 0 8 0 17 0 11 0 3 204 888
5:45 PM 0 5 98 3 0 14 59 6 0 8 0 21 0 12 0 0 226 909
Count Total 0 30 744 17 0 44 415 78 0 38 0 87 0 76 1 20 1,550 0 13 429 14 0 38 230 38 0 23 0 65 0 49 1 9 909
0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3
- 0% 1% 0% - 0% 0% 0% - 0% - 0% - 0% 0% 0% 0%

EB WB NB SB EB WB NB SB E W N S
4:00 PM 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 4
4:15 PM 1 2 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 2 2
4:30 PM 2 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 13 4
4:45 PM 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 11 0
5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 8 2
5:15 PM 2 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 8 2
5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 1
5:45 PM 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 6 4
Count Total 7 3 0 0 7 4 0 0 1 2 52 19
Peak Hour 3 0 0 0 3 3 0 0 1 2 23 9
10 11 74
3 6 35
0 1 3
1 2 11
0 2 10
2 1 11
2 2 17
0 1 11
2 0 7
3 2 4
Interval
Start
Heavy Vehicle Totals Bicycles Pedestrians (Crossing Leg) Total Total Total
Rolling
Hour
Total Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
Interval
Start
W 20th Ave W 20th Ave Pioneer Ct Elkhorn Ct
15-min
Total
Garrett Strang
(415) 444-6376 [email protected]
761 of 1101
www.idaxdata.com
Count Summaries - Heavy Vehicles

UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT
4:00 PM 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0
4:15 PM 0 0 1 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0
4:30 PM 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0
4:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7
5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5
5:15 PM 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 4
5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2
5:45 PM 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 3
Count Total 0 0 7 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10
Pk Hr Heavy 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3
Count Summaries - Bikes

UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT
4:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
4:15 PM 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0
4:30 PM 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0
4:45 PM 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 5
5:00 PM 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 7
5:15 PM 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 6
5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 5
5:45 PM 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 6
Count Total 0 0 7 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11
Pk Hr Bike 0 0 3 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6
15-min
Total
Rolling
Hour
Total Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
Rolling
Hour
Total Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
Interval
Start
W 20th Ave W 20th Ave Pioneer Ct Elkhorn Ct
Interval
Start
W 20th Ave W 20th Ave Pioneer Ct Elkhorn Ct
15-min
Total
Garrett Strang
(415) 444-6376 [email protected]
762 of 1101
www.idaxdata.com
Date:

Peak Hour Count Period:

Peak Hour:

HV% PHF
EB 0% 0.90
WB 0% 0.89
NB 1% 0.97
SB 1% 0.93
TOTAL 1% 0.96
Peak Hour Count Summaries

UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT
5:00 PM 0 125 7 30 0 6 11 49 3 30 367 6 12 6 246 59 957 0 5:15 PM 0 119 10 37 0 12 9 46 2 19 334 7 13 22 255 50 935 0 5:30 PM 0 92 12 29 0 8 15 29 2 25 372 3 12 15 244 31 889 0 5:45 PM 0 83 12 44 0 13 10 30 2 36 355 5 9 12 223 49 883 3,664 0 419 41 140 0 39 45 154 9 110 1,428 21 46 55 968 189 3,664 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 13 0 0 0 13 0 29
- 0% 5% 0% - 0% 0% 1% 0% 0% 1% 0% 0% 0% 1% 0% 1%

EB WB NB SB EB WB NB SB E W N S
5:00 PM 0 0 5 4 0 1 0 0 4 3 6 4
5:15 PM 2 0 1 2 1 0 0 0 2 3 8 1
5:30 PM 0 1 3 5 0 0 2 0 3 2 6 2
5:45 PM 0 0 4 2 1 1 0 1 8 1 6 2
Peak Hour 2 1 13 13 29 2 2 2 1 7 17 9 26 9 61
17 9 2 13
6 3
9 1 17
5 1 14
Bicycles Pedestrians (Crossing Leg)
Total Total Total
Interval
Start
Heavy Vehicle Totals
Note: For complete count summary (all intervals), see following pages. ** Heavy Vehicle Classifications include FHWA Classes 4-13. ** Count Summaries include heavy vehicles, but exclude bicycles in overall count.

Rolling
Hour
Total Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
Peak Hour
Interval
Start
W 20th Ave W 20th Ave El Camino Real El Camino Real
15-min
Total
5:00 PM to 6:00 PM
9/11/2025
4:00 PM to 6:00 PM
0 2
0 1
00 10
1 0
2 0
26 9
9 17
N
El Camino Real
W 20th Ave
W 20th Ave
El Camino
Real
W 20th AveEl Camino
Real
TEV: 3,664
PHF: 0.9572
189
968
55 1,258
2,047
46 154
45 39
238
117
0 21
1,428
110
1,156
1,568
9 140
41 419
600
344 0
Garrett Strang
(415) 444-6376 [email protected]
763 of 1101
www.idaxdata.com
Count Summaries - All Vehicles

UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT
4:00 PM 1 77 8 17 0 5 15 43 0 15 326 7 9 19 245 23 810 0 4:15 PM 0 82 11 22 0 11 11 33 4 15 329 10 3 2 242 37 812 0 4:30 PM 0 72 7 18 0 12 9 51 2 15 362 6 7 13 213 35 822 0 4:45 PM 0 77 15 53 0 14 11 43 3 28 285 7 13 9 184 33 775 3,219 5:00 PM 0 125 7 30 0 6 11 49 3 30 367 6 12 6 246 59 957 3,366 5:15 PM 0 119 10 37 0 12 9 46 2 19 334 7 13 22 255 50 935 3,489 5:30 PM 0 92 12 29 0 8 15 29 2 25 372 3 12 15 244 31 889 3,556 5:45 PM 0 83 12 44 0 13 10 30 2 36 355 5 9 12 223 49 883 3,664 Count Total 1 727 82 250 0 81 91 324 18 183 2,730 51 78 98 1,852 317 6,883 0 419 41 140 0 39 45 154 9 110 1,428 21 46 55 968 189 3,664 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 13 0 0 0 13 0 29
- 0% 5% 0% - 0% 0% 1% 0% 0% 1% 0% 0% 0% 1% 0% 1%

EB WB NB SB EB WB NB SB E W N S
4:00 PM 0 0 6 3 0 0 0 0 2 1 6 1
4:15 PM 1 0 8 4 0 1 0 0 1 0 9 2
4:30 PM 2 0 6 5 1 0 0 0 0 2 10 5
4:45 PM 2 1 8 5 0 0 0 0 1 6 11 1
5:00 PM 0 0 5 4 0 1 0 0 4 3 6 4
5:15 PM 2 0 1 2 1 0 0 0 2 3 8 1
5:30 PM 0 1 3 5 0 0 2 0 3 2 6 2
5:45 PM 0 0 4 2 1 1 0 1 8 1 6 2
Count Total 7 2 41 30 3 3 2 1 21 18 62 18
Peak Hour 2 1 13 13 2 2 2 1 17 9 26 9
80 9 119
29 7 61
9 2 13
6 3 17
9 1 17
5 1 14
13 1 17
16 0 19
9 0 10
13 1 12
Interval
Start
Heavy Vehicle Totals Bicycles Pedestrians (Crossing Leg) Total Total Total
Rolling
Hour
Total Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
Interval
Start
W 20th Ave W 20th Ave El Camino Real El Camino Real
15-min
Total
Garrett Strang
(415) 444-6376 [email protected]
764 of 1101
www.idaxdata.com
Count Summaries - Heavy Vehicles

UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT
4:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 1 1 1 9 0
4:15 PM 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 7 0 0 0 4 0 13 0
4:30 PM 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 5 0 13 0
4:45 PM 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 1 0 0 8 0 1 0 4 0 16 51
5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 4 0 9 51
5:15 PM 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 2 0 5 43
5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 3 0 0 0 5 0 9 39
5:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 2 0 6 29
Count Total 0 3 2 2 0 0 0 2 0 1 40 0 1 1 27 1 80
Pk Hr Heavy 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 13 0 0 0 13 0 29
Count Summaries - Bikes

UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT
4:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
4:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0
4:30 PM 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0
4:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2
5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 3
5:15 PM 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 3
5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 2 4
5:45 PM 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 3 7
Count Total 0 0 3 0 0 0 3 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 9
Pk Hr Bike 0 0 2 0 0 0 2 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 7
15-min
Total
Rolling
Hour
Total Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
Rolling
Hour
Total Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
Interval
Start
W 20th Ave W 20th Ave El Camino Real El Camino Real
Interval
Start
W 20th Ave W 20th Ave El Camino Real El Camino Real
15-min
Total
Garrett Strang
(415) 444-6376 [email protected]
765 of 1101
Location: W 20th Ave, Between O'Farrell St & Elkhorn Ct Date Range: 9/11/2025 - 9/17/2025
Site Code: 01
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 2 3 5 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 2 3 5 1:00 AM 2 1 3 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 2 1 3 2:00 AM 1 2 3 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1 2 3 3:00 AM 2 1 3 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 2 1 3 4:00 AM 5 4 9 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 5 4 9 5:00 AM 11 16 27 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 11 16 27 6:00 AM 39 49 88 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 39 49 88 7:00 AM 143 271 414 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 143 271 414 8:00 AM 284 318 602 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 284 318 602 9:00 AM 143 132 275 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 143 132 275 10:00 AM 134 121 255 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 134 121 255 11:00 AM 135 149 284 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 135 149 284 12:00 PM 159 177 336 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 159 177 336 1:00 PM 136 154 290 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 136 154 290 2:00 PM 277 228 505 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 277 228 505 3:00 PM 314 167 481 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 314 167 481 4:00 PM 337 210 547 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 337 210 547 5:00 PM 458 260 718 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 458 260 718 6:00 PM 205 177 382 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 205 177 382 7:00 PM 141 124 265 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 141 124 265 8:00 PM 110 96 206 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 110 96 206 9:00 PM 18 39 57 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 18 39 57 10:00 PM 16 24 40 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 16 24 40 11:00 PM 6 15 21 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 6 15 21 Total 3,078 2,738 5,816 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3,078 2,738 5,816 Percent 53% 47% - - - - - - - - - - - - 53% 47%
AM Peak 08:00 08:00 08:00 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 08:00 08:00 08:00 Vol. 284 318 602 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 284 318 602 PM Peak 17:00 17:00 17:00 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 17:00 17:00 17:00 Vol. 458 260 718 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 458 260 718

1. Mid-week average includes data between Tuesday and Thursday. 9/11/2025 9/12/2025 9/13/2025 9/14/2025 9/15/2025 9/16/2025 Time Thursday Friday Saturday Sunday Monday Tuesday Wednesday Mid-Week Average 9/17/2025
1 Project Manager: (415) 310-6469
[email protected]
766 of 1101
Appendix B
Intersection Level of Service Calculations
767 of 1101
Queues Existing AM
1: Alameda de las Pulgas & W 20th Ave 10/20/2025
Existing AM 3:23 pm 07/31/2025 Baseline Synchro 12 Report

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 21 39 5 42 18 190 32 677 57 357 385 97 Future Volume (vph) 21 39 5 42 18 190 32 677 57 357 385 97 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length (ft) 0 50 0 225 185 0 250 0
Storage Lanes 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0
Taper Length (ft) 25 25 25 25
Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes
Link Speed (mph) 25 25 30 30
Link Distance (ft) 376 2563 1290 948
Travel Time (s) 10.3 69.9 29.3 21.5
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Shared Lane Traffic (%)
Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 65 5 0 66 207 35 798 0 388 523 0 v/c Ratio 0.37 0.02 0.37 0.60 0.27 0.72 0.71 0.25
Control Delay (s/veh) 45.0 0.2 44.9 13.9 47.1 32.0 37.4 10.3 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay (s/veh) 45.0 0.2 44.9 13.9 47.1 32.0 37.4 10.3 Queue Length 50th (ft) 36 0 37 0 20 214 201 77
Queue Length 95th (ft) 79 0 79 65 53 313 #367 127
Internal Link Dist (ft) 296 2483 1210 868
Turn Bay Length (ft) 50 225 185 250
Base Capacity (vph) 544 563 535 616 135 1120 549 2090
Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.12 0.01 0.12 0.34 0.26 0.71 0.71 0.25 Intersection Summary
Area Type: Other
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.

Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
768 of 1101
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Existing AM 1: Alameda de las Pulgas & W 20th Ave 10/20/2025
Existing AM 3:23 pm 07/31/2025 Baseline Synchro 12 Report

Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 21 39 5 42 18 190 32 677 57 357 385 97 Future Volume (vph) 21 39 5 42 18 190 32 677 57 357 385 97 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.97
Flt Protected 0.98 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot) 1830 1583 1800 1583 1770 3498 1770 3433 Flt Permitted 0.98 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm) 1830 1583 1800 1583 1770 3498 1770 3433 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 23 42 5 46 20 207 35 736 62 388 418 105 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 5 0 0 187 0 4 0 0 12 0
Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 65 0 0 66 20 35 794 0 388 511 0 Turn Type Split NA Perm Split NA Perm Prot NA Prot NA
Protected Phases 4 4 8 8 5 2 1 6
Permitted Phases 4 8
Actuated Green, G (s) 7.2 7.2 8.7 8.7 3.8 30.0 27.2 53.4 Effective Green, g (s) 7.2 7.2 8.7 8.7 3.8 30.0 27.2 53.4 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.08 0.08 0.10 0.10 0.04 0.33 0.30 0.59 Clearance Time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 144 125 171 151 73 1151 528 2012
v/s Ratio Prot c0.04 c0.04 0.02 c0.23 c0.22 0.15
v/s Ratio Perm 0.00 0.01
v/c Ratio 0.45 0.00 0.39 0.13 0.48 0.69 0.73 0.25
Uniform Delay, d1 40.1 38.6 38.7 37.7 42.7 26.5 28.7 9.2 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 2.2 0.0 1.4 0.4 4.9 1.7 5.3 0.1
Delay (s) 42.3 38.7 40.1 38.1 47.6 28.3 34.0 9.2
Level of Service D D D D D C C A
Approach Delay (s/veh) 42.0 38.6 29.1 19.8
Approach LOS D D C B
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay (s/veh) 26.7 HCM 2000 Level of Service C HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.65
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 91.1 Sum of lost time (s) 18.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 61.5% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group
769 of 1101
HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Existing AM 2: Elkhorn Ct & W 20th Ave 10/20/2025
Existing AM 3:23 pm 07/31/2025 Baseline Synchro 12 Report

Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 9 327 11 45 411 53 2 0 12 57 0 10 Future Volume (Veh/h) 9 327 11 45 411 53 2 0 12 57 0 10 Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop
Grade 0% 0% 0% 0%
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 10 355 12 49 447 58 2 0 13 62 0 11 Pedestrians
Lane Width (ft)
Walking Speed (ft/s)
Percent Blockage
Right turn flare (veh)
Median type None None
Median storage veh)
Upstream signal (ft) 731
pX, platoon unblocked
vC, conflicting volume 505 367 966 984 361 968 961 476
vC1, stage 1 conf vol
vC2, stage 2 conf vol
vCu, unblocked vol 505 367 966 984 361 968 961 476
tC, single (s) 4.1 4.1 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2
tC, 2 stage (s)
tF (s) 2.2 2.2 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3
p0 queue free % 99 96 99 100 98 72 100 98
cM capacity (veh/h) 1060 1192 221 236 684 220 243 589
Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 SB 1
Volume Total 377 554 15 73
Volume Left 10 49 2 62
Volume Right 12 58 13 11
cSH 1060 1192 534 243
Volume to Capacity 0.00* 0.04 0.03 0.30
Queue Length 95th (ft) 1 3 2 30
Control Delay (s/veh) 0.3 1.2 11.9 26.1
Lane LOS A A B D
Approach Delay (s/veh) 0.3 1.2 11.9 26.1
Approach LOS B D
Intersection Summary
Average Delay 2.8
Intersection Capacity Utilization 64.1% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15
* Value less than 0.01.
770 of 1101
Queues Existing AM
3: El Camino Real & W 20th Ave 10/20/2025
Existing AM 3:23 pm 07/31/2025 Baseline Synchro 12 Report

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 321 21 85 36 37 98 151 1165 18 72 856 308 Future Volume (vph) 321 21 85 36 37 98 151 1165 18 72 856 308 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length (ft) 0 0 0 0 230 0 240 0
Storage Lanes 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 0
Taper Length (ft) 25 25 25 25
Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes
Link Speed (mph) 30 30 30 30
Link Distance (ft) 731 818 1467 812
Travel Time (s) 16.6 18.6 33.3 18.5
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Shared Lane Traffic (%) 32%
Lane Group Flow (vph) 237 227 0 0 79 107 164 1286 0 78 1265 0 v/c Ratio 0.74 0.70 0.47 0.42 0.67 0.52 0.49 0.61
Control Delay (s/veh) 57.6 50.2 59.5 13.5 61.0 23.1 61.5 27.6 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay (s/veh) 57.6 50.2 59.5 13.5 61.0 23.1 61.5 27.6 Queue Length 50th (ft) 172 148 55 0 114 238 55 245
Queue Length 95th (ft) 282 253 115 49 206 363 117 382
Internal Link Dist (ft) 651 738 1387 732
Turn Bay Length (ft) 230 240
Base Capacity (vph) 468 468 483 505 331 2464 208 2057
Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.51 0.49 0.16 0.21 0.50 0.52 0.38 0.61 Intersection Summary
Area Type: Other
771 of 1101
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Existing AM 3: El Camino Real & W 20th Ave 10/20/2025
Existing AM 3:23 pm 07/31/2025 Baseline Synchro 12 Report

Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 321 21 85 36 37 98 151 1165 18 72 856 308 Future Volume (vph) 321 21 85 36 37 98 151 1165 18 72 856 308 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Lane Util. Factor 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.91 1.00 0.91 Frt 1.00 0.94 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.96
Flt Protected 0.95 0.98 0.98 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot) 1681 1622 1818 1583 1770 5073 1770 4883 Flt Permitted 0.95 0.98 0.98 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm) 1681 1622 1818 1583 1770 5073 1770 4883 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 349 23 92 39 40 107 164 1266 20 78 930 335 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 18 0 0 0 97 0 1 0 0 38 0
Lane Group Flow (vph) 237 209 0 0 79 10 164 1285 0 78 1227 0 Turn Type Split NA Split NA Perm Prot NA Prot NA
Protected Phases 4 4 8 8 5 2 1 6
Permitted Phases 8
Actuated Green, G (s) 21.1 21.1 10.3 10.3 15.3 53.8 8.4 46.9 Effective Green, g (s) 21.1 21.1 10.3 10.3 15.3 53.8 8.4 46.9 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.19 0.19 0.09 0.09 0.14 0.48 0.08 0.42 Clearance Time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 317 306 167 146 242 2445 133 2052
v/s Ratio Prot c0.14 0.13 c0.04 c0.09 0.25 0.04 c0.25
v/s Ratio Perm 0.01
v/c Ratio 0.75 0.68 0.47 0.07 0.68 0.53 0.59 0.60
Uniform Delay, d1 42.7 42.1 48.1 46.3 45.8 20.0 49.9 25.0 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 9.3 6.2 2.1 0.2 7.3 0.8 6.5 1.3
Delay (s) 52.0 48.3 50.2 46.5 53.1 20.9 56.4 26.3
Level of Service D D D D D C E C
Approach Delay (s/veh) 50.2 48.0 24.5 28.1
Approach LOS D D C C
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay (s/veh) 30.6 HCM 2000 Level of Service C HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.63
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 111.6 Sum of lost time (s) 18.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 61.7% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group
772 of 1101
HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Existing AM 4: Elkhorn Ct & Dwy 10/20/2025
Existing AM 3:23 pm 07/31/2025 Baseline Synchro 12 Report

Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 0 0 4 0 0 0 9 53 0 0 63 0
Future Volume (Veh/h) 0 0 4 0 0 0 9 53 0 0 63 0
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free
Grade 0% 0% 0% 0%
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 0 0 4 0 0 0 10 58 0 0 68 0
Pedestrians
Lane Width (ft)
Walking Speed (ft/s)
Percent Blockage
Right turn flare (veh)
Median type None None
Median storage veh)
Upstream signal (ft)
pX, platoon unblocked
vC, conflicting volume 146 146 68 150 146 58 68 58
vC1, stage 1 conf vol
vC2, stage 2 conf vol
vCu, unblocked vol 146 146 68 150 146 58 68 58
tC, single (s) 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 4.1 4.1
tC, 2 stage (s)
tF (s) 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 2.2 2.2
p0 queue free % 100 100 100 100 100 100 99 100
cM capacity (veh/h) 819 740 995 810 740 1008 1533 1546
Direction, Lane # EB 1 NB 1 SB 1
Volume Total 4 68 68
Volume Left 0 10 0
Volume Right 4 0 0
cSH 995 1533 1700
Volume to Capacity 0.00* 0.00* 0.04
Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 0 0
Control Delay (s/veh) 8.6 1.1 0.0
Lane LOS A A
Approach Delay (s/veh) 8.6 1.1 0.0
Approach LOS A
Intersection Summary
Average Delay 0.8
Intersection Capacity Utilization 20.0% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15
* Value less than 0.01.
773 of 1101
Queues Existing PM
1: Alameda de las Pulgas & W 20th Ave 10/20/2025
Existing PM 9:28 am 09/17/2025 Baseline Synchro 12 Report

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 131 35 12 46 3 178 11 470 103 355 529 10 Future Volume (vph) 131 35 12 46 3 178 11 470 103 355 529 10 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length (ft) 0 50 0 225 185 0 250 0
Storage Lanes 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0
Taper Length (ft) 25 25 25 25
Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes
Link Speed (mph) 30 30 30 30
Link Distance (ft) 376 2563 1290 948
Travel Time (s) 8.5 58.3 29.3 21.5
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Shared Lane Traffic (%)
Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 180 13 0 53 193 12 623 0 386 586 0 v/c Ratio 0.63 0.03 0.30 0.58 0.10 0.72 0.79 0.30
Control Delay (s/veh) 46.1 0.2 44.3 14.2 45.5 34.6 43.9 11.8 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay (s/veh) 46.1 0.2 44.3 14.2 45.5 34.6 43.9 11.8 Queue Length 50th (ft) 96 0 29 0 7 165 195 77
Queue Length 95th (ft) 185 0 71 65 27 251 #406 171
Internal Link Dist (ft) 296 2483 1210 868
Turn Bay Length (ft) 50 225 185 250
Base Capacity (vph) 390 463 387 495 137 1160 567 2138
Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.46 0.03 0.14 0.39 0.09 0.54 0.68 0.27 Intersection Summary
Area Type: Other
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.

Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
774 of 1101
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Existing PM 1: Alameda de las Pulgas & W 20th Ave 10/20/2025
Existing PM 9:28 am 09/17/2025 Baseline Synchro 12 Report

Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 131 35 12 46 3 178 11 470 103 355 529 10 Future Volume (vph) 131 35 12 46 3 178 11 470 103 355 529 10 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.97 1.00 1.00
Flt Protected 0.96 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot) 1792 1583 1779 1583 1770 3444 1770 3529 Flt Permitted 0.96 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm) 1792 1583 1779 1583 1770 3444 1770 3529 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 142 38 13 50 3 193 12 511 112 386 575 11 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 11 0 0 175 0 17 0 0 1 0
Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 180 2 0 53 18 12 606 0 386 585 0 Turn Type Split NA Perm Split NA Perm Prot NA Prot NA
Protected Phases 4 4 8 8 5 2 1 6
Permitted Phases 4 8
Actuated Green, G (s) 13.8 13.8 8.4 8.4 1.1 25.0 23.6 47.5 Effective Green, g (s) 13.8 13.8 8.4 8.4 1.1 25.0 23.6 47.5 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.16 0.16 0.09 0.09 0.01 0.28 0.27 0.53 Clearance Time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 278 246 168 149 21 969 470 1887
v/s Ratio Prot c0.10 c0.03 0.01 c0.18 c0.22 0.17
v/s Ratio Perm 0.00 0.01
v/c Ratio 0.65 0.01 0.32 0.12 0.57 0.63 0.82 0.31
Uniform Delay, d1 35.2 31.7 37.5 36.8 43.6 27.8 30.6 11.5 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 5.1 0.0 1.1 0.4 32.5 1.3 11.0 0.1 Delay (s) 40.3 31.7 38.6 37.2 76.1 29.1 41.6 11.6
Level of Service D C D D E C D B
Approach Delay (s/veh) 39.8 37.5 30.0 23.5
Approach LOS D D C C
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay (s/veh) 28.7 HCM 2000 Level of Service C HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.66
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 88.8 Sum of lost time (s) 18.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 63.0% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group
775 of 1101
HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Existing PM 2: Elkhorn Ct & W 20th Ave 10/20/2025
Existing PM 9:28 am 09/17/2025 Baseline Synchro 12 Report

Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 13 429 14 38 230 38 23 0 65 49 1 9 Future Volume (Veh/h) 13 429 14 38 230 38 23 0 65 49 1 9 Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop
Grade 0% 0% 0% 0%
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 14 466 15 41 250 41 25 0 71 53 1 10 Pedestrians
Lane Width (ft)
Walking Speed (ft/s)
Percent Blockage
Right turn flare (veh)
Median type None None
Median storage veh)
Upstream signal (ft) 731
pX, platoon unblocked
vC, conflicting volume 291 481 865 875 474 925 862 271
vC1, stage 1 conf vol
vC2, stage 2 conf vol
vCu, unblocked vol 291 481 865 875 474 925 862 271
tC, single (s) 4.1 4.1 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2
tC, 2 stage (s)
tF (s) 2.2 2.2 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3
p0 queue free % 99 96 90 100 88 75 100 99
cM capacity (veh/h) 1271 1082 260 274 591 211 279 768
Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 SB 1
Volume Total 495 332 96 64
Volume Left 14 41 25 53
Volume Right 15 41 71 10
cSH 1271 1082 444 239
Volume to Capacity 0.01 0.04 0.22 0.27
Queue Length 95th (ft) 1 3 20 26
Control Delay (s/veh) 0.3 1.4 15.3 25.4
Lane LOS A A C D
Approach Delay (s/veh) 0.3 1.4 15.3 25.4
Approach LOS C D
Intersection Summary
Average Delay 3.8
Intersection Capacity Utilization 48.4% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15
776 of 1101
Queues Existing PM
3: El Camino Real & W 20th Ave 10/20/2025
Existing PM 9:28 am 09/17/2025 Baseline Synchro 12 Report

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 419 41 140 39 45 154 119 1428 21 101 968 189 Future Volume (vph) 419 41 140 39 45 154 119 1428 21 101 968 189 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length (ft) 0 0 0 0 230 0 240 0
Storage Lanes 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 0
Taper Length (ft) 25 25 25 25
Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes
Link Speed (mph) 30 30 30 30
Link Distance (ft) 731 818 1467 812
Travel Time (s) 16.6 18.6 33.3 18.5
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Shared Lane Traffic (%) 27%
Lane Group Flow (vph) 332 320 0 0 91 167 129 1575 0 110 1257 0 v/c Ratio 0.81 0.77 0.51 0.55 0.66 0.76 0.69 0.64
Control Delay (s/veh) 57.3 49.6 59.8 14.5 66.8 32.6 74.3 30.6 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay (s/veh) 57.3 49.6 59.8 14.5 66.8 32.6 74.3 30.6 Queue Length 50th (ft) 244 211 67 0 95 379 83 287
Queue Length 95th (ft) #397 338 122 66 #178 474 #178 364 Internal Link Dist (ft) 651 738 1387 732
Turn Bay Length (ft) 230 240
Base Capacity (vph) 471 474 471 533 217 2076 165 1950
Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.70 0.68 0.19 0.31 0.59 0.76 0.67 0.64 Intersection Summary
Area Type: Other
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.

Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
777 of 1101
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Existing PM 3: El Camino Real & W 20th Ave 10/20/2025
Existing PM 9:28 am 09/17/2025 Baseline Synchro 12 Report

Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 419 41 140 39 45 154 119 1428 21 101 968 189 Future Volume (vph) 419 41 140 39 45 154 119 1428 21 101 968 189 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Lane Util. Factor 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.91 1.00 0.91 Frt 1.00 0.93 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98
Flt Protected 0.95 0.98 0.98 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot) 1681 1613 1821 1583 1770 5074 1770 4961 Flt Permitted 0.95 0.98 0.98 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm) 1681 1613 1821 1583 1770 5074 1770 4961 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 455 45 152 42 49 167 129 1552 23 110 1052 205 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 23 0 0 0 151 0 1 0 0 19 0
Lane Group Flow (vph) 332 297 0 0 91 16 129 1574 0 110 1238 0 Turn Type Split NA Split NA Perm Prot NA Prot NA
Protected Phases 4 4 8 8 5 2 1 6
Permitted Phases 8
Actuated Green, G (s) 27.4 27.4 11.1 11.1 12.4 46.2 10.2 44.0 Effective Green, g (s) 27.4 27.4 11.1 11.1 12.4 46.2 10.2 44.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.24 0.24 0.10 0.10 0.11 0.41 0.09 0.39 Clearance Time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 407 391 179 155 194 2076 159 1933
v/s Ratio Prot c0.20 0.18 c0.05 c0.07 c0.31 0.06 0.25
v/s Ratio Perm 0.01
v/c Ratio 0.82 0.76 0.51 0.11 0.66 0.76 0.69 0.64
Uniform Delay, d1 40.4 39.7 48.3 46.4 48.3 28.6 49.8 28.0 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 11.9 8.2 2.3 0.3 8.3 2.7 12.2 1.6 Delay (s) 52.3 47.9 50.6 46.7 56.6 31.2 62.1 29.7
Level of Service D D D D E C E C
Approach Delay (s/veh) 50.1 48.1 33.1 32.3
Approach LOS D D C C
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay (s/veh) 36.6 HCM 2000 Level of Service D HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.75
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 112.9 Sum of lost time (s) 18.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 70.1% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group
778 of 1101
HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Existing PM 4: Elkhorn Ct & Dwy 10/20/2025
Existing PM 9:28 am 09/17/2025 Baseline Synchro 12 Report

Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 0 0 6 0 0 0 9 42 0 0 53 0
Future Volume (Veh/h) 0 0 6 0 0 0 9 42 0 0 53 0
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free
Grade 0% 0% 0% 0%
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 0 0 7 0 0 0 10 46 0 0 58 0
Pedestrians
Lane Width (ft)
Walking Speed (ft/s)
Percent Blockage
Right turn flare (veh)
Median type None None
Median storage veh)
Upstream signal (ft)
pX, platoon unblocked
vC, conflicting volume 124 124 58 131 124 46 58 46
vC1, stage 1 conf vol
vC2, stage 2 conf vol
vCu, unblocked vol 124 124 58 131 124 46 58 46
tC, single (s) 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 4.1 4.1
tC, 2 stage (s)
tF (s) 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 2.2 2.2
p0 queue free % 100 100 99 100 100 100 99 100
cM capacity (veh/h) 846 761 1008 831 761 1023 1546 1562 Direction, Lane # EB 1 NB 1 SB 1
Volume Total 7 56 58
Volume Left 0 10 0
Volume Right 7 0 0
cSH 1008 1546 1700
Volume to Capacity 0.00* 0.00* 0.03
Queue Length 95th (ft) 1 0 0
Control Delay (s/veh) 8.6 1.4 0.0
Lane LOS A A
Approach Delay (s/veh) 8.6 1.4 0.0
Approach LOS A
Intersection Summary
Average Delay 1.1
Intersection Capacity Utilization 19.4% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15
* Value less than 0.01.
779 of 1101
Queues Opening Year AM
1: Alameda de las Pulgas & W 20th Ave 10/20/2025
Opening Year AM 12:18 pm 10/14/2025 Baseline Synchro 12 Report

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 21 39 5 42 18 193 32 677 57 359 385 97 Future Volume (vph) 21 39 5 42 18 193 32 677 57 359 385 97 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length (ft) 0 50 0 225 185 0 250 0
Storage Lanes 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0
Taper Length (ft) 25 25 25 25
Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes
Link Speed (mph) 25 25 30 30
Link Distance (ft) 376 2563 1290 948
Travel Time (s) 10.3 69.9 29.3 21.5
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Shared Lane Traffic (%)
Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 65 5 0 66 210 35 798 0 390 523 0 v/c Ratio 0.37 0.02 0.37 0.61 0.27 0.72 0.71 0.25
Control Delay (s/veh) 45.0 0.2 44.9 13.9 47.1 32.1 37.5 10.3 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay (s/veh) 45.0 0.2 44.9 13.9 47.1 32.1 37.5 10.3 Queue Length 50th (ft) 36 0 37 0 20 214 202 77
Queue Length 95th (ft) 79 0 79 66 53 314 #371 127
Internal Link Dist (ft) 296 2483 1210 868
Turn Bay Length (ft) 50 225 185 250
Base Capacity (vph) 543 562 534 618 135 1118 547 2091
Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.12 0.01 0.12 0.34 0.26 0.71 0.71 0.25 Intersection Summary
Area Type: Other
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.

Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
780 of 1101
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Opening Year AM 1: Alameda de las Pulgas & W 20th Ave 10/20/2025
Opening Year AM 12:18 pm 10/14/2025 Baseline Synchro 12 Report

Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 21 39 5 42 18 193 32 677 57 359 385 97 Future Volume (vph) 21 39 5 42 18 193 32 677 57 359 385 97 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.97
Flt Protected 0.98 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot) 1830 1583 1800 1583 1770 3498 1770 3433 Flt Permitted 0.98 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm) 1830 1583 1800 1583 1770 3498 1770 3433 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 23 42 5 46 20 210 35 736 62 390 418 105 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 5 0 0 190 0 4 0 0 12 0
Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 65 0 0 66 20 35 794 0 390 511 0 Turn Type Split NA Perm Split NA Perm Prot NA Prot NA
Protected Phases 4 4 8 8 5 2 1 6
Permitted Phases 4 8
Actuated Green, G (s) 7.2 7.2 8.7 8.7 3.8 30.0 27.3 53.5 Effective Green, g (s) 7.2 7.2 8.7 8.7 3.8 30.0 27.3 53.5 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.08 0.08 0.10 0.10 0.04 0.33 0.30 0.59 Clearance Time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 144 124 171 151 73 1150 529 2013
v/s Ratio Prot c0.04 c0.04 0.02 c0.23 c0.22 0.15
v/s Ratio Perm 0.00 0.01
v/c Ratio 0.45 0.00 0.39 0.13 0.48 0.69 0.74 0.25
Uniform Delay, d1 40.1 38.7 38.7 37.8 42.7 26.6 28.7 9.2 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 2.2 0.0 1.4 0.4 4.9 1.8 5.3 0.1
Delay (s) 42.4 38.7 40.2 38.2 47.6 28.4 34.0 9.2
Level of Service D D D D D C C A
Approach Delay (s/veh) 42.1 38.7 29.2 19.8
Approach LOS D D C B
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay (s/veh) 26.8 HCM 2000 Level of Service C HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.65
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 91.2 Sum of lost time (s) 18.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 61.6% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group
781 of 1101
HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Opening Year AM 2: Elkhorn Ct & W 20th Ave 10/20/2025
Opening Year AM 12:18 pm 10/14/2025 Baseline Synchro 12 Report

Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 9 335 11 45 416 53 2 0 12 57 0 10 Future Volume (Veh/h) 9 335 11 45 416 53 2 0 12 57 0 10 Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop
Grade 0% 0% 0% 0%
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 10 364 12 49 452 58 2 0 13 62 0 11 Pedestrians
Lane Width (ft)
Walking Speed (ft/s)
Percent Blockage
Right turn flare (veh)
Median type None None
Median storage veh)
Upstream signal (ft) 731
pX, platoon unblocked
vC, conflicting volume 510 376 980 998 370 982 975 481
vC1, stage 1 conf vol
vC2, stage 2 conf vol
vCu, unblocked vol 510 376 980 998 370 982 975 481
tC, single (s) 4.1 4.1 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2
tC, 2 stage (s)
tF (s) 2.2 2.2 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3
p0 queue free % 99 96 99 100 98 71 100 98
cM capacity (veh/h) 1055 1182 216 231 676 215 239 585
Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 SB 1
Volume Total 386 559 15 73
Volume Left 10 49 2 62
Volume Right 12 58 13 11
cSH 1055 1182 526 238
Volume to Capacity 0.00* 0.04 0.03 0.31
Queue Length 95th (ft) 1 3 2 31
Control Delay (s/veh) 0.3 1.2 12.0 26.7
Lane LOS A A B D
Approach Delay (s/veh) 0.3 1.2 12.0 26.7
Approach LOS B D
Intersection Summary
Average Delay 2.8
Intersection Capacity Utilization 64.6% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15
* Value less than 0.01.
782 of 1101
Queues Opening Year AM
3: El Camino Real & W 20th Ave 10/20/2025
Opening Year AM 12:18 pm 10/14/2025 Baseline Synchro 12 Report

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 326 21 88 36 37 98 153 1170 18 72 859 311 Future Volume (vph) 326 21 88 36 37 98 153 1170 18 72 859 311 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length (ft) 0 0 0 0 230 0 240 0
Storage Lanes 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 0
Taper Length (ft) 25 25 25 25
Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes
Link Speed (mph) 30 30 30 30
Link Distance (ft) 731 818 1467 812
Travel Time (s) 16.6 18.6 33.3 18.5
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Shared Lane Traffic (%) 32%
Lane Group Flow (vph) 241 232 0 0 79 107 166 1292 0 78 1272 0 v/c Ratio 0.74 0.70 0.47 0.43 0.67 0.53 0.49 0.62
Control Delay (s/veh) 57.4 50.0 59.7 13.5 61.3 23.3 61.8 28.0 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay (s/veh) 57.4 50.0 59.7 13.5 61.3 23.3 61.8 28.0 Queue Length 50th (ft) 175 151 56 0 117 246 55 253
Queue Length 95th (ft) 287 258 115 49 209 365 117 384
Internal Link Dist (ft) 651 738 1387 732
Turn Bay Length (ft) 230 240
Base Capacity (vph) 466 466 481 503 330 2455 207 2045
Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.52 0.50 0.16 0.21 0.50 0.53 0.38 0.62 Intersection Summary
Area Type: Other
783 of 1101
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Opening Year AM 3: El Camino Real & W 20th Ave 10/20/2025
Opening Year AM 12:18 pm 10/14/2025 Baseline Synchro 12 Report

Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 326 21 88 36 37 98 153 1170 18 72 859 311 Future Volume (vph) 326 21 88 36 37 98 153 1170 18 72 859 311 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Lane Util. Factor 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.91 1.00 0.91 Frt 1.00 0.94 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.96
Flt Protected 0.95 0.98 0.98 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot) 1681 1620 1818 1583 1770 5073 1770 4883 Flt Permitted 0.95 0.98 0.98 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm) 1681 1620 1818 1583 1770 5073 1770 4883 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 354 23 96 39 40 107 166 1272 20 78 934 338 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 19 0 0 0 97 0 1 0 0 39 0
Lane Group Flow (vph) 241 213 0 0 79 10 166 1291 0 78 1233 0 Turn Type Split NA Split NA Perm Prot NA Prot NA
Protected Phases 4 4 8 8 5 2 1 6
Permitted Phases 8
Actuated Green, G (s) 21.5 21.5 10.4 10.4 15.5 53.8 8.4 46.7 Effective Green, g (s) 21.5 21.5 10.4 10.4 15.5 53.8 8.4 46.7 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.19 0.19 0.09 0.09 0.14 0.48 0.07 0.42 Clearance Time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 322 310 168 146 244 2434 132 2034
v/s Ratio Prot c0.14 0.13 c0.04 c0.09 0.25 0.04 c0.25
v/s Ratio Perm 0.01
v/c Ratio 0.75 0.69 0.47 0.07 0.68 0.53 0.59 0.61
Uniform Delay, d1 42.7 42.2 48.2 46.4 45.9 20.3 50.2 25.5 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 9.2 6.2 2.1 0.2 7.6 0.8 6.9 1.4
Delay (s) 51.9 48.4 50.3 46.6 53.5 21.2 57.1 26.9
Level of Service D D D D D C E C
Approach Delay (s/veh) 50.2 48.2 24.9 28.6
Approach LOS D D C C
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay (s/veh) 31.0 HCM 2000 Level of Service C HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.64
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 112.1 Sum of lost time (s) 18.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 62.2% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group
784 of 1101
HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Opening Year AM 4: Elkhorn Ct & Dwy 10/20/2025
Opening Year AM 12:18 pm 10/14/2025 Baseline Synchro 12 Report

Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 0 0 4 0 0 0 9 53 0 0 63 0
Future Volume (Veh/h) 0 0 4 0 0 0 9 53 0 0 63 0
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free
Grade 0% 0% 0% 0%
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 0 0 4 0 0 0 10 58 0 0 68 0
Pedestrians
Lane Width (ft)
Walking Speed (ft/s)
Percent Blockage
Right turn flare (veh)
Median type None None
Median storage veh)
Upstream signal (ft)
pX, platoon unblocked
vC, conflicting volume 146 146 68 150 146 58 68 58
vC1, stage 1 conf vol
vC2, stage 2 conf vol
vCu, unblocked vol 146 146 68 150 146 58 68 58
tC, single (s) 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 4.1 4.1
tC, 2 stage (s)
tF (s) 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 2.2 2.2
p0 queue free % 100 100 100 100 100 100 99 100
cM capacity (veh/h) 819 740 995 810 740 1008 1533 1546
Direction, Lane # EB 1 NB 1 SB 1
Volume Total 4 68 68
Volume Left 0 10 0
Volume Right 4 0 0
cSH 995 1533 1700
Volume to Capacity 0.00* 0.00* 0.04
Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 0 0
Control Delay (s/veh) 8.6 1.1 0.0
Lane LOS A A
Approach Delay (s/veh) 8.6 1.1 0.0
Approach LOS A
Intersection Summary
Average Delay 0.8
Intersection Capacity Utilization 20.0% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15
* Value less than 0.01.
785 of 1101
Queues Opening Year PM
1: Alameda de las Pulgas & W 20th Ave 10/20/2025
Opening Year PM 12:26 pm 10/14/2025 Baseline Synchro 12 Report

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 131 35 12 46 3 180 11 470 103 358 529 10 Future Volume (vph) 131 35 12 46 3 180 11 470 103 358 529 10 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length (ft) 0 50 0 225 185 0 250 0
Storage Lanes 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0
Taper Length (ft) 25 25 25 25
Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes
Link Speed (mph) 30 30 30 30
Link Distance (ft) 376 2563 1290 948
Travel Time (s) 8.5 58.3 29.3 21.5
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Shared Lane Traffic (%)
Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 180 13 0 53 196 12 623 0 389 586 0 v/c Ratio 0.63 0.03 0.30 0.59 0.10 0.72 0.79 0.30
Control Delay (s/veh) 46.2 0.2 44.4 14.3 45.5 34.7 44.1 11.8 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay (s/veh) 46.2 0.2 44.4 14.3 45.5 34.7 44.1 11.8 Queue Length 50th (ft) 96 0 29 0 7 165 197 77
Queue Length 95th (ft) 185 0 71 65 27 251 #412 171
Internal Link Dist (ft) 296 2483 1210 868
Turn Bay Length (ft) 50 225 185 250
Base Capacity (vph) 389 462 386 497 136 1157 565 2132
Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.46 0.03 0.14 0.39 0.09 0.54 0.69 0.27 Intersection Summary
Area Type: Other
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.

Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
786 of 1101
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Opening Year PM 1: Alameda de las Pulgas & W 20th Ave 10/20/2025
Opening Year PM 12:26 pm 10/14/2025 Baseline Synchro 12 Report

Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 131 35 12 46 3 180 11 470 103 358 529 10 Future Volume (vph) 131 35 12 46 3 180 11 470 103 358 529 10 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.97 1.00 1.00
Flt Protected 0.96 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot) 1792 1583 1779 1583 1770 3444 1770 3529 Flt Permitted 0.96 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm) 1792 1583 1779 1583 1770 3444 1770 3529 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 142 38 13 50 3 196 12 511 112 389 575 11 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 11 0 0 178 0 17 0 0 1 0
Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 180 2 0 53 18 12 606 0 389 585 0 Turn Type Split NA Perm Split NA Perm Prot NA Prot NA
Protected Phases 4 4 8 8 5 2 1 6
Permitted Phases 4 8
Actuated Green, G (s) 13.8 13.8 8.4 8.4 1.1 25.0 23.8 47.7 Effective Green, g (s) 13.8 13.8 8.4 8.4 1.1 25.0 23.8 47.7 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.16 0.16 0.09 0.09 0.01 0.28 0.27 0.54 Clearance Time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 277 245 167 149 21 967 473 1891
v/s Ratio Prot c0.10 c0.03 0.01 c0.18 c0.22 0.17
v/s Ratio Perm 0.00 0.01
v/c Ratio 0.65 0.01 0.32 0.12 0.57 0.63 0.82 0.31
Uniform Delay, d1 35.3 31.8 37.6 36.9 43.7 27.9 30.6 11.5 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 5.2 0.0 1.1 0.4 32.5 1.3 11.0 0.1 Delay (s) 40.5 31.8 38.7 37.3 76.2 29.2 41.6 11.6
Level of Service D C D D E C D B
Approach Delay (s/veh) 39.9 37.6 30.1 23.6
Approach LOS D D C C
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay (s/veh) 28.8 HCM 2000 Level of Service C HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.66
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 89.0 Sum of lost time (s) 18.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 63.1% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group
787 of 1101
HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Opening Year PM 2: Elkhorn Ct & W 20th Ave 10/20/2025
Opening Year PM 12:26 pm 10/14/2025 Baseline Synchro 12 Report

Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 13 434 14 38 238 38 23 0 65 49 1 9 Future Volume (Veh/h) 13 434 14 38 238 38 23 0 65 49 1 9 Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop
Grade 0% 0% 0% 0%
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 14 472 15 41 259 41 25 0 71 53 1 10 Pedestrians
Lane Width (ft)
Walking Speed (ft/s)
Percent Blockage
Right turn flare (veh)
Median type None None
Median storage veh)
Upstream signal (ft) 731
pX, platoon unblocked
vC, conflicting volume 300 487 880 890 480 940 877 280
vC1, stage 1 conf vol
vC2, stage 2 conf vol
vCu, unblocked vol 300 487 880 890 480 940 877 280
tC, single (s) 4.1 4.1 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2
tC, 2 stage (s)
tF (s) 2.2 2.2 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3
p0 queue free % 99 96 90 100 88 74 100 99
cM capacity (veh/h) 1261 1076 254 268 586 206 273 759
Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 SB 1
Volume Total 501 341 96 64
Volume Left 14 41 25 53
Volume Right 15 41 71 10
cSH 1261 1076 437 234
Volume to Capacity 0.01 0.04 0.22 0.27
Queue Length 95th (ft) 1 3 21 27
Control Delay (s/veh) 0.3 1.4 15.5 26.1
Lane LOS A A C D
Approach Delay (s/veh) 0.3 1.4 15.5 26.1
Approach LOS C D
Intersection Summary
Average Delay 3.8
Intersection Capacity Utilization 48.8% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15
788 of 1101
Queues Opening Year PM
3: El Camino Real & W 20th Ave 10/20/2025
Opening Year PM 12:26 pm 10/14/2025 Baseline Synchro 12 Report

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 422 41 143 39 45 154 122 1436 21 101 974 194 Future Volume (vph) 422 41 143 39 45 154 122 1436 21 101 974 194 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length (ft) 0 0 0 0 230 0 240 0
Storage Lanes 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 0
Taper Length (ft) 25 25 25 25
Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes
Link Speed (mph) 30 30 30 30
Link Distance (ft) 731 818 1467 812
Travel Time (s) 16.6 18.6 33.3 18.5
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Shared Lane Traffic (%) 26%
Lane Group Flow (vph) 340 319 0 0 91 167 133 1584 0 110 1270 0 v/c Ratio 0.82 0.76 0.51 0.55 0.68 0.77 0.69 0.66
Control Delay (s/veh) 57.6 48.0 60.2 14.8 68.0 33.1 74.7 31.1 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay (s/veh) 57.6 48.0 60.2 14.8 68.0 33.1 74.7 31.1 Queue Length 50th (ft) 252 209 68 1 99 387 83 294
Queue Length 95th (ft) #413 336 122 67 #185 478 #178 369 Internal Link Dist (ft) 651 738 1387 732
Turn Bay Length (ft) 230 240
Base Capacity (vph) 469 473 469 531 216 2064 164 1932
Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.72 0.67 0.19 0.31 0.62 0.77 0.67 0.66 Intersection Summary
Area Type: Other
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.

Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
789 of 1101
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Opening Year PM 3: El Camino Real & W 20th Ave 10/20/2025
Opening Year PM 12:26 pm 10/14/2025 Baseline Synchro 12 Report

Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 422 41 143 39 45 154 122 1436 21 101 974 194 Future Volume (vph) 422 41 143 39 45 154 122 1436 21 101 974 194 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Lane Util. Factor 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.91 1.00 0.91 Frt 1.00 0.93 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98
Flt Protected 0.95 0.98 0.98 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot) 1681 1611 1821 1583 1770 5074 1770 4959 Flt Permitted 0.95 0.98 0.98 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm) 1681 1611 1821 1583 1770 5074 1770 4959 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 459 45 155 42 49 167 133 1561 23 110 1059 211 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 25 0 0 0 150 0 1 0 0 20 0
Lane Group Flow (vph) 340 294 0 0 91 17 133 1583 0 110 1250 0 Turn Type Split NA Split NA Perm Prot NA Prot NA
Protected Phases 4 4 8 8 5 2 1 6
Permitted Phases 8
Actuated Green, G (s) 28.0 28.0 11.1 11.1 12.5 46.1 10.2 43.8 Effective Green, g (s) 28.0 28.0 11.1 11.1 12.5 46.1 10.2 43.8 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.25 0.25 0.10 0.10 0.11 0.41 0.09 0.39 Clearance Time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 415 397 178 154 195 2062 159 1915
v/s Ratio Prot c0.20 0.18 c0.05 c0.08 c0.31 0.06 0.25
v/s Ratio Perm 0.01
v/c Ratio 0.82 0.74 0.51 0.11 0.68 0.77 0.69 0.65
Uniform Delay, d1 40.3 39.4 48.6 46.7 48.5 29.0 50.1 28.6 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 11.9 7.3 2.5 0.3 9.4 2.8 12.2 1.7 Delay (s) 52.2 46.6 51.0 47.0 58.0 31.8 62.3 30.3
Level of Service D D D D E C E C
Approach Delay (s/veh) 49.5 48.4 33.9 32.9
Approach LOS D D C C
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay (s/veh) 37.0 HCM 2000 Level of Service D HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.76
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 113.4 Sum of lost time (s) 18.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 70.5% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group
790 of 1101
HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Opening Year PM 4: Elkhorn Ct & Dwy 10/20/2025
Opening Year PM 12:26 pm 10/14/2025 Baseline Synchro 12 Report

Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 0 0 6 0 0 0 9 42 0 0 53 0
Future Volume (Veh/h) 0 0 6 0 0 0 9 42 0 0 53 0
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free
Grade 0% 0% 0% 0%
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 0 0 7 0 0 0 10 46 0 0 58 0
Pedestrians
Lane Width (ft)
Walking Speed (ft/s)
Percent Blockage
Right turn flare (veh)
Median type None None
Median storage veh)
Upstream signal (ft)
pX, platoon unblocked
vC, conflicting volume 124 124 58 131 124 46 58 46
vC1, stage 1 conf vol
vC2, stage 2 conf vol
vCu, unblocked vol 124 124 58 131 124 46 58 46
tC, single (s) 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 4.1 4.1
tC, 2 stage (s)
tF (s) 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 2.2 2.2
p0 queue free % 100 100 99 100 100 100 99 100
cM capacity (veh/h) 846 761 1008 831 761 1023 1546 1562 Direction, Lane # EB 1 NB 1 SB 1
Volume Total 7 56 58
Volume Left 0 10 0
Volume Right 7 0 0
cSH 1008 1546 1700
Volume to Capacity 0.00* 0.00* 0.03
Queue Length 95th (ft) 1 0 0
Control Delay (s/veh) 8.6 1.4 0.0
Lane LOS A A
Approach Delay (s/veh) 8.6 1.4 0.0
Approach LOS A
Intersection Summary
Average Delay 1.1
Intersection Capacity Utilization 19.4% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15
* Value less than 0.01.
791 of 1101
Queues
1: Alameda de las Pulgas & W 20th Ave 12/19/2025
Opening Year Plus Project AM 1:08 pm 10/14/2025 Baseline Synchro 12 Report

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 21 39 5 44 18 198 32 677 58 361 385 97 Future Volume (vph) 21 39 5 44 18 198 32 677 58 361 385 97 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length (ft) 0 50 0 225 185 0 250 0
Storage Lanes 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0
Taper Length (ft) 25 25 25 25
Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes
Link Speed (mph) 25 25 30 30
Link Distance (ft) 376 2563 1290 948
Travel Time (s) 10.3 69.9 29.3 21.5
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 23 42 5 48 20 215 35 736 63 392 418 105 Shared Lane Traffic (%)
Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 65 5 0 68 215 35 799 0 392 523 0 v/c Ratio 0.37 0.02 0.37 0.61 0.28 0.72 0.72 0.25
Control Delay (s/veh) 45.3 0.2 44.6 13.6 47.5 32.4 38.1 10.4 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay (s/veh) 45.3 0.2 44.6 13.6 47.5 32.4 38.1 10.4 Queue Length 50th (ft) 36 0 38 0 20 215 204 77
Queue Length 95th (ft) 80 0 81 66 54 319 #381 131
Internal Link Dist (ft) 296 2483 1210 868
Turn Bay Length (ft) 50 225 185 250
Base Capacity (vph) 541 560 532 619 134 1115 545 2085
Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.12 0.01 0.13 0.35 0.26 0.72 0.72 0.25 Intersection Summary
Area Type: Other
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.

Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
792 of 1101
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
1: Alameda de las Pulgas & W 20th Ave 12/19/2025
Opening Year Plus Project AM 1:08 pm 10/14/2025 Baseline Synchro 12 Report

Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 21 39 5 44 18 198 32 677 58 361 385 97 Future Volume (vph) 21 39 5 44 18 198 32 677 58 361 385 97 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.97
Flt Protected 0.98 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot) 1830 1583 1799 1583 1770 3497 1770 3433 Flt Permitted 0.98 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm) 1830 1583 1799 1583 1770 3497 1770 3433 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 23 42 5 48 20 215 35 736 63 392 418 105 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 5 0 0 194 0 5 0 0 12 0
Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 65 0 0 68 21 35 794 0 392 511 0 Turn Type Split NA Perm Split NA Perm Prot NA Prot NA
Protected Phases 4 4 8 8 5 2 1 6
Permitted Phases 4 8
Actuated Green, G (s) 7.2 7.2 9.0 9.0 3.8 30.0 27.4 53.6 Effective Green, g (s) 7.2 7.2 9.0 9.0 3.8 30.0 27.4 53.6 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.08 0.08 0.10 0.10 0.04 0.33 0.30 0.59 Clearance Time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 143 124 176 155 73 1145 529 2008
v/s Ratio Prot c0.04 c0.04 0.02 c0.23 c0.22 0.15
v/s Ratio Perm 0.00 0.01
v/c Ratio 0.45 0.00 0.39 0.14 0.48 0.69 0.74 0.25
Uniform Delay, d1 40.3 38.9 38.7 37.7 42.9 26.8 28.9 9.3 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 2.3 0.0 1.4 0.4 4.9 1.8 5.5 0.1
Delay (s) 42.6 38.9 40.1 38.2 47.8 28.6 34.4 9.3
Level of Service D D D D D C C A
Approach Delay (s/veh) 42.3 38.6 29.4 20.1
Approach LOS D D C C
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay (s/veh) 27.0 HCM 2000 Level of Service C HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.65
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 91.6 Sum of lost time (s) 18.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 61.9% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group
793 of 1101
HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
2: Elkhorn Ct & W 20th Ave 12/19/2025
Opening Year Plus Project AM 1:08 pm 10/14/2025 Baseline Synchro 12 Report

Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 14 335 11 45 416 70 2 0 12 90 0 19 Future Volume (Veh/h) 14 335 11 45 416 70 2 0 12 90 0 19 Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop
Grade 0% 0% 0% 0%
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 15 364 12 49 452 76 2 0 13 98 0 21 Pedestrians
Lane Width (ft)
Walking Speed (ft/s)
Percent Blockage
Right turn flare (veh)
Median type None None
Median storage veh)
Upstream signal (ft) 731
pX, platoon unblocked
vC, conflicting volume 528 376 1009 1026 370 1001 994 490 vC1, stage 1 conf vol
vC2, stage 2 conf vol
vCu, unblocked vol 528 376 1009 1026 370 1001 994 490
tC, single (s) 4.1 4.1 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2
tC, 2 stage (s)
tF (s) 2.2 2.2 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3
p0 queue free % 99 96 99 100 98 53 100 96
cM capacity (veh/h) 1039 1182 202 222 676 208 232 578
Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 SB 1
Volume Total 391 577 15 119
Volume Left 15 49 2 98
Volume Right 12 76 13 21
cSH 1039 1182 515 235
Volume to Capacity 0.01 0.04 0.03 0.51
Queue Length 95th (ft) 1 3 2 65
Control Delay (s/veh) 0.5 1.1 12.2 35.2
Lane LOS A A B E
Approach Delay (s/veh) 0.5 1.1 12.2 35.2
Approach LOS B E
Intersection Summary
Average Delay 4.7
Intersection Capacity Utilization 64.0% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15
794 of 1101
Queues
3: El Camino Real & W 20th Ave 12/19/2025
Opening Year Plus Project AM 1:08 pm 10/14/2025 Baseline Synchro 12 Report

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 353 21 94 36 37 98 156 1170 18 72 859 325 Future Volume (vph) 353 21 94 36 37 98 156 1170 18 72 859 325 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length (ft) 0 0 0 0 230 0 240 0
Storage Lanes 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 0
Taper Length (ft) 25 25 25 25
Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes
Link Speed (mph) 30 30 30 30
Link Distance (ft) 731 818 1467 812
Travel Time (s) 16.6 18.6 33.3 18.5
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 384 23 102 39 40 107 170 1272 20 78 934 353 Shared Lane Traffic (%) 32%
Lane Group Flow (vph) 261 248 0 0 79 107 170 1292 0 78 1287 0 v/c Ratio 0.77 0.72 0.47 0.43 0.69 0.53 0.49 0.64
Control Delay (s/veh) 58.7 50.9 60.5 13.5 62.5 24.1 62.5 29.0 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay (s/veh) 58.7 50.9 60.5 13.5 62.5 24.1 62.5 29.0 Queue Length 50th (ft) 193 165 57 0 122 254 56 267
Queue Length 95th (ft) 312 277 115 49 214 365 117 389
Internal Link Dist (ft) 651 738 1387 732
Turn Bay Length (ft) 230 240
Base Capacity (vph) 460 460 475 498 326 2425 205 2010
Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.57 0.54 0.17 0.21 0.52 0.53 0.38 0.64 Intersection Summary
Area Type: Other
795 of 1101
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
3: El Camino Real & W 20th Ave 12/19/2025
Opening Year Plus Project AM 1:08 pm 10/14/2025 Baseline Synchro 12 Report

Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 353 21 94 36 37 98 156 1170 18 72 859 325 Future Volume (vph) 353 21 94 36 37 98 156 1170 18 72 859 325 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Lane Util. Factor 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.91 1.00 0.91 Frt 1.00 0.94 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.96
Flt Protected 0.95 0.98 0.98 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot) 1681 1620 1818 1583 1770 5073 1770 4876 Flt Permitted 0.95 0.98 0.98 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm) 1681 1620 1818 1583 1770 5073 1770 4876 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 384 23 102 39 40 107 170 1272 20 78 934 353 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 18 0 0 0 97 0 1 0 0 41 0
Lane Group Flow (vph) 261 230 0 0 79 10 170 1291 0 78 1246 0 Turn Type Split NA Split NA Perm Prot NA Prot NA
Protected Phases 4 4 8 8 5 2 1 6
Permitted Phases 8
Actuated Green, G (s) 22.8 22.8 10.4 10.4 15.8 53.8 8.5 46.5 Effective Green, g (s) 22.8 22.8 10.4 10.4 15.8 53.8 8.5 46.5 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.20 0.20 0.09 0.09 0.14 0.47 0.07 0.41 Clearance Time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 337 325 166 145 246 2404 132 1997
v/s Ratio Prot c0.16 0.14 c0.04 c0.10 0.25 0.04 c0.26
v/s Ratio Perm 0.01
v/c Ratio 0.77 0.71 0.48 0.07 0.69 0.54 0.59 0.62
Uniform Delay, d1 42.9 42.2 49.0 47.1 46.5 21.1 50.8 26.6 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 10.6 6.8 2.1 0.2 8.1 0.9 6.9 1.5
Delay (s) 53.5 49.1 51.1 47.3 54.6 21.9 57.7 28.0
Level of Service D D D D D C E C
Approach Delay (s/veh) 51.4 48.9 25.7 29.7
Approach LOS D D C C
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay (s/veh) 32.2 HCM 2000 Level of Service C HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.65
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 113.5 Sum of lost time (s) 18.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 63.6% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group
796 of 1101
HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
4: Elkhorn Ct & Dwy 12/19/2025
Opening Year Plus Project AM 1:08 pm 10/14/2025 Baseline Synchro 12 Report

Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 0 0 45 0 0 0 29 53 0 0 63 0
Future Volume (Veh/h) 0 0 45 0 0 0 29 53 0 0 63 0
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free
Grade 0% 0% 0% 0%
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 0 0 49 0 0 0 32 58 0 0 68 0
Pedestrians
Lane Width (ft)
Walking Speed (ft/s)
Percent Blockage
Right turn flare (veh)
Median type None None
Median storage veh)
Upstream signal (ft)
pX, platoon unblocked
vC, conflicting volume 190 190 68 239 190 58 68 58
vC1, stage 1 conf vol
vC2, stage 2 conf vol
vCu, unblocked vol 190 190 68 239 190 58 68 58
tC, single (s) 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 4.1 4.1
tC, 2 stage (s)
tF (s) 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 2.2 2.2
p0 queue free % 100 100 95 100 100 100 98 100
cM capacity (veh/h) 758 690 995 669 690 1008 1533 1546
Direction, Lane # EB 1 NB 1 SB 1
Volume Total 49 90 68
Volume Left 0 32 0
Volume Right 49 0 0
cSH 995 1533 1700
Volume to Capacity 0.05 0.02 0.04
Queue Length 95th (ft) 4 2 0
Control Delay (s/veh) 8.8 2.7 0.0
Lane LOS A A
Approach Delay (s/veh) 8.8 2.7 0.0
Approach LOS A
Intersection Summary
Average Delay 3.3
Intersection Capacity Utilization 21.1% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15
797 of 1101
Queues
1: Alameda de las Pulgas & W 20th Ave 12/19/2025
Opening Year Plus Project PM 1:39 pm 10/14/2025 Baseline Synchro 12 Report

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 131 35 12 47 3 181 11 470 105 362 529 10 Future Volume (vph) 131 35 12 47 3 181 11 470 105 362 529 10 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length (ft) 0 50 0 225 185 0 250 0
Storage Lanes 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0
Taper Length (ft) 25 25 25 25
Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes
Link Speed (mph) 30 30 30 30
Link Distance (ft) 376 2563 1290 948
Travel Time (s) 8.5 58.3 29.3 21.5
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 142 38 13 51 3 197 12 511 114 393 575 11 Shared Lane Traffic (%)
Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 180 13 0 54 197 12 625 0 393 586 0 v/c Ratio 0.63 0.03 0.31 0.59 0.10 0.72 0.80 0.30
Control Delay (s/veh) 46.4 0.2 44.5 14.2 45.5 34.7 44.5 11.8 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay (s/veh) 46.4 0.2 44.5 14.2 45.5 34.7 44.5 11.8 Queue Length 50th (ft) 96 0 29 0 7 165 200 77
Queue Length 95th (ft) 184 0 72 65 27 252 #418 171
Internal Link Dist (ft) 296 2483 1210 868
Turn Bay Length (ft) 50 225 185 250
Base Capacity (vph) 387 461 384 496 135 1153 563 2125
Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.47 0.03 0.14 0.40 0.09 0.54 0.70 0.28 Intersection Summary
Area Type: Other
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.

Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
798 of 1101
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
1: Alameda de las Pulgas & W 20th Ave 12/19/2025
Opening Year Plus Project PM 1:39 pm 10/14/2025 Baseline Synchro 12 Report

Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 131 35 12 47 3 181 11 470 105 362 529 10 Future Volume (vph) 131 35 12 47 3 181 11 470 105 362 529 10 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.97 1.00 1.00
Flt Protected 0.96 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot) 1792 1583 1779 1583 1770 3442 1770 3529 Flt Permitted 0.96 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm) 1792 1583 1779 1583 1770 3442 1770 3529 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 142 38 13 51 3 197 12 511 114 393 575 11 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 11 0 0 178 0 17 0 0 1 0
Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 180 2 0 54 19 12 608 0 393 585 0 Turn Type Split NA Perm Split NA Perm Prot NA Prot NA
Protected Phases 4 4 8 8 5 2 1 6
Permitted Phases 4 8
Actuated Green, G (s) 13.8 13.8 8.5 8.5 1.1 25.1 23.9 47.9 Effective Green, g (s) 13.8 13.8 8.5 8.5 1.1 25.1 23.9 47.9 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.15 0.15 0.10 0.10 0.01 0.28 0.27 0.54 Clearance Time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 276 244 169 150 21 967 473 1892
v/s Ratio Prot c0.10 c0.03 0.01 c0.18 c0.22 0.17
v/s Ratio Perm 0.00 0.01
v/c Ratio 0.65 0.01 0.32 0.13 0.57 0.63 0.83 0.31
Uniform Delay, d1 35.5 32.0 37.7 37.0 43.9 28.0 30.8 11.5 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 5.4 0.0 1.1 0.4 32.5 1.3 11.8 0.1 Delay (s) 40.9 32.0 38.8 37.4 76.3 29.3 42.6 11.6
Level of Service D C D D E C D B
Approach Delay (s/veh) 40.3 37.7 30.2 24.0
Approach LOS D D C C
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay (s/veh) 29.1 HCM 2000 Level of Service C HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.66
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 89.3 Sum of lost time (s) 18.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 63.4% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group
799 of 1101
HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
2: Elkhorn Ct & W 20th Ave 12/19/2025
Opening Year Plus Project PM 1:39 pm 10/14/2025 Baseline Synchro 12 Report

Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 21 434 14 38 238 67 23 0 65 62 1 13 Future Volume (Veh/h) 21 434 14 38 238 67 23 0 65 62 1 13 Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop
Grade 0% 0% 0% 0%
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 23 472 15 41 259 73 25 0 71 67 1 14 Pedestrians
Lane Width (ft)
Walking Speed (ft/s)
Percent Blockage
Right turn flare (veh)
Median type None None
Median storage veh)
Upstream signal (ft) 731
pX, platoon unblocked
vC, conflicting volume 332 487 918 940 480 974 911 296
vC1, stage 1 conf vol
vC2, stage 2 conf vol
vCu, unblocked vol 332 487 918 940 480 974 911 296
tC, single (s) 4.1 4.1 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2
tC, 2 stage (s)
tF (s) 2.2 2.2 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3
p0 queue free % 98 96 89 100 88 66 100 98
cM capacity (veh/h) 1227 1076 236 249 586 194 259 744
Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 SB 1
Volume Total 510 373 96 82
Volume Left 23 41 25 67
Volume Right 15 73 71 14
cSH 1227 1076 423 223
Volume to Capacity 0.02 0.04 0.23 0.37
Queue Length 95th (ft) 1 3 22 40
Control Delay (s/veh) 0.6 1.3 16.0 30.2
Lane LOS A A C D
Approach Delay (s/veh) 0.6 1.3 16.0 30.2
Approach LOS C D
Intersection Summary
Average Delay 4.5
Intersection Capacity Utilization 49.1% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15
800 of 1101
Queues
3: El Camino Real & W 20th Ave 12/19/2025
Opening Year Plus Project PM 1:39 pm 10/14/2025 Baseline Synchro 12 Report

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 432 41 145 39 45 154 127 1436 21 101 974 218 Future Volume (vph) 432 41 145 39 45 154 127 1436 21 101 974 218 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length (ft) 0 0 0 0 230 0 240 0
Storage Lanes 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 0
Taper Length (ft) 25 25 25 25
Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes
Link Speed (mph) 30 30 30 30
Link Distance (ft) 731 818 1467 812
Travel Time (s) 16.6 18.6 33.3 18.5
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 470 45 158 42 49 167 138 1561 23 110 1059 237 Shared Lane Traffic (%) 27%
Lane Group Flow (vph) 343 330 0 0 91 167 138 1584 0 110 1296 0 v/c Ratio 0.82 0.78 0.51 0.55 0.70 0.77 0.70 0.67
Control Delay (s/veh) 57.9 50.0 60.2 15.2 69.2 33.2 74.9 31.5 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay (s/veh) 57.9 50.0 60.2 15.2 69.2 33.2 74.9 31.5 Queue Length 50th (ft) 254 220 68 2 103 387 83 300
Queue Length 95th (ft) #418 #355 122 68 #196 478 #178 376 Internal Link Dist (ft) 651 738 1387 732
Turn Bay Length (ft) 230 240
Base Capacity (vph) 468 471 468 529 216 2060 164 1922
Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.73 0.70 0.19 0.32 0.64 0.77 0.67 0.67 Intersection Summary
Area Type: Other
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.

Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
801 of 1101
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
3: El Camino Real & W 20th Ave 12/19/2025
Opening Year Plus Project PM 1:39 pm 10/14/2025 Baseline Synchro 12 Report

Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 432 41 145 39 45 154 127 1436 21 101 974 218 Future Volume (vph) 432 41 145 39 45 154 127 1436 21 101 974 218 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Lane Util. Factor 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.91 1.00 0.91 Frt 1.00 0.93 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97
Flt Protected 0.95 0.98 0.98 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot) 1681 1612 1821 1583 1770 5074 1770 4946 Flt Permitted 0.95 0.98 0.98 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm) 1681 1612 1821 1583 1770 5074 1770 4946 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 470 45 158 42 49 167 138 1561 23 110 1059 237 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 24 0 0 0 148 0 1 0 0 24 0
Lane Group Flow (vph) 343 306 0 0 91 19 138 1583 0 110 1272 0 Turn Type Split NA Split NA Perm Prot NA Prot NA
Protected Phases 4 4 8 8 5 2 1 6
Permitted Phases 8
Actuated Green, G (s) 28.2 28.2 11.1 11.1 12.7 46.1 10.2 43.6 Effective Green, g (s) 28.2 28.2 11.1 11.1 12.7 46.1 10.2 43.6 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.25 0.25 0.10 0.10 0.11 0.41 0.09 0.38 Clearance Time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 417 400 177 154 197 2059 158 1898
v/s Ratio Prot c0.20 0.19 c0.05 c0.08 c0.31 0.06 0.26
v/s Ratio Perm 0.01
v/c Ratio 0.82 0.76 0.51 0.12 0.70 0.77 0.70 0.67
Uniform Delay, d1 40.3 39.6 48.7 46.8 48.6 29.1 50.2 29.0 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 12.3 8.5 2.5 0.4 10.7 2.8 12.5 1.9 Delay (s) 52.7 48.1 51.2 47.2 59.3 32.0 62.7 30.9
Level of Service D D D D E C E C
Approach Delay (s/veh) 50.4 48.6 34.2 33.4
Approach LOS D D C C
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay (s/veh) 37.5 HCM 2000 Level of Service D HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.76
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 113.6 Sum of lost time (s) 18.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 70.8% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group
802 of 1101
HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
4: Elkhorn Ct & Dwy 12/19/2025
Opening Year Plus Project PM 1:39 pm 10/14/2025 Baseline Synchro 12 Report

Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 0 0 23 0 0 0 44 42 0 0 53 0
Future Volume (Veh/h) 0 0 23 0 0 0 44 42 0 0 53 0
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free
Grade 0% 0% 0% 0%
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 0 0 25 0 0 0 48 46 0 0 58 0
Pedestrians
Lane Width (ft)
Walking Speed (ft/s)
Percent Blockage
Right turn flare (veh)
Median type None None
Median storage veh)
Upstream signal (ft)
pX, platoon unblocked
vC, conflicting volume 200 200 58 225 200 46 58 46
vC1, stage 1 conf vol
vC2, stage 2 conf vol
vCu, unblocked vol 200 200 58 225 200 46 58 46
tC, single (s) 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 4.1 4.1
tC, 2 stage (s)
tF (s) 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 2.2 2.2
p0 queue free % 100 100 98 100 100 100 97 100
cM capacity (veh/h) 741 674 1008 695 674 1023 1546 1562 Direction, Lane # EB 1 NB 1 SB 1
Volume Total 25 94 58
Volume Left 0 48 0
Volume Right 25 0 0
cSH 1008 1546 1700
Volume to Capacity 0.02 0.03 0.03
Queue Length 95th (ft) 2 2 0
Control Delay (s/veh) 8.7 3.9 0.0
Lane LOS A A
Approach Delay (s/veh) 8.7 3.9 0.0
Approach LOS A
Intersection Summary
Average Delay 3.3
Intersection Capacity Utilization 21.3% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15
803 of 1101
Queues Cumulative AM
1: Alameda de las Pulgas & W 20th Ave 10/20/2025
Cumulative AM 11:10 am 10/17/2025 Baseline Synchro 12 Report

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 21 39 10 84 38 193 47 838 57 530 437 97 Future Volume (vph) 21 39 10 84 38 193 47 838 57 530 437 97 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length (ft) 0 50 0 225 185 0 250 0
Storage Lanes 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0
Taper Length (ft) 25 25 25 25
Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes
Link Speed (mph) 25 25 30 30
Link Distance (ft) 376 2563 1290 948
Travel Time (s) 10.3 69.9 29.3 21.5
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Shared Lane Traffic (%)
Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 65 11 0 132 210 51 973 0 576 580 0 v/c Ratio 0.38 0.04 0.55 0.54 0.41 0.91 1.10 0.30
Control Delay (s/veh) 47.6 0.3 47.6 10.9 54.3 45.4 102.1 13.2 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay (s/veh) 47.6 0.3 47.6 10.9 54.3 45.4 102.1 13.2 Queue Length 50th (ft) 38 0 76 0 30 297 ~406 97
Queue Length 95th (ft) 83 0 140 64 73 #497 #694 162
Internal Link Dist (ft) 296 2483 1210 868
Turn Bay Length (ft) 50 225 185 250
Base Capacity (vph) 521 544 513 601 129 1074 525 1935
Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.12 0.02 0.26 0.35 0.40 0.91 1.10 0.30 Intersection Summary
Area Type: Other
~ Volume exceeds capacity, queue is theoretically infinite.

Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.

Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
804 of 1101
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Cumulative AM 1: Alameda de las Pulgas & W 20th Ave 10/20/2025
Cumulative AM 11:10 am 10/17/2025 Baseline Synchro 12 Report

Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 21 39 10 84 38 193 47 838 57 530 437 97 Future Volume (vph) 21 39 10 84 38 193 47 838 57 530 437 97 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.97
Flt Protected 0.98 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot) 1830 1583 1801 1583 1770 3505 1770 3443 Flt Permitted 0.98 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm) 1830 1583 1801 1583 1770 3505 1770 3443 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 23 42 11 91 41 210 51 911 62 576 475 105 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 10 0 0 183 0 3 0 0 11 0
Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 65 1 0 132 27 51 970 0 576 569 0 Turn Type Split NA Perm Split NA Perm Prot NA Prot NA
Protected Phases 4 4 8 8 5 2 1 6
Permitted Phases 4 8
Actuated Green, G (s) 7.3 7.3 12.2 12.2 5.1 29.2 27.4 51.5 Effective Green, g (s) 7.3 7.3 12.2 12.2 5.1 29.2 27.4 51.5 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.08 0.08 0.13 0.13 0.05 0.31 0.29 0.55 Clearance Time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 141 122 233 205 95 1087 515 1884
v/s Ratio Prot c0.04 c0.07 0.03 c0.28 c0.33 0.17
v/s Ratio Perm 0.00 0.02
v/c Ratio 0.46 0.01 0.57 0.13 0.54 0.89 1.12 0.30
Uniform Delay, d1 41.5 40.1 38.5 36.3 43.3 30.9 33.3 11.6 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 2.4 0.0 3.1 0.3 5.7 9.4 76.3 0.1
Delay (s) 43.9 40.1 41.6 36.6 49.1 40.4 109.7 11.6
Level of Service D D D D D D F B
Approach Delay (s/veh) 43.3 38.5 40.8 60.5
Approach LOS D D D E
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay (s/veh) 49.3 HCM 2000 Level of Service D HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.88
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 94.1 Sum of lost time (s) 18.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 78.9% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group
805 of 1101
HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Cumulative AM 2: Elkhorn Ct & W 20th Ave 10/20/2025
Cumulative AM 11:10 am 10/17/2025 Baseline Synchro 12 Report

Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 9 512 11 45 444 53 2 0 12 57 0 10 Future Volume (Veh/h) 9 512 11 45 444 53 2 0 12 57 0 10 Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop
Grade 0% 0% 0% 0%
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 10 557 12 49 483 58 2 0 13 62 0 11 Pedestrians
Lane Width (ft)
Walking Speed (ft/s)
Percent Blockage
Right turn flare (veh)
Median type None None
Median storage veh)
Upstream signal (ft) 731
pX, platoon unblocked
vC, conflicting volume 541 569 1204 1222 563 1206 1199 512 vC1, stage 1 conf vol
vC2, stage 2 conf vol
vCu, unblocked vol 541 569 1204 1222 563 1206 1199 512
tC, single (s) 4.1 4.1 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2
tC, 2 stage (s)
tF (s) 2.2 2.2 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3
p0 queue free % 99 95 99 100 98 59 100 98
cM capacity (veh/h) 1028 1003 151 169 526 149 175 562
Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 SB 1
Volume Total 579 590 15 73
Volume Left 10 49 2 62
Volume Right 12 58 13 11
cSH 1028 1003 395 168
Volume to Capacity 0.00* 0.05 0.04 0.43
Queue Length 95th (ft) 1 4 3 49
Control Delay (s/veh) 0.3 1.3 14.5 41.9
Lane LOS A A B E
Approach Delay (s/veh) 0.3 1.3 14.5 41.9
Approach LOS B E
Intersection Summary
Average Delay 3.3
Intersection Capacity Utilization 69.5% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15
* Value less than 0.01.
806 of 1101
Queues Cumulative AM
3: El Camino Real & W 20th Ave 10/20/2025
Cumulative AM 11:10 am 10/17/2025 Baseline Synchro 12 Report

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 380 200 88 36 39 167 186 1908 107 72 1304 311 Future Volume (vph) 380 200 88 36 39 167 186 1908 107 72 1304 311 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length (ft) 0 0 0 0 230 0 240 0
Storage Lanes 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 0
Taper Length (ft) 25 25 25 25
Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes
Link Speed (mph) 30 30 30 30
Link Distance (ft) 731 818 1467 812
Travel Time (s) 16.6 18.6 33.3 18.5
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Shared Lane Traffic (%) 12%
Lane Group Flow (vph) 363 363 0 0 81 182 202 2190 0 78 1755 0 v/c Ratio 0.86 0.84 0.50 0.59 0.77 0.97 0.52 0.97
Control Delay (s/veh) 64.7 60.5 64.3 15.9 69.7 47.2 66.6 52.4 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay (s/veh) 64.7 60.5 64.3 15.9 69.7 47.2 66.6 52.4 Queue Length 50th (ft) 297 287 64 0 156 ~643 61 502
Queue Length 95th (ft) #507 #490 118 71 #264 #847 117 #664 Internal Link Dist (ft) 651 738 1387 732
Turn Bay Length (ft) 230 240
Base Capacity (vph) 423 433 436 518 299 2256 188 1815
Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.86 0.84 0.19 0.35 0.68 0.97 0.41 0.97 Intersection Summary
Area Type: Other
~ Volume exceeds capacity, queue is theoretically infinite.

Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.

Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
807 of 1101
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Cumulative AM 3: El Camino Real & W 20th Ave 10/20/2025
Cumulative AM 11:10 am 10/17/2025 Baseline Synchro 12 Report

Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 380 200 88 36 39 167 186 1908 107 72 1304 311 Future Volume (vph) 380 200 88 36 39 167 186 1908 107 72 1304 311 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Lane Util. Factor 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.91 1.00 0.91 Frt 1.00 0.96 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.97
Flt Protected 0.95 0.99 0.98 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot) 1681 1688 1819 1583 1770 5045 1770 4938 Flt Permitted 0.95 0.99 0.98 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm) 1681 1688 1819 1583 1770 5045 1770 4938 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 413 217 96 39 42 182 202 2074 116 78 1417 338 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 9 0 0 0 166 0 4 0 0 26 0
Lane Group Flow (vph) 363 354 0 0 81 16 202 2186 0 78 1729 0 Turn Type Split NA Split NA Perm Prot NA Prot NA
Protected Phases 4 4 8 8 5 2 1 6
Permitted Phases 8
Actuated Green, G (s) 30.6 30.6 10.8 10.8 18.1 54.2 8.8 44.9 Effective Green, g (s) 30.6 30.6 10.8 10.8 18.1 54.2 8.8 44.9 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.25 0.25 0.09 0.09 0.15 0.44 0.07 0.37 Clearance Time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 420 422 160 139 261 2233 127 1811
v/s Ratio Prot c0.22 0.21 c0.04 c0.11 c0.43 0.04 0.35
v/s Ratio Perm 0.01
v/c Ratio 0.86 0.84 0.51 0.12 0.77 0.98 0.61 0.95
Uniform Delay, d1 43.9 43.6 53.3 51.4 50.2 33.5 55.2 37.8 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 16.6 13.6 2.5 0.4 13.3 14.7 8.5 12.9 Delay (s) 60.6 57.2 55.8 51.8 63.5 48.2 63.7 50.6
Level of Service E E E D E D E D
Approach Delay (s/veh) 58.9 53.0 49.5 51.2
Approach LOS E D D D
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay (s/veh) 51.6 HCM 2000 Level of Service D HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.89
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 122.4 Sum of lost time (s) 18.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 81.0% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group
808 of 1101
HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Cumulative AM 4: Elkhorn Ct & Dwy 10/20/2025
Cumulative AM 11:10 am 10/17/2025 Baseline Synchro 12 Report

Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 0 0 4 0 0 0 9 53 0 0 63 0
Future Volume (Veh/h) 0 0 4 0 0 0 9 53 0 0 63 0
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free
Grade 0% 0% 0% 0%
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 0 0 4 0 0 0 10 58 0 0 68 0
Pedestrians
Lane Width (ft)
Walking Speed (ft/s)
Percent Blockage
Right turn flare (veh)
Median type None None
Median storage veh)
Upstream signal (ft)
pX, platoon unblocked
vC, conflicting volume 146 146 68 150 146 58 68 58
vC1, stage 1 conf vol
vC2, stage 2 conf vol
vCu, unblocked vol 146 146 68 150 146 58 68 58
tC, single (s) 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 4.1 4.1
tC, 2 stage (s)
tF (s) 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 2.2 2.2
p0 queue free % 100 100 100 100 100 100 99 100
cM capacity (veh/h) 819 740 995 810 740 1008 1533 1546
Direction, Lane # EB 1 NB 1 SB 1
Volume Total 4 68 68
Volume Left 0 10 0
Volume Right 4 0 0
cSH 995 1533 1700
Volume to Capacity 0.00* 0.00* 0.04
Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 0 0
Control Delay (s/veh) 8.6 1.1 0.0
Lane LOS A A
Approach Delay (s/veh) 8.6 1.1 0.0
Approach LOS A
Intersection Summary
Average Delay 0.8
Intersection Capacity Utilization 20.0% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15
* Value less than 0.01.
809 of 1101
Queues
1: Alameda de las Pulgas & W 20th Ave 12/19/2025
Cumulative PM 11:17 am 10/17/2025 Baseline Synchro 12 Report

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 131 50 40 99 10 180 17 537 157 414 730 10 Future Volume (vph) 131 50 40 99 10 180 17 537 157 414 730 10 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length (ft) 0 50 0 225 185 0 250 0
Storage Lanes 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0
Taper Length (ft) 25 25 25 25
Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes
Link Speed (mph) 30 30 30 30
Link Distance (ft) 376 2563 1290 948
Travel Time (s) 8.5 58.3 29.3 21.5
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 142 54 43 108 11 196 18 584 171 450 793 11 Shared Lane Traffic (%)
Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 196 43 0 119 196 18 755 0 450 804 0 v/c Ratio 0.71 0.12 0.54 0.53 0.16 0.83 0.92 0.42
Control Delay (s/veh) 55.3 0.6 50.4 11.7 50.3 42.1 62.4 16.1 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay (s/veh) 55.3 0.6 50.4 11.7 50.3 42.1 62.4 16.1 Queue Length 50th (ft) 121 0 74 0 11 227 288 137
Queue Length 95th (ft) 210 0 134 63 36 #350 #542 267
Internal Link Dist (ft) 296 2483 1210 868
Turn Bay Length (ft) 50 225 185 250
Base Capacity (vph) 337 420 334 456 118 1005 489 1912
Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.58 0.10 0.36 0.43 0.15 0.75 0.92 0.42 Intersection Summary
Area Type: Other
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.

Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
810 of 1101
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
1: Alameda de las Pulgas & W 20th Ave 12/19/2025
Cumulative PM 11:17 am 10/17/2025 Baseline Synchro 12 Report

Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 131 50 40 99 10 180 17 537 157 414 730 10 Future Volume (vph) 131 50 40 99 10 180 17 537 157 414 730 10 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.97 1.00 1.00
Flt Protected 0.97 1.00 0.96 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot) 1798 1583 1782 1583 1770 3419 1770 3532 Flt Permitted 0.97 1.00 0.96 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm) 1798 1583 1782 1583 1770 3419 1770 3532 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 142 54 43 108 11 196 18 584 171 450 793 11 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 37 0 0 172 0 24 0 0 1 0
Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 196 6 0 119 24 18 731 0 450 803 0 Turn Type Split NA Perm Split NA Perm Prot NA Prot NA
Protected Phases 4 4 8 8 5 2 1 6
Permitted Phases 4 8
Actuated Green, G (s) 14.8 14.8 12.0 12.0 2.3 28.0 26.8 52.5 Effective Green, g (s) 14.8 14.8 12.0 12.0 2.3 28.0 26.8 52.5 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.15 0.15 0.12 0.12 0.02 0.28 0.27 0.53 Clearance Time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 267 235 214 190 40 961 476 1861
v/s Ratio Prot c0.11 c0.07 0.01 c0.21 c0.25 0.23
v/s Ratio Perm 0.00 0.01
v/c Ratio 0.73 0.03 0.56 0.12 0.45 0.76 0.95 0.43
Uniform Delay, d1 40.5 36.2 41.3 39.1 48.0 32.7 35.7 14.4 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 10.0 0.0 3.1 0.3 7.9 3.6 27.8 0.2 Delay (s) 50.5 36.3 44.4 39.4 55.9 36.3 63.5 14.6
Level of Service D D D D E D E B
Approach Delay (s/veh) 48.0 41.3 36.8 32.1
Approach LOS D D D C
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay (s/veh) 36.1 HCM 2000 Level of Service D HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.79
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 99.6 Sum of lost time (s) 18.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 70.6% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group
811 of 1101
HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
2: Elkhorn Ct & W 20th Ave 12/19/2025
Cumulative PM 11:17 am 10/17/2025 Baseline Synchro 12 Report

Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 13 521 14 38 304 38 23 0 65 49 1 9 Future Volume (Veh/h) 13 521 14 38 304 38 23 0 65 49 1 9 Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop
Grade 0% 0% 0% 0%
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 14 566 15 41 330 41 25 0 71 53 1 10 Pedestrians
Lane Width (ft)
Walking Speed (ft/s)
Percent Blockage
Right turn flare (veh)
Median type None None
Median storage veh)
Upstream signal (ft) 731
pX, platoon unblocked
vC, conflicting volume 371 581 1045 1055 574 1105 1042 351 vC1, stage 1 conf vol
vC2, stage 2 conf vol
vCu, unblocked vol 371 581 1045 1055 574 1105 1042 351
tC, single (s) 4.1 4.1 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2
tC, 2 stage (s)
tF (s) 2.2 2.2 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3
p0 queue free % 99 96 87 100 86 66 100 99
cM capacity (veh/h) 1188 993 195 214 519 156 218 693
Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 SB 1
Volume Total 595 412 96 64
Volume Left 14 41 25 53
Volume Right 15 41 71 10
cSH 1188 993 362 178
Volume to Capacity 0.01 0.04 0.27 0.36
Queue Length 95th (ft) 1 3 26 38
Control Delay (s/veh) 0.3 1.3 18.5 36.1
Lane LOS A A C E
Approach Delay (s/veh) 0.3 1.3 18.5 36.1
Approach LOS C E
Intersection Summary
Average Delay 4.1
Intersection Capacity Utilization 53.3% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15
812 of 1101
Queues
3: El Camino Real & W 20th Ave 12/19/2025
Cumulative PM 11:17 am 10/17/2025 Baseline Synchro 12 Report

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 422 73 233 50 72 166 161 1832 21 155 1519 233 Future Volume (vph) 422 73 233 50 72 166 161 1832 21 155 1519 233 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length (ft) 0 0 0 0 230 0 240 0
Storage Lanes 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 0
Taper Length (ft) 25 25 25 25
Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes
Link Speed (mph) 30 30 30 30
Link Distance (ft) 731 818 1467 812
Travel Time (s) 16.6 18.6 33.3 18.5
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 459 79 253 54 78 180 175 1991 23 168 1651 253 Shared Lane Traffic (%) 11%
Lane Group Flow (vph) 409 382 0 0 132 180 175 2014 0 168 1904 0 v/c Ratio 0.93 0.82 0.62 0.54 0.86 1.04 1.09 1.07
Control Delay (s/veh) 72.4 50.3 63.0 15.6 88.7 67.6 149.2 79.3 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay (s/veh) 72.4 50.3 63.0 15.6 88.7 67.6 149.2 79.3 Queue Length 50th (ft) 330 249 100 11 137 ~624 ~148 ~602 Queue Length 95th (ft) #578 #455 167 79 #285 #790 #312 #764 Internal Link Dist (ft) 651 738 1387 732
Turn Bay Length (ft) 230 240
Base Capacity (vph) 441 465 442 508 203 1941 154 1783
Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.93 0.82 0.30 0.35 0.86 1.04 1.09 1.07 Intersection Summary
Area Type: Other
~ Volume exceeds capacity, queue is theoretically infinite.

Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.

Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
813 of 1101
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
3: El Camino Real & W 20th Ave 12/19/2025
Cumulative PM 11:17 am 10/17/2025 Baseline Synchro 12 Report

Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 422 73 233 50 72 166 161 1832 21 155 1519 233 Future Volume (vph) 422 73 233 50 72 166 161 1832 21 155 1519 233 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Lane Util. Factor 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.91 1.00 0.91 Frt 1.00 0.90 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98
Flt Protected 0.95 0.99 0.98 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot) 1681 1583 1825 1583 1770 5077 1770 4984 Flt Permitted 0.95 0.99 0.98 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm) 1681 1583 1825 1583 1770 5077 1770 4984 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 459 79 253 54 78 180 175 1991 23 168 1651 253 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 50 0 0 0 146 0 1 0 0 14 0
Lane Group Flow (vph) 409 332 0 0 132 34 175 2013 0 168 1890 0 Turn Type Split NA Split NA Perm Prot NA Prot NA
Protected Phases 4 4 8 8 5 2 1 6
Permitted Phases 8
Actuated Green, G (s) 31.5 31.5 14.1 14.1 13.8 45.9 10.5 42.6 Effective Green, g (s) 31.5 31.5 14.1 14.1 13.8 45.9 10.5 42.6 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.26 0.26 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.38 0.09 0.36 Clearance Time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 441 415 214 186 203 1941 154 1769
v/s Ratio Prot c0.24 0.21 c0.07 0.10 c0.40 c0.09 0.38
v/s Ratio Perm 0.02
v/c Ratio 0.93 0.80 0.62 0.18 0.86 1.04 1.09 1.07
Uniform Delay, d1 43.1 41.3 50.4 47.8 52.2 37.1 54.8 38.7 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 25.5 10.3 5.2 0.5 29.2 30.8 98.9 42.3 Delay (s) 68.7 51.6 55.6 48.2 81.4 67.9 153.7 81.0
Level of Service E D E D F E F F
Approach Delay (s/veh) 60.4 51.4 69.0 86.9
Approach LOS E D E F
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay (s/veh) 73.6 HCM 2000 Level of Service E HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.95
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 18.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 86.7% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group
814 of 1101
HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
4: Elkhorn Ct & Dwy 12/19/2025
Cumulative PM 11:17 am 10/17/2025 Baseline Synchro 12 Report

Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 0 0 6 0 0 0 9 42 0 0 53 0
Future Volume (Veh/h) 0 0 6 0 0 0 9 42 0 0 53 0
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free
Grade 0% 0% 0% 0%
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 0 0 7 0 0 0 10 46 0 0 58 0
Pedestrians
Lane Width (ft)
Walking Speed (ft/s)
Percent Blockage
Right turn flare (veh)
Median type None None
Median storage veh)
Upstream signal (ft)
pX, platoon unblocked
vC, conflicting volume 124 124 58 131 124 46 58 46
vC1, stage 1 conf vol
vC2, stage 2 conf vol
vCu, unblocked vol 124 124 58 131 124 46 58 46
tC, single (s) 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 4.1 4.1
tC, 2 stage (s)
tF (s) 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 2.2 2.2
p0 queue free % 100 100 99 100 100 100 99 100
cM capacity (veh/h) 846 761 1008 831 761 1023 1546 1562 Direction, Lane # EB 1 NB 1 SB 1
Volume Total 7 56 58
Volume Left 0 10 0
Volume Right 7 0 0
cSH 1008 1546 1700
Volume to Capacity 0.00* 0.00* 0.03
Queue Length 95th (ft) 1 0 0
Control Delay (s/veh) 8.6 1.4 0.0
Lane LOS A A
Approach Delay (s/veh) 8.6 1.4 0.0
Approach LOS A
Intersection Summary
Average Delay 1.1
Intersection Capacity Utilization 19.4% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15
* Value less than 0.01.
815 of 1101
Queues
1: Alameda de las Pulgas & W 20th Ave 12/19/2025
Cumulative Plus Project AM 11:26 am 10/17/2025 Baseline Synchro 12 Report

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 21 39 10 86 38 198 47 838 58 532 437 97 Future Volume (vph) 21 39 10 86 38 198 47 838 58 532 437 97 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length (ft) 0 50 0 225 185 0 250 0
Storage Lanes 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0
Taper Length (ft) 25 25 25 25
Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes
Link Speed (mph) 25 25 30 30
Link Distance (ft) 376 2563 1290 948
Travel Time (s) 10.3 69.9 29.3 21.5
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 23 42 11 93 41 215 51 911 63 578 475 105 Shared Lane Traffic (%)
Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 65 11 0 134 215 51 974 0 578 580 0 v/c Ratio 0.38 0.04 0.56 0.54 0.41 0.91 1.10 0.30
Control Delay (s/veh) 47.6 0.3 47.7 10.8 54.5 45.7 104.0 13.3 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay (s/veh) 47.6 0.3 47.7 10.8 54.5 45.7 104.0 13.3 Queue Length 50th (ft) 38 0 77 0 30 299 ~410 97
Queue Length 95th (ft) 84 0 141 63 74 #500 #700 163
Internal Link Dist (ft) 296 2483 1210 868
Turn Bay Length (ft) 50 225 185 250
Base Capacity (vph) 520 544 511 604 129 1073 524 1932
Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.13 0.02 0.26 0.36 0.40 0.91 1.10 0.30 Intersection Summary
Area Type: Other
~ Volume exceeds capacity, queue is theoretically infinite.

Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.

Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
816 of 1101
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
1: Alameda de las Pulgas & W 20th Ave 12/19/2025
Cumulative Plus Project AM 11:26 am 10/17/2025 Baseline Synchro 12 Report

Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 21 39 10 86 38 198 47 838 58 532 437 97 Future Volume (vph) 21 39 10 86 38 198 47 838 58 532 437 97 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.97
Flt Protected 0.98 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot) 1830 1583 1800 1583 1770 3505 1770 3443 Flt Permitted 0.98 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm) 1830 1583 1800 1583 1770 3505 1770 3443 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 23 42 11 93 41 215 51 911 63 578 475 105 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 10 0 0 187 0 3 0 0 11 0
Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 65 1 0 134 28 51 971 0 578 569 0 Turn Type Split NA Perm Split NA Perm Prot NA Prot NA
Protected Phases 4 4 8 8 5 2 1 6
Permitted Phases 4 8
Actuated Green, G (s) 7.3 7.3 12.4 12.4 5.1 29.2 27.4 51.5 Effective Green, g (s) 7.3 7.3 12.4 12.4 5.1 29.2 27.4 51.5 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.08 0.08 0.13 0.13 0.05 0.31 0.29 0.55 Clearance Time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 141 122 236 208 95 1085 514 1880
v/s Ratio Prot c0.04 c0.07 0.03 c0.28 c0.33 0.17
v/s Ratio Perm 0.00 0.02
v/c Ratio 0.46 0.01 0.57 0.14 0.54 0.89 1.12 0.30
Uniform Delay, d1 41.6 40.2 38.4 36.2 43.4 31.1 33.5 11.6 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 2.4 0.0 3.1 0.3 5.7 9.6 78.6 0.1
Delay (s) 44.0 40.2 41.6 36.5 49.2 40.7 112.0 11.7
Level of Service D D D D D D F B
Approach Delay (s/veh) 43.4 38.4 41.1 61.8
Approach LOS D D D E
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay (s/veh) 50.0 HCM 2000 Level of Service D HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.88
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 94.3 Sum of lost time (s) 18.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 79.2% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group
817 of 1101
HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
2: Elkhorn Ct & W 20th Ave 12/19/2025
Cumulative Plus Project AM 11:26 am 10/17/2025 Baseline Synchro 12 Report

Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 14 512 11 45 444 70 2 0 12 90 0 19 Future Volume (Veh/h) 14 512 11 45 444 70 2 0 12 90 0 19 Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop
Grade 0% 0% 0% 0%
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 15 557 12 49 483 76 2 0 13 98 0 21 Pedestrians
Lane Width (ft)
Walking Speed (ft/s)
Percent Blockage
Right turn flare (veh)
Median type None None
Median storage veh)
Upstream signal (ft) 731
pX, platoon unblocked
vC, conflicting volume 559 569 1233 1250 563 1225 1218 521 vC1, stage 1 conf vol
vC2, stage 2 conf vol
vCu, unblocked vol 559 569 1233 1250 563 1225 1218 521
tC, single (s) 4.1 4.1 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2
tC, 2 stage (s)
tF (s) 2.2 2.2 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3
p0 queue free % 99 95 99 100 98 32 100 96
cM capacity (veh/h) 1012 1003 141 162 526 144 169 555
Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 SB 1
Volume Total 584 608 15 119
Volume Left 15 49 2 98
Volume Right 12 76 13 21
cSH 1012 1003 385 166
Volume to Capacity 0.01 0.05 0.04 0.72
Queue Length 95th (ft) 1 4 3 109
Control Delay (s/veh) 0.4 1.3 14.7 67.9
Lane LOS A A B F
Approach Delay (s/veh) 0.4 1.3 14.7 67.9
Approach LOS B F
Intersection Summary
Average Delay 7.0
Intersection Capacity Utilization 69.1% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15
818 of 1101
Queues
3: El Camino Real & W 20th Ave 12/19/2025
Cumulative Plus Project AM 11:26 am 10/17/2025 Baseline Synchro 12 Report

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 407 200 94 36 39 167 189 1908 107 72 1304 325 Future Volume (vph) 407 200 94 36 39 167 189 1908 107 72 1304 325 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length (ft) 0 0 0 0 230 0 240 0
Storage Lanes 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 0
Taper Length (ft) 25 25 25 25
Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes
Link Speed (mph) 30 30 30 30
Link Distance (ft) 731 818 1467 812
Travel Time (s) 16.6 18.6 33.3 18.5
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 442 217 102 39 42 182 205 2074 116 78 1417 353 Shared Lane Traffic (%) 14%
Lane Group Flow (vph) 380 381 0 0 81 182 205 2190 0 78 1770 0 v/c Ratio 0.90 0.88 0.50 0.60 0.77 0.97 0.52 0.98
Control Delay (s/veh) 70.3 65.8 64.4 16.7 69.9 46.8 66.8 54.2 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay (s/veh) 70.3 65.8 64.4 16.7 69.9 46.8 66.8 54.2 Queue Length 50th (ft) 316 307 64 2 159 ~639 61 510
Queue Length 95th (ft) #542 #528 118 74 #271 #847 117 #672 Internal Link Dist (ft) 651 738 1387 732
Turn Bay Length (ft) 230 240
Base Capacity (vph) 422 432 435 515 299 2260 188 1812
Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.90 0.88 0.19 0.35 0.69 0.97 0.41 0.98 Intersection Summary
Area Type: Other
~ Volume exceeds capacity, queue is theoretically infinite.

Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.

Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
819 of 1101
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
3: El Camino Real & W 20th Ave 12/19/2025
Cumulative Plus Project AM 11:26 am 10/17/2025 Baseline Synchro 12 Report

Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 407 200 94 36 39 167 189 1908 107 72 1304 325 Future Volume (vph) 407 200 94 36 39 167 189 1908 107 72 1304 325 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Lane Util. Factor 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.91 1.00 0.91 Frt 1.00 0.96 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.97
Flt Protected 0.95 0.99 0.98 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot) 1681 1685 1819 1583 1770 5045 1770 4933 Flt Permitted 0.95 0.99 0.98 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm) 1681 1685 1819 1583 1770 5045 1770 4933 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 442 217 102 39 42 182 205 2074 116 78 1417 353 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 9 0 0 0 163 0 4 0 0 28 0
Lane Group Flow (vph) 380 372 0 0 81 19 205 2186 0 78 1742 0 Turn Type Split NA Split NA Perm Prot NA Prot NA
Protected Phases 4 4 8 8 5 2 1 6
Permitted Phases 8
Actuated Green, G (s) 30.6 30.6 10.8 10.8 18.3 54.4 8.8 44.9 Effective Green, g (s) 30.6 30.6 10.8 10.8 18.3 54.4 8.8 44.9 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.25 0.25 0.09 0.09 0.15 0.44 0.07 0.37 Clearance Time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 419 420 160 139 264 2238 127 1806
v/s Ratio Prot c0.23 0.22 c0.04 c0.12 c0.43 0.04 0.35
v/s Ratio Perm 0.01
v/c Ratio 0.91 0.89 0.51 0.14 0.78 0.98 0.61 0.96
Uniform Delay, d1 44.6 44.3 53.4 51.6 50.2 33.5 55.3 38.1 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 22.8 19.5 2.5 0.4 13.3 14.3 8.5 14.3 Delay (s) 67.4 63.8 55.9 52.0 63.5 47.8 63.8 52.4
Level of Service E E E D E D E D
Approach Delay (s/veh) 65.6 53.2 49.1 52.9
Approach LOS E D D D
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay (s/veh) 53.0 HCM 2000 Level of Service D HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.91
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 122.6 Sum of lost time (s) 18.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 82.0% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group
820 of 1101
HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
4: Elkhorn Ct & Dwy 12/19/2025
Cumulative Plus Project AM 11:26 am 10/17/2025 Baseline Synchro 12 Report

Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 0 0 45 0 0 0 29 53 0 0 63 0
Future Volume (Veh/h) 0 0 45 0 0 0 29 53 0 0 63 0
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free
Grade 0% 0% 0% 0%
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 0 0 49 0 0 0 32 58 0 0 68 0
Pedestrians
Lane Width (ft)
Walking Speed (ft/s)
Percent Blockage
Right turn flare (veh)
Median type None None
Median storage veh)
Upstream signal (ft)
pX, platoon unblocked
vC, conflicting volume 190 190 68 239 190 58 68 58
vC1, stage 1 conf vol
vC2, stage 2 conf vol
vCu, unblocked vol 190 190 68 239 190 58 68 58
tC, single (s) 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 4.1 4.1
tC, 2 stage (s)
tF (s) 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 2.2 2.2
p0 queue free % 100 100 95 100 100 100 98 100
cM capacity (veh/h) 758 690 995 669 690 1008 1533 1546
Direction, Lane # EB 1 NB 1 SB 1
Volume Total 49 90 68
Volume Left 0 32 0
Volume Right 49 0 0
cSH 995 1533 1700
Volume to Capacity 0.05 0.02 0.04
Queue Length 95th (ft) 4 2 0
Control Delay (s/veh) 8.8 2.7 0.0
Lane LOS A A
Approach Delay (s/veh) 8.8 2.7 0.0
Approach LOS A
Intersection Summary
Average Delay 3.3
Intersection Capacity Utilization 21.1% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15
821 of 1101
Queues
1: Alameda de las Pulgas & W 20th Ave 12/19/2025
Cumulative Plus Project PM 11:22 am 10/17/2025 Baseline Synchro 12 Report

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 131 50 40 100 10 181 17 537 159 418 730 10 Future Volume (vph) 131 50 40 100 10 181 17 537 159 418 730 10 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length (ft) 0 50 0 225 185 0 250 0
Storage Lanes 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0
Taper Length (ft) 25 25 25 25
Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes
Link Speed (mph) 30 30 30 30
Link Distance (ft) 376 2563 1290 948
Travel Time (s) 8.5 58.3 29.3 21.5
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 142 54 43 109 11 197 18 584 173 454 793 11 Shared Lane Traffic (%)
Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 196 43 0 120 197 18 757 0 454 804 0 v/c Ratio 0.71 0.12 0.54 0.54 0.16 0.83 0.93 0.42
Control Delay (s/veh) 55.3 0.6 50.6 11.6 50.3 42.2 63.8 16.1 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay (s/veh) 55.3 0.6 50.6 11.6 50.3 42.2 63.8 16.1 Queue Length 50th (ft) 121 0 75 0 11 228 291 137
Queue Length 95th (ft) 210 0 135 63 36 #352 #547 267
Internal Link Dist (ft) 296 2483 1210 868
Turn Bay Length (ft) 50 225 185 250
Base Capacity (vph) 337 420 334 457 118 1004 489 1912
Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.58 0.10 0.36 0.43 0.15 0.75 0.93 0.42 Intersection Summary
Area Type: Other
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.

Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
822 of 1101
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
1: Alameda de las Pulgas & W 20th Ave 12/19/2025
Cumulative Plus Project PM 11:22 am 10/17/2025 Baseline Synchro 12 Report

Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 131 50 40 100 10 181 17 537 159 418 730 10 Future Volume (vph) 131 50 40 100 10 181 17 537 159 418 730 10 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.97 1.00 1.00
Flt Protected 0.97 1.00 0.96 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot) 1798 1583 1782 1583 1770 3418 1770 3532 Flt Permitted 0.97 1.00 0.96 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm) 1798 1583 1782 1583 1770 3418 1770 3532 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 142 54 43 109 11 197 18 584 173 454 793 11 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 37 0 0 173 0 24 0 0 1 0
Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 196 6 0 120 24 18 733 0 454 803 0 Turn Type Split NA Perm Split NA Perm Prot NA Prot NA
Protected Phases 4 4 8 8 5 2 1 6
Permitted Phases 4 8
Actuated Green, G (s) 14.8 14.8 12.0 12.0 2.3 28.0 26.8 52.5 Effective Green, g (s) 14.8 14.8 12.0 12.0 2.3 28.0 26.8 52.5 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.15 0.15 0.12 0.12 0.02 0.28 0.27 0.53 Clearance Time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 267 235 214 190 40 960 476 1861
v/s Ratio Prot c0.11 c0.07 0.01 c0.21 c0.26 0.23
v/s Ratio Perm 0.00 0.01
v/c Ratio 0.73 0.03 0.56 0.12 0.45 0.76 0.95 0.43
Uniform Delay, d1 40.5 36.2 41.3 39.1 48.0 32.8 35.8 14.4 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 10.0 0.0 3.3 0.3 7.9 3.6 29.6 0.2 Delay (s) 50.5 36.3 44.7 39.4 55.9 36.4 65.4 14.6
Level of Service D D D D E D E B
Approach Delay (s/veh) 48.0 41.4 36.9 32.9
Approach LOS D D D C
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay (s/veh) 36.5 HCM 2000 Level of Service D HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.79
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 99.6 Sum of lost time (s) 18.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 70.9% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group
823 of 1101
HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
2: Elkhorn Ct & W 20th Ave 12/19/2025
Cumulative Plus Project PM 11:22 am 10/17/2025 Baseline Synchro 12 Report

Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 21 521 14 38 304 67 23 0 65 62 1 13 Future Volume (Veh/h) 21 521 14 38 304 67 23 0 65 62 1 13 Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop
Grade 0% 0% 0% 0%
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 23 566 15 41 330 73 25 0 71 67 1 14 Pedestrians
Lane Width (ft)
Walking Speed (ft/s)
Percent Blockage
Right turn flare (veh)
Median type None None
Median storage veh)
Upstream signal (ft) 731
pX, platoon unblocked
vC, conflicting volume 403 581 1083 1105 574 1139 1076 367 vC1, stage 1 conf vol
vC2, stage 2 conf vol
vCu, unblocked vol 403 581 1083 1105 574 1139 1076 367
tC, single (s) 4.1 4.1 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2
tC, 2 stage (s)
tF (s) 2.2 2.2 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3
p0 queue free % 98 96 86 100 86 54 100 98
cM capacity (veh/h) 1156 993 181 198 519 147 206 679
Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 SB 1
Volume Total 604 444 96 82
Volume Left 23 41 25 67
Volume Right 15 73 71 14
cSH 1156 993 349 170
Volume to Capacity 0.02 0.04 0.27 0.48
Queue Length 95th (ft) 2 3 27 58
Control Delay (s/veh) 0.5 1.2 19.2 44.4
Lane LOS A A C E
Approach Delay (s/veh) 0.5 1.2 19.2 44.4
Approach LOS C E
Intersection Summary
Average Delay 5.2
Intersection Capacity Utilization 53.6% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15
824 of 1101
Queues
3: El Camino Real & W 20th Ave 12/19/2025
Cumulative Plus Project PM 11:22 am 10/17/2025 Baseline Synchro 12 Report

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 432 73 235 50 72 166 166 1832 21 155 1519 257 Future Volume (vph) 432 73 235 50 72 166 166 1832 21 155 1519 257 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length (ft) 0 0 0 0 230 0 240 0
Storage Lanes 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 0
Taper Length (ft) 25 25 25 25
Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes
Link Speed (mph) 30 30 30 30
Link Distance (ft) 731 818 1467 812
Travel Time (s) 16.6 18.6 33.3 18.5
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 470 79 255 54 78 180 180 1991 23 168 1651 279 Shared Lane Traffic (%) 12%
Lane Group Flow (vph) 414 390 0 0 132 180 180 2014 0 168 1930 0 v/c Ratio 0.94 0.84 0.62 0.55 0.89 1.04 1.09 1.08
Control Delay (s/veh) 74.4 52.4 63.0 16.1 92.6 67.6 149.2 84.8 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay (s/veh) 74.4 52.4 63.0 16.1 92.6 67.6 149.2 84.8 Queue Length 50th (ft) 335 258 100 12 141 ~624 ~148 ~617 Queue Length 95th (ft) #589 #472 167 81 #296 #790 #312 #780 Internal Link Dist (ft) 651 738 1387 732
Turn Bay Length (ft) 230 240
Base Capacity (vph) 441 464 442 507 203 1941 154 1781
Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.94 0.84 0.30 0.36 0.89 1.04 1.09 1.08 Intersection Summary
Area Type: Other
~ Volume exceeds capacity, queue is theoretically infinite.

Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.

Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
825 of 1101
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
3: El Camino Real & W 20th Ave 12/19/2025
Cumulative Plus Project PM 11:22 am 10/17/2025 Baseline Synchro 12 Report

Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 432 73 235 50 72 166 166 1832 21 155 1519 257 Future Volume (vph) 432 73 235 50 72 166 166 1832 21 155 1519 257 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Lane Util. Factor 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.91 1.00 0.91 Frt 1.00 0.90 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98
Flt Protected 0.95 0.99 0.98 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot) 1681 1585 1825 1583 1770 5077 1770 4975 Flt Permitted 0.95 0.99 0.98 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm) 1681 1585 1825 1583 1770 5077 1770 4975 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 470 79 255 54 78 180 180 1991 23 168 1651 279 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 49 0 0 0 144 0 1 0 0 16 0
Lane Group Flow (vph) 414 341 0 0 132 36 180 2013 0 168 1914 0 Turn Type Split NA Split NA Perm Prot NA Prot NA
Protected Phases 4 4 8 8 5 2 1 6
Permitted Phases 8
Actuated Green, G (s) 31.5 31.5 14.1 14.1 13.8 45.9 10.5 42.6 Effective Green, g (s) 31.5 31.5 14.1 14.1 13.8 45.9 10.5 42.6 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.26 0.26 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.38 0.09 0.36 Clearance Time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 441 416 214 186 203 1941 154 1766
v/s Ratio Prot c0.25 0.22 c0.07 0.10 c0.40 c0.09 0.38
v/s Ratio Perm 0.02
v/c Ratio 0.94 0.82 0.62 0.19 0.89 1.04 1.09 1.08
Uniform Delay, d1 43.3 41.6 50.4 47.8 52.3 37.1 54.8 38.7 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 27.7 12.2 5.2 0.5 33.7 30.8 98.9 48.0 Delay (s) 71.0 53.8 55.6 48.3 86.1 67.9 153.7 86.7
Level of Service E D E D F E F F
Approach Delay (s/veh) 62.7 51.4 69.4 92.1
Approach LOS E D E F
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay (s/veh) 76.2 HCM 2000 Level of Service E HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.95
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 18.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 87.1% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group
826 of 1101
HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
4: Elkhorn Ct & Dwy 12/19/2025
Cumulative Plus Project PM 11:22 am 10/17/2025 Baseline Synchro 12 Report

Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 0 0 23 0 0 0 44 42 0 0 53 0
Future Volume (Veh/h) 0 0 23 0 0 0 44 42 0 0 53 0
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free
Grade 0% 0% 0% 0%
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 0 0 25 0 0 0 48 46 0 0 58 0
Pedestrians
Lane Width (ft)
Walking Speed (ft/s)
Percent Blockage
Right turn flare (veh)
Median type None None
Median storage veh)
Upstream signal (ft)
pX, platoon unblocked
vC, conflicting volume 200 200 58 225 200 46 58 46
vC1, stage 1 conf vol
vC2, stage 2 conf vol
vCu, unblocked vol 200 200 58 225 200 46 58 46
tC, single (s) 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 4.1 4.1
tC, 2 stage (s)
tF (s) 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 2.2 2.2
p0 queue free % 100 100 98 100 100 100 97 100
cM capacity (veh/h) 741 674 1008 695 674 1023 1546 1562 Direction, Lane # EB 1 NB 1 SB 1
Volume Total 25 94 58
Volume Left 0 48 0
Volume Right 25 0 0
cSH 1008 1546 1700
Volume to Capacity 0.02 0.03 0.03
Queue Length 95th (ft) 2 2 0
Control Delay (s/veh) 8.7 3.9 0.0
Lane LOS A A
Approach Delay (s/veh) 8.7 3.9 0.0
Approach LOS A
Intersection Summary
Average Delay 3.3
Intersection Capacity Utilization 21.3% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15
827 of 1101
Appendix C
Volume Sheets
828 of 1101
220 W 20th Avenue
San Mateo, CA
Intersection Number: 1
Traffix Node Number: 1
Intersection Name: Alameda de las Pulgas and W 20th Avenue Peak Hour: AM Date of Analysis:

Count Date:

Movements
Southbound Approach Westbound Approach Northbound Approach Eastbound Approach Scenario RT TH LT RT TH LT RT TH LT RT TH LT Total
bkgdisting Conditions 97 385 357 190 18 42 57 677 32 5 39 21 1920 check 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Approved Project Trips
1919 O'Farrell Street 0 0 2 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5
Bay Meadows Phase II Extension 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Approved Trips 0 0 2 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5
Opening Year Conditions 97 385 359 193 18 42 57 677 32 5 39 21 1925 check 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Proposed Project Trips 0 0 2 5 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 10
Opening Year + Project Conditions 97 385 361 198 18 44 58 677 32 5 39 21 1935 check 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Cumlative No Project Conditions 97 437 530 193 38 84 57 838 47 10 39 21 2391 check 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Cumulative + Project Conditions 97 437 532 198 38 86 58 838 47 10 39 21 2401 check 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Intersection Number: 2
Traffix Node Number: 2
Intersection Name: Elkhorn Court/Pioneer Court and W 20th Avenue Peak Hour: AM Date of Analysis:

Count Date:

Movements
Southbound Approach Westbound Approach Northbound Approach Eastbound Approach Scenario RT TH LT RT TH LT RT TH LT RT TH LT Total
Existing Conditions 10 0 57 53 411 45 12 0 2 11 327 9 937 check 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Approved Project Trips
1919 O'Farrell Street 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 7 0 11
Bay Meadows Phase II Extension 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 2 Total Approved Trips 0 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 8 0 13
Opening Year Conditions 10 0 57 53 416 45 12 0 2 11 335 9 950 check 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Proposed Project Trips 9 0 33 17 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 64
Opening Year + Project Conditions 19 0 90 70 416 45 12 0 2 11 335 14 1014 check 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Cumlative No Project Conditions 10 0 57 53 444 45 12 0 2 11 512 9 1155 check 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Cumulative + Project Conditions 19 0 90 70 444 45 12 0 2 11 512 14 1219 check 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
10/20/25
09/11/25
10/20/25
09/11/25
Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc.
12/23/2025
Sum_AM
220 W 20 Ave Volumes 2025-12-19
829 of 1101
220 W 20th Avenue
San Mateo, CA
Intersection Number: 3
Traffix Node Number: 3
Intersection Name: El Camino Real and W 20th Avenue
Peak Hour: AM Date of Analysis:

Count Date:

Movements
Southbound Approach Westbound Approach Northbound Approach Eastbound Approach Scenario RT TH LT RT TH LT RT TH LT RT TH LT Total
Existing Conditions 308 856 72 98 37 36 18 1165 151 85 21 321 3168 check 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Approved Project Trips
1919 O'Farrell Street 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 0 5 11
Bay Meadows Phase II Extension 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 5 1 1 0 0 10 Total Approved Trips 3 3 0 0 0 0 0 5 2 3 0 5 21
Opening Year Conditions 311 859 72 98 37 36 18 1170 153 88 21 326 3189 check 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Proposed Project Trips 14 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 6 0 27 50
Opening Year + Project Conditions 325 859 72 98 37 36 18 1170 156 94 21 353 3239 check 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Cumlative No Project Conditions 311 1304 72 167 39 36 107 1908 186 88 200 380 4798 check 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Cumulative + Project Conditions 325 1304 72 167 39 36 107 1908 189 94 200 407 4848 check 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Intersection Number: 4
Traffix Node Number: 4
Intersection Name: Elkhorn Court/Pioneer Court and Project Driveway Peak Hour: AM Date of Analysis:

Count Date:

Movements
Southbound Approach Westbound Approach Northbound Approach Eastbound Approach Scenario RT TH LT RT TH LT RT TH LT RT TH LT Total
Existing Conditions 0 63 0 0 0 0 0 53 9 4 0 0 129
check 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Approved Project Trips
1919 O'Farrell Street 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Bay Meadows Phase II Extension 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Approved Trips 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Opening Year Conditions 0 63 0 0 0 0 0 53 9 4 0 0 129
check 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Proposed Project Trips 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 29 45 0 0 74
Opening Year + Project Conditions 0 63 0 0 0 0 0 53 29 45 0 0 190 check 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Cumlative No Project Conditions 0 63 0 0 0 0 0 53 9 4 0 0 129 check 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Cumulative + Project Conditions 0 63 0 0 0 0 0 53 29 45 0 0 190 check 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
09/11/25
10/20/25
09/11/25
10/20/25
Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc.
12/23/2025
Sum_AM
220 W 20 Ave Volumes 2025-12-19
830 of 1101
220 W. 20th Avenue
San Mateo, CA
Intersection Number: 1
Traffix Node Number: 1
Intersection Name: Alameda de las Pulgas and W 20th Avenue Peak Hour: PM Date of Analysis:

Count Date:

Movements
Southbound Approach Westbound Approach Northbound Approach Eastbound Approach Scenario RT TH LT RT TH LT RT TH LT RT TH LT Total
Existing Conditions 10 529 355 178 3 46 103 470 11 12 35 131 1883 check 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Approved Project Trips
1919 O'Farrell Street 0 0 3 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5
Bay Meadows Phase II Extension 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Approved Trips 0 0 3 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5
Opening Year Conditions 10 529 358 180 3 46 103 470 11 12 35 131 1888 check 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Proposed Project Trips 0 0 4 1 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 8
Opening Year + Project Conditions 10 529 362 181 3 47 105 470 11 12 35 131 1896 check 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Cumlative No Project Conditions 10 730 414 180 10 99 157 537 17 40 50 131 2375 check 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Cumulative + Project Conditions 10 730 418 181 10 100 159 537 17 40 50 131 2383 check 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Intersection Number: 2
Traffix Node Number: 2
Intersection Name: Elkhorn Court/Pioneer Court and W 20th Avenue Peak Hour: PM Date of Analysis:

Count Date:

Movements
Southbound Approach Westbound Approach Northbound Approach Eastbound Approach Scenario RT TH LT RT TH LT RT TH LT RT TH LT Total
Existing Conditions 9 1 49 38 230 38 65 0 23 14 429 13 909 check 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Approved Project Trips
1919 O'Farrell Street 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 9
Bay Meadows Phase II Extension 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 4 Total Approved Trips 0 0 0 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 13
Opening Year Conditions 9 1 49 38 238 38 65 0 23 14 434 13 922 check 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Proposed Project Trips 4 0 13 29 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 54
Opening Year + Project Conditions 13 1 62 67 238 38 65 0 23 14 434 21 976 check 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Cumlative No Project Conditions 9 1 49 38 304 38 65 0 23 14 521 13 1075 check 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Cumulative + Project Conditions 13 1 62 67 304 38 65 0 23 14 521 21 1129 check 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
10/20/25
09/11/25
10/20/25
09/11/25
Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc.
12/23/2025
Sum_PM
220 W 20 Ave Volumes 2025-12-19
831 of 1101
220 W. 20th Avenue
San Mateo, CA
Intersection Number: 3
Traffix Node Number: 3
Intersection Name: El Camino Real and W 20th Avenue
Peak Hour: PM Date of Analysis:

Count Date:

Movements
Southbound Approach Westbound Approach Northbound Approach Eastbound Approach Scenario RT TH LT RT TH LT RT TH LT RT TH LT Total
Existing Conditions 189 968 101 154 45 39 21 1428 119 140 41 419 3664 check 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Approved Project Trips
1919 O'Farrell Street 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 3 10
Bay Meadows Phase II Extension 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 8 2 2 0 0 18 Total Approved Trips 5 6 0 0 0 0 0 8 3 3 0 3 28
Opening Year Conditions 194 974 101 154 45 39 21 1436 122 143 41 422 3692 check 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Proposed Project Trips 24 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 2 0 10 41
Opening Year + Project Conditions 218 974 101 154 45 39 21 1436 127 145 41 432 3733 check 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Cumlative No Project Conditions 233 1519 155 166 72 50 21 1832 161 233 73 422 4937 check 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Cumulative + Project Conditions 257 1519 155 166 72 50 21 1832 166 235 73 432 4978 check 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Intersection Number: 4
Traffix Node Number: 4
Intersection Name: Elkhorn Court/Pioneer Court and Project Driveway Peak Hour: PM Date of Analysis:

Count Date:

Movements
Southbound Approach Westbound Approach Northbound Approach Eastbound Approach Scenario RT TH LT RT TH LT RT TH LT RT TH LT Total
Existing Conditions 0 53 0 0 0 0 0 42 9 6 0 0 110
check 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Approved Project Trips
1919 O'Farrell Street 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Bay Meadows Phase II Extension 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Approved Trips 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Opening Year Conditions 0 53 0 0 0 0 0 42 9 6 0 0 110
check 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Proposed Project Trips 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 44 23 0 0 67
Opening Year + Project Conditions 0 53 0 0 0 0 0 42 44 23 0 0 162 check 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Cumlative No Project Conditions 0 53 0 0 0 0 0 42 9 6 0 0 110 check 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Cumulative + Project Conditions 0 53 0 0 0 0 0 42 44 23 0 0 162 check 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
09/11/25
10/20/25
09/11/25
10/20/25
Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc.
12/23/2025
Sum_PM
220 W 20 Ave Volumes 2025-12-19
832 of 1101
Appendix D
Signal Warrant Analysis
833 of 1101
12/19/2025
0 TRAFFIC SIGNAL WARRANTS WORKSHEET
Analyst: JL date: 12/19/25
Major Street: W 20th Avenue Critical Approach Speed* (mph) 25 Minor Street: Pioneer Court/ Elkhorn Court Critical Approach Speed* (mph) 25 *Posted Speed.

Critical speed of major street traffic > 50 mph (64 km/h)….…..…...….......……..

In built up area of isolated community of < 10,000 population….…...……….…..

Urban (U)
Warrant 3 - Peak Hour
PART A
(All parts 1, 2, and 3 below must be satisfied)

AM PEAK PERIOD
Minor Street Approach Direction w/ Highest Delay SB SB SB SB SB Highest Minor Street Average Delay (sec/veh) 26.1 26.7 35.2 41.9 67.9 Corresponding Minor Street Approach Volume (veh/hr) 67 67 109 67 109 Minor Street Total Delay (veh-hrs) 0.5 0.5 1.1 0.8 2.1
Total Entering Volume (veh/hr) 937 950 1014 1155 1219

1. No No No No No

2. No No Yes No Yes

3. Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Signal Warranted based on Part A? No No No No No
PART B

AM PEAK PERIOD
One
2 or
More
Major Street - Both Approaches W 20th Avenue X 856 869 891 1074 1096 Minor Street - Highest Approach Pioneer Court/
Elkhorn Court X 67 67 109 67 109
Signal Warranted based on Part B? No No No No No Cumulative The volume on the same minor street approach equals or exceeds 100 vph for 1 moving lane of traffic or 150 vph for 2 moving lanes; AND
The total entering volume serviced during the hour equals or exceeds 800 vph for intersections with 4 or more approaches or 650 vph for intersections with 3 approaches.

The total delay experienced for traffic on one minor street approach controlled by a STOP sign equals or exceeds 4 vehicle-hours for a 1- lane approach and 5 vehicle-hours for a 2-lane approach; AND Rural (R)
Opening YearOY + Prj

AM PEAK PERIOD
Cumul + Prj
Opening YearOY + Prj
ExistingCumulative
Source: California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices for Streets and Highways (FHWA's MUTCD 2009 Edition, as amended for use in California).

Existing
Approach
Lanes
The need for a traffic control signal should be considered if an engineering study finds that the criteria in either of the following two categories (Parts A and B) are met:

The Warrant is satisfied if the plotted point for vehicles per hour on the major street (both approaches) and the corresponding per hour higher vehicle volume minor street approach (one direction only) for one hour (any four consecutive 15-minute periods) fall above the applicable curves in California MUTCD Figure 4C-3 or 4C-4.

Cumul + Prj
or
File: Elkhorn & 20th - Signal Warrant 2025-12-19
Tab: Signal Warrants 3 (AM)
834 of 1101
12/19/2025
0 W 20th Avenue & Pioneer Court AM PEAK PERIOD
Warrant 3, Part B - Peak-Hour Vehicular Volume
One
2 or
More
Major Street - Both Approaches W 20th Avenue X 856 869 891 1074 1096 Minor Street - Highest Approach Pioneer Court/
Elkhorn Court X 67 67 109 67 109
Signal Warranted Based on Part B - Peak-Hour Volumes? No No No No No *Warrant is satisfied if plotted points fall above the appropriate curve in graph above. Existing Opening Year
Source: Figure 4C-3 California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices for Streets and Highways (FHWA's MUTCD 2009 Edition, as amended for use in California) .
* Note: 150 vph applies as the lower threshold volume for a minor-street approach with two or more lanes and 100 vph applies as the lower threshold volume for a minor-street approach with one lane.

Approach
Lanes
AM PEAK PERIOD OY + Prj Cumulative Cumul + Prj
Existing Opening Year OY + Prj
Cumulative
Cumul + Prj
0 100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 1700 1800 Minor Street - Highest Approach (vph)
Major Street - Total of Both Approaches (vph)
Warrant 3, Part B - Peak-Hour Vehicular Volume
*100
*150
2 or more lanes & 2 or more lanes
2 or more lanes & 1 lane
1 lane & 1 lane
File: Elkhorn & 20th - Signal Warrant 2025-12-19
Tab: Warrant 3, Part B-Graph (AM)
835 of 1101
12/19/2025
0 TRAFFIC SIGNAL WARRANTS WORKSHEET
Analyst: JL date: 12/19/25
Major Street: W 20th Avenue Critical Approach Speed* (mph) 25 Minor Street: Pioneer Court/ Elkhorn Court Critical Approach Speed* (mph) 25 *Posted Speed.

Critical speed of major street traffic > 50 mph (64 km/h)….…..…...….......……..

In built up area of isolated community of < 10,000 population….…...……….…..

Urban (U)
Warrant 3 - Peak Hour
PART A
(All parts 1, 2, and 3 below must be satisfied)

PM PEAK HOUR
Minor Street Approach Direction w/ Highest Delay SB SB SB SB SB Highest Minor Street Average Delay (sec/veh) 25.4 26.1 30.2 36.1 44.4 Corresponding Minor Street Approach Volume (veh/hr) 59 59 76 59 76 Minor Street Total Delay (veh-hrs) 0.4 0.4 0.6 0.6 0.9
Total Entering Volume (veh/hr) 909 922 976 1075 1129

1. No No No No No

2. No No No No No

3. Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Signal Warranted based on Part A? No No No No No
PART B

PM PEAK HOUR
One
2 or
More
Major Street - Both Approaches W 20th Avenue X 762 775 812 928 965 Minor Street - Highest Approach Pioneer Court/
Elkhorn Court X 88 88 88 88 88
Signal Warranted based on Part B? No No No No No
Rural (R)
Opening YearOY + Prj

PM PEAK HOUR
Existing
The need for a traffic control signal should be considered if an engineering study finds that the criteria in either of the following two categories (Parts A and B) are met:

Cumulative
Approach
Lanes
Cumul + Prj
The volume on the same minor street approach equals or exceeds 100 vph for 1 moving lane of traffic or 150 vph for 2 moving lanes; AND
The total entering volume serviced during the hour equals or exceeds 800 vph for intersections with 4 or more approaches or 650 vph for intersections with 3 approaches.

The total delay experienced for traffic on one minor street approach controlled by a STOP sign equals or exceeds 4 vehicle-hours for a 1- lane approach and 5 vehicle-hours for a 2-lane approach; AND Existing
Cumul + Prj
The Warrant is satisfied if the plotted point for vehicles per hour on the major street (both approaches) and the corresponding per hour higher vehicle volume minor street approach (one direction only) for one hour (any four consecutive 15-minute periods) fall above the applicable curves in California MUTCD Figure 4C-3 or 4C-4.

Opening YearOY + Prj
Source: California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices for Streets and Highways (FHWA's MUTCD 2009 Edition, as amended for use in California).

Cumulative
or
File: Elkhorn & 20th - Signal Warrant 2025-12-19
Tab: Signal Warrants 3 (PM)
836 of 1101
12/19/2025
0 W 20th Avenue & Pioneer Court PM PEAK HOUR
Warrant 3, Part B - Peak-Hour Vehicular Volume
One
2 or
More
Major Street - Both Approaches W 20th Avenue X 762 775 812 928 965 Minor Street - Highest Approach Pioneer Court/
Elkhorn Court X 88 88 88 88 88
Signal Warranted Based on Part B - Peak-Hour Volumes? No No No No No *Warrant is satisfied if plotted points fall above the appropriate curve in graph above.

Approach
Lanes
Source: Figure 4C-3 California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices for Streets and Highways (FHWA's MUTCD 2009 Edition, as amended for use in California) .

Opening Year
OY + Prj
Cumulative
Existing
* Note: 150 vph applies as the lower threshold volume for a minor-street approach with two or more lanes and 100 vph applies as the lower threshold volume for a minor-street approach with one lane.

Cumul + Prj

PM PEAK HOUR
Existing Opening Year
OY + Prj
Cumulative
Cumul + Prj
0 100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 1700 1800 1900 2000 2100 Minor Street - Highest Approach (vph)
Major Street - Total of Both Approaches (vph)
Warrant 3, Part B - Peak-Hour Vehicular Volume
*100
*150
2 or more lanes & 2 or more lanes
2 or more lanes & 1 lane
1 lane & 1 lane
File: Elkhorn & 20th - Signal Warrant 2025-12-19
Tab: Warrant 3, Part B-Graph (PM)
837 of 1101
Appendix E
Garage Turning Templates
838 of 1101
CHECKED CITY OF SAN MATEO 220 W 20TH AVENUE TURNING TEMPLATE HEXAGON TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS, INC. 100 Century Center Court, Suite 501 San Jose, California 95112 Ph: (408) 971-6100 www.hextrans.com DRAWN FIGURE NO. DATE SCALE 1 LEVEL 2 RAMP DOWN 839 of 1101 CHECKED CITY OF SAN MATEO 220 W 20TH AVENUE TURNING TEMPLATE HEXAGON TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS, INC. 100 Century Center Court, Suite 501 San Jose, California 95112 Ph: (408) 971-6100 www.hextrans.com DRAWN FIGURE NO. DATE SCALE 2 LEVEL 1 RAMP DOWN 840 of 1101 CHECKED CITY OF SAN MATEO 220 W 20TH AVENUE TURNING TEMPLATE HEXAGON TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS, INC. 100 Century Center Court, Suite 501 San Jose, California 95112 Ph: (408) 971-6100 www.hextrans.com DRAWN FIGURE NO. DATE SCALE 3 LEVEL 1 RAMP UP841 of 1101 CHECKED CITY OF SAN MATEO 220 W 20TH AVENUE TURNING TEMPLATE HEXAGON TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS, INC. 100 Century Center Court, Suite 501 San Jose, California 95112 Ph: (408) 971-6100 www.hextrans.com DRAWN FIGURE NO. DATE SCALE 4 LEVEL B1 RAMP UP842 of 1101 Appendix F
San Mateo County C/CAG Checklist Worksheet
843 of 1101
Jan 1, 2022
Form Continues on Page 2
Sum percentages from each selected
measure from rows 1-6
Total from Required Measures
%
7 6 1% M9 - Design Streets to Encourage Bike/Ped Access Design adjacent streets or roadways to facilitate multimodal travel. ALL 5 1% M8 - Secure Bicycle Storage
Comply with CalGREEN minimum bicycle parking requirements.

ALL
4 10% M6 - Transit or Ridesharing Passes/Subsidies
Offer tenants passes or subsidies for monthly public transit or ridesharing costs incurred, equivalent to 30% of value or $50 - whichever is lower.

ALL
3 5% M4 - Actively Participate in Commute.org or Transportation Management Association (TMA) Equivalent
Obtain certification of registration from Commute.org or equivalent TMA incorporation documents.

TOD & Non- transit Proximate
Select only one based on Project Type
Transit
Proximate 15%
2 0.5% M3 - TDM Coordinator/Contact Person
Provide TDM coordinator/liaison for tenants. May be contracted through 3rd party provider, such as Commute.org.

ALL
1 1% M2 - Orientation, Education, Promotional Programs and/or Materials Offer new residents an orientation or education program or materials.

ALL
Measure Project Types Percentage Yes
C Required Measures You must select all measures that apply for your project type Click on each measure s title for more information Identify your project type
B Trip Reduction Target
1/2 to 3 miles from high quality transit service
35% Trip Reduction Required
Transit Proximate
More than 3 miles from high quality transit service
35% Trip Reduction Required
Non-Transit Proximate
Less than 1/2-mile from high quality transit service
25% Trip Reduction Required
TOD
Select one option based on your project s distance to high quality transit Read more about high quality transit at
ccagtdm.org/high-quality-transit
Project Jurisdiction

D D M M Y Y Y Y
Application Date
Project Address
Contact Email Address
Contact Phone Address
Contact First and Last Name
Parcel Number
A Applicant Information
[email protected]
Questions?
Any new development project anticipated to
generate at least 100 average daily trips is subject to the C/CAG TDM Policy and must complete a TDM
Checklist and implement associated measures to
mitigate traffic impacts.

About this Form
Read more at ccagtdm.org
500+ ADT; 50+ Units
Residential (Multi-Family) Land Use: Large Project TDM Checklist ccagtdm.org

220 W. 20th Avenue 039-303-400 0 6 1 0 2 0 2 5
City of San Mateo SummerHill Apartment Communities, Richard Norris (650) 842-2411 [email protected] ✓ ✓
✓
✓
✓
✓

18.5 844 of 1101
Jan 1, 2022
ccagtdm.org
Visit Our Website
[email protected]
Email Us
Questions?
F Submit Checklist
See for how to
submit this form.
ccagtdm.org/submission
Percentage from Additional Measures
Section D Row 22 %
Sum of required and
additional measures
Total Percentage from all Selected Measures
%
Percentage from Required Measures
Section C Row 7 %
+
Copy from Section
Trip Reduction
Target
B %
Total Percentage from all selected measures must be greater than or equal to Trip Reduction Target E Project Totals
Sum percentages from each selected
measure from rows 8 - 21
Total from Additional Measures
%
22 21 3% M26 Pedestrian Oriented Uses & Amenities on Ground Floor Provide on-site, visible amenities to tenants and guests, such as cafes, gyms, childcare, retail.

All
20 0.5% M24 Bike Repair Station
Offer on-site bike repair space/tools in visible, secure area.

All
19 7% M23 Gap Closure
Construct or enhance quality of biking and walking facilities to/from site to existing trails, bikeways, and/or adjacent

streets.

All
18 2% M22 Active Transportation Subsidies
Offer biking/walking incentives to tenants, such as gift card/product raffles.

All
17 1% M21 Bike/Scooter Share On Site
Allocate space for bike/scooter share parking.

All
16 10% M20 Shuttle Program/Shuttle Consortium/Fund Transit Service Establish a shuttle service to regional transit hubs or commercial centers. Shuttle service should be provided free of charge to employees and guests.

Non-transit
Proximate
%
15 M19 Land Dedication or Capital Improvements for Transit Contribute space on, or adjacent to, the project site for transit improvements.

Other (i.e., Micromobility Parking Zone, TNC Loading Zone) 1% Visual/Electrical Improvements (i.e., Lighting, Signage) 1% Bus Shelter 1%
Bus Pullout Space 1% ALL
Total percentages
selected

Select one or more
14 1% M18 Car Share On Site
Provide on-site car share or vehicle fleets.

ALL
13 4% M17 Developer TDM Fee/TDM Fund
Voluntary impact fee payment on a per unit or square footage basis, to fund the implementation of TDM programs.

ALL
12 10% M15 Reduced Parking
Provide off-street parking at least 10% below locally-required minimums, or else below the locally-permitted parking maximums.

Consideration may be required of potential spillover parking into surrounding areas.

ALL
11 25% M14 Paid Parking at Market Rate
Offer hourly/daily parking rates proportional to monthly rate or equivalent to cost of transit fare.

ALL
10 3% M11 Family supportive Amenities
On-site secure storage of personal car seats, strollers, cargo bicycles, or other large bicycles. Property owners can also provide shared building equipment, such as shopping carts or cargo bicycles for check out by residents.

ALL
9 1% M10 Delivery Amenities
Offer delivery amenities, including dedicated receipt and storage areas, to reduce need for multiple trips to conduct similar

business.

ALL
8 2% M5 Carpool or Vanpool Program
Establish carpool/vanpool program for tenants and register program with Commute.org.

ALL
Measure Project Types Percentage Yes
D Additional Recommended Select enough to meet the trip reduction target from section B Click on each measure s title for more information 500+ ADT; ~50+ Units
Residential (Multi Family) Land Use: Large Project TDM Checklist ccagtdm.org

✓
✓
✓
✓

7.5 18.5 7.5 26 25 845 of 1101
www.coxcastle.com Los Angeles | Orange County | San Francisco Cox, Castle & Nicholson LLP
50 California Street, Suite 3200
San Francisco, California 94111-4710
P: 415.262.5100 F: 415.262.5199
Christian H. Cebrian
415.262.5123
[email protected]
October 3, 2025

VIA E-MAIL
Elaine Ling
Principal Planner
City of San Mateo
330 W. 20th Avenue
San Mateo, CA 94403
Email: [email protected]
Re: AB 130 Eligibility
220 W. 20th Avenue, San Mateo
APN No. 039-030-400
Dear Ms. Ling:

On June 30, 2025, Governor Newsom signed into law Assembly Bill (“AB”) 130. AB 130 went into effect immediately by its terms. Among other changes to existing law, AB 130 established a new statutory infill exemption for purposes of the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”), which is codified in Pub. Res. Code, § 21080.66. The new statutory infill exemption applies to all aspects of eligible “housing development project[s]” that meet the site eligibility and project eligibility requirements for the exemption.

On behalf of SummerHill Apartment Communities (“SummerHill”), please find enclosed a checklist substantiating the eligibility for the new statutory infill exemption for the proposed 232 residential unit project (“Project”) at 220 W. 20th Avenue.

For projects with applications “deemed compete” pursuant to Government Code Section 65589.5(h)(5) (the Housing Accountability Act) before July 1, 2026, the City must initiate tribal consultation within 14 days of notice that the Project is eligible for the AB 130 exemption.

Government Code Section 65589.5(h)(5) defines “deemed complete” to mean that the applicant has submitted an SB330 preliminary application or, if the applicant has not submitted a preliminary application, has submitted a complete formal application.

SummerHill made minor revisions to the Project’s previously submitted SB 330 preliminary application on or about June 27, 2025. Because the Project’s SB 330 preliminary application was submitted before July 1, 2026, please notify by certified mail and email each California Native American tribe that is traditionally and culturally affiliated with the project site and invite the tribes to consult on the project’s potential effects on tribal cultural resources within 14 days of receipt of this letter as contemplated by Pub. Res. Code § 21080.66(b)(1)(A)(ii). 846 of 1101
Elaine Ling
October 3, 2025

SummerHill looks forward to working with the City to process the Project in accordance with AB 130. Please feel free to contact me or Richard Norris if you have any questions regarding the above request.

Sincerely,
Cox, Castle & Nicholson LLP
Christian H. Cebrian
Encl.
cc: Elaine Breeze
Richard Norris
847 of 1101
- 1 -
AB 130 Infill Exemption Analysis – 220 W. 20th Avenue
On June 30, 2025, Governor Newsom signed into law AB 130, which went into effect immediately. Among other changes to existing law, AB 130 established a new statutory infill exemption under the California Environmental Quality Act, which is codified in Pub. Res. Code, § 21080.66.

Below is a checklist establishing that SummerHill Apartment Communities (“Applicant”) proposed residential development project (the “Project”) at 220 W. 20th Avenue (the “Property”) satisfies the requirement for the AB 130 infill exemption.

Site or Project Eligibility Requirement Project’s Compliance with Requirement Housing Development Project. The
project is a “housing development
project” as defined in Gov. Code §§
65905.5 and 65589.5(h)(2), which
include projects with either a single
dwelling unit, multiple residential
units only or certain mixed-use
projects.

This requirement is satisfied.

The Project proposes 232 units. The Project therefore
qualifies as a housing development project per the
definitions in Gov. Code §§ 65905.5 and 65589.5(h)(2).

Maximum Size. The project site is not
more than 20 acres. (Pub. Res. Code, §
21080.66, subd. (a)(1)(A).

This requirement is satisfied.

The project site totals approximately 1.54 acres.

Urban Area. The project site either is
located within the boundaries of an
incorporated municipality or is located
within an urban area as defined by the
United States Census Bureau. (Pub.

Res. Code, § 21080.66, subd. (a)(2).)
This requirement is satisfied.

The Property is located within the City of San Mateo (the “City”).

Urban Uses. The project site meets
any of the following criteria:
(1) Has been previously developed
with an urban use.1
(2) At least 75 percent of the
perimeter of the site adjoins2 parcels
that are developed with urban uses.

This requirement is satisfied.

The Property is developed with an existing office building and therefore meets option (1). The Property also
qualifies under options (2), (3), and (4) because it adjoins urban uses on all sides.
1 The term “urban use” is defined in Pub. Res. Code, § 21080.66, subd. (f)(3) to mean “any current or previous residential or commercial development, public institution, or public park that is surrounded by other urban uses, parking lot or structure, transit or transportation passenger facility, or retail use, or any combination of those uses.” 2 The term “adjoins” is defined in Pub. Res. Code, § 21080.66, subd. (f)(1) to “include[] parcels that are only separated by a street, pedestrian path, or bicycle path.” 848 of 1101
- 2 -
Site or Project Eligibility Requirement Project’s Compliance with Requirement (3) At least 75 percent of the area
within one-quarter mile radius of the
site is developed with urban uses.
(4) For sites with four sides, at least
three out of the four sides are
developed with urban uses and at
least two-thirds of the perimeter of
the Site adjoins parcels that are
developed with urban uses.
(Pub. Res. Code, § 21080.66, subd.
(a)(3).)
Consistency with General Plan and
Zoning. The project is consistent with
the applicable general plan and zoning
ordinance, as well as any applicable
local coastal program. For purposes of
this requirement, a housing
development project shall be deemed
consistent with the general plan and
zoning ordinance and any applicable
local coastal program if there is
substantial evidence that would allow
a reasonable person to conclude that
the housing development project is
consistent. Further, approval of a
density bonus, incentives or
concessions, waivers or reductions of
development standards, and reduced
parking ratios per the State Density
Bonus Law shall not be a grounds for
determining that the project is
inconsistent with the applicable
general plan, zoning ordinance, or
local coastal program.
(Pub. Res. Code, § 21080.66, subd.
(a)(4).)3
This requirement is satisfied.

As demonstrated by the Project’s application materials, the Project is consistent with the applicable general plan and zoning ordinance in effect upon submittal of the
Project’s SB 330 Preliminary Application after
consideration of those standards associated with the
Project’s requested Density Bonus Law waivers and
concessions.

Minimum Density. The project must
“be at least one-half of the applicable
This requirement is satisfied.
3 See also Pub. Res. Code, § 21080.66, subd. (e), which provides that AB 130 “does not affect the eligibility of a housing development project for a density bonus, incentives or concessions, waivers or reductions of development standards, and reduced parking ratios pursuant to Section 65915 of the Government Code.” 849 of 1101
- 3 -
Site or Project Eligibility Requirement Project’s Compliance with Requirement density specified in subparagraph (B)
of paragraph (3) of subdivision (c) of
Section 65583.2 of the Government
Code.”
In the case of the City, which qualifies
as a jurisdiction in a metropolitan
county, this requires a minimum
density of at least 15 units per acre.
(Pub. Res. Code, § 21080.66, subd.
(a)(5).)
The Project proposes to construct a total of 232 units, which would result in a gross and net density of
approximately 150.3 dwelling units per acre.

Site Eligibility Criteria Incorporated by
Reference to Provisions of SB 35.

The project must “satisf[y] the
requirements specified in paragraph
(6) of subdivision (a) of Section
65913.4 of the Government Code.”
(Pub. Res. Code, § 21080.66, subd.
(a)(6).)
Each of the individual requirements comprising this
requirement are satisfied as discussed further below.

Coastal Zone Exclusion. The
development is not located in any
of the following:
“(i) An area of the coastal zone
subject to paragraph (1) or (2)
of subdivision (a) of Section
30603 of the Public Resources
Code.
(ii) An area of the coastal zone
that is not subject to a
certified local coastal program
or a certified land use plan.
(iii) An area of the coastal zone
that is vulnerable to five feet
of sea level rise, as determined
by the National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration,
the Ocean Protection Council,
the United States Geological
Survey, the University of
California, or a local
This requirement is satisfied.

The Property is not located in the coastal zone.
850 of 1101
- 4 -
Site or Project Eligibility Requirement Project’s Compliance with Requirement government’s coastal hazards
vulnerability assessment.
(iv) In a parcel within the
coastal zone that is not zoned
for multifamily housing.
(v) In a parcel in the coastal
zone and located on either of
the following:
(I) On, or within a 100-
foot radius of, a
wetland, as defined in
Section 30121 of the
Public Resources Code.
(II) On prime
agricultural land, as
defined in Sections
30113 and 30241 of the
Public Resources Code.”
(Gov. Code, § 65913, subd.
(a)(6)(A).)
Farmland Exclusion. The project
is not located on a site that is
either prime farmland or
farmland of statewide importance
or zoned for agricultural
protection.
(Gov. Code, § 65913.4, subd.
(a)(6)(B).)
This requirement is satisfied.

The Property is not located on a site that is farmland or zoned for agricultural protection.

See the California Important Farmland Finder, available at https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/DLRP/CIFF/.

Wetlands Exclusion. The project
is not located on wetlands.
(Gov. Code, § 65913.4, subd.
(a)(6)(C).)
This requirement is satisfied.

The Property does not contain any wetlands.

See the United States Fish and Wildlife Service Wetlands Mapper, available at
https://fwsprimary.wim.usgs.gov/wetlands/apps/wetland
s-mapper/.
851 of 1101
- 5 -
Site or Project Eligibility Requirement Project’s Compliance with Requirement Very High Fire Hazard Severity
Zone Exclusion. The project is not
within a very high fire hazard
severity zone.
(Gov. Code, § 65913.4, subd.
(a)(6)(D).)
This requirement is satisfied.

The Property is not within a very high fire hazard severity zone.

See Figure S-12 “Wildfire Hazard Zones” within the City’s General Plan, available at:
https://strivesanmateo.org/wpcontent/uploads/2024/03/StriveSanMateo_GP2040_Ado pted_3-18-2024_Web.pdf.

Cortese List and Hazardous
Waste Site Exclusion. The project
is not within a hazardous waste
site that is listed pursuant to Gov.

Code section 65962.5 or a
hazardous waste site designated
by the Department of Toxic
Substances Control pursuant to
Health and Safety Code section
25356 unless certain
requirements are met.
(Gov. Code, § 65913.4, subd.
(a)(6)(E).)
This requirement is satisfied.

This Property is not listed on the state’s Cortese list (i.e., the list pursuant to Gov. Code section 65962.5) and has not been designated as a hazardous waste site by the
Department of Toxic Substances Control pursuant to
Health and Safety Code section 25356.

The Cortese List Data Resources are available at
https://calepa.ca.gov/sitecleanup/corteselist/.

The EnviroStor list is available at
http://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov.

Earthquake Fault Zone Exclusion.

The project is not within a
delineated earthquake fault zone
unless certain requirements are
met.
(Gov. Code, § 65913.4, subd.
(a)(6)(F).)
This requirement is satisfied.

The Property is not located within an earthquake fault
zone.

See the Fault Activity Map of California, available at
https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/fam//.
852 of 1101
- 6 -
Site or Project Eligibility Requirement Project’s Compliance with Requirement Special Flood Hazard Area
Exclusion. The project is not
located on lands within a special
flood hazard area subject to
inundation by the 1 percent
annual chance flood (100-year
flood) unless certain
requirements are met.
(Gov. Code, § 65913.4, subd.
(a)(6)(G).)
This requirement is satisfied.

The Property is not located within an applicable special flood hazard area.

See FEMA’s National Flood Hazard Layer Viewer, available at https://hazardsfema.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?i d=8b0adb51996444d4879338b5529aa9cd.

Regulatory Floodway Exclusion.

The project is not located within a
regulatory floodway unless
certain requirements are met.
(Gov. Code, § 65913.4, subd.
(a)(6)(H).)
This requirement is satisfied.

The Property is not located within a regulatory floodway.

See FEMA’s National Flood Hazard Layer Viewer, available at https://hazardsfema.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?i d=8b0adb51996444d4879338b5529aa9cd.

Conservation and Natural
Resource Protection Plan
Exclusion. The project is not
located on lands identified for
conservation, subject to a habitat
conservation plan, or other
adopted natural resource
protection plan.
(Gov. Code, § 65913.4, subd.
(a)(6)(I).)
This requirement is satisfied.

The Property is not located on lands identified for
conservation in a conservation plan.

See the California Habitat Conservation Plans Map,
available at
https://databasin.org/maps/new/#datasets=c116dd0d32
df408cb44ece185d98731c.

Protected Species Habitat
Exclusion. The project is not
located on habitat for protected
species.
(Gov. Code, § 65913.4, subd.
(a)(6)(J).)
This requirement is satisfied.

The Property is comprised of a developed, infill
parcel. The General Plan 2040 Figure COS-1 “Vegetation
Habitats” maps the site as “Urban” and does not show
any special status vegetation habitat. Further, Figures 4.3- 1 “Special-Status Plant Species and Sensitive Natural
Habitats” and 4.3-2 “Special-Status Animal Species and
853 of 1101
- 7 -
Site or Project Eligibility Requirement Project’s Compliance with Requirement Critical Habitats” from the Strive San Mateo General Plan and Climate Plan Update’s August 2023 Draft EIR do not
indicate any special status plant of animal species critical habitats being near the site.

See also the USFWS Critical Habitat for Threatened &
Endangered Species Mapper, available at
https://www.arcgis.com/apps/mapviewer/index.html?url
=https://services.arcgis.com/QVENGdaPbd4LUkLV/ArcGIS
/rest/services/USFWS_Critical_Habitat/FeatureServer.

Conservation Easement
Exclusion. The project is not
subject to lands under a
conservation easement.
(Gov. Code, § 65913.4, subd.
(a)(6)(K).)
This requirement is satisfied. A review of the Property’s title report indicates the Property is not subject to a conservation easement.

Prohibition on Demolition of Historic
Structures. The project does not
require the demolition of a historic
structure that was placed on a
national, state, or local historic register
before the date a preliminary
application was submitted for the
project pursuant to Section 65941.1 of
the Government Code.
(Pub. Res. Code, § 21080.66, subd.
(a)(7).)
This requirement is satisfied.

The Property’s existing structures have not been placed on a national, state, or local historic register.

The City’s Historic Building Survey Final Report is available at
https://www.cityofsanmateo.org/DocumentCenter/View/
47850/Historic-Building-Survey-1989.

The primary list for the California Register of Historical Resources is available at
https://ohp.parks.ca.gov/listedresources/.

The National Register of Historic Places is available at https://www.nps.gov/subjects/nationalregister/databaseresearch.htm.

Prohibition on Hotels and Similar
Transient Uses. For a project that is
deemed complete pursuant to
paragraph (5) of subdivision (h) of
Section 65589.5 of the Government
Code on or after January 1, 2025, no
portion of the project is designated for
use as a hotel, motel, bed and
This requirement is satisfied.

No portion of the Project is designated for use as a hotel, motel, bed and breakfast inn, or other transient lodging. 854 of 1101
- 8 -
Site or Project Eligibility Requirement Project’s Compliance with Requirement breakfast inn, or other transient
lodging.
(Pub. Res. Code, § 21080.66, subd.
(a)(8).)
109262\18931542v1
855 of 1101
1 SummerHill Apartment Communities (SHAC)
Community Outreach Summary
220 W. 20th Avenue, San Mateo
May 6, 2026

OVERVIEW
The SHAC project team has continually prioritized neighbor and neighborhood outreach and engagement as a top priority for the project during due diligence and application approval process phases. The public outreach plan has utilized the following strategies to inform and seek feedback from residential and commercial neighbors in proximity to the project site:
• Transparency and a willingness to meet regularly at key milestones or to share new information:
• Direct engagement and requests to meet with:
o Corte Bella HOA and residents
o FHAR (Family Housing and Adult Resources, Inc.)
o Asiya Shriners
o Elks Lodge leadership
o Serra High School leadership and attending their neighborhood meeting o Beresford Hillsdale Neighborhood Association
o The Lark Apartment ownership
• Community meetings or presentations:
o Initial City of San Mateo required virtual meeting
o Two (2) community meetings with Corte Bella residents o Presentation to the Beresford Hillsdale Neighborhood Association Below are a detailed list and summary of the outreach and engagement activities which have occurred to date:

1. Community Meeting - May 15, 2025: SHAC hosted a community meeting per City of San Mateo protocol on Zoom with approximately 35 attendees. We introduced the company, the team members, described the project entitlement process, and presented the project plans and a:ordable housing plan. Community comments focused on:
• Tra:ic on W. 20th Ave.
• Speeding on W. 20th Ave.
• Parking
• Size of building
• Loss of sunlight
• Building design – would like a design more consistent with Corte Bella’s • Infrastructure – water and sewage
• People’s dogs using Corte Bella yards as bathrooms
• Emergency Vehicle Access – no access on north side
856 of 1101
2 • Lack of short term loading spaces for door dash/uber • Site vision triangle conflicts with exiting from Corte Bella’s garage • Parking for the project’s construction workers

2. Serra High School Community Meeting – June 12, 2025: SHAC attended the bi-annual Serra High School community meeting as an attendee. SHAC heard continued concerns regarding tra:ic, parking, and speeding on W. 20th Ave.

3. FHAR (Family Housing and Adult Resources - June 16, 2025: SHAC met with leaders at FHAR to introduce the project to them. FHAR described that their developmentally disabled clients are dropped o: in vans daily and might be a:ected by the construction noise and construction tra:ic. Construction parking staging were also discussed. SHAC described that o:site parking areas will be secured for construction and a designated construction representative will be available through the process. SHAC also provided the City’s construction hours.

4. Asiya Shriners – July 15, 2025: Presented at the Board meeting of the Asiya Shriners. SHAC heard comments on the following topics:
• Parking
• Concern regarding interference with their childcare tenant’s operations due to garage location and on street drop-o: and pick-up.
• Construction impacts
o Congestion on Elkhorn
o Debris
• Building’s shadow interference with Shriner’ s new solar panels

5. San Mateo Elks Lodge – July 2025: SHAC contacted the San Mateo Elks Lodge leadership in July of 2025 o:ering to meet to review the project to them. While they did not choose to meet with us, we did discuss the possibility of renting construction parking on a portion of their lot in the future.

6. Corte Bella Community Meeting – August 12, 2025: Approximately 20 people attended a community meeting SHAC hosted on-site at 220 W. 20th Avenue to review project progress and discuss changes made to the project in response to feedback from the 5/15/25 community meeting. Changes made in response to prior community feedback included:
• Added parking on W. 20th, including a loading zone for delivery drivers such as Lyft, Doordash, etc.
• Changed architecture on W. 20th to be warmer and use stucco near Corte Bella to match it more closely
857 of 1101
3 • Added a brick base with a formal beveled detailing to corner of W. 20th Ave. and Elkhorn Ct.
• Inclusion of a separated sidewalk and street trees
• Added a dog run at the 7th level
• Added a crosswalk across W. 20th Ave. at Elkhorn Ct.

In addition to the SHAC reviewing the changes made as a result of prior feedback, additional items brought up by Corte Bella residents included:

• Concerns over water pressure dropping as a result of the project • Concerns over the number of parking stalls in the garage • Continued concern over visibility when leaving Corte Bella • Understanding the loss of sunlight

7. Beresford Hillsdale Neighborhood Association - September 23, 2025: SHAC presented the project at a regularly scheduled meeting of the association attended by approximately 35 residents and fielded questions about design, parking, tra:ic, height, and construction.

8. Serra High School Community Meeting – January 22, 2026: SHAC attended the bi-annual Serra High School community meeting as an attendee. SHAC heard more concerns regarding tra:ic, parking, and speeding on W. 20th. In addition, SHAC fielded several questions community members had regarding its 220 W. 20th Ave. project.

9. Corte Bella Resident Follow Up Meeting – February 3, 2026: At an in-person meeting in Corte Bella’s Community Room attended by over 20 residents, SHAC discussed the changes made to the plans to improve the project based on community feedback and additional analysis performed:
• Changed tandem parking stalls to a mechanized pallet slider parking system to allow tandem parking stalls to be assigned to individual units, making them more useful and adding greater utility
• Added a loading zone “duck out” in-front of the project on Elkhorn Ct. for move-ins • Reviewed Civil Engineer’s analysis of sight vision triangles at Corte Bella’s exit on W. 20th Ave. and their determination that our landscaping and building did not pose a safety issue for vehicles exiting Corte Bella
• Improvements to the architecture included:
o Added awnings at corner of Elkhorn and W. 20th Ave
o Added cornice trim along parapet walls
o Refined ground level planting at walk-up units
o Added 12” frames at freeway side of specific balconies o Reduced depth of some balconies facing Corte Bella
858 of 1101
4 o Extended 3rd level railing to give the project a more residential quality o Thickened the north facing wall at the building’s base to create more significant shadows at window recesses
• Removed bulb-out at corner of W. 20th Avenue and Elkhorn Ct. • Reviewed the shadow study in greater detail
• Enlarged the rooftop dog run
• Removed of balconies facing Highway 92 to comply with AB130 • Added grass and walking path at the 6,100 SF Common Area • Location of Recology pick-up in northeastern corner of site

10. Corte Bella Follow Up – February-May 2026: As a result of the comments regarding water pressure during the February community meeting at Corte Bella, SHAC raised the concern with Calwater. Calwater subsequently performed a water pressure analysis as a result of our inquiry. After reviewing the results of the analysis, Calwater has characterized the water pressure as normal for the area.

SHAC has also o:ered to repaint the existing red curb at Corte Bella’s 20th Ave. garage exit where sightline was analyzed, and is assisting the HOA in finding a replacement light fixture for one that is needed in their common area.

11. Asiya Shriners - February 9, 2026: SHAC presented the changes made to the project to the Asiya Shriners Board on February 9, 2026, and addressed previous comments. SHAC described the changes to the plans as presented at the February 3rd Corte Bella meeting as well as the following additional items:
• Reviewed the shadow study in greater detail, demonstrating no impact on the Shriner’s recently installed solar panels.
• Reviewed trash pick-up plan and followed up with Recology after the meeting to confirm approach
In response to a request received at the Board meeting, SHAC has:
• Revised the project plans to enlarge the loading zone in front of the project on Elkhorn Ct. to now accommodate two vehicles.
• O:ered to repaint and install formal City signage for the existing passenger loading zone on the Shriner’s side of Elkhorn Ct, subject to City approval.

The Shriners Board has also requested that SHAC move the parking garage access to W. 20th Avenue. However, this would be inconsistent with City policy. Additionally, the current location was reviewed by the City in relation to the driveway for The Lark and found to be appropriate.
859 of 1101
5 12. W. 20th Avenue Crosswalk at Elkhorn Court/Pioneer Court We have also worked with City sta: around tra:ic calming as a follow-up to the feedback we received during our community outreach and have mutually agreed to install a High Visibility Crosswalk with Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons across W. 20th Avenue as a project condition.

13. The Lark Apartments ownership
SHAC first reached out to the owners of The Lark Apartments located at 1950 Elkhorn Ct. in May of 2025 to discuss improving the 6,100 SF Common Area and EVA that is shared with the 220 W. 20th Avenue property, including removing the existing asphalt driveway and replacing it with a concrete walking path and grasscrete. This April, we reached an agreement with ownership allowing SHAC to reconstruct this Common Area and EVA as part of the 220 W. 20th project and shown in the current submittal drawings while continuing to allow The Lark residents to use the newly improved path and area. 860 of 1101
1 Holeva Finau
From: Larisa Ocanada
Sent: Tuesday, May 26, 2026 10:00 AM
To: Planning Commission
Cc: Joanna Winter
Subject: Agenda Item #3: Planning Commission Meeting - 220 W. 20th Avenue Attachments: SAMCEDA Letter of Support - 220 W. 20th - 5.26.26.pdf Dear Chair Patel and Members of the Planning Commission, Please see the leƩer of support from SAMCEDA’s President & CEO, Rosanne Foust, regarding SummerHill Apartment CommuniƟes’ (SHAC) proposal to redevelop 220 W. 20th Avenue in San Mateo.

The aƩached leƩer pertains to Agenda Item #3 for the City of San Mateo’s upcoming Planning Commission MeeƟng on Tuesday, May 26th at 7:00PM.

Thank you!
Larisa Ocañada
MarkeƟng, CommunicaƟons and OperaƟons Manager
San Mateo County Economic Development AssociaƟon (SAMCEDA) 2 www.samceda.org
861 of 1101
862 of 1101
1 Holeva Finau
From: Nolan Katz
Sent: Tuesday, May 26, 2026 12:26 PM
To: Planning Commission
Subject: Hello
I vote against the proposed apartment complex near 20th and Elkhorn Ct NolanKatz, Past Potentate. Asiya Shriners
Sent from Asiya Shriners App.

Sent from my iPhone
863 of 1101
1 Holeva Finau
From: Oleksii Chuiko
Sent: Tuesday, May 26, 2026 11:30 AM
To: Planning Commission
Subject: May 26 Agenda - Item 3 - Public Comment
Dear Chair and Members of the Planning Commission,

For the record, my name is Oleksii Chuiko, and I serve as the Director of Operations for Asiya Shriners, located at 1925 Elkhorn Court. I have served in this capacity since 2014. Additionally, I bring the perspective of a former fellow commissioner, having previously served as the Chairman of the Planning Commission for the City of Oakley.

I am writing to you today to voice our strong opposition to the proposed 7-story development adjacent to Elkhorn Court. In its current iteration, this project represents a net loss for our organization, our tenants, and the entire surrounding neighborhood.

Having sat in your exact seats, I understand the immense pressure to approve housing. During my tenure as a commissioner, I was an adamant proponent of housing and voted to approve the vast majority of projects brought before us—even when they caused minor inconveniences.

However, I drew a strict line that I believe must be upheld here: I never voted to approve a project that sacrificed, or even had the potential to sacrifice, public safety, nor one that actively undermined established local businesses that generate vital revenue for the city.

We are not anti-housing. In fact, our organization has a proven track record of successful collaboration with residential developers. When Essex was developing the neighboring Park20 property (now known as The Lark), I worked directly with them. That process was a drastically different experience from what we are experiencing now. Essex engaged with us as a true neighbor, and we were able to find mutual agreements that resulted in a win-win for both parties while prioritizing the community.

Unfortunately, the current proposal disregards basic public safety and infrastructure realities.

Elkhorn Court is a narrow, dead-end cul-de-sac that is already heavily gridlocked. Our building houses two vulnerable populations: a child care center (Little Bloom) and an adult day care facility (Partners for Independence). During peak morning and evening hours, the traffic from drop-offs and pick-ups overlaps directly with our fraternal events, as well as residents of the Lark returning from work.

Injecting hundreds of additional vehicles into this specific, cramped bottleneck is a recipe for disaster for drivers and pedestrians alike. Furthermore, the resulting construction and permanent traffic chaos will severely threaten the operations of our tenants. If these tax-paying local businesses are forced to shut down or relocate, the loss of revenue will directly impact the 864 of 1101
2 Shriners' ability to operate our facility and support our global charity - Shriners Children’s Hospitals.

The critical need for housing in the Bay Area does not justify building a project of this massive scale anywhere there is open space, without adequate infrastructure to support it.

As a former peer in municipal planning, I strongly urge you to NOT approve this project in its current iteration. I ask that you direct the developer to seek a proper location for a project of this size, or at the very least, return with a major redesign that mitigates this safety crisis—such as moving the main parking garage entrance completely away from the Elkhorn Court cul-de-sac and onto 20th Avenue.

Thank you for your time, your leadership, and your dedicated service to our community.

Respectfully submitted,
Oleksii Chuiko
Director of Operations
ASIYA Shrine Center - Shriners International #15

www.asiyashriners.com
This communication constitutes an electronic communication within the meaning of the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 USC 2510, and its disclosure is strictly limited to the recipient intended by the sender of this message. This communication may contain confidential and privileged material for the sole use of the intended recipient and receipt by anyone other than the intended recipient does not constitute a loss of the confidential or privileged nature of the communication. Any review or distribution by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient please contact the sender by return electronic mail and delete all copies of this communication. 865 of 1101
1 Holeva Finau
From: Roberto Bradford
Sent: Tuesday, May 26, 2026 3:55 PM
To: Planning Commission
Subject: Public Comment - Item 3
Hello. My name is Roberto Bradford. I am a member of Asiya Shriners, which meets at 1925 Elkhorn Ct. in San Mateo. I am writing to express my opposition to the proposed apartment building on 20th & Elkhorn.

While I agree that more housing is needed in the Bay Area in general, the proposed building does not take traffic and safety into consideration. Elkhorn Ct. is not a major artery designed to handle a major increase in traffic such as the one that would be created by a 7 storey building. Our building's tenants include a daycare center for dependent adults and a daycare center for children. As it is now, the traffic during arrival and dismissal times is often very heavy for both events at our building and for the residents of the existing apartment complex at the end of the cul-de-sac. Adding 232 more units would create chaos for anyone trying to get in and out of Elkhorn. There is also the safety hazard that would be augmented with the influx of traffic. As mentioned before, our tenants include children and developmentally delayed adults. There is a very real possibility of someone, child or adult, running out into traffic, and that possibility would be exponentially higher if there were that many more vehicles on the road.

With those concerns, our nonprofit might face the possibility of losing our tenants to a safer, quieter location. That would be detrimental both to our organization, which would lose a substantial amount of income, and to the care centers, which would be forced to leave the place where they have been for years to find a new place to operate.

I do not oppose a new building entirely, but I believe that there should be more guaranteed safety measures in place before a project of this scope is approved. Thank you. 866 of 1101
1 Holeva Finau
From: Sam Weseloh <
Sent: Tuesday, May 26, 2026 11:11 AM
To: Planning Commission
Subject: Item 3 5/26 Agenda

VOTE NO FOR THIS DEVELOPMENT
ASIYA SHRINERS AND ITS CHARITY WORK WILL BE NEGATIVELY IMPACTED—- both SHORT TERM AND LONG TERM NO NO NO NO NO!
—Concerned ciƟzen of San Mateo County.

Sent from my iPhone
867 of 1101
1 Holeva Finau
From: Stephanie Davis
Sent: Tuesday, May 26, 2026 1:54 PM
To:

Cc: Joanna Winter; Simin Zakavand; Sung H. Kwon; Mazarin Vakharia; Holeva Finau Subject: 220 W. 20th Ave - Follow Up to Pre Agenda Questions Good Afternoon
In follow up to the pre-agenda meeting last Friday 5-22-26 and outstanding questions for the above application, regarding windows on the north (rear) side of the building and use of a eucalyptus tree species as street tree type to be planted, staƯ has outreached to the Building Department and City Arborist (respectfully) and would like to oƯer the following responses.

1. Residential window types on Rear/North Side of building and any code requirements as to whether these windows are required to be operable.

The windows are specified as operable on Sheet A3.4. The windows of these residential dwelling units are not required to be operable for emergency escape and rescue purposes because the building is exempt based on the selected type of construction. However, the windows are used for required natural ventilation which shall be not less than 4 percent of the floor area being ventilated in accordance with 2025 CBC Section 1205.1.

Thus, tt is possible to design the dwelling units for this project with no operable windows and not rely on natural ventilation. In such case, they shall be designed for more the complex and expensive HVAC mechanical ventilation per 2025 California Mechanical Code,which brings outside air through the ductwork (typical oƯices). In summary, it is possible for such windows to be inoperable and allowed by the code but unusual for dwelling units.

2. The use of a eucalyptus as a street tree species.

While some eucalyptus species have developed a problematic reputation due to characteristics such as large mature size, excessive bark shedding that can contribute to fire fuel loads, undesirable growth habits, and invasive tendencies (e.g., Blue gum, River red gum, etc.), the eucalyptus family is highly diverse, and many species possess traits that make them suitable for urban environments. In fact, the City’s Street Tree Master Plan includes several eucalyptus species approved for planting in the public right-of-way. Examples include Swamp Mallee (Eucalyptus spathulata), Lemon-scented gum (Eucalyptus citriodora), Spotted gum (Eucalyptus maculata), and Manna gum (Eucalyptus viminalis). According to the Street Tree Master Plan, these species have demonstrated more favorable behavior, exhibit smaller growth habits, are remarkably droughtand salt-tolerant, and possess unique traits that are well adapted to our changing climate. Please note that the City’s Street Tree Master Plan underwent a full revamping process and adoption in 2022 by the Parks and Recreation Managing Arborist and City Council. This document includes a section on tree species selection that features eucalyptus trees (see page 11). For this application, Flame gold trees (Koelreuteria bipinnata) along 20th Ave and Beautiful leaf Eucalyptus ( Eucalyptus calophylla) on Elkhorn Ct were required in accordance with SMMC 27.71.120.

Please let me know of further questions, thank you.
868 of 1101
2 Stephanie B. Davis, AICP
Contract Principal Planner | Community Development Dept. 330 W. 20th Ave., San Mateo, CA 94403
Cell: (650) 773-7249 | [email protected]
The l nked image cannot be displayed The f le may have been moved enamed o deleted Ve ify that the link poin s o the co ect file and location
869 of 1101
1 Stephanie Davis
From: Holeva Finau
Sent: Wednesday, June 3, 2026 10:22 AM
To: Richard Rodriguez
Cc: RickCell Rodriguez; Sung H. Kwon; Joanna Winter; Stephanie Davis Subject: RE: Hello
Hi Richard,
Confirming receipt of your public comment regarding 220 W. 20th Avenue – New Mul#-Family Residen#al Development (PA-2025-063) on behalf of the Planning Commission bcc'd in this correspondence.

Thank you,
Holeva S Finau
Administra#ve Assistant | Community Development Dept.
330 W. 20th Ave., San Mateo, CA 94403
650-522-7236 | [email protected]

-----Original Message-----
From: Richard Rodriguez < >
Sent: Sunday, May 31, 2026 5:52 AM
To: Planning Commission <[email protected]> Cc: RickCell Rodriguez < >; RickCell Rodriguez < >
Subject: Hello
Are Richard J Rodriguez opposed this apartment development. I am an I am a totally disabled person and Under the Americans With Disabili#es Act I will file a complaint with the federal government that you are discrimina#ng against handicap persons.

The SanMateo County greed is ignoring the safety over poli#cal issues. This apartment complex development is not a sound minded decision. I request that Army Corps of Engineers and local, state, and federal engineering, etc. be brought in and inves#gate.

Truly
Richard J Rodriguez
Sent from Asiya Shriners App.

Sent from my iPhone
870 of 1101
1 From: Kyle Dargis
Sent: Saturday, June 13, 2026 12:59 PM
To: City Council (San Mateo)
Cc: Clerk
Subject: Public comment on item 25 - apartments on 20th ave Council,
While I support the need for new housing in San Mateo, I ask you to deny the project on 20th Avenue as is it currently planned.

First, I agree with the Shriner's concerns about locaƟng the entrance on Elkhorn Court.

Second, there is limited parking in the area and eight guest spots for that many units is insufficient. This will impact seniors, disabled adults, and families who would be unable to visit residents as when they have small children, they cannot rely on Ubers, a 20 minutes walk from Caltrain with strollers and such. This would already compound an exisƟng shortage of parking.

The contrucƟon will likely cause the child day care and special needs adult care to close. There is already a shortage of day care opƟons, and this will also only hurt San Mateo residents.

Please do not approve the plan.

Kyle Dargis
871 of 1101
1 From: Alison L
Sent: Sunday, June 14, 2026 7:18 PM
To: City Council (San Mateo); Clerk
Subject: Public comment- Item 25
Greetings council,
I do not support the contruction of over 300 units on 20th Avenue in San Mateo due to safety reasons and the negative impact on the surrounding area. Given the many projects being planned and the many layoffs in tech I ask you to hold off for three years until we know the impact. Alternatively, reduce the number of units and make it a two story complex.

Thank you for your attention.

Alison Lewis
San Mateo
Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone
872 of 1101
1 From: James Lloyd
Sent: Monday, June 15, 2026 11:12 AM
To: City Council (San Mateo); Adam Loraine; Nicole Fernandez; Danielle Cwirko-Godycki; Lisa Diaz Nash; Rob Newsom
Cc: City Attorney's Office; Community Development Distribution; City Mgr; Joanna Winter; Clerk
Subject: Re: public comment re item 25 for tonight's Council meeting Attachments: San Mateo - 220 W. 20th Avenue - HAA.pdf
Apologies, please replace our recently submitted comment letter for tonight's meeting with the version attached to this email.

James M. Lloyd
Director of Planning and Investigations
California Housing Defense Fund
CalHDF is grant & donation funded
On Mon, Jun 15, 2026 at 2:09 PM James Lloyd wrote:

Dear San Mateo City Council,
The California Housing Defense Fund (“CalHDF”) submits the attached public comment re item 25 for tonight's Council meeting, the proposed 232-unit housing development project at 220 W. 20th Avenue, which includes 23 units dedicated to very low-income households and eight units dedicated to moderate income households.

Sincerely,
James M. Lloyd
Director of Planning and Investigations
California Housing Defense Fund
CalHDF is grant & donation funded
873 of 1101
Jun 15, 2026
City of San Mateo
330 W 20th Ave
San Mateo, CA 94403
Re: Proposed Housing Development Project at 220 W. 20th Avenue To: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected] Cc: [email protected],
[email protected], [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected];
Dear San Mateo City Council,
The California Housing Defense Fund (“CalHDF”) submits this letter to remind the City of its obligation to abide by all relevant state laws when evaluating the proposed 232-unit housing development project at 220 W. 20th Avenue, which includes 23 units dedicated to very low-income households and eight units dedicated to moderate income households. These laws include the Housing Accountability Act (“HAA”), the Density Bonus Law (“DBL”), and AB 130.

The HAA provides the project legal protections. It requires approval of zoning and general plan compliant housing development projects unless findings can be made regarding specific, objective, written health and safety hazards. (Gov. Code, § 65589.5, subds. (d), (j).) The HAA also bars cities from imposing conditions on the approval of such projects that would render the project infeasible (id. at subd. (d)) or reduce the project’s density (id. at subd. (j)) unless, again, such written findings are made. As a development with at least two-thirds of its area devoted to residential uses, the project falls within the HAA’s ambit, and it complies with local zoning code and the City’s general plan. Increased density, concessions, and waivers that a project is entitled to under the DBL (Gov. Code, § 65915) do not render the project noncompliant with the zoning code or general plan, for purposes of the HAA (Gov.

Code, § 65589.5, subd. (j)(3)). The HAA’s protections therefore apply, and the City may not reject the project except based on health and safety standards, as outlined above.

Furthermore, if the City rejects the project or impairs its feasibility, it must conduct “a 2201 Broadway, PH1, Oakland, CA 94612
www.calhdf.org
874 of 1101
thorough analysis of the economic, social, and environmental effects of the action.” (Id. at subd. (b).)
CalHDF also writes to emphasize that the DBL offers the proposed development certain protections. The City must respect these protections. In addition to granting the increase in residential units allowed by the DBL, the City must not deny the project the proposed waivers and concessions with respect to height, front yard setback, rear yard setback, open space dimensions, parking dimensions, massing breaks, and entries. If the City wishes to deny requested waivers, Government Code section 65915, subdivision (e)(1) requires findings that the waivers would have a specific, adverse impact upon health or safety, and for which there is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the specific adverse impact. If the City wishes to deny requested concessions, Government Code section 65915, subdivision (d)(1) requires findings that the concessions would not result in identifiable and actual cost reductions, that the concessions would have a specific, adverse impact on public health or safety, or that the concessions are contrary to state or federal law. The City, if it makes any such findings, bears the burden of proof. (Gov. Code, § 65915, subd. (d)(4).) Of note, the DBL specifically allows for a reduction in required accessory parking in addition to the allowable waivers and concessions. (Id. at subd. (p).) Additionally, the California Court of Appeal has ruled that when an applicant has requested one or more waivers and/or concessions pursuant to the DBL, the City “may not apply any development standard that would physically preclude construction of that project as designed, even if the building includes ‘amenities’ beyond the bare minimum of building components.” (Bankers Hill 150 v. City of San Diego (2022) 74 Cal.App.5th 755, 775.)
Furthermore, the project is eligible for a statutory exemption from CEQA pursuant to AB 130. (Pub. Res. Code, § 21080.66.) Caselaw from the California Court of Appeal affirms that local governments err, and may be sued, when they improperly refuse to grant a project a CEQA exemption or streamlined CEQA review to which it is entitled. (Hilltop Group, Inc. v.

County of San Diego (2024) 99 Cal.App.5th 890, 911.)
As you are well aware, California remains in the throes of a statewide crisis-level housing shortage. New housing such as this is a public benefit: by providing affordable housing, it will mitigate the state’s homelessness crisis; it will increase the city’s tax base; it will bring new customers to local businesses; and it will reduce displacement of existing residents by reducing competition for existing housing. It will also help cut down on transportation-related greenhouse gas emissions by providing housing in denser, more urban areas, as opposed to farther-flung regions in the state (and out of state). While no one project will solve the statewide housing crisis, the proposed development is a step in the right direction. CalHDF urges the City to approve it, consistent with its obligations under state law.
2 of 3
875 of 1101
876 of 1101
1 From: Joanna Winter
Sent: Monday, June 15, 2026 10:24 AM
To: Norris, Richard
Cc: Stephanie Davis; Zachary Dahl; Breeze, Elaine; Simin Zakavand; Martin McTaggart; Chantal Eaton
Subject: FW: 220 W. 20th Avenue Residential Project
Attachments: 220 W. 20th Residential Project - Letter to Zach Dahl - 6-15-26.pdf Thanks, Richard. We appreciate the additional voluntary measures you’re proposing. I’m including Simin and the City Clerk’s oƯice as well.

Joanna
Joanna Winter (she/her)
Planning Manager | Community Development Dept.
330 W. 20th Ave., San Mateo, CA 94403
650-522-7211 | [email protected]
From: Norris, Richard
Sent: Monday, June 15, 2026 10:08 AM
To: Joanna Winter <[email protected]>; Stephanie Davis <[email protected]> Cc: Zachary Dahl <[email protected]>; Breeze, Elaine Subject: FW: 220 W. 20th Avenue Residential Project
Hi Joanna and Stephanie,
Please see the letter I just sent to Zach that I missed cc’ing you on.

Best,
Richard
Richard Norris
Vice President of Development
SummerHill Apartment Communities
All subject matter contained in this email is confidential and proprietary to SummerHill Homes/SummerHill Apartment Communities and should not be disclosed to any person not listed as an original recipient. SummerHill Homes/ SummerHill Apartment Communities. All rights reserved. 877 of 1101
2 From: Norris, Richard
Sent: Monday, June 15, 2026 10:05 AM
To: Zachary Dahl <[email protected]>
Cc: '[email protected]' <[email protected]>; '[email protected]' <[email protected]>; [email protected]; '[email protected]' <[email protected]>; '[email protected]' <[email protected]>; [email protected]; '[email protected]' <[email protected]>; Jason Hallare <[email protected]>; John Thompson <[email protected]>; Oleksii Chuiko ; Breeze, Elaine ; Cebrian, Christian H.

Subject: 220 W. 20th Avenue Residential Project
Hi Zach,
Please find a letter as a follow-up to our meeting on Thursday.

Oleskii, please share this letter with Robert and your members and tenants as appropriate.

Thank you,
Richard
Richard Norris
Vice President of Development
SummerHill Apartment Communities

shapartments.com
878 of 1101
777 S. California Ave, Palo Alto, CA 94304 phone 650.493.4040 fax 650.857.1077 SHApartments.com June 15, 2026
Zach Dahl
Director of Community Development
City of San Mateo
330 W 20th Avenue
San Mateo, CA 94403
Re: 220 W. 20th Avenue Residential Project

Dear Mr. Dahl:

On behalf of SummerHill Apartment Communities (SHAC), thank you for coordinating a third meeting with our neighbors, the Asiya Shriners, to further discuss our project located at 220 W. 20th Ave. with them. As you know, our company values community engagement and creating solutions to neighbor concerns when we are reasonably able to, and we appreciate you creating opportunities to learn more about their concerns to continue to do so on this project.

From our most recent meeting with the Asiya Shriners (Shriners), we understand that the Shriners are concerned that our project’s construction would affect both the Shriners and their tenants, the Little Bloom Child Development Center and Partners for Independence Adult Day Center due to traffic, dust, and noise.

Following our meeting, we reviewed the project’s conditions of approval as well as relevant laws and regulations that govern the construction and operation of our buildings. Several of the most pertinent of these are described in detail below. In addition, we have reviewed the concerns with our construction management colleagues as well as technical consultants and would like to share a voluntary suite of additional accommodations we are prepared to implement beyond our existing robust conditions.

Project Design
Changes in Response to Community Outreach
As presented in detail to the Planning Commission, SHAC has made many changes to the project design as a result of feedback we have received during our community outreach process and this is reflected in our current plans.

Additional Accommodations
As we described during our meeting with the City and the Shriners, in response to their concerns, we have also offered to implement the following accommodations subject to their approval and/or the City San Mateo’s:
879 of 1101

2 • Repaint and extend the Passenger Loading Zone and install enforceable city signage on Elkhorn Court
• Add reduced 15 MPH School zone speed limit signs on Elkhorn Court at W. 20th Ave. • Add striping and/or signage for tenant parking with times in the Shriner’s parking lot As a follow-up to the meeting, subject to City coordination approval, we would also propose the following:
• Add a temporary construction ingress driveway on West 20th for the demolition through slab-ongrade portion of the construction. This would allow vehicles to enter from W. 20th Ave. and exit onto Elkhorn Ct. reducing trips on Elkhorn by 50% during this phase and keep vehicles on the project side of the street.
• Add “T’” parking striping on the southern side of W. 20th (non-project side). This was suggested by Corte Bella residents. We have already proposed this striping on our side.

Construction Management
Conditions of Approval
Condition of Approval 4 requires that prior to issuance of any permits, SHAC shall submit a Construction Management Plan (CMP), for review and approval by the Community Development Director, which will be implemented throughout all phases of construction that includes:
• Construction Timeline
• Construction Phasing Plan
• Project 24-Hour Liaison and Disturbance Coordinator Name and Contact Information • Construction Sign as required in Pre-Construction Meeting Guide • Construction Hours Acknowledgment and Work Hour Waiver Requirements for Extended Operations (e.g. large concrete pours, crane hoists, etc.) • Winterization Plan (If excavation/grading will occur in wet season) • Documentation of Adjacent Street Condition (when applicable) • Traffic Control and Logistic Plan
• Road or Sidewalk Closure Plan,
• Construction Hauling Routes,
• Worker Parking Location and Agreements
• Materials and Equipment Staging Plan
• Construction Equipment List including compliance with applicable Air Quality and Emission Regulations
• Erosion and Dust Control Plan
• Vibration Monitoring Plan
• Construction Noise Mitigation Plan
• Vector Control Plan
• Pre-construction Conference
880 of 1101

3 By complying with this condition, SHAC will address many of the Shriner’s concerns regarding traffic safety and dust during construction.

Neighbor Pre-Construction Meeting
In addition to the actions required by the CMP, SHAC will host a Neighborhood Pre-Construction Meeting onsite, typically two (2) months before the start of construction. During this meeting, neighbors will meet SHAC’s construction management team supervising this project, obtain their contact information, learn about the project schedule and process, and be able to ask SHAC’s team any questions they have about the project.

Best Management Practices (BMPs) to Reduce Dust
Condition 4 requires an erosion and dust control plan as well which will include incorporation of the Bay Area Air District’s recommended Best Management Practices (BMP). BMPs that will be implemented during construction of the project will include:
• Watering unpaved exposed surfaces twice daily
• Covering the beds of all trucks transporting loose soil, sand or other materials off-site • Using a wet vacuum truck to remove visible mud and dirt tracked onto adjacent roadways • Limiting speeds on unpaved roads to 15 MPH, paving all roadways, driveways, and sidewalks as soon as possible (unless seeding or soil binders are used) • Suspending all excavation, grading, demolition activities whenever wind speeds exceed 20 MPH • Washing all truck and equipment tires prior to them leaving the site • Providing the telephone number and name of the person to contact at the lead agency regarding dust complaints
• Posting the Air District’s General Air Pollution Complaints’ phone number Noise Attenuation
Conditions of Approval
As described above, the CMP requires that we create a Noise Mitigation Plan per the City’s guide. We will include the following measures:
• Equip all internal combustion engine-driven equipment with intake and exhaust mufflers that are in good condition and appropriate for the equipment. • Unnecessary idling of internal combustion engines shall be strictly prohibited. • Locate stationary noise-generating equipment, such as air compressors or portable power generators, as far as possible from sensitive receptors and property lines. If they must be located within 35 feet of receptors and property lines, adequate muffling (with barriers or enclosures where feasible and appropriate) shall be used to reduce noise levels at the adjacent sensitive receptors.
• Utilize “quiet” air compressors and other stationary noise sources where technology exists. • Control noise from construction workers’ radios to a point where they are not audible at existing residences bordering the project site.

In addition, the project will also comply with the City’s Noise Ordinance which includes regulations for construction hours and levels of noise.
881 of 1101

4 Additional Accommodations
Following our meeting with Asiya Shriners and City staff, SHAC engaged Salter Inc., the project’s acoustical engineering firm who has previously studied the project, to develop a list of additional voluntary noise reduction accommodations that we could implement during construction of our project.

Please see attached Memorandum dated June 12, 2026, which SHAC will implement. They include:
• Conducting construction activity to reduce noise impacts at adjacent property boundaries wherever possible
• Using well maintained equipment judiciously to be as quiet as practicable • Selecting hydraulically or electrically powered equipment while avoiding pneumatically powered equipment where feasible, prohibiting unnecessary idling of internal combustion engines • Requiring equipment to be turned off if not in use for over 5 minutes, and installing exterior building sheathing at the upper floors as early as is feasible to act as a barrier to noise at the adjacent uses
• Erecting, in locations as directed by the City, 8-foot high construction noise barriers at the eastern and southeastern perimeter of the site prior to commencement of ground-level construction activities. Doing so is intended to block direct noise line-of-sight to exposed facades of adjacent buildings, reducing the noise level by at least a 5 dB at the receiver when the barrier breaks line of site to the source.

Please let me know if you, or any of your colleagues, have any questions regarding how the conditions of approval or other regulations will be implemented by the project, or if we can offer any additional details on the voluntary suite of additional accommodations outlined above. I can be reached by e-mail at We look forward to continuing working
with the City of San Mateo and community on this project.

Sincerely,
Richard Norris
Vice President of Development
CC: City of San Mateo Mayor and City Council
Alex Khojikian, City of San Mateo
Matt Fabry, City of San Mateo
Joanna Winter, City of San Mateo
Stephanie Davis, City of San Mateo
Jason Hallare, City of San Mateo
John Thompson, City of San Mateo
Oleskii Chuiko, Asiya Shriners
Elaine Breeze, SummerHill Apartment Communities
Christian Cebrian, Cox, Castle, Nicholson
Enclosure: Construction Equipment Noise-Reduction Measures, June 12, 2026 882 of 1101
883 of 1101
220 20th Avenue
12 June 2026
Construction Equipment Noise-Reduction Measures