San Bruno/South San Francisco
Community-Based
Transportation Plan
2026
City/County Association
of Governments
of San Mateo County
C/CAG
San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan 2 |
San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan | 3
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Many thanks to the Steering Committee, made up of staff members from the cities of San Bruno and South San Francisco, as well as to community members and residents of San Bruno and South San Francisco.
CBTP Steering Committee
Kelly Beggs, City of San Bruno
Harry Yip, City of San Bruno
Steve Ojeda, City of San Bruno
Michael Laughlin, City of San Bruno
Megan Wooley-Ousdahl, City of South San Francisco
Matthew Ruble, City of South San Francisco
Project Facilitators and Plan Development Team
Susy Kalkin, City/County Association of Governments of San Mateo County (C/CAG) Taylor McAdam, Fehr and Peers
TF Chen, Fehr and Peers
Schenae Rourk, Redwood Resources
Daniel Iacofano, MIG
Maria Mayer, MIG
Noé Noyola, MIG
Stephanie Pavón, MIG
Ed Canalin, MIG
Community Advisors
Hermes Monzon, Brittany Burgo, and Dana Abarca, Friends of Old Town (South San Francisco)
Julio Garcia, Rise South City
Nicolas Rackard-Hilt, San Bruno Healthy Homes
Matt Jones, Silicon Valley Bike Coalition
Elida Valencia Sobalvarro, YMCA Resource Center
Nicholette Tolmie, SamTrans
2026
City/County Association
of Governments of
San Mateo County
(C/CAG)
San Bruno/South San Francisco
Community-Based
Transportation Plan
Community Organizations
Panaderia RicoPan, San Bruno
Resilient San Bruno
All Souls Church, South San Francisco
La Hacienda Market, South San Francisco
Rise South City, South San Francisco
South San Francisco Farmers’ Market
YMCA South San Francisco
San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan 4 | | 5 Executive Summary
This Community-Based
Transportation Plan includes
a set of recommended projects
and programs to address local
transportation and mobility
challenges raised by community
members and provide solutions
that will benefit residents across
the cities of San Bruno and South
San Francisco.
A Community-Based Transportation
Plan, or CBTP, seeks to address
transportation access issues for
residents who are more likely to be
dependent upon transit or other forms
of transportation other than a car, but
may have less resources or access
to travel where they need to go. The
Metropolitan Transportation Commission
(MTC), which is the organization that
coordinates transportation planning for
the nine counties in the Bay Area region,
funds community-recommended projects
which advance access to transportation and
mobility in communities it has identified
as Equity Priority Communities, or EPCs.
These EPCs are census tracts across the
Bay Area which have higher than average
low-income residents, residents of color,
older adults, people with disabilities,
residents without cars, single parent
families, and residents paying a
majority of their incomes toward
housing payments. These community
members are more likely to be transit
dependent.
C/CAG, the City/County Association of
Governments of San Mateo County,
is the coordinating organization
for this CBTP, which covers several
census tracts in the cities of San
Bruno and South San Francisco.
MTC has identified six Equity Priority
Communities in these two cities,
shown in Figure 1, where residents
meet some or all of the EPC
characteristics mentioned above. Two
of these Equity Priority Communities
are located in census tracts near
Downtown San Bruno. Four Equity
Priority Communities are in South
San Francisco—in census tracts
which include the neighborhoods of
Downtown South San Francisco, Old
Town, Paradise Valley, Orange Park,
Mayfair Village, Lindenville, and the
area east of Highway 101.
Figure 1: Map of San Bruno and South San Francisco Equity Priority Communities Source: Metropolitan Transportation Commission, Plan Bay Area 2050 San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan 6 | | 7
In partnership with community organizations, the CBTP project team created a community survey and organized and/or attended eight community events.
The team heard from more than 400 community members who live in these six Equity Priority Communities about the transportation challenges and safety issues they experience when they travel, and their suggestions to improve the local transportation system. Community members shared their challenges when walking, bicycling, and using the bus or other transit options.
Community members talked about unsafe intersections where it is hard to cross, sidewalks and streets in need of repairs, bus stops without shelters, missed bus connections, desire for more local transportation options, and streets in need of bicycle lanes. Many residents mentioned the difficulty in getting to school, work, community services and other destinations via available bus and paratransit/shuttle services, due to infrequent or lack of transit service in their communities, and busy highways and streets that create barriers between their neighborhoods and where they need to travel.
At several community events, residents mentioned that they needed more local and affordable shuttle services for residents. In San Bruno, several community members suggested that additional shuttles might ease traffic and parking congestion they experience in their neighborhoods. Community members also mentioned the need for more information about existing transit services in their communities. In addition to making safety improvements, improving pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure, and expanding transit service where possible, increasing efforts to promote and provide information about available transportation services will be a key and ongoing goal of this CBTP.
This is the second CBTP developed by C/CAG and community partners for the cities of San Bruno and South San Francisco. Many of the strategies laid out in this CBTP are similar to those from the previous plan developed in 2012, such as the ongoing need for sidewalk repairs and pedestrian crosswalks, expanding bikeway miles and safe routes to school, and providing more information about existing bus, shuttle, and other transportation services. The proposed projects and programs laid out in this CBTP are organized into several strategies, which together address the current transportation challenges most often raised by community members. These strategies will help C/CAG and its partners at local jurisdictions, SamTrans, regional transit agencies, and community organizations focus on projects that will provide the most benefit to residents in EPCs.
Some of the projects related to these strategies are at specific locations in these six Equity Priority Communities, such as enhancing crosswalks at Lomita Park Elementary in San Bruno, providing a crossing for bicyclists from the Centennial Way Trail to San Bruno BART and the Huntington Ave cycle track, and expanding bus access to serve Paradise Valley in South San Francisco. Other projects recommend larger programmatic changes, such as expanding the 101 Express Lanes travel voucher program to serve more residents; providing more realtime information for transit and shuttle services; and offering more multilingual education and support for would be bus and transit users.
Staff from the cities of San Bruno and South San Francisco and from SamTrans transit agency reviewed and responded to a potential list of projects and programs relevant to their communities and service areas, and have shared updates about how they might implement many of these recommendations through their Capital Improvement Plans or other upcoming planning efforts, if approved by city/agency leadership.
MTC recently introduced a new round of grant funding called Community Action Resource and Empowerment (CARE), which may be available to support many of these community-identified projects. Given the broader changes to federal funding streams that C/CAG, MTC and area jurisdictions and transit agencies rely upon to fund transportation and transit-related improvements in their communities, the project team has included several other potential streams of funding which may help support the implementation of some of the projects and programs suggested in this CBTP. C/CAG will continue to meet regularly with partners and jurisdictions to review the status of CBTP projects and determine what additional support is needed to ensure that community-based recommendations are implemented where it is possible to do so, and residents experience improved mobility and access to the places they need to go.
This CBTP includes several types of
proposed projects:
Extend planned bicycle routes to connect South San
Francisco residents to San Bruno BART station
Enhance crosswalks near Lomita Park Elementary so
students and parents feel safe walking to school
Install more street lighting along sidewalks in San Bruno where community members say they feel unsafe walking
at night
Expand frequency and bus service along SamTrans routes
which serve EPC residents
Develop new employer partnerships to expand San Bruno
shuttle service
Expand travel vouchers to residents to
encourage a shift from driving to the bus, bicycle
or other modes
Provide multilingual trainings for residents who want
to use the bus but don’t understand how to access
information or discount programs
BIKE, WALK & ROLL
SAFETY
AFFORDABILITY
INFORMATION
TRANSIT
San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan 8 | | 9 Executive Summary.......................................................................4 Introduction...................................................................................... 9 MTC and CBTP Process and Goals.......................................................10 Equity Priority Communities..................................................................11 Current Planning Context..................................................................... 12 Community Profiles.....................................................................14 Priority Communities Analysis ............................................................. 15 San Bruno EPCs Profile........................................................................ 18 San Bruno Community Area EPC Metrics ........................................... 20 South San Francisco EPCs Profile........................................................ 21 South San Francisco Community Area EPC Metrics............................23 Community Travel Patterns..................................................................26 Existing Transportation Infrastructure and Services......28 Existing Pedestrian Infrastructure........................................................30 Existing Bicycle Network...................................................................... 31 Physical Travel Barriers........................................................................34 Transit Service and Ridership ..............................................................40 Traffic Hotspots and Vehicle Volumes.................................................46 Street Safety ........................................................................................47 Review of Previous CBTP Strategies ................................................... 51 Community Needs Assessment.............................................52 Overview of Community Engagement Activities..................................53 Community-Identified Transportation Needs and
Suggestions ....................................................................................... 58 Recommendations to Address Community
Transportation Challenges.......................................................66 Evaluation Criteria............................................................................... 68 Proposed Transportation Strategies and Projects...............................68 CBTP Project Matrix and Implementation Plan...............121 CBTP Projects Table........................................................................... 123 Available Funding Opportunities....................................................... 133 Monitoring and Evaluating Progress...................................................137 Appendices.................................................................................. 138 Appendix A: Community Assessment Report of San Bruno
and South San Francisco EPCs
Appendix B: Review of Previous CBTP Plan Strategies
and Implementation
Appendix C: Community Engagement Summary
Appendix D: Annual CBTP Tracking Checklist (Sample)
Table of Contents
Introduction
San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan 10 | | 11
In neighborhoods across South San Francisco, San Bruno, and the broader Bay Area region, residents, workers and visitors travel to school, work, the doctor, the grocery store and so many more places. For some community members,
these trips require more time and effort, due to distance, cost, access to transportation, health and/or age, and many depend upon available transportation services to get where they need to go.
This Community-Based Transportation Plan, or CBTP, is an effort to address the needs of community members who are more likely to depend on transit or modes of travel other than by car. In some communities, these other travel options are less accessible. The CBTP, in coordination with local cities and agencies, community organizations and residents, lays out some key priorities and potential projects to improve transportation options and mobility for San Bruno and South San Francisco residents, focused especially on several neighborhoods where there is a greater need for equitable access to transportation.
C/CAG and partners at the City of San Bruno, City of South San Francisco, SamTrans and others created an initial CBTP for San Bruno and South San Francisco in 2012. This document reviews the progress of the previous plan and serves as an update to that CBTP.
MTC and CBTP Process and Goals
Community-Based Transportation Plan development is coordinated on a regional level by the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC), which provides funding to county transportation and coordinating agencies such as C/ CAG to develop a CBTP in partnership with community members, stakeholder groups and local jurisdictions. Community members identify the most important transportation challenges in their neighborhoods, and potential strategies and projects to improve mobility and transportation in their communities.
The Key Goals of Community-Based
Transportation Plans
Engage residents and community
organizations in conducting
the analysis and shaping
recommendations of the plan.
Improve access and mobility for
low-income communities
The process to develop this CBTP included the following steps:
1. Assess the current conditions of residents in local Equity Priority Communities
2. Review the past CBTP to check progress on projects and strategies
3. Engage community members and stakeholders about their current transportation and mobility challenges, needs and suggestions for improvements
4. Develop, in partnership with jurisdictions, transit agencies and community members, a set of recommended strategies to address local transportation and mobility needs
5. Create a priority projects list, reviewed by community stakeholders and partner jurisdictions and agencies
6. Determine which projects are already underway at cities/agencies
7. Develop an implementation plan for final list of priority projects
8. Review the plan together on an annual basis to determine progress Equity Priority Communities
CBTPs focus on several community areas that have been determined by the Metropolitan Transportation Commission to be most in need for priority funding to support improving access for residents to transportation services. MTC used a region-wide process of analyzing communities by a set of key U.S. Census data points which measure the percentages of underserved populations, such as high percentages of households with low incomes, or residents of color in a given census tract compared to the average for all of the Bay Area.1 MTC identified six Equity Priority Communities in San Bruno and South San Francisco. These are census tracts with high percentages of residents who are more likely to be transit dependent – including residents of color, lowincome residents, older adults, residents with disabilities, residents who many not speak English very well, single parents, and residents without access to a car—and who may be most in need of access to additional transportation options in their communities. Because some of these census tracts include more than one neighborhood, the project team has identified some of the feedback and recommendations by its neighborhood location within these EPCs.
1 Metropolitan Transportation Commission. “What are Equity Priority Communities?” Accessed September 2025 from https://mtc.ca.gov/planning/transportation/access-equity-mobility/equity-priority-communities San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan 12 | | 13
The 8 EPC Metrics
Equity Priority Communities are census tracts in Bay Area counties which have a significant concentration of residents from underserved populations—these communities may have experienced disadvantage and underinvestment due to their background or socioeconomic status, and who may be more likely to be transit dependent. These include:
MTC determines a community is an EPC if it has a greater percentage of residents of color and low-income residents than most Bay Area census tracts, or if the community area exceeds the regional percentage threshold for low-income residents as well as three or more other demographic variables listed above. 1 People of Color 2 Low-Income 3 Limited English Proficiency 4 Zero-Vehicle Households 5 Seniors 75 Yrs and Over 6 People with a Disability 7 Single Parent Families 8 Severely Rent-Burdened Households Current Planning Context
Many of the sources of funding which C/CAG, local jurisdictions, and agency partners use to support projects like those recommended in this CBTP originate from federal sources, including some COVID-19 era funds that are coming to an end. There also may be changes at federal agencies which may require C/CAG and partners to consider different sources of funding to support this work. Inconsistent and low ridership levels on some SamTrans bus routes, which collect fares to help fund service, affects how much funding there may be available to expand transit routes and frequencies.
In addition to changes in funding sources and availability, another key limitation to improving mobility in San Bruno, South San Francisco, and across the Bay Area and beyond is the shortage of people to work as bus and shuttle drivers. The shortage of drivers affects transit agencies, school districts, and other industries who employ drivers. While this trend is slowly beginning to reverse, this may also limit what additional transit services local cities and agencies can provide.
San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan 14 | | 15
Community Profiles
Priority Communities Analysis
The Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) determined that four census tracts in the City of South San Francisco and two in the City of San Bruno qualified as Equity Priority Communities (EPCs), as seen in the map in Figure 1. The City of San Bruno’s EPCs comprise the neighborhoods of San Bruno Park, Downtown San Bruno and Lomita Park (in yellow). In South San Francisco, the EPCs include Paradise Valley, Old Town, Downtown, Orange Park, Lindenville, and East of 101 (in blue).
Source: Metropolitan Transportation Commission, What are Equity Priority Communities? Figure 2: Map of San Bruno and South San Francisco Equity Priority Communities Source: Metropolitan Transportation Commission, Plan Bay Area 2050 People of Color
(70% threshold)
Low-Income
Residents (28%)
Limited English
Proficiency (12%)
Older Adults 75 Years of
Age and Over (8%)
People with a
Disability (12%)
Single Parent
Families (18%)
Severely Rent-Burdened
Households (14%)
Equity Priority Communities as defined by MTC are census tracts which exceed the regional concentration threshold (the % in parentheses below) of residents according to several key demographic factors:
Zero-Vehicle
Households (15%)
San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan 16 | | 17
The thresholds listed here represent one-half of a standard deviation above the Bay Area regional average, which means that there is a statistically significant concentration of residents who identify as or experience this demographic factor.2
If a census tract exceeds both the threshold values for low-income residents and people of color, or exceeds the threshold value for low-income residents and also exceeds the threshold values for three or more of the other factors listed above, it is designated an Equity Priority Community.
The regional averages and thresholds for these data factors were determined by MTC using 2018 ACS data, which is shown in the table in Figure 2. At the time, these six census tracts were only four—two of these tracts (6041.01 in San Bruno and 6022 in South San Francisco) were split into two in 2020.
All four of these 2018 census tracts in San Bruno and South San Francisco exceed the Bay Area regional threshold of residents of color and low-income residents (highlighted in yellow in Figure 3), which means they qualify as Equity Priority Communities. Additionally, these census tracts far exceed the Bay Area regional average and threshold for the percentage of households who are severely rent burdened, meaning they pay more than half of total household incomes toward rent or a mortgage. Three of these census tracts have high percentages of residents who say they speak English less than very well or not at all. Two South San Francisco census tracts have high percentages of single parent families, and the other South San Francisco census tract has a high percentage of older adults relative to the Bay Area average and threshold.
In 2024, MTC proposed revisions to these thresholds based upon updated Census data from 2022. In San Bruno and South San Francisco, many of these data points shifted. While thresholds of residents of color far exceeds the regional average and threshold, only two of the six census tracts in this CBTP would qualify as EPCs when using this updated data, since the others no longer meet the threshold of low-income residents (see Appendix A for 2022 data).
The project team and advisory committee determined that this update would maintain the 2012 study area and use the 2018 data thresholds for this CBTP.
However, the Equity Priority Community profiles which follow this section use more recent data, from 2022, to describe the residents who live within these EPCs. Most of the analysis describes the community areas from each city separately, focusing especially on the key metrics where they meet the EPC thresholds.
A census tract is an area in a community
about the size of a neighborhood, which
the U.S. Census Bureau uses to analyze
populations. Each census tract has a
population size of 1,500 and 8,000
residents.
(Source: www.census.gov)
Figure 3: Threshold Measures for Equity Priority Communities in San Bruno and South San Francisco (2018 U.S. Census American Community Survey data) Demographic Factor (Higlighted: Meets or Exceeds Regional Threshold)
Bay Area
Regional
Average
Bay Area
Regional
Threshold
San Bruno
EPC 6041.01*
South San
Francisco
EPC 6021
South San
Francisco
EPC 6022*
South San
Francisco
EPC 6023
People of Color 58% 70% 84% 88% 87% 88%
Low-Income Residents (<200% of Federal Poverty Threshold) 21% 28% 32% 47% 31% 29% Limited English Proficiency 8% 12% 13% 20% 17% 9%
Zero-Vehicle Households 9% 15% 7% 7% 10% 9%
Older Adults 75 Years of Age and Over 6% 8% 4% 3% 4% 10% People with a Disability 10% 12% 8% 9% 7% 11%
Single-Parent Families 13% 18% 14% 20% 24% 16%
Severely Rent-Burdened Households 10% 14% 35% 35% 21% 39% Sources: MTC. Plan Bay Area 2050; U.S. Census, American Community Survey, 5-year data tables, 2018. *Note: in 2020, many census tracts were revised, including two included in this CBTP. San Bruno 6041.01 was divided into 6041.03 and 6041.04, and South San Francisco 6022 was divided into 6022.01 and 6022.02 2 Metropolitan Transportation Commission. PBA2050+ 2024 Equity Priority Communities Update, MTC Policy Advisory Council Presentation. April 2024 San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan 18 | | 19
Population, Households and Families
The EPCs in San Bruno are two census tracts in and near Downtown San Bruno, shown in yellow in Figure 3, which also include parts of the San Bruno Park and Lomita Park neighborhoods. Approximately 8,206 people live in the San Bruno EPCs, in 2,576 households.3 Thirty-six percent of families in the EPCs are headed by a single parent. One in ten single parent families in the EPCs are experiencing poverty.4
Race and Ethnicity
Two thirds of San Bruno EPC residents (67%) identify as people of color or multi-racial. More than half of residents identify as Hispanic or Latino (57%), 22 percent as Asian and nearly seven percent as Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander.
Income
Nearly one in five residents (18%) in the San Bruno EPCs earn annual incomes below 200 percent of the poverty threshold. Eight percent of residents, or 658 people, earn incomes less than the poverty threshold, of $14,880 for one person (2022 threshold and data). The median income for the San Bruno EPCs is approximately $22,000 less than the median for the entire City of San Bruno ($131,700 in 2022). As seen in Figure 4, nearly half of households in both San Bruno EPCs have annual incomes of less than $100,000 per year. Source: Metropolitan Transportation Commission, Plan Bay Area 2050 3 U.S. Census Bureau. “ Demographic and Housing Estimates.” American Community Survey, ACS 5-Year Estimates Data Profiles, Table DP05, 2022. A detailed community profile of all of the EPCs is available in Appendix A.
4 U.S. Census Bureau. “Poverty Status in the Past 12 Months of Families by Family Type by Work Experience of Householder and Spouse.” American Community Survey, ACS 5-Year Estimates Data Profiles, Detailed Table B17016, 2022
EPCS PROFILE San Bruno
Figure 4: San Bruno Equity Priority Communities
Age
One in four residents in the San Bruno EPCs are under 21. Twelve percent of EPC residents are over the age of 62, and four percent of residents are over the age of 75. Most residents in the San Bruno EPCs are working-age adults.
Residents with Disabilities
Approximately nine percent of residents in the San Bruno EPCs area are living with a disability. Four percent of residents in the San Bruno Park EPC (Census Tract 6041.04), or 165 people, have a vision difficulty. In the Lomita Park/ Downtown EPC (Census Tract 6041.03), six percent of residents, or 265 people, are living with a cognitive disability.
Language Proficiency
Almost two-thirds of residents in the San Bruno EPCs say they speak a language other than English at home. Forty-six percent of residents speak Spanish, approximately six percent of residents speak Chinese (which includes Cantonese and Mandarin) and three percent speak Tagalog. One in three San Bruno EPCs residents say they speak English less than very well—this includes 61 percent of Spanish speakers, more than half of Chinese speakers (55%), and one-third of Tagalog speakers (36%).
Vehicle Ownership
Approximately 11 percent of households in the San Bruno EPCs do not have at least one vehicle at home. Most of these households are in the Lomita Park/ Downtown EPC, where 17 percent of households do not have a car.
Rent Burden
Approximately 39 percent of households in the San Bruno EPCs, or 680 households, are severely rent-burdened, meaning that they use 50 percent or more of their income toward rent or other housing costs. 34%
38%
47%
44%
Less than $25,000 $25,000 to $50,000
$50,000 to $75,000 $75,000 to $100,000
San Bruno Park
(6041.04)
Lomita Park/
Downtown San Bruno
(6041.03)
City of San Bruno
San Mateo County
64%
39%
45%
36%
61%
55%
Tagalog Spanish Chinese
Speaks English "very well" Speaks English less than "very well" Figure 5: San Bruno EPC Residents with Incomes Below $100,000 in the last 12 Months
Figure 6: San Bruno EPC Residents with Incomes Below $100,000 in the last 12 Months
Source: U.S. Census Bureau. “Income in the Past 12 Months (in 2022 Inflation-Adjusted Dollars).” American Community Survey, ACS 5-Year Estimates Subject Tables, 2022, Table S1901 Source: U.S. Census Bureau. “Language Spoken at Home for the Population 5 Years and Over.” Amercan Community Survey, ACS 5-Year Estimates Detailed Tables, Table C16001, 2022 San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan 20 |
64% of residents identify as people of color or multiracial 20% of residents live in low-income households
19% of single parent families are experiencing poverty
5% of residents are 75 years or older
9% of residents are living with a disability. 4% of
residents have a hearing difficulty and 6% have a
cognitive difficulty
17% of households have no vehicle at home
50% of Spanish and Chinese speakers (including
Cantonese and Mandarin), and 45% of Tagalog speakers
speak English less than very well
42% of residents pay more than half of their incomes
toward rent or housing costs
70% of residents identify as people of color or multiracial 17% of residents live in low-income households
No single parent families in this EPC are experiencing
poverty
2% of residents are 75 years or older
10% of residents are living with a disability. 4% of EPC residents have a vision difficulty
4% of households have no vehicle at home
69% of Spanish and Chinese speakers (including
Cantonese and Mandarin) speak English less than very
well
34% of residents pay more than half of their incomes
toward rent or housing costs
San Bruno Community Area EPC Metrics
Lomita Park/Downtown San Bruno
(Census Tract 6041.03) San Bruno Park (Census Tract 6041.04) | 21
Population, Households and Families
The Equity Priority Communities in South San Francisco are four census tracts, which include the neighborhoods of Paradise Valley, Old Town, East Downtown and West Downtown, Orange Park, Mayfair Village, Lindenville, and the area East of 101. Approximately 15,806 people live in these four EPCs in 5,167 households.5
One-third (33%) of families in
the EPCs are headed by a single parent. Nearly one in five single parent families (19%) in the EPCs are experiencing poverty.6
Race and Ethnicity
Nearly eight in every ten South San Francisco EPC residents (77%) identify as people of color or multi-racial. Approximately half of residents identify as Hispanic or Latino (52%), and one in four (24%) as Asian. Three of the four EPCs have more than ten percent of residents who identify as Filipino.
Income
One in four residents (24%) in the South San Francisco EPCs earn annual incomes below 200 percent of the poverty threshold.
Twelve percent of residents, or 1,897 people, earn incomes less than the poverty threshold, of $14,880 for one person (2022 threshold and data).
In three of the four South San Francisco EPCs, the median income of all households is $40,000 to $45,000 less than the city’s median income of $127,000. More than half of households in the East Downtown/Old Town EPC and Paradise Valley EPC, and two-thirds of households in the West Downtown EPC have annual incomes below $100,000.
Source: Metropolitan Transportation Commission, Plan Bay Area 2050 EPCS PROFILE South San Francisco
Figure 7: San Bruno Equity Priority Communities
5 U.S. Census Bureau. “ Demographic and Housing Estimates.” American Community Survey, ACS 5-Year Estimates Data Profiles, Table DP05, 2022. A detailed community profile of all of the EPCs is available in Appendix A.
6 U.S. Census Bureau. “Poverty Status in the Past 12 Months of Families by Family Type by Work Experience of Householder and Spouse.” American Community Survey, ACS 5-Year Estimates Data Profiles, Detailed Table B17016, 2022
San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan 22 | | 23
Age
One in four residents (24%) in the South San Francisco EPCs are under the age of 21. One in five (21%) are older adults: 16 percent are over the age of 62, and five percent of residents are over the age of 75.
Residents with Disabilities
Approximately eight percent of residents in the South San Francisco EPCs area are living with a disability. Nearly seven percent of residents in the Downtown/Oldtown EPC (Census Tract 6022.22), or 207 people, experience a cognitive difficulty. In the Paradise Valley EPC (Census Tract 6021), approximately six percent of residents, or 219 people, are living with an ambulatory disability.
Language Proficiency
Seventy-one percent of residents in the South San Francisco EPCs say they speak a language other than English at home. Forty percent of residents speak Spanish, six percent of residents speak Chinese (which includes Cantonese and Mandarin), and another six percent speak Tagalog.
One in four South San Francisco EPCs residents (27%) say they speak English less than very well—this includes 44 percent of Spanish speakers, more than half of Chinese speakers (53%), and one-third of Tagalog speakers (34%).
Vehicle Ownership
Approximately 8 percent of households in the South San Francisco EPCs do not have at least one vehicle at home. Thirteen percent of households in the East Downtown/Old Town EPC, and ten percent of households in the West Downtown EPC do not have a car.
Rent Burden
Approximately 29 percent of households in the South San Francisco EPCs, or 973 households, are severely rent-burdened, meaning that they use 50 percent or more of their income toward rent or other housing costs.
34%
40%
58%
65%
58%
33%
San Mateo County
City of South
San Francisco
Paradise Valley (6021)
West Downtown South
San Francisco (6022.01)
East Downtown South San Francisco/
Old Town (6022.02)
Orange Park/ Lindenville/
East of 101 (6023)
Less than $25,000 $25,000 to $50,000 $50,000 to $75,000 $75,000 to $100,000 Figure 8: South San Francisco EPC Residents with Incomes Below $100,000 in the last 12 Months
Figure 9: English Language Proficiency Among South San Francisco EPC Residents Who Speak Other Languages at Home
Source: U.S. Census Bureau. “Language Spoken at Home for the Population 5 Years and Over.” American Community Survey, ACS 5-Year Estimates Detailed Tables, Table C16001, 2022 66%
56%
47%
34%
44%
53%
Tagalog Spanish Chinese
Speaks English "very well"
Speaks English less than "very well"
Source: U.S. Census Bureau. “Income in the Past 12 Months (in 2022 Inflation-Adjusted Dollars).” American Community Survey, ACS 5-Year Estimates Subject Tables, 2022, Table S1901 82% of residents identify as people of color or multiracial 31% of residents live in low-income households
2% of single parent families are experiencing poverty
3% of residents are 75 years or older
9% of residents are living with a disability. 4% of
residents have a hearing difficulty and 6% have a
cognitive difficulty
7% of households have no vehicle at home
50% of Spanish speakers, 70% Chinese speakers
(including Cantonese and Mandarin), and 36% of
Tagalog speakers speak English less than very well
29% of residents pay more than half of their incomes
toward rent or housing costs
59% of residents identify as people of color or multiracial 26% of residents live in low-income households
1% single parent families in this EPC are experiencing
poverty
6% of residents are 75 years or older
7% of residents are living with a disability. 4% of EPC residents have a vision difficulty
10% of households have no vehicle at home
42% of Spanish speakers, 36% Chinese speakers
(including Cantonese and Mandarin), and 37% of
Tagalog speakers speak English less than very well
30% of residents pay more than half of their incomes
toward rent or housing costs
South San Francisco Community Area EPC Metrics
Paradise Valley (Census Tract 6021) West Downtown South San Francisco (Census Tract 6022.01) San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan | 23
San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan | 25
88% of residents identify as people of color or multiracial 20% of residents live in low-income households
8% of single parent families are experiencing poverty
6% of residents are 75 years or older
10% of residents are living with a disability. 4% of
residents have a hearing difficulty and 6% have a
cognitive difficulty
13% of households have no vehicle at home
54% of Spanish speakers, 70% Chinese speakers
(including Cantonese and Mandarin), and 24% of
Tagalog speakers speak English less than very well
28% of residents pay more than half of their incomes
toward rent or housing costs
84% of residents identify as people of color or multiracial 21% of residents live in low-income households
9% single parent families in this EPC are experiencing
poverty
5% of residents are 75 years or older
7% of residents are living with a disability. 4% of EPC residents have a vision difficulty
4% of households have no vehicle at home
26% of Spanish speakers, 40% Chinese speakers
(including Cantonese and Mandarin), and 8% of Tagalog
speakers speak English less than very well
21% of residents pay more than half of their incomes
toward rent or housing costs
South San Francisco Community Area EPC Metrics
East Downtown South San Francisco/Old Town
(Census Tract 6022.02)
Orange Park/Mayfair Village/Lindenville/
East of 101 (Census Tract 6022.01)
24 |
San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan 26 | | 27
Community Travel Patterns
Nearly three fourths of residents in both San Bruno and South San Francisco EPCs drive to work—73 percent in the San Bruno EPCs and 74 percent in South San Francisco EPCs. But many do not drive alone. In South San Francisco, an average of 19 percent of EPC residents carpool to work. In the East Downtown South San Francisco/Old Town EPC, 25 percent of residents carpool. Approximately seven percent of residents in the San Bruno CBTP Area carpool to work.
Nine percent of all South San Francisco EPC residents use public transit to get to work, while four percent walk and two percent bike to work. In some neighborhoods within the South San Francisco EPCs, 10 percent of residents walk to work. In the San Bruno EPCs, eight percent of residents use public transit, six percent bike to work and three percent walk. In the San Bruno Park/Downtown San Bruno EPC, one in ten residents (11%) bike to work.
The map in Figure 10 shows this commute mode split for each of the six Equity Priority Community Areas in San Bruno and South San Francisco.
Approximately one in three workers in both the San Bruno EPCs (31%) and South San Francisco EPCs (also 31%) work in the city they live in. Nearly three fourths of San Bruno EPC residents (74%), and 71 percent of South San Francisco EPC residents work in San Mateo County.
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
IÆ
%&k(
%&j(
?»
San Francisco
International Airport
San Francisco
Bay Centennial Trail San Mateo Ave
Spruce Ave
Eucalyptus Ave
Utah Ave
Littlefield Ave
Gateway Blvd Oyster Point Blvd
S Airport Blvd
San Bruno Ave
Jenevein Ave
Crystal Springs Rd
Sneath Ln
El Camino Real
Cherry Ave
Grand Ave
Linden Ave
City of
South San Francisco
City of
San Bruno
City of Brisbane
EAST SIDE
OYSTER POINT
SOUTH
AIRPORT
LINDENVILLE
MAYFAIR
VILLAGE
EL CAMINO
FRANCISCO
TERRACE
SOUTHWOOD
ORANGE
PARK
DOWNTOWN
PARADISE
VALLEY
OLD TOWN
SAN BRUNO
PARK
DOWNTOWN
LOMITA
PARK
BART
BART
Caltrain
Caltrain
BART
° 0 0.25 0.5 1
Mile
!! BART Routes
!! Caltrain Routes
Project Area and Transit
Bus Stops
Study Area Boundary
City Boundaries
Basemap
Trails
Parks and Open Space
San Francisco Bay
Commute Mode
Drove Alone
Carpooled
Transit
Walked
Bicycle
Worked from Home (WFH)
Other
Tract Boundary
Figure 10: Commute Mode Split, San Bruno and South San Francisco CBTP Equity Priority Community Areas, 2022
Source: U.S. Census Bureau. “Commuting Characteristics by Sex.” American Community Survey, ACS 5-Year Estimates Tables, Table S801, 2022
Ten percent of South San Francisco EPC residents work from home, at least part of the week, which is less than half of the percentage of all San Mateo County residents who work from home (19%). Only seven percent of San Bruno CBTP Area residents say they work from home.
Two thirds of all workers who live in San Bruno EPCs (63%) and half of South San Francisco EPCs workers (55%) travel 20 to 24 minutes or less to get to work. While the commute for most EPC residents is 45 minutes or less, six of San Bruno EPC residents and 14% of South San Francisco EPC residents travel 45 minutes or longer to get to work. The chart below compares commute times with the average for all San Mateo County residents.
19%
2%
1%
7%
9%
59%
7%
3%
5%
8%
7%
66%
10%
4%
2%
9%
19%
55%
Worked
from Home
Walked
Biked
Used Public
Transit
Carpooled
Drove alone
to work
South San Francisco EPCs
San Bruno EPCs
San Mateo County
6%
33%
22%
26%
7% 6%
19%
30%
21%
24%
3% 3% 8%
28%
21%
24%
10% 9%
Less than 10
minutes
10 to 20 minutes 20 to 30 minutes 30 to 45 minutes 45 to 60 minutes More than 60 minutes
South San Francisco EPCs San Bruno EPCs San Mateo County Figure 12: Workers Who Commute from San Bruno and South San Francisco EPCs and San Mateo County, by Travel
Mode, 2022
Figure 11: Travel Time (in Minutes) to Work for Residents of San Bruno and South San Francisco EPCs and San Mateo County
Source: U.S. Census Bureau. “Commuting Characteristics by Sex.” American Community Survey, ACS 5-Year Estimates Tables, Table S801, 2022 Source: U.S. Census Bureau. “Commuting Characteristics by Sex.” American Community Survey, ACS 5-Year Estimates Tables, Table S801, 2022
San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan 28 | | 29
Existing Transportation
Infrastructure and
Services
This section describes the existing
transportation infrastructure and services
within the cities of San Bruno and
South San Francisco. It also highlights
recommendations from relevant city and
countywide plans that identify needs and
improvements related to pedestrian, bicycle,
transit and street infrastructure and services.
This map of Key Destinations in the San Bruno and South San Francisco Equity Priority Communities at right (Figure 13) shows major streets, transit routes and connections.
The map also highlights some of the key destinations that community members have described as being important
to reach in their neighborhoods, including grocery stores, schools, medical offices, and community and senior centers.
Figure 13: Key Destinations in San Bruno and South San Francisco EPCs Sources: County of San Mateo; GTFS; California EDD; Google Maps San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan 30 | | 31
Figure 14: Missing Sidewalks in San Bruno and South San Francisco EPCs Sources: Active South City Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan, 2022; Google Maps.
Existing Pedestrian Infrastructure
South San Francisco’s 2022 Active South City Bicycle & Pedestrian Master Plan includes recommendations related to pedestrian infrastructure including sidewalks, curb ramps, crosswalks, signals and beacons, and other pedestrian support facilities, such as shade structures, benches, and landscaping. The plan identifies several gaps in the existing pedestrian network, such as sidewalk gaps and degraded pedestrian support facilities.
Within South San Francisco EPCs, most of these sidewalk gaps are in the area east of Highway 101, with additional gaps along El Camino Real and Railroad Avenue. The map in Figure 14 illustrates the gaps in sidewalks in and around South San Francisco EPCs.
The 2016 City of San Bruno Walk ‘n Bike Plan identified existing pedestrian facilities such as sidewalks, crosswalks, and off-street footpaths. The plan highlights that the city has a comprehensive system of sidewalks, marked crosswalks, and pedestrian crossing signals, especially on arterials and collectors. Additionally, many residential streets have sidewalks on at least one side of the street, and many intersections in residential areas have marked crosswalks, particularly when crossing a major street. Off-street footpaths are found within two parks, San Bruno City Park and Juniper Serra County Park, both within walking distance of the study area. San Bruno does not have an inventory of missing sidewalks.
Existing Bicycle Network
The California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) recognizes four classifications of bicycle facilities as described here:
Class I—
Shared-Use Path
Provides a completely separated right-ofway for the exclusive use of bicyclists and pedestrians with crossflow minimized (e.g.,
off-street bicycle paths).
Class II—
Bicycle Lanes
Provides a striped lane for one-way travel on
a street or highway. May include a “buffer”
zone consisting of a striped portion of street
between the bicycle lane and the nearest
vehicle travel lane.
Class III—
Bicycle Route
Provides for shared use with motor vehicle
traffic; however, are often signed and/or
include traffic calming.
Class IV—
Separated Bikeway
Provides a right-of-way designated exclusively
for bicycle travel adjacent to a street and
protected from vehicular traffic. Types of
separation include, but are not limited to,
grade separation, flexible posts, inflexible
physical barriers, or on-street parking.
The City of South San Francisco’s existing bicycle network includes a mix of these facility types and includes more than 50 miles of bikeways, or 31 percent of the city’s streets. The existing bicycle network is comprised of 10 miles of Class I shared-use paths, 16 miles of Class II bike lanes, 23 miles of Class III bike routes, and 2.3 miles of Class IV separated bikeways. Approximately half of the city’s bike network, 24.25 miles, are bikeways that are separated from vehicle traffic (Class I, Class II, and Class IV).
Based on the 2016 City of San Bruno Walk ‘n Bike Plan, the city has a limited bicycle network, with Class II bike lanes on only a handful of streets including Sneath Lane, Commodore Drive, and Sharp Park Road. Within the study area, San Bruno’s bike network primarily consists of bicycle facilities (Class IV and Class III) along the length of the Huntington/San Antonio Avenue corridor. The city is currently constructing a protected Class IV bicycle route, the Huntington Cycle Track on Huntington Ave, which when completed will run from the Centennial Way Trail and San Bruno BART station south to San Bruno Avenue and the San Bruno Caltrain station. The Centennial Way Trail connects San Bruno and South San Francisco.
The map in Figure 15 displays the existing and recommended bicycle networks by class type in the EPCs and surrounding neighborhoods in South San Francisco, as proposed in the Active South City Plan. An additional view on the next page (Figure 16) shows the bike network in San Bruno as proposed in its Walk ‘n Bike Plan.
San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan 32 | | 33
Figure 15: Existing and Recommended Bicycle Network in South San Francisco (2022) Source: Active South City Plan Source: City of San Bruno Walk ‘n Bike Plan Figure 16: Existing and Proposed Bicycle Network in San Bruno (2016) San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan 34 | | 35
Physical Travel Barriers
Several streets and highways, Caltrain’s rail line and Colma Creek create physical barriers and challenging crossings for pedestrians and bicyclists in the EPCs. The map in Figure 17 visualizes these barriers. Some of these are impassable outside of designated crossings while some are more permeable but involve a high-stress and time-consuming crossing.
In the City of South San Francisco, US-101 and Colma Creek serve as physical barriers in some places, blocking residents’ movements around their neighborhoods; Interstate 380 crosses through several neighborhoods in the City of San Bruno, and limits access between communities to its north and south. El Camino Real (State Highway 82) and Caltrain’s right of way affect residents and create challenging crossings in both South San Francisco and San Bruno.
Key Recommendations from Relevant Plans
The previous South San Francisco/San Bruno Community-Based Transportation Plan (CBTP) included a strategy aimed at improving pedestrian amenities. Since the previous CBTP was developed in 2012, South San Francisco upgraded El Camino Real between the BART station and Arroyo Drive and will be launching a study of additional improvements. San Bruno and South San Francisco are also in the process of planning access improvements around the San Bruno BART Station along Huntington Avenue and Sneath Lane.
In addition to the goals set forth in the 2022 Active South City Plan, the South San Francisco General Plan proposes policies to improve pedestrian connections and sidewalks and expand amenities such Figure 17: Travel Barriers in the San Bruno and South San Francisco Equity Priority Communities
Source: City of South San Francisco Lindenville Specific Plan, 2023 as street furniture and lighting. The
Lindenville Specific Plan (see Figure 18)
also envisions a network of connected
trails, greenways, and open spaces,
that would enhance the pedestrian
experience in this portion of South San
Francisco.
The San Bruno Walk ‘n Bike Plan sets
the goal of making walking more
pleasant and convenient by filling
existing sidewalk gaps, removing
pedestrian obstacles, and providing
more pedestrian amenities such as
street lighting and benches. The
Active South City Plan and the San
Bruno Walk ‘n Bike Plan each identify
intersections and corridors for
pedestrian infrastructure improvements
within the study area (see Figure 19
and Figure 20). Many of the pedestrian
improvements along San Bruno Avenue
have since been implemented.
PARKS AND OPEN
Figure 24: Parks and Open Space Framework
Figure 18: Lindenville Specific Plan, Parks and Open Space Framework Source: City of South San Francisco Lindenville
Specific Plan, 2023
San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan 36 | | 37
FINAL – JUNE 2022
MAp 12
Source: Active South City Plan
Figure 19: Pedestrian Priority Areas, Active South City Plan City of San Bruno Walk ‘n Bike Plan | Pedestrian projects Page 66 Proposed pedestrian projects
Source: San Bruno Walk ‘n Bike Plan
Figure 20: Proposed Pedestrian Projects, San Bruno Walk ‘n Bike Plan San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan 38 | | 39
One of the goals in the San Mateo County Countywide Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan is to establish a connected network of facilities for bicyclists and pedestrians.
This plan includes several of the San Bruno and South San Francisco EPCs as “pedestrian focus areas,” or communities within the county likely to have the highest walking activity, and it calls out the difficulties of accessing both the South San Francisco and San Bruno BART station as a pedestrian and when trying to cross Highway 101. The plan includes a list of corridors that might benefit from complete streets enhancements, including El Camino Real, and sections of San Mateo Ave and San Bruno Ave in San Bruno, and McLellan Drive, Westborough Blvd/Chestnut Ave, and Grand Ave in South San Francisco.
The San Mateo County Transportation Plan also calls out the physical barriers to access that many pedestrians experience, including the Caltrain rail line and barriers to walking created by the US 101, I-280 and I-380 freeways. It highlights the unsafe intersection crossing conditions near Caltrain and BART stations, as well as poor lighting along the routes that may discourage walking to transit stations. This plan mentions the need for pedestrian improvements such as safe crossings along El Camino Real, and the potential for safety improvements on ECR for all street users through the Grand Boulevard Initiative (GBI), which was recently relaunched by SamTrans. When completed, the GBI will provide safety enhancements including traffic calming, medians and lighting, and expand space for active transportation by widening crosswalks and adding separate bikeways and street trees.
The recent Active 101: US 101 San Mateo County Crossings Improvement Implementation Plan, coordinated by San Mateo County Transportation Authority, identifies crossing and corridor improvement projects near US 101 which would expand and support safe bicycling, pedestrian and other active mobility use and reduce traffic congestion, looking especially at equity priority communities and areas identified as part of local high injury networks. The plan proposes a Priority Network of corridor projects throughout San Mateo County, and calls out six projects to serve as pilot projects, including the San Bruno Avenue East overcrossing at the US 101/I-380 interchange.
In the previous CBTP, “Improve Bicycle Amenities” was listed as a strategy. The 2022 Active South City Plan sets goals to improve bicycle and pedestrian network connectivity to major transit stops and community destinations such as parks, schools, libraries, and community centers. The plan specifically identifies gaps in the network and recommends upgrading 29 miles of the network, for a full buildout mileage of approximately 73 miles. The proposed bicycle network would include over 20 miles of Class IV separated bikeways. Within the study area, there are many corridors with proposed added and improved bicycle infrastructure, including upgraded Class IV separated bikeways on E. Grand Avenue, Utah Avenue, Airport Boulevard, El Camino Real, Sister Cities Boulevard, and Chestnut Avenue.
The City of San Bruno Walk ‘n Bike plan set a goal of creating a bicycle network that connects residents to destinations within and beyond San Bruno, including downtown, rail transit stations, schools, parks, and other key destinations. The plan identifies a total of 53 corridors for bike network expansion, including several proposed Class III bike routes along Euclid Avenue, Angus Avenue, Mastick Avenue, and San Mateo Avenue within the study area. These would all intersect with the existing bike lanes on the Huntington Avenue/San Antonio Avenue corridor, which the city is in the process of upgrading to a Class IV bikeway.
The 2021 San Mateo County Countywide Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan includes recommendations to complete a countywide “Backbone Network” of bicycle lanes, to expand north-south and east-west connections across the county, increase connections between and within communities, and improve access for residents who live in underserved areas to other parts of San Mateo County. Some of the segment recommendations included adding new bicycle facilities to segments of El Camino Real, San Mateo Avenue and Sneath Lane in and near the San Bruno EPCs, along Grand Avenue near Spruce Avenue in South San Francisco, and adding connections to Centennial Way Trail and BART in South San Francisco.
In addition to closing gaps in the local bicycle network, the San Mateo County Transportation Plan emphasizes the importance of reducing barriers to access and circulation caused by rail lines, freeways and major streets. It also calls for cities and local agencies to adopt bicycle-friendly policies and standards for new developments and transportation projects and promote complete streets design principles to ensure safe and convenient access to bicyclists. It also calls for transit agencies to encourage and support bicycle use by providing better access for riders and facilities like bike parking.
Figure 21: Transit Service in the San Bruno and South San Francisco EPCs Sources: GTFS; SamTrans; BART; Commute.org
San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan 40 | | 41
Transit Service and Ridership
Service Coverage
The following transit operators serve the study area, offering rail, bus, shuttle, and ferry services, illustrated in the map in Figure 21.
Rail
BART provides regional rail service between the East Bay, San Francisco, and San Mateo County. The South San Francisco, San Bruno, and San Francisco International Airport stations are within a mile of the study area. Two BART lines serve the South San Francisco, San Bruno, and San Francisco International Airport Stations: the Yellow Line connecting Antioch with San Francisco International Airport, and the Red Line connecting Richmond and Millbrae. Both lines travel to the East Bay via San Francsico. The Yellow line operates every 15 minutes throughout the day, and the Red Line has 20-minute headways. A one-way trip originating from any of the three BART stations in the study area costs between $4 to about $20 depending on the distance of the trip.7
Caltrain provides passenger rail service on the Peninsula between San Francisco and San José, and limited service to Morgan Hill and Gilroy during weekday commute periods. The South San Francisco Caltrain Station serves local, limited, and express trains, with approximately 15-minute headways during peak times and 30-minute headways during off-peak times in both the northbound and southbound directions.
The San Bruno Caltrain Station serves local trains, with 30-minute headways throughout the day in both the northbound and southbound directions. A oneway trip originating from either Caltrain station costs between $4 to about $15 depending on the number of “zones” a passenger travels through. The Caltrain stations are both within the study area.
Bus
SamTrans is the regional bus provider for San Mateo County. Several routes connect the study area to Palo Alto, Daly City, and downtown San Francisco.
SamTrans routes that serve the study area include those listed in Figure 22.
Figure 23 illustrates SamTrans stop locations by the average number of weekly boardings, taken from data collected in August 2024. The bus stops with the greatest number of boardings include BART stops in South San Francisco and San Bruno, and several stops in downtown South San Francisco. One single ride on a SamTrans bus costs about $2 at a flat rate.
7 Fares for each mode are based on payment made via a standard Clipper Card and by an adult when applicable. Other payment methods and passenger types may be subject to discounts. See section about Transit Fares and Other Transportation Discounts below for more details.
Figure 22: SamTrans Bus Routes with Service in the CBTP Study Area Route Hours of Service
Route 41
(Parkside IL – San Bruno BART)
School-Oriented Service
Route 130
(Daly City BART - Airport & Linden/Oyster Point)
Weekdays: Operates between 5:00 AM and 12:04 AM with 10- to 15-minute peak hour headways Weekends: Operates between 6:00 AM and 10:25 PM with 15-minute peak hour headways Route 138
(Safe Harbor Shelter)
Limited outbound AM service and inbound PM service on weekdays and weekends Route 141
(Airport/Linden - Skyline College)
Weekdays and Weekends: Operates between 6:15 AM and 10:48 PM with 30-minute peak hour headways
Route 142
(SFO - Shelter Creek)
Weekdays and Weekends: Operates between 6:02 AM and 6:21 PM with 60-minute peak hour headways
Route 292
(San Francisco - SFO - Hillsdale Mall)
Weekdays: Operates 24 hours per day with 20-minute peak hour headways Weekends: Operates between 4:00 AM and 2:52 AM with 30-minute peak hour headways Route 397
(San Francisco - Palo Alto Transit Ctr)
Weekdays and Weekends: Overnight service with 40 – 60-minute headways Route ECR
(Daly City BART - Palo Alto Transit Ctr)
Weekdays: Operates between 5:00 AM and 2:00 AM with 15-minute peak hour headways Weekends: Operates between 4:50 AM and 2:20 AM with 15-minute peak hour headways Route EPX (East Palo Alto -
San Bruno BART and San Francisco)
Weekdays: Operates between 5:05 AM and 8:15 PM with 40- to 50-minute headways Source: SamTrans
San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan 42 | | 43
Ferry
The Water Emergency Transportation Authority (WETA) provides weekday commuter ferry service from the Oakland/Alameda ferry terminals to the South San Francisco Ferry Terminal. There are three morning departures from Oakland/Alameda to South San Francisco, and three evening departures from South San Francisco to Oakland/Alameda. The ferry route serves commuters from the East Bay traveling to South San Francisco for work.
8 One single ride on the ferry route costs about $5 at a flat rate.
Shuttle
The City of South San Francisco operates the Free South City Shuttle with three routes: the Western Shuttle Route (Orange Route), the Clockwise Shuttle Route (Blue Route), and the Counterclockwise Shuttle Route (Green Route) (Figure 24). The Orange Route offers connections between the Serramonte Center, South San Francisco BART/Route 130, schools, and parks. The Blue and Green Routes connect with South San Francisco BART/ Route 130, Route ECR, City Hall, medical facilities, recreation facilities, schools, and parks.
Commute.org operates seven shuttle routes in the South San Francisco study area that connect various employment centers in the area east of US101 to the South San Francisco BART and Caltrain stations and the South San Francisco Ferry Terminal. The routes include Oyster Point BART, Oyster Point Caltrain, Oyster Point Ferry, Utah-Grand BART, and Utah-Grand Caltrain.
Oyster Point Mobility Group provides commuting options in the Oyster Point area of South San Francisco, offering connections to BART, Caltrain, and the San Francisco Bay Ferry at the Oyster Point Marina Terminal.
Figure 23: SamTrans Transit Stops by Average Weekly Boardings, August 2024 Source: SamTrans
8 WETA Onboard Ferry Survey Summary Report, 2025.
Paratransit and Mobility Services
SamTrans provides two on-demand, shared ride ADA
paratransit services for San Mateo County residents with disabilities who cannot independently use SamTrans
bus service. Redi-Wheels serves residents in Bayside
communities of the county, including San Bruno and South San Francisco. RediCoast serves residents in San Mateo
County coast side communities. Users have to apply to use the service and call one day in advance to book a ride.
The City of South San Francisco offers three free shuttle routes which provide connections to key destinations
in neighborhoods throughout the city and run from
approximately 7 AM to 7 PM Monday through Friday.
The shuttle service has an app that provides real-time
information about the locations of shuttles on each route.
The City of San Bruno provides a Senior Center Bus with door-to-door service to programs for San Bruno residents.
San Bruno’s Senior Center Bus runs Monday through Friday and requires reservations 24 hours in advance.
Sam Trans provides mobility ambassadors and training to support older adults, new riders and users with mobility challenges learn how to confidently ride the SamTrans bus system.
9 San Mateo County Paratransit Rider’s Guide. SamTrans. Accessed from www.samtrans.com/media/18512 10 City of South San Francisco. Free South City Shuttle. Accessed from www.ssf.net/Services/Free-South-City-Shuttle 11 Senior Mobility Guide. Sam Trans. Accessed from www.samtrans.com/media/34996/download?inline Figure 24: Free South City Shuttle Route Map
Source: City of South San Francisco, Free South City Shuttle San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan 44 | | 45
Service Gaps
While there are a number of transit options available in and around the study area, several factors limit their impact on residents’ mobility. First, due to the high number of transit providers, service in the area is not always well integrated, and a single trip often involves navigating more than one system. Additionally, many of the providers primarily serve traditional commuters, so service is sparser during off-peak hours, including the middle of the day and later in the evening.
The focus on commuters is also reflected in the imbalance between the prevalence of north-south routes, which connect the study area to San Francisco and the South Bay, and the relative lack of east-west routes, which enable trips between the study area and the surrounding communities. The same physical barriers which limit pedestrian and bicycle mobility also limit residents’ access to transit. These include area freeways, Colma Creek, and Caltrain’s right of way.
Transit Fare and other Transportation Discounts
Transit users across the Bay Area can use the Clipper Card to pay fares on all Bay Area Transit Agency vehicles, including SamTrans buses, Caltrain, BART, and ferries.12 Clipper provides a discount fare program for low-income riders, called Clipper START, which provides a 50 percent discount on all fares.13 Clipper also provides Regional Transit Cards, which give discounted fares to riders with disabilities, and discounted Youth and Senior Clipper Cards, for riders ages 5 to 18 and 65 or older.14
The Go Card program, provided by San Mateo 101 Express Lanes, offers $200 per year to low-income San Mateo County residents to help to pay for transportation costs, including trips on public transit, through express lanes, toll bridges, paratransit and bike or scooter rentals.15
Key Recommendations from Relevant Plans
Several local plans have implications for the future of transit in the study area.
The previous South San Francisco/San Bruno CBTP identified several strategies related to transit improvements, including improving stop amenities and security, improving affordability of transit, increasing SamTrans bus service, improving connectivity of existing service, and enhancing access to the South San Francisco Caltrain station. Programs such as the free South City Shuttle have supported the implementation of some of these strategies. Since that time the South San Francisco Caltrain station has been relocated to connect directly with Grand Avenue and E. Grand Avenue for easier access and a more open, pleasant rider experience on the platforms.
The 2022 Shape South San Francisco General Plan includes recommended actions to improve station access, leverage employee transportation demand management programs, and implement transit improvements including transit signal priority, bus bulb outs, and bus-only lanes on transit priority corridors. The 2013 San Bruno Transit Corridors Plan lays out a vision of the city’s commercial corridors that are accessible by transit and full of more dense, mixed-use land uses. Key transit recommendations identified in the Corridors Plan include implementing a circulator shuttle route, enhancing bus shelters and waiting areas, and promoting opportunities to increase transit ridership.
The San Mateo County Transportation Plan includes recommendations to provide a transit signal priority at more intersections and Bus Rapid Transit along key 12 Clipper Card. Clipper. Accessed from www.clippercard.com/ClipperWeb/new-to-clipper.html 13 Clipper Start. Accessed from www.clipperstartcard.com/s/ 14 Discount Cards. Clipper. Accessed from www.clippercard.com/ClipperWeb/discounts.html 15 101 Express Lanes. Go Card Program. Accessed from 101expresslanes.org/program/equity-program commuting corridors where congestion is a growing issue. It also calls for increased local bus service to connect riders to regional transit stations, such as the BART and Caltrain stations in and near the EPCs.
The Grand Boulevard Initiative (GBI) is a key countywide project that includes transit, walk, and bike improvements along El Camino Real. The project aims to improve bus access and travel times along the corridor and implement streetscape changes that will include bus stop enhancements, bus lanes, transit signal priority and greater access to bus stops. South San Francisco is leading its own El Camino Real Mobility Plan that will be incorporated into the GBI. The plan will include recommendations for enhancing safety for all modes and
improving the experience for people walking, biking, and taking transit. San Bruno is currently leading a study with C/CAG and the City of Millbrae to determine multimodal improvements along the corridor. All of these plans align with the CBTP in addressing El Camino Real as a local travel barrier.
As a result of the Reimagine SamTrans project, SamTrans finished implementing an updated bus network in August 2024. The new network includes improved frequency, expanded service hours, more direct routes, new connections, and a new on-demand service. SamTrans also initiated the Bus Stop Improvement Plan (BSIP) in 2022 to enhance the bus stop experience for all customers by upgrading amenities and facilities. This included changing stop locations and consolidating bus stops on El Camino Real to improve travel times.
Source: Google Maps; Note: Blue dots outline the Equity Priority Communities in South San Francisco and San Bruno Figure 25: Traffic Volumes in the San Bruno and South San Francisco EPCs San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan 46 | | 47
Traffic Hotspots and Vehicle Volumes
There are several heavily trafficked arterials and freeways that run through the CBTP study area, given it’s location on the peninsula between San Francisco and Silicon Valley. US-101, CA-82 (El Camino Real), and I-380 all increase access to regional destinations for local residents. These highways and streets also enable vehicle travel to and from adjacent employment centers such as the East of 101 employment area and San Francisco International Airport. While these freeways improve mobility for study area residents, their high levels of vehicle traffic also bring negative consequences to the area. The map in Figure 25 shows the traffic volumes during afternoon peak hour travel in the EPCs.
Several neighborhoods in the Equity Priority Communities in South San Francisco and San Bruno have disproportionately high pollution burdens from diesel particulate matter and congestion, two pollution sources that stem from the area’s industrial and logistics uses and its proximity to high-volume roads. The high proportion of freight truck traffic traveling to, from, and through the area disperse diesel particulate matter, and exhaust from non-diesel vehicles contains many toxic chemicals that may pose health risks to the study area’s residents and workers. Based on these and other socio-economic factors, Caltrans has identified the portions of the study area west of US-101 as Transportation-Based Priority Populations, meaning that residents in those areas are most burdened by the transportation system and receive the fewest benefits from it. See the Caltrans Transportation Equity Index (EQI) map in Figure 26 which illustrates these communities in the San Bruno and South San Francisco EPCs. Darkest purple shows the neighborhoods which experience the greatest exposure to high traffic volumes.
Another local transportation burden is the congestion caused by the high traffic volumes on adjacent freeways. During the afternoon peak period (4-6pm), US-101 and I-380 both experience congested conditions, most notably at the interchange between the two freeways. Traffic congestion on US-101 also backs up onto the streets near its on and off ramps, including Linden Avenue and Grand Avenue to the west and East Grand Avenue and Gateway Boulevard to the east.
Key Recommendations and Actions from Relevant Plans
South San Francisco, in their 2040 General Plan, Shape SSF, identified congestion as a potential hindrance to economic growth of the city, as it could deter commercial and residential growth. The plan identifies that traffic congestion could particularly threaten growth of the East of 101 portion of the study area where many jobs are distant from Caltrain. However, the city has begun to address this issue by partnering with large employers in the area, including Genentech, to implement transportation demand management measures such as commute shuttles. At the time of the writing of the general plan, South San Francisco was also working to establish a community facilities district to fund transportation and infrastructure upgrades in the East of 101 area. Shape SSF identifies walkable station areas and first/last mile options as critical to reducing congestion and improving the overall transportation system in South San Francisco. These improvements are particularly importation for the East of 101 and Lindenville areas where buses and shuttles provide reliable connections and can reduce burdens from traffic congestion and delays.
The San Mateo County Transportation Plan also highlights the growing role of congestion in the region as the county has emerged as an employment destination within the Bay Area. One key objective in the Transportation Plan’s Action Plan Priorities list is to increase the number of employers and employees within San Mateo County who have access to and participate in a commute alternatives program at work.
The San Mateo 101 Express Lanes Equity Study looked at potential investments for mobility improvements in historically underserved communities along the 101, in order to ensure that community members would benefit from revenue generated from Express Lanes tolls. The study explored potential options for a Pilot Equity Program responsive to the needs and suggestions of community members who live near the Express Lanes, as well as provide financial support for low-income travelers who might use the Express Lanes. The study recommended an Equity Program which included a combination of pre-loaded toll tags for low-income drivers, and pre-loaded Clipper cards for transit users. This is now known as the Community Transportation Benefits Program and provides an annual benefit of $200 in transit credit on a Clipper Card and a onetime benefit of $200 in Toll credits on a FasTrak Transponder.16 Street Safety
Extensive street safety planning has been conducted in South San Francisco and San Bruno and both cities have Local Roadway Safety Plans (LRSP) that identify collision patterns and trends as well as recommended safety interventions. South San Francisco and San Bruno have both identified high injury networks in previous planning documents, as displayed in the maps which follow below in Figure 27 and Figure 28. These networks represent street segments and intersections that pose the some of the highest safety risks to pedestrians, cyclists and drivers.
San Bruno’s identified high injury network accounted for 55 percent of injury collisions and 83 percent of fatal or serious injury collisions between 2015 and 2019. In South San Francisco, the high injury network accounted for 75 percent of injury collisions between 2015 and 2019. South San Francisco recently completed a safe speed limit assessment and is starting a Vision Zero Action Plan, which will inform Figure 26: Caltrans Transportation Equity Index (EQI) in the San Bruno and South San Francisco EPCs
Source: Caltrans Transportation Equity Index (EQI) Caltrans Transportation Equity Index (EQI) Version 1.0 Web Map; Note: Blue dots outline the Equity Priority Communities in South San Francisco and San Bruno. 16 Senior Mobility Guide. Sam Trans. Accessed from www.samtrans.com/media/34996/ download?inline
San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan 48 | | 49
street safety priorities with a context-based approach rather than a crash-rate based approach.
Key Recommendations and Actions from Relevant Plans
The LRSP for each city identifies priority street segments and intersections for future street safety improvements. In San Bruno, many of the priority intersections are concentrated along El Camino Real and San Bruno Avenue, both of which run through the city’s Equity Priority Communities. Safety projects, including intersection improvements at both signalized and unsignalized intersections (installing raised pavement and striping, advanced stop bars, and flashing beacons) and street segment improvements (installing separated bike lanes) are identified for many intersections and segments throughout San Bruno, including several intersections along El Camino Real.
In South San Francisco, the priority intersections within the EPCs include:
• Linden Avenue and Grand Avenue,
• Grand Avenue and Spruce Avenue,
• Spruce Avenue and North Canal Street,
• Commercial Avenue and Chestnut Avenue, and
• Shaw Road and San Mateo Avenue
The South San Francisco 2040 General Plan Shape SSF and LRSP identify broad policies and actions that the city can take to enhance safety for all road users.
Shape SSF discusses improving safety for pedestrians and cyclists by enhancing street crossings at key locations like El Camino Real and near the South San Francisco BART station. The city plans to implement measures such as median refuges, bulb-outs, highly visible crosswalks, and flashing beacons to increase safety at intersections throughout the city. Additionally, there is a broader effort to reduce vehicle speeds and implement traffic calming measures across the city to decrease the frequency and severity of collisions, with an emphasis on high-risk areas like school zones and streets with vulnerable users.
Figure 27: City of San Bruno High Injury Network
Source: City of San Bruno Local Roadway Safety Plan, 2023 San Mateo and Huntington Avenues, San Bruno San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan 50 | | 51
Figure 28: City of South San Francisco, High Injury Network Source: Draft General Plan, November 2021. Collisions from Transportation Injury Mapping System 2015-2019 Review of Previous CBTP Strategies
In 2012, C/CAG and partner cities completed a Community Based Transportation Plan for San Bruno and South San Francisco, which included most of the same communities that are part of this plan.
Before engaging community members about current issues and needs, the project team reviewed the progress of strategies and related actions proposed in the 2012 plan to address what residents considered their priority transportation and mobilityrelated needs at that time. Strategies in the 2012 CBTP included making improvements to bus stops, improving pedestrian safety, expanding the bicycle network, increasing public access to information about transit and shuttle services, and expanding existing transit service and frequencies. Many of these strategies are continued here in this plan.
The project team met with planning staff at the cities of San Bruno and South San Francisco, and at SamTrans, the local transit agency to discuss these strategies, their status toward completion, and how these strategies related to their current work. This review also assessed whether infrastructure and service updates were completed at specific locations provided by community members that were in need of transportation infrastructure improvements.
The project team developed a matrix to review the 2012 CBTP strategies and projects, and reviewed updates to all locationbased comments from community members that were included in the 2012 plan. These are available in Appendix B.
Downtown South San Francisco
San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan 52 | | 53
Community Needs
Assessment
Overview of Community Engagement
Activities
Between November 2024 and June 2025, consultant staff
from MIG and Redwood Resources partnered with the City/ County Association of Governments of San Mateo County (C/ CAG) to gather community input for this CBTP.
The team collected feedback from more than 400 community members through a combination of in-person and virtual
methods. The project team held interviews with seven local community advocates, organized four community focus
groups and four pop-up events, and participated in several briefing sessions with city planning committees. There were 126 responses to the paper survey.
During these activities, the project team heard from
community members about their transportation challenges and suggestions for improvements to transportation
services in their community. Project team members also
asked participants to identify any unsafe locations and key destinations they travel to in their neighborhoods and community.
Themes from the input are described below. Much of this input was also geographically located onto a map of San Bruno and South San Francisco Equity Priority Communities.
This can be accessed at: https://bit.ly/46AYMCT. A full summary of engagement activities is available in Appendix C.
Interviews with Community Advocates
As a foundational step, the team identified and talked to representatives from five community organizations that have direct relationships with residents living in EPCs in San Bruno and South San Francisco.
These organizations were selected for their trusted roles within the community and their deep understanding of
local needs. Through a series of one-on-one and small
group interviews, representatives from these organizations provided a comprehensive view of the transportation
challenges faced by San Bruno and South San Francisco’s Equity Priority Communities.
Representatives emphasized the following themes:
Transit Affordability and Access • Cost is a major barrier, especially for low-income residents and warehouse workers.
•Loss of previous SamTrans bus pass assistance programs funded through the Lifeline Transportation Program has
worsened transit access.
• Infrequent or unreliable transit service makes commuting inefficient and especially difficult for residents with multiple jobs or family responsibilities.
Connectivity and Coverage Gaps • Limited transit routes and first/last-mile connectivity force people to rely on cars.
Stakeholder
organizations
interviewed by the
project team: • San Bruno Healthy Homes
(San Bruno)
• Rise South City (South San
Francisco)
• YMCA Community
Resource Center (serves
South San Francisco and
San Bruno residents)
• Friends of Old Town
(South San Francisco)
• Silicon Valley Bike
Coalition (regional
organization, serves South
San Francisco and San
Bruno communities)
San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan 54 | | 55
• Key locations like the YMCA Resource Center and food distribution sites are hard to access without a car.
• Transit-dependent residents in South San Francisco would benefit from more information about the Free South City shuttle services.
Bicycle and Pedestrian Safety Issues
• Poor walkability due to narrow or damaged sidewalks and unsafe crossings. • Lack of bike lanes and connectivity, particularly along major corridors and at key intersections (e.g., El Camino Real and San Mateo Avenue in San Bruno, and connections to San Bruno BART).
• Unsafe infrastructure deters walking and biking, especially for youth and seniors.
Transit Infrastructure Needs
• More bus shelters with seating, lighting, and weather protection are needed, especially at high traffic bus stops.
• Improved wayfinding and signage can enhance user experience and safety.
Proposed Transportation Solutions
• Expand shuttle routes and improve frequency for buses and Caltrain. • Add dedicated bus lanes or BRT on corridors like El Camino Real. • Enhance bike and pedestrian infrastructure, including safer crossings, extended bike lanes, and sidewalk improvements.
• Improve connections between major transit hubs and underserved neighborhoods.
Geographic and Policy Considerations
• Community organization representatives urged the inclusion of East San Bruno and San Bruno Avenue in the study area due to upcoming redevelopment (e.g., Tanforan Mall).
• They also encouraged alignment with the San Bruno Transit Corridors Plan and soliciting input from advisory committees such as the South San Francisco Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee (BPAC) and San Bruno Complete Streets Committee.
Outreach Strategies
Community representatives interviewed by the project team recommended engaging EPC community members through trusted, informal, and culturally responsive and accessible approaches. They suggested tailoring outreach efforts to reflect the diversity of the community and ensuring in-language engagement for residents who primarily speak Spanish or other non-English languages.
Interviewees also emphasized offering incentives and hosting activities at familiar community hubs like churches and resource centers and with trusted community organizations which have established relationships and trust with the community and are well-positioned to lead grassroots outreach. Additionally, community representatives reminded the project team that offering virtual engagement options like Zoom focus groups, scheduling sessions outside of regular business hours, and ensuring materials and events are accessible in both English and Spanish can help to effectively reach underserved and hard-to-reach populations.
To initiate the engagement process, the project team developed large-format posters in English and Spanish featuring detailed maps of each Equity Priority Community (EPC), accompanied by key questions such as: “What is most frustrating about transportation in your area?” and “What ideas do you have for improving mobility?” The team also created a bilingual paper survey designed to gather more in-depth information about residents’ transit use and mobility habits. These are all available as part of Appendix B.
With these materials prepared, the project team reached out to a range of community settings to ensure broad participation. This included outreach to community-based organizations, developing pop-up events outside churches and stores, and organizing focus groups collaborating with key partners.
The project team held eight community outreach events in the six Equity Priority Communities.
More than 300 people participated in interviews and engagement events, and there were 126 responses to the community survey. Community-identified transportation needs and recommendations are summarized below, and a summary of outreach activities is available as Appendix C.
Community Pop-up Events
and Focus Groups
Pop-up Events
All Souls Catholic Church, South San Francisco
La Hacienda Market, South San Francisco
La Mexicana Produce Market, San Bruno
Rico Pan Latin Pastries, San Bruno
Focus Groups
Friends of Old Town (South San Francisco)
Resilient San Bruno
San Bruno Healthy Homes
YMCA Community Resource Center
San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan 56 | | 57
WHAT ARE YOU TRANSPORTATION IDEAS?
¿CUÁLES SON SUS IDEAS DE TRANSPORTE?
!!
!!
!!
!l
!l
!l
!l
!l
!l
!l
!l
!l
!l
!l
!l
!l
!l
!l
!l
!l
!l
!l !l
!l
c5
c5
c5
c5
c5
c5
c5
!³
!³
!³
!³
!³
!³
!³
!³
!³
!³
!³ !³
! !³ nsH !nsH
ns!H
!nsH
ns!H
ns!H
!nsH !ñ
!ñ
!ñ !ñ
cÆ cÆ
!4
!4
!4
!4
!4
!4
!4 !4
!4
!4
!Þ !×
City of
South San Francisco
City of Brisbane
San Francisco
Bay Cen ten n ia l Tra il
?»
IÆ
%&k(
San Bruno
(Caltrain)
South San Francisco
(Caltrain)
San Bruno
(BART)
SAN B RU N O
PARK
EL CAM IN O
FRANCISCO
TERRACE L IN DENVI L L E
MAYFAI R
VI L L AGE
SOU THWOOD
ORANGE
PARK
DOWN TOWN
OL D TOWN
PARAD ISE
VAL L EY
SOU TH
AIRPORT
EASTSI DE
OYSTER PO IN T
E Sa n B ru n o Ave
S L i n den Ave
H i l l s i de B l vd
H aze l wood Dr
Ch estn ut Ave W Ora n g e Ave
S Sp ru ce Ave
Larch Ave
Du bu qu e Ave
S p r u c e Ave
4Th Ln
Li n den Ave
M ap l e Ave
5Th Ave
N Can a l St
Bayh i l l Dr
M i l l er Ave
M yrt l e Ave
Gran d Ave
Rockwood Dr
B aden Ave
San Bru n o Ave W
P alm Ave
E u cal yptu s Ave
Oyster Poi n t B l vd
Ch erry Ave
Forest Vi ew Dr
E Gran d Ave
2N d Ln
M a s son Ave H u n ti n g ton Ave
Park Way
El Cami n o Real
Tam ara ck Ln
3Rd Ln
N orthwood Dr
H eml ock Ave
I n d u str i a l Way
Sh aw Rd
Comm erc i a l Ave
1 St Ln
San M ateo Ave
U tah Ave
S Ai rport B l vd
Littl efiel d Ave
Gateway B l vd
H arbor Way
N Acces s Rd
Ai rport B l vd
R a i l road Ave
S Mapl e Ave
Sn eath Ln
F orbes B l vd
Mari n a B l vd
Eccl es Ave
N Mcdon n el l Rd
S i ster C iti es B l vd
D n a Way
Sign H il l Park
Terrab ay
Gym n a s i um
Oyster
Point Park
Centenn ia l
Dog Park
Paradise
Va l l ey
Park
San Bruno Mountain
State an d Cou nty Park
Si ster Cities Park
7th Aven u e an d
Wa l n ut
Park
7th
Aven u e
Park
Orange
Memorial
Park
Gardiner Lot
Cypress
an d P i n e P l ayl ot
San Bruno
Point Park
B aysh ore C irc l e
Park
H i l lside
Ath l etic
Field
Forest Lane
Park
C ity H a l l Tot
Lot
Commodore
Park
Brentwood
Park
0 0.2 0.4
Mile
Uses | Usos
!× Sen ior Centers | Centro para An cianos
!Þ Comm u n ity Centers | Centros Com u n itar ios
!4 School s | Escuelas
cÆ L ibrary | B ib l ioteca s
!ñ Governm ent Faci l iti es | I n sta l acion es Gu bern am enta l es !nsH C l i n i cs an d Med i ca l Centers | C l i n i ca s y Centros Méd i cos !³ Grocery Stores | Ti en d a s de Com esti b l es
c5 N e i g h borh ood Reta i l Center s | Centros Vec i n a l es de Ti en d a s M i n or i sta s c5 Reg ion a l Commercia l Centers | Centros Comercia l es Reg ion a l es !l M ajor Em p l oyers | Pr i n c i p a l es Em p l eadores Em p l oym ent Area | Área s de Em p l eo
Commercia l D i strict | D i strito Comercia l
Tra i l s | Sen deros
Ca ltra in Routes | Ruta de Ca ltra in
Basemap Featu res | Características del Mapa Base
B ART Routes | Ruta de B ART
!!
!!
City Bou n dary | Lím ite de l a Ci u dad
Bu s Stops | Parada de Autobú s
QUESTION 1:
What transportation challenges are most
frustrating in this area?
QUESTION 2:
What improvements at what locations
would make you feel safer driving, walking,
or using a mobility device, or on a bike?
PREGUNTA 1:
¿Cuáles son los desafíos de transporte más
frustrantes en esta área?
PREGUNTA 2:
¿Qué mejoras en qué lugares le harían
sentir más seguro al conducir, caminar,
usar un aparato de movilidad o andar en
bicicleta?
!!
!!
!!
!l
!l
!l
!l
!l
!l
!l
!l
!l
!l
!l
!l
!l
!l
!l
!l
!l
!l
!l !l
!l
c5
c5
c5
c5
c5
c5
c5
!³
!³
!³
!³
!³
!³
!³
!³
!³
!³
!³ !³
! !³ nsH !nsH
ns!H
!nsH
ns!H
ns!H
!nsH !ñ
!ñ
!ñ !ñ
cÆ cÆ
!4
!4
!4
!4
!4
!4
!4 !4
!4
!4
!Þ !×
City of
South San Francisco
City of Brisbane
San Francisco
Bay Cen ten n ia l Tra il
?»
IÆ
%&k(
San Bruno
(Caltrain)
South San Francisco
(Caltrain)
San Bruno
(BART)
SAN B RU N O
PARK
EL CAM IN O
FRANCISCO
TERRACE L IN DENVI L L E
MAYFAI R
VI L L AGE
SOU THWOOD
ORANGE
PARK
DOWN TOWN
OL D TOWN
PARAD ISE
VAL L EY
SOU TH
AIRPORT
EASTSI DE
OYSTER PO IN T
E Sa n B ru n o Ave
S L i n den Ave
H i l l s i de B l vd
H aze l wood Dr
Ch estn ut Ave W Ora n g e Ave
S Sp ru ce Ave
Larch Ave
Du bu qu e Ave
S p r u c e Ave
4Th Ln
Li n den Ave
M ap l e Ave
5Th Ave
N Can a l St
Bayh i l l Dr
M i l l er Ave
M yrt l e Ave
Gran d Ave
Rockwood Dr
B aden Ave
San Bru n o Ave W
P alm Ave
E u cal yptu s Ave
Oyster Poi n t B l vd
Ch erry Ave
Forest Vi ew Dr
E Gran d Ave
2N d Ln
M a s son Ave H u n ti n g ton Ave
Park Way
El Cami n o Real
Tam ara ck Ln
3Rd Ln
N orthwood Dr
H eml ock Ave
I n d u str i a l Way
Sh aw Rd
Comm erc i a l Ave
1 St Ln
San M ateo Ave
U tah Ave
S Ai rport B l vd
Littl efiel d Ave
Gateway B l vd
H arbor Way
N Acces s Rd
Ai rport B l vd
R a i l road Ave
S Mapl e Ave
Sn eath Ln
F orbes B l vd
Mari n a B l vd
Eccl es Ave
N Mcdon n el l Rd
S i ster C iti es B l vd
D n a Way
Sign H il l Park
Terrab ay
Gym n a s i um
Oyster
Point Park
Centenn ia l
Dog Park
Paradise
Va l l ey
Park
San Bruno Mountain
State an d Cou nty Park
Si ster Cities Park
7th Aven u e an d
Wa l n ut
Park
7th
Aven u e
Park
Orange
Memorial
Park
Gardiner Lot
Cypress
an d P i n e P l ayl ot
San Bruno
Point Park
B aysh ore C irc l e
Park
H i l lside
Ath l etic
Field
Forest Lane
Park
C ity H a l l Tot
Lot
Commodore
Park
Brentwood
Park
0 0.2 0.4
Mile
Uses | Usos
!× Sen ior Centers | Centro para An cianos
!Þ Comm u n ity Centers | Centros Com u n itar ios
!4 School s | Escuelas
cÆ L ibrary | B ib l ioteca s
!ñ Governm ent Faci l iti es | I n sta l acion es Gu bern am enta l es !nsH C l i n i cs an d Med i ca l Centers | C l i n i ca s y Centros Méd i cos !³ Grocery Stores | Ti en d a s de Com esti b l es
c5 N e i g h borh ood Reta i l Center s | Centros Vec i n a l es de Ti en d a s M i n or i sta s c5 Reg ion a l Commercia l Centers | Centros Comercia l es Reg ion a l es !l M ajor Em p l oyers | Pr i n c i p a l es Em p l eadores Em p l oym ent Area | Área s de Em p l eo
Commercia l D i strict | D i strito Comercia l
Tra i l s | Sen deros
Ca ltra in Routes | Ruta de Ca ltra in
Basemap Featu res | Características del Mapa Base
B ART Routes | Ruta de B ART
!!
!!
City Bou n dary | Lím ite de l a Ci u dad
Bu s Stops | Parada de Autobú s
!!
!l
!l
!l
!l
!l
!l
!l
!l
!l
!l
!l
!l
!l
!l
!l
c5
c5
!³
!³
!³
!³
!³
ns!H
!4
co
City of Brisbane
San Francisco
Bay
IÆ
San Bruno
Caltrain)
South San Francisco
(Caltrain)
OWN
OL D TOWN
PARAD ISE
VAL L EY
SOU TH
AIRPORT
EASTSI DE
OYSTER PO IN T
E Sa n B ru n o Ave
Du bu qu e Ave
ve
Li n den Ave
ap l e Ave
5Th Ave
Oyster Poi n t B l vd
E Gran d Ave
I n d u str i a l Way
Sh aw Rd
San M ateo Ave
U tah Ave
S Ai rport B l vd
Littl efiel d Ave
Gateway B l vd
H arbor Way
N Acces s Rd
Ai rport B l vd
F orbes B l vd
Mari n a B l vd
Eccl es Ave
N Mcdon n el l Rd
S i ster C iti es B l vd
D n a Way
Oyster
Point Park
Paradise
Va l l ey
Park
San Bruno Mountain
State an d Cou nty Park
7th Aven u e an d
Wa l n ut
Park
7th
Aven u e
Park
Gardiner Lot
Cypress
an d P i n e P l ayl ot
San Bruno
Point Park
0 0.2 0.4
Mile
Uses | Usos
!× Sen ior Centers | Centro para An cianos
!Þ Comm u n ity Centers | Centros Com u n itar ios
!4 School s | Escuelas
cÆ L ibrary | B ib l ioteca s
!ñ Governm ent Faci l iti es | I n sta l acion es Gu bern am enta l es !nsH C l i n i cs an d Med i ca l Centers | C l i n i ca s y Centros Méd i cos !³ Grocery Stores | Ti en d a s de Com esti b l es
c5 N e i g h borh ood Reta i l Center s | Centros Vec i n a l es de Ti en d a s M i n or i sta s c5 Reg ion a l Commercia l Centers | Centros Comercia l es Reg ion a l es !l M ajor Em p l oyers | Pr i n c i p a l es Em p l eadores Figure 29: CBTP Outreach Posters Figure 30: CBTP Community Survey San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan 58 | | 59
Community-Identified Transportation
Needs and Suggestions
The transportation challenges, issues and recommendations heard from community members during interviews, at outreach events and through the survey are summarized below under several themes. These include pedestrian, bicycle, street and transit infrastructure; transit service; safety; affordable access; and awareness and knowledge about the existing transportation system. The sections discussing each of these themes include some of the key issues and recommendations from residents collected during outreach. Some of these issues may have already been addressed by cities as we developed this plan. See Appendix C for a more detailed discussion of comments from community members.
La Hacienda Market, South San Francisco Rico Pan, San Bruno La Mexicana Market, San Bruno
Pedestrian Infrastructure Improvements
Across 37 individual comments, community members emphasized the urgent need for safer, more accessible, and better-connected pedestrian infrastructure in both San Bruno and South San Francisco. Many comments reflect concerns over unsafe walking conditions, particularly in areas with high traffic volumes, near schools, or in neighborhoods where sidewalks and lighting are inadequate or deteriorating. Community members called for improved crosswalks and intersection safety, especially near Cypress and Pine Playlot in South San Francisco, Lomita Park Elementary School in San Bruno, and along major roads such as El Camino Real, San Mateo Avenue, and Spruce Avenue. Women especially noted fears about safety when walking in poorly lit areas, such as along South Linden Ave, south of Canal Street in South San Francisco, along Sneath Lane in San Bruno, and on the Centennial Way Trail between Orange Park and Maple Avenue.
Other comments from community members centered on the need for a more comprehensive and connected network of pedestrian pathways, to address gaps in sidewalks and walking paths that make it difficult for residents to reach transit, parks, schools and neighborhood services. This lack of connectivity especially affects children walking to school (community members mentioned Belle Aire Elementary School sidewalks flood on rainy days) and residents who are trying to access public transit without a car (lack of a marked crossing on Huntington Avenue from the Centennial Way Trail and reaching the bus stops at Linden and Armor Avenues are two examples). Respondents also recommended adding streetscape design elements, such as benches, trees for shade, and signage along walking corridors to encourage walking and address local environmental concerns.
Key issues and suggestions raised by
community members: • Many sidewalks are narrow and poorly maintained • Dim or inadequate street lighting makes walking at night feel unsafe, along South Linden Avenue south of Canal Street in South San Francisco, and along San Bruno Avenue, Herman Street and Kains Avenue, and on Angus Avenue near Third Avenue
• Safety enhancements such as raised crosswalks and stop signs with flashing lights are needed for pedestrians at intersections, such as those around Lomita Park Elementary
• Install bulb-outs, pedestrian refuge islands along busy streets such as El Carmino Real, and at the intersection of San Mateo Avenue and ECR
• Confusing or dangerous crossings along or under busy streets near the San Bruno BART station and Interstate 380 in San Bruno • Gaps or hazards in pedestrian pathways prevent residents from getting to transit stops, schools, and other key destinations, such as flooding near Belle Air Elementary
• Prioritize pedestrian infrastructure enhancements in underserved, residential neighborhoods
San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan 60 | | 61
Bicycle and Active Transportation Infrastructure
Community feedback revealed a strong and consistent demand for safer, more connected, and more accessible bicycle infrastructure in South San Francisco and San Bruno. Across 53 individual comments, residents emphasized the need to shift from fragmented, high-risk biking environments to a more bike-friendly network with first/last-mile connections to transit.
Many participants described the existing bicycle network as incomplete or unsafe, especially along major corridors and near schools, parks, and commercial centers. Bicyclists reported feeling forced to share the street with fast-moving vehicles due to a lack of dedicated bike lanes or shoulders.
Comments highlighted that even where bike lanes exist, they are often unprotected, too narrow, or interrupted by unsafe intersections, creating stress and discouraging ridership.
Key issues and suggestions raised by
community members:
• The bicycle network is incomplete along major corridors and near schools, parks, and commercial corridors
• Riders feel unsafe sharing streets with fast moving vehicles • Unprotected bike lanes discourage ridership
• There is a lack of east-west connections from key locations like Skyline College in San Bruno, especially across Highway 101 and along the Caltrain corridor
• Arterial streets are intimidating for younger riders and families • There is a need for separated, protected bicycle lanes which would support use among students, low-income workers, older adults and new riders who may avoid biking due to fear of traffic • More secure bike parking at transit hubs and public buildings, wayfinding signage, and improved lighting along popular bicycle corridors such as Centennial Way Trail and Linden Avenue • Add bike repair stations, particularly near transit nodes to support riders and promote transit and bicycle integration Street Infrastructure
A total of 54 comments pointed to street-related concerns, including poor pavement conditions, unsafe intersections, and traffic flow issues. Some suggested redesigning specific intersections to enhance safety for pedestrians, while others asked for traffic calming and speed enforcement in neighborhoods.
These improvements were often framed as necessary for safety but also for improving transit performance and multimodal integration.
Community members in San Bruno also talked about the expense and complication of parking in their neighborhoods, and desires for simpler, more affordable parking options near businesses and in Downtown San Bruno. They also requested alternatives like shuttles that residents and visitors could use to get around the city, especially between residential neighborhoods and San Bruno BART and Caltrain stations, to Skyline College, Skyline Trail, and to key retail and medical destinations along El Camino Real.
Key issues and suggestions raised by
community members:
• Repair streets, especially those with many potholes and poor pavement conditions, including El Camino Real in San Bruno and South San Francisco, as well as and 2nd, Easton, Green, Kains and Hensley Avenues in San Bruno which can be safety hazards for scooter and bicycle users
• Improvements to streets like El Camino Real can help improve reliability and comfort of transit service
• Traffic management is needed to address speeding on local neighborhood streets, such as Cypress and Linden Avenues and Park Way in South San Francisco
• Visitor traffic and parking in residential neighborhoods in San Bruno limits access for residents
All Souls Catholic Church, South San Francisco
All Souls Catholic Church, South San Francisco
San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan 62 | | 63
Transit Services
Community members across South San Francisco and San Bruno expressed strong and consistent interest in improving the area’s public transit system, and discussed the importance of frequent, reliable, and well-connected transit options, especially for residents who rely on transit as their primary means of mobility.
Some of the key issues mentioned by residents included a need for an enhanced local bus service network (69 comments) with more frequent service, especially on evenings and weekends, and expanded service, particularly to underserved or disconnected communities which need better access to medical facilities, schools and job centers. Community members also shared the need for better first- and last-mile connections and local shuttle services (31 comments) to link communities with existing transit services, and improving regional connectivity between local and regional transit, particularly BART and Caltrain (25 comments). Other comments included suggestions for improving real time bus arrival information and trip planning tools and expanding paratransit options for residents with disabilities.
Community members also requested enhancements at bus stops to improve safety and comfort while waiting for the bus, including better lighting at bus stops, more visible and maintained shelters with weather protections, and a stronger presence from transit ambassadors or community safety patrols at transit hubs.
Key issues and suggestions raised by
community members:
• More frequent bus service needed, especially on evenings and weekends
• Expanded bus service, especially in underserved and
disconnected communities
• Better first- and last-mile connectivity between BART and Caltrain stations and residential neighborhoods
• More local shuttle service to link communities to transit and to important community destinations
• Better regional transit connectivity
• Improved real time information and trip-planning tools • Expanded paratransit services
• Lighting and shelter enhancements at bus stops
• Better maintenance of shelters
• Stronger community safety presence needed at transit stations Safety
Residents expressed a desire for streets and transit environments that feel safe, secure, and welcoming for all users, whether walking, biking, or waiting for the bus. These concerns spanned both traffic-related safety and personal security, with particular emphasis on vulnerable users such as seniors, youth, and people with disabilities.
Community members shared concerns related to pedestrian safety, especially in areas with high traffic volumes, limited street crossings or poorly maintained sidewalks. Residents identified numerous locations where crossing the street felt dangerous due to missing or faded crosswalks, wide intersections with fast moving vehicles, and lack of pedestrian signals or stop signs.
This was especially important for residents near schools, transit stops and senior housing, where residents often rely on walking as a primary mode of transportation. Comments included suggestions for traffic management measures, such as speed humps, bulb-outs and raised crosswalks to make walking routes more visible and protected. Near schools, residents called for more crossings with flashing beacons, curb extensions and crossing guards.
Residents also mentioned concerns about personal safety, particularly when waiting for transit in poorly lit or isolated areas. Many residents, especially women, seniors and people with disabilities, say they felt vulnerable, especially in early morning or evening, to theft, harassment or violence.
Community members suggested better lighting at bus stops and along walking paths, more visible and maintained shelters, more security features such as emergency call buttons, and a stronger presence of ambassadors or community safety patrols at transit hubs.
Key issues and suggestions raised by
community members:
• Pedestrian safety concerns in areas with high traffic volumes, limited crossings or poorly maintained sidewalks
• Wide intersections with fast moving vehicles, missing or faded crosswalks and lack of pedestrian signals or stop signs are concerns especially for residents near schools, transit stops and senior housing who depend on walking
• Unsafe crossings and unmonitored bus stops seen as barriers to independence and mobility in neighborhoods with high populations of young people
• Community members feel vulnerable when waiting for transit in poorly lit or isolated areas
• Need for better lighting and security features, visible and maintained shelters, community safety patrols at transit centers to foster a sense of safety and encourage walking, biking and transit use
San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan 64 | | 65
Affordability and Cost Barriers
For many residents in South San Francisco and San Bruno, the cost of transportation is a significant and ongoing barrier to mobility. Community feedback revealed that even when transit services are available, the price of riding – along with hidden costs related to time, reliability, and access – can deter regular use, particularly among lower-income households, youth, older adults, and residents in affordable housing.
Community members mentioned the strain of paying for daily transit fares, especially for families and riders who rely upon multiple trips per day. Participants shared that even modest fare costs add up quickly, and current discount programs are not sufficient or well known.
Concerns about affordability were especially common among older adults on fixed incomes, low-wage workers commuting to multiple jobs, and youth and students without access to free or reduced fares. Several comments suggested a need for free or subsidized transit programs for priority populations, and expanding existing youth and senior fare programs, which they stressed would increase local transit ridership.
In addition to fare costs, residents shared that discount programs are not accessible, due to their complex eligibility requirements or lack of awareness about them. Some mentioned that language barriers or limited internet access prevented them from enrolling in fare discount programs.
Affordability concerns among EPC residents extended beyond fares, to the indirect costs that many experience. Riders miss work or appointments due to long wait times and infrequent service; a lack of safe walking or biking access to transit leads some to rely on more costly ride hail services. And riders often have to pay multiple fares when they miss a transfer connection. Several residents without access to a personal vehicle expressed frustration with how much more expensive and time-consuming it can be to depend on public transportation, especially in a system that isn’t always reliable. While driving is often perceived as faster and more convenient, many low-income residents simply cannot afford to own and maintain a car—making the affordability of transit a fundamental equity issue.
Key issues and suggestions raised by
community members:
• Paying daily transit fares, especially on multiple trips, strains the budgets of low-income families and riders
• Need for subsidized transit programs for priority
populations
• Inaccessibility of current discount programs due to
eligibility requirements, lack of awareness, language
barriers, limited internet access
• Indirect costs to riding transit include missed work and appointments because of long wait times and infrequent
service; use of costly ride hail service due to unsafe
walking or biking access to transit; and paying multiple fares because of missed transit connections
• Affordability of transit is a fundamental equity issue, since many residents cannot afford to own and maintain a
personal vehicle
Information and Awareness
Community feedback from residents of South San Francisco and San Bruno revealed a significant need for better communication, outreach, and visibility around local and regional transportation services. While many people expressed interest in using transit, shuttles, and other mobility options, they often lacked the information or guidance to do so confidently. This disconnect was especially prominent among immigrant families, seniors, and low-income households—populations that are most likely to benefit from accessible transportation but are often least likely to receive or understand critical information. In both cities, community members highlighted the linguistic diversity of their neighborhoods and called for translated and culturally relevant materials, especially in Spanish, Tagalog, Cantonese and Mandarin. Many residents rely on printed materials and are less likely to access transit information online.
Residents mentioned they had never heard of discount programs, such as Clipper START, the youth Clipper Card or local shuttle or paratransit services, and didn’t know how to apply for them. Others who know about these programs say they find them inaccessible because of confusing eligibility requirements or language barriers. Residents suggested providing assistance with applications and enrollments at schools and senior centers, and during community food distribution events, and sharing informational charts about fare options and benefits in multiple languages.
Community members, especially in San Bruno, expressed frustration with outdated signage about transit service and difficulty in finding updated schedules. Many said they needed low-tech printed brochures and staff to call for support. Residents said they need information in real time about delays, route changes, and shuttle availability, and suggested that route information should be posted at high-traffic areas, transit stations and senior housing complexes.
Residents in both South San Francisco and San Bruno suggested that more positive messaging could encourage transit use and reduce the stigma to using transit, especially for those new to the system. Community members suggested free “Try Transit” days, transit ambassadors or ride-alongs for seniors and young people, and social media or local radio campaigns showcasing real riders and the benefits of using transit.
Key issues and suggestions raised by
community members:
• Limited awareness among residents about local
transit services, such as the San Bruno Senior
shuttle, bus service connections from the San
Bruno Caltrain station, and SamTrans route
changes and frequencies, particularly along El
Camino Real and Sneath Avenue
• Need for more multilingual and culturally
accessible printed informational materials
• More promotion and education related to fare
discount and low-cost transit programs for
older adults, young people and low-income
riders, such as Clipper START, and the youth
and senior Clipper Cards and how to apply for
them
• More real-time, easy to use information on
signage/postings available to all residents to
view and access
• Promote benefits of transit use to encourage
new riders and expand use among those new
to the system
San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan 66 | | 67
Recommendations to
Address Community
Transportation
Challenges
Based on the input collected during community
engagement, the project team has developed
a set of recommended strategies to address
community members’ stated needs related to
transportation challenges, access and mobility
in and around their communities.
Strategy Description
Improve pedestrian safety and community
access
Improve pedestrian safety and access by installing more crosswalks and safety enhancements to reduce traffic collisions, improve safety, and expand neighborhood accessibility.
Expand bicycle network connectivity, safety,
and amenities
Provide bicycle connectivity to existing shared-use paths such as the Centennial Way Trail, on critical corridors such as El Camino Real and San Mateo Avenue. Create safe, comfortable bikeways on streets with high vehicle volumes and speeds. Provide repair stations and additional bike parking at transit stations.
Improve street infrastructure and safety Repair damaged street pavement and implement traffic management strategies to facilitate safer travel for everyone.
Improve transit amenities
Maintain and expand bus stop amenities such as shelters, benches, restrooms at transit stations, and improve pedestrian and bicycle connectivity to bus stops and transit centers to enhance the rider experience and encourage new ridership.
Extend and adjust transit service routes, times,
and frequencies to reflect the needs of older
adults, students, and essential workers
Adjust transit and shuttle routes, timing and frequency to reflect the needs of community members who need travel options in the evenings and on the weekends.
Improve transit reliability and connectivity Improve on-time performance of existing transit services and ensure riders in need of regional travel can make efficient connections between transit routes and regional transit systems.
Expand options for low- or no-cost
transportation services
Expand programs which reduce the financial burdens of transit on low-income residents.
Expand awareness of transit and
transportation services
Promote transportation services that are already available to residents through ongoing campaigns to grow awareness among potential riders and encourage mode shift.
This section assesses these strategies and several recommended projects which meet the goals of each strategy.
Figure 31: 2025 CBTP Transportation Strategies
San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan 68 | | 69
Evaluation Criteria
Each strategy and related recommended projects and programs are briefly discussed in the section that follows. These suggested projects and programs are introduced and assessed based upon their potential to provide benefits to residents who live in one or more of the six San Bruno and South San Francisco EPCs, and whether and how they relate to existing projects or plans. Each suggested project and program is also evaluated on how well it responds to the questions laid out below: how it might increase access to transportation services and expand mobility for residents, how feasible partner cities and agencies could find funding for the project, and how easy or difficult it might be to implement the work needed to bring the project to completion.
Community Benefit • Does this serve communities in the EPCs who are in greatest need for additional services, or who experience the greatest barriers to mobility? • Will this improve local health and safety outcomes for community members? • Does the project have support from community members and organizations? • Does it provide widespread benefits that will impact many people? Increases Access and Mobility • Does this provide additional transportation access and expand mobility for transit-dependent residents?
Financial Feasibility • Are there existing or potential funding sources available to cover the costs of this project?
• Are there additional ongoing costs, such as maintenance? • Does this project overlap with other current city/agency projects which could help fund the work?
Ease of Implementation • How easy will it be to implement this solution ?
• Is there one lead agency involved, or will it require coordination among multiple jurisdictions and/or agencies?
• How well does this project correspond to existing planning projects and goals? • Is this achievable within a reasonable timeframe? Each of these criteria is rated on a 1 to 5 scale, with a 1 rating for those projects which would provide the least benefit and/or hardest to achieve, and 5 for those projects which would provide the most
benefits and/or easiest to achieve.
An average of these criteria has been
calculated and included in the CBTP
projects table on page 123.
Proposed Transportation Strategies and Projects
This section provides a brief description of each proposed strategy and set of projects based upon the needs and recommendations of community members. It also provides an initial feasibility assessment of each proposed project. Please note that these are proposed projects, and implementation of any of these is subject to interagency coordination, technical review, city and/or agency approval and funding availability.
Legend: 1 2
3 4 5
Least Benefit/
Hardest to Achieve
Greatest Benefit/
Easiest to Achieve
STRATEGY A
IMPROVE PEDESTRIAN
SAFETY AND
COMMUNITY ACCESS
Improve pedestrian safety
and access by installing
more crosswalks and safety
enhancements to reduce traffic
collisions, improve safety, and
expand neighborhood accessibility.
San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan 70 |
San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan | 71
PROJECT
Add pedestrian-scale street lighting to enhance pedestrian safety in San Bruno along San Bruno Avenue, San Mateo
Avenue, Herman Street and Kains Avenue, and on Angus
Avenue near Third Avenue. A
Description
Several community members said they feel unsafe walking along dark stretches of San Bruno streets mentioned above. Linden Avenue in South San Francisco was also mentioned by community members as a street in need of lighting--since our outreach activities, the city of South San Francisco has completed an upgrade to LED fixtures to enhance lighting along Linden which addresses the lighting concerns in South San Francisco.
Community benefits
This will improve how safe pedestrians feel while walking along several San Bruno streets in EPC communities.
Increased mobility and access
This may also improve mobility options for neighborhood residents if they feel safer walking along lighted sidewalks.
Existing plans and projects
San Bruno’s Walk n Bike Plan includes pedestrian-scale lighting for San Bruno Avenue, east of El Camino Real. The city also recently finished the first phase of a street lighting replacement project. The city’s San Mateo Avenue Streetscape Plan includes recommendations for pedestrian-level pole-mounted light fixtures and lighting to improve illumination along San Mateo Avenue. South San Francisco’s recently completed lighting upgrades to LED fixtures on Grand and Linden Avenues was partly funded by Peninsula Energy. South San Francisco has no additional downtown lighting projects programmed in their CIP.
Financial feasibility
Adding new lighting is an expensive project, and it will have ongoing additional maintenance and energy costs. Potential funding sources in addition to Peninsula Energy include the U.S. Department of Transportation’s Strengthening Mobility and Revolutionizing Transportation Grants program, and the Department of Energy’s Energy Efficiency and Conservation Block Grant Program.
Ease of implementation
San Bruno city staff will look to include these streets in upcoming lighting project programming. Adding new streetlights will need time for planning and design, for parts and equipment acquisition and installation crew time. It may also require coordination with PG&E or other regional utility providers.
Description
Community members in the neighborhood to the east of the San Bruno BART station say it is hard to access the bus depot and BART station on foot without a protected crosswalk.
Community benefits
A protected crossing would provide a safer connection to the BART station, especially for residents who live directly to the east of the station.
Increased mobility and access
This may provide increased access for community residents to the San Bruno BART station and buses which stop there, and support mobility of local residents, especially those who live in the neighborhood bounded by Tanforan and Huntington Avenues and by Caltrain to the east.
Existing plans and projects
San Bruno’s Walk ‘n Bike Plan includes streetscape improvements to Huntington Ave between BART and Caltrain stations.
Financial feasibility
Funding for a raised crosswalk could come from the city’s Measures G or Q city maintenance funds, or from countywide Measure A and W funding. Additional federal sources, like Safe Streets for All (SS4A) or Surface Transportation Block Grant (STBG) might be available fund this work as part of a larger program or project.
Ease of implementation
This project could be added to the next phase of maintenance work related to the Huntington cycle track, and/or as part of upcoming city crosswalk and pavement maintenance projects.
PROJECT
Create a raised crosswalk across Huntington at Pacific Ave for community members to safely access San Bruno BART station.
A
San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan 72 |
San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan | 73
Description
Many community members mentioned the difficulty of crossing El Camino Real (ECR), as it is a major thoroughfare through San Bruno and South San Francisco. The city of San Bruno has recently enhanced many crosswalks and intersections along ECR, but residents suggest additional improvements at the intersection with San Bruno Avenue, given traffic volumes and ongoing safety concerns.
Community benefits
Additional enhancements to the busy intersection at San Bruno Avenue and ECR may lead to improved safety outcomes for residents, many of whom currently perceive the street as unsafe to cross. It would also provide more widespread benefits to others who travel through the area, whether by car, bus, or other means.
Increased mobility and access
This project may provide additional mobility access if residents feel safer crossing ECR to get around their neighborhood and beyond.
Existing plans and projects
San Bruno’s Walk ‘n Bike Plan includes considerations for corner bulbouts at the intersection. SamTrans’ Grand Boulevard Initiative aims to improve bus travel and reliability along ECR, with streetscape improvements planned to begin in 2030.
Financial feasibility
Curb extensions are expensive to install, and this would be a complex project, with redesign and potential construction time to make changes to this intersection and to nearby bus stop locations.
Funding options might include SS4A or SHOPP.
Ease of implementation
Given Caltrans’ jurisdiction over ECR, work at this intersection would require planning and coordination among several agencies including Caltrans, SamTrans for bus stops and the City of San Bruno.
Implementation is subject to interragency coordination, technical reviews of the intersection and funding availability.
| 72
Image capture: Apr 2025 © 2026 Google
PROJECT
Enhance crosswalks with bulbouts (curb extensions) and
adjust SamTrans bus stop locations at the El Camino Real and San Bruno Avenue intersection. A
73 |
Description
Several community members and survey respondents mentioned feeling unsafe when trying to traverse the area underneath Interstate 380, and recommended enhancements to these underpasses, including lighting, walkways and bicycle lanes to make safer connections to Huntington Ave and the San Bruno BART station.
Community benefits
Providing lighting and designated pedestrian and bicycle pathways may help to improve safety outcomes for those who need to travel under I-380 to reach Huntington Ave and the BART station.
Increased mobility and access
This would provide a safe connection to and from the BART station, the cycle track and to the Tanforan Mall for San Bruno EPC residents who live south of I-380 and would expand both access and mobility options for community members who live both north and south of these underpasses.
Existing plans and projects
The City of San Bruno’s Walk ‘n Bike Plan includes pedestrianscale lighting, sidewalk enhancements and a separated bikeway along Huntington Ave between the San Bruno BART and Caltrain stations. Work on the Huntington Avenue Cycle Track, funded by San Mateo County’s Measure W, has been completed south of the I-380 overpass. The second phase of the Cycle Track is funded and will be under construction this summer.
Financial feasibility
San Bruno could potentially connect some of this work to its enhancements and bikeway development along Huntington
Ave south of the BART station, which should include the I-380 underpass. Other potential funding sources include the statewide Active Transportation Program (ATP), and California Climate Investments STEP Program which funds accessibility improvements in disadvantaged communities.
Ease of implementation
This project would require coordination between Caltrans and the City of San Bruno. This is potentially a complex project, with implementation subject to interagency coordination, technical review of issues and potential enhancements, and funding availability.
PROJECT
Enhance lighting, bicycle facilities and pedestrian-friendly walkways to the I-380 underpasses at Huntington and San Mateo Avenues, including visible pathway connections to Huntington Ave cycle track and to San Bruno BART station.
A
San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan 74 |
San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan | 75
Description
Lomita Park residents and community members mentioned feeling unsafe when trying to cross the street to school, and recommended speed humps and enhancements to crossings at intersections near the school. The City of San Bruno will need to coordinate with the City of Millbrae and Millbrae Elementary School District, as the streets and school are along the border between the cities of San Bruno and Millbrae.
Community benefits
This project would provide safety enhancements for students and their families, as well as others who live and walk in this EPC’s neighborhood.
Increased mobility and access
This project would enhance access to a key destination in the Lomita Park neighborhood, and safer crosswalks and intersections may provide additional access for neighbors in the EPC.
Existing plans and projects
San Bruno’s Safe Routes to School Plan includes traffic management measures for some schools—adding Lomita Park Elementary to this plan would provide access to a potential funding source for these improvements.
Financial feasibility
Other potential sources include SS4A, STEP, San Mateo County’s Measures A and W, and when it becomes available, MTC-CARE funding.
Ease of implementation
In addition to funding availability and city approval, an intersection study may be needed to implement this project, as well as time for design and construction.
PROJECT
Coordinate with the City of Millbrae and the Millbrae Elementary School District to implement traffic management measures, such as speed humps near Lomita Park Elementary School in San Bruno, along Santa Helena, San Antonio and San Anselmo Avenues to slow traffic near the San Anselmo/Santa Helena and San Antonio/Santa Helena intersections and pedestrian crossings. A Description
Community members mentioned that there have been several instances when the sidewalks near Belle Air Elementary School have flooded, making it difficult for students and parents to access the school safely.
Community benefits
This project would remove a significant barrier that students are experiencing trying to get to school. This would potentially provide improved health and safety outcomes for those walking to school, and for the larger neighborhood.
Increased mobility and access
This project would enhance access to a key destination in the Belle Air neighborhood, part of one of San Bruno’s EPCs.
Existing plans and projects
San Bruno’s Safe Routes to School Plan includes sidewalk construction and extensions around Belle Air Elementary School.
Financial feasibility
The City of San Bruno’s recent funding Measures G and Q extend its ability to cover the cost of urgent maintenance and infrastructure repairs, and these should be able to help fund this project. Other potential sources include SS4A, Safe Routes to School funding, and CCI STEP funding.
Ease of implementation
This project will need to be included and prioritized when scheduling the city’s future maintenance and infrastructure work.
PROJECT
Evaluate the impacts to pedestrian infrastructure from
flooding near Belle Air Elementary School and determine the feasibility of design features and stormwater management that could reduce impacts to this infrastructure.
A
San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan 76 |
San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan | 77
Description
Several community members said they felt unsafe walking on the Centennial Way Trail (CWT) and requested safety and security enhancements, benches, and marked lanes to reserve separate space for pedestrians and bicyclists. Some safety enhancements have already been completed, such as trail widening and improved lighting on the segment between South Maple and Spruce Avenues.
Community benefits
The CWT is a shared-use path that provides benefits to local residents both as open space and as a connection to key locations along its route. Enhancing the trail could potentially provide improved health and safety benefits to those who live in nearby EPCs.
Increased mobility and access
Increased use among local residents could enhance their access and mobility as well.
Existing plans and projects
South San Francisco’s Centennial Way Trail Master Plan, which governs improvements to the trail, indicates opportunities for additional lighting and seating, location-specific signage tied to 911 dispatch, and signage for separation between transportation types.
Centennial Trail Park South opened in Fall 2024 and included a widened trail and improved lighting on the CWT section between South Maple and Spruce Avenues.
Financial feasibility
The City of South San Francisco has recently been awarded federal funds to support upgrades and park development along the CWT.
Additional enhancements suggested here could be funded by state grant funds like STEP or through San Mateo County’s Measures A and W. There may be ongoing staffing and maintenance needs that will need to be budgeted for as well.
Ease of implementation
Many of these enhancements are already part of recommendations in the CWT Master Plan. Crossings or major modifications would require a case-by-case evaluation.Portions of the trail are on BART and SFPUC property with PG&E easements requiring agency approvals.
Time may be needed for design, planning, procuring equipment, construction and any coordination needed with emergency services.
PROJECT
Provide safety and quality of life enhancements to the
Centennial Way Trail, including more lighting, emergency call boxes, benches, and marking lanes for bicyclists and pedestrians. A
Description
Community members said that sidewalks are in need of repair on East and West San Bruno Avenue in San Bruno, and Maple Street in downtown South San Francisco. Some of the responsibility for these repairs may fall to local property owners.
Community benefits
Sidewalks free of cracks and breaks provide safe opportunities for community members to get around and are especially important for older adults and residents with disabilities.
Increased mobility and access
This would potentially improve mobility and expand access for EPC residents who live and walk or roll along San Bruno Ave and Maple Street in South San Francisco.
Existing plans and projects
San Bruno’s Walk ‘n Bike Plan includes sidewalk construction along parts of West San Bruno Avenue, west of Interstate 280, and sidewalk enhancements with landscaping east of ECR before July 2026.
Financial feasibility
Sidewalk repairs are usually the responsibility of local property owners, if not caused by a city tree or city-owned utilities. Property owners can take part in city sidewalk repair programs, where city contractors do needed repairs, paid for by the owner. When the cities may be responsible for sidewalk repaids, funding from local measures, such as Measures G and Q in San Bruno and local funding Measure W in South San Francisco extend the pool of funds these cities have to provide maintenance and repair to sidewalk infrastructure.
Ease of implementation
City sidewalk repair programs may take longer than repairs done through private contractors. Both cities have sidewalk maintenance schedules which may include portions of these streets.
PROJECT
Coordinate sidewalk repairs along East and West San Bruno Avenue in San Bruno and along Maple Street in downtown
South San Francisco.
A
San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan 78 |
Project Community
Benefit
Mobility and
Access
Financial
Feasibility
Ease of
Implementation
Add pedestrian-scale street lighting to enhance pedestrian safety in San Bruno along San Bruno Ave, San Mateo Ave, Herman St, Kains Ave, and on Angus Ave near Third Ave.
5313
Create a raised crosswalk across Huntington at Pacific Ave for community members to safely access San Bruno BART station.
5535
Enhance crosswalks with bulbouts (curb extensions) and adjust SamTrans bus stop locations at the El Camino Real and San Bruno Avenue intersection. 5531
Enhance lighting, bicycle facilities and pedestrian walkways to the I-380 underpasses at Huntington and San Mateo Avenues, including visible pathway connections to Huntington Ave cycle track and to San Bruno BART station. 5531
Coordinate with the City of Millbrae and the Millbrae Elementary School District to implement traffic management measures, such as speed humps near Lomita Park Elementary School, along Santa Helena, San Antonio and San Anselmo Avenues to slow traffic near the San Anselmo/Santa Helena and San Antonio/Santa Helena intersections and pedestrian crossings.
5555
Evaluate the impacts to pedestrian infrastructure from flooding near Belle Air Elementary School and determine the feasibility of design features and stormwater management that could reduce impacts to this infrastructure. 5553
Provide safety and quality of life enhancements to the Centennial Way Trail, including more lighting, emergency call boxes, benches, and marking lanes for bicyclists and pedestrians.
5355
Coordinate sidewalk repairs along East and West San Bruno Ave in San Bruno and along Maple Street in Downtown South San Francisco.
5533
Figure 32: Improve Pedestrian Safety and Community Access, Project Evaluation Criteria Note: These four criteria are rated on a scale of 1, 3 or 5. The average of these is used to create a Project Priority Legend: Assessment Score, which is listed in the CBTP Projects Table, Figure 40, on page 123. 1 2 3 4 5 Least Benefit/
Hardest to Achieve
Greatest Benefit/
Easiest to Achieve
San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan
STRATEGY B
EXPAND BICYCLE
NETWORK
CONNECTIVITY,
SAFETY,
AND AMENITIES
Provide bicycle connectivity to
existing shared-use paths such as
the Centennial Way Trail, on critical
corridors such as El Camino Real
and San Mateo Avenue. Create
safe, comfortable bikeways on
streets with high vehicle volumes
and speeds. Provide repair stations
and additional bike parking at
transit stations.
| 79
San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan 80 |
San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan | 81
Description
Community members have mentioned the need for safer and more reliable travel options along El Camino Real (ECR). This project would provide a safe, continuous bikeway and wider sidewalks for travel on or along ECR for community members to reach their homes, schools, and other key destinations.
Community benefits
This project could provide widespread benefits for pedestrians and bicyclists in South San Francisco and regionally.
Increased mobility and access
Providing a safe, protected bikeway may increase bicycle ridership.
The bikeway may also connect to a proposed Class IV bikeway in Colma, would would expand access to the countywide bicycle network.
Existing plans and projects
The City of South San Francisco is currently preparing an El Camino Real Mobility Plan which will propose a multimodal vision for El Camino Real. The recommendations in the plan will fold into the countywide Grand Boulevard Initiative (GBI). As a part of the initial recommendations for ECR in South San Francisco, bikeways with links to the existing Centennial Way Trail are proposed in the designs, either as an on-street Class IV bikeway or as a Class I shared-use path. As a part of this project, the City of South San Francisco is also considering widening sidewalks and improving transit speed and efficiency, in alignment with adopted city policies. The City of San Bruno is also participating in the GBI and is participating in a C/CAG study with the City of Millbrae to develop a multimodal street section on ECR.
Financial feasibility
Funding for this project could come from the Countywide Measure W, or state/federal sources such as ATP, SHOPP, STEP or SS4A.
Ease of implementation
El Camino Real is a state-owned street, so coordination with Caltrans will be needed. However, Caltrans is generally supportive of bicyclist and pedestrian facilities on state-owned streets to increase safe, multimodal options for communities. In addition to interagency coordination, mplementation will also depend upon analysis from the ECR Mobility Plan, and the availabilty of funding for the project.
PROJECT
Design a multimodal El Camino Real in South San Francisco, incorporating a continuous bikeway and wider sidewalks. B Description
Community members have talked about the lack of east-west bicycle routes in San Bruno. Developing a protected bike lane or multi-use path on San Bruno Avenue East would connect riders and San Bruno Park residents to the Huntington Avenue Cycle Track and the San Bruno Caltrain station, to the SFO airport, and provide a regional connection to the San Francisco Bay Trail, a 500-mile multi-use trail around the entire Bay, which currently has a segment that starts just east of the 101 on San Bruno Avenue East.
Community benefits
This project would provide community and transit connections and provide more regional connectivity. It would also make walking and biking safer along San Bruno Ave, especially across the long unprotected crossings for the 101 on and off ramps.
Increased mobility and access
This bicycle route would provide additional east-west access for residents in the San Bruno Park EPC, and potential access to SFO and the San Francisco Bay Trail for the broader community.
Existing plans and projects
This proposed route is suggested in San Bruno’s Transit Corridors Plan, to help meet the plan’s goal of enhancing bicycle connectivity among transit corridors such as the one on San Bruno Ave near the Caltrain station. It also proposes a potential road diet to make the San Bruno Avenue East segment safer for bicyclists and pedestrians, and a pedestrian and bicycle overcrossing south of the Highway 101/I380 interchange. SMCTA’s Active 101 Plan (January 2026) lists the San Bruno Ave interchange and this part of San Bruno Avenue as a priority pedestrian safety project and proposes options with Class I or Class IV bike lanes and intersection upgrades.
Financial feasibility
Funding for this project could come from the Countywide Measures A and W, or state/federal sources such as ATP, STEP or SS4A.
Ease of implementation
This would take several years to plan and implement, if approved by the city, and need coordination with Caltrans. However several potential early designs have been developed as part of the Active 101 Plan. Additional design, alternatives analysis and community engagement will be needed.
PROJECT
Develop a protected bicycle lane on San Bruno Avenue East which connects the San Bruno Caltrain station at Huntington Avenue to the San Francisco Bay Trail.
B
San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan 82 |
San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan | 83
Description
Community members in South San Francisco mentioned it would be helpful to have a bicycle route that links Old Town to the San Bruno BART station, which is easier to reach than the South San Francisco station. South San Francisco has a Class III bicycle route on Spruce Avenue from Hillside (in the Paradise Valley EPC) to Railroad Avenue.
Community benefits
This would provide additional connectivity to the BART station for South San Francisco EPC residents and potentially provide a safer means to bike to the station.
Increased mobility and access
This would provide a needed link for bicyclists from Old Town to the San Bruno BART station.
Existing plans and projects
The Active South City Plan includes a recommendation for a Class IV separated bikeway on Spruce from Railroad Ave to El Camino Real.
The city has a complete street concept for the segment of South Spuce Ave, from Canal to ECR, which includes an alternative option for Class I bike paths.
Financial feasibility
It would cost several million dollars to implement a bikeway on Spruce Avenue, and a separated path may not be feasible on this street, given its size. Potential funding sources include ATP, SS4A, STBG and STEP grant programs.
Ease of implementation
This may take five or more years to implement, if and when a project like this is approved. In addition to approval time, it would require time for planning coordination and community consideration given that Spruce Avenue is a narrow street with parking that is used by many residents.
PROJECT
Extend the planned Spruce Avenue bicycle route south beyond Railroad Avenue to connect to the San Bruno BART station. B Description
Community members have called for a safe crossing to the San Bruno BART station from the south terminus of the Centennial Way Trail (CWT) at Huntington Avenue. Currently there is no marked crossing to get across Huntington Avenue, where it turns west around the BART station. The City of San Bruno’s Huntington Avenue Cycle Track, when completed will end to the north at San Bruno BART station. This crossing would connect the Cycle Track to the CWT.
Community benefits
This project would provide a safer connection for bicyclists and pedestrians across Huntington Avenue.
Increased mobility and access
This could potentially improve transit access for residents in all EPCs.
Existing plans and projects
The City of San Bruno’s Walk ‘n Bike Plan includes pedestrian-scale lighting, sidewalk enhancements and a separated bikeway along Huntington Ave between the San Bruno BART and Caltrain stations.
The second phase of construction of the Huntington Cycle Track, which will begin in 2026, includes a plan for adding signals to cross Huntington Avenue and connect the Cycle Track with the CWT.
Financial feasibility
San Bruno was recently awarded Measure W funding to complete the second phase of the Huntington Avenue Cycle Track, which will provide connections for bicyclists to the San Bruno BART station.
The city plans to include a north side connection across Huntington Avenue to the BART station.
Ease of implementation
These crossing improvements should be integrated into the next phase of Huntington Cycle Track project, which will begin in 2026.
PROJECT
Install a safe crossing for bicyclists and pedestrians across Huntington Avenue in San Bruno, which links the south end of the Centennial Way Trail to the San Bruno BART station.
B
San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan 84 |
San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan | 85
Description
Community members and advocates say that they need access to emergency repair stations at transit hubs.
Community benefits
This project could potentially provide widespread benefits for bicyclists and new riders across the region.
Increased mobility and access
Expanding amenities like on-the-go bike repair may encourage more residents to use their bicycles.
Existing plans and projects
San Bruno’s Walk ‘n Bike Plan includes a goal to pursue funding for a public bike repair station at the BART station.
Financial feasibility
These repair hubs usually provide the essential tools for minor bike repairs and cost about $1,000 to $5,000. Funding may be available through San Mateo County Measures A and W, or ATP or STEP grants.
Ease of implementation
There are several jurisdictions and agencies involved, which may complicate the planning and implementation. However, the cities may be able to install these in other locations through regular operational programs.
PROJECT
Install bicycle repair stations at the South San Francisco and San Bruno Caltrain stations and at the South San Francisco and San Bruno BART stations. B
| 85
Description
Community members who want to ride their bicycles say they need additional and secure places to store and lock their bikes in San Bruno.
Community benefits
Additional parking and storage would provide benefits to bicycle riders and potential new riders. Locations are within San Bruno EPC areas and might support residents who live there.
Increased mobility and access
Additional places to lock and store bicycles may encourage more residents to travel by bike.
Existing plans and projects
BART’s Bicycle Program Capital Plan includes plans for “incremental increases” in bike parking at South San Francisco and San Bruno stations.
Financial feasibility
Funding for bike racks and lockers might be available through San Mateo County Measures A and W, or ATP or STEP grants.
Ease of implementation
Many of these enhancements are already part of recommendations in the CWT Master Plan. Time may be needed for design, planning, procuring equipment, construction and any coordination needed with emergency services.
PROJECT
Provide additional bike parking, racks and secure bike lockers along San Mateo Avenue, at 1st Avenue and Angus Avenue, and in downtown San Bruno.
B
San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan 86 |
Project Community
Benefit
Mobility and
Access
Financial
Feasibility
Ease of
Implementation
Design a multimodal El Camino Real in South San Francisco, incorporating a continuous bikeway and wider sidewalks. 5 5 3 3
Develop a protectedbicycle lane on San Bruno Avenue East which connects the San Bruno Caltrain station at Huntington Avenue to the San Francisco Bay Trail. 5 5 1 3 Extend the planned Spruce Avenue bicycle route south beyond Railroad Avenue to connect to the San Bruno BART station. 5 5 1 1
Install a safe crossing for bicyclists and pedestrians across Huntington Avenue in San Bruno, which links the south end of the Centennial Way Trail to the San Bruno BART station.
5 5 3 5
Install bicycle repair stations at the South San Francisco and San Bruno Caltrain stations and the South San Francisco and San Bruno BART stations. 5 3 5 1 Provide additional bike parking, racks and secure bike lockers along San Mateo Avenue, at 1st Avenue and Angus Avenue, and in downtown San Bruno. 5 3 5 5 Figure 33: Expand Bicycle Network Connectivity, Safety, and Amenities, Project Evaluation Criteria Note: These four criteria are rated on a scale of 1, 3 or 5. The average of these is used to create a Project Priority Legend: Assessment Score, which is listed in the CBTP Projects Table, Figure 40, on page 123. 1 2 3 4 5
Least Benefit/
Hardest to Achieve
Greatest Benefit/
Easiest to Achieve
| 87
STRATEGY C
Improve local street
infrastructure and
safety
Repair damaged street pavement
and implement traffic management
strategies to facilitate
safer travel for everyone.
San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan 88 |
San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan | 89
Description
Several community members mentioned feeling unsafe walking in Old Town due to street racing taking place along Cypress and Linden Avenues. The city recently completed the traffic calming improvements along Linden Avenue, adding crosswalks, curb ramps, bulb-outs and safety features to reduce speeds and improve pedestrian access. Additional signage and an RRFB have also been installed at Cypress and Grand Avenues.
Community benefits
Traffic calming measures such as speed humps or curb extensions may lead to lower vehicle speeds and safer streets and crossings.
Increased mobility and access
Pedestrians and active transportation users may feel safer walking and traveling along Cypress and Linden if traffic is moving at slower speeds. This may encourage and support more walking and active transportation use.
Existing plans and projects
South San Francisco’s Active South City Plan included road diet improvements along Linden Ave, which have been completed, and advance yield markings/signs at Cypress and Grand. The city has installed an RRFB at Cypress and Grand.
Financial feasibility
Additional traffic calming measures, if needed, could be funded through local Measure W funding or grants from programs such as Safe Streets for All (SS4A) or Road to Zero’s Community Traffic Safety Grants.
Ease of implementation
This project may require a traffic study to determine if sections of these streets may need any additional calming measures. It may also require review by the city’s Traffic Advisory Committee to determine if any further appropriate treatments are needed, and approve installation.
C
PROJECT
Add traffic calming measures to Cypress and Linden Avenues in Old Town South San Francisco to address street racing.
Description
Community members described safety concerns from sharing the sidewalk with young people riding scooters and bicycles on First Avenue in San Bruno and along Maple Avenue in South San Francisco. Installing a multi-use path on the existing sidewalk with signage, along with education and policy updates if needed regarding sidewalk use may help make travel safer for everyone.
Community benefits
Increased signage, paired with an educational outreach program would provide safety benefits to young riders and make sidewalks safer for all users. This would provide benefits that would reach beyond the cities’ EPCs.
Increased mobility and access
Pedestrians and active transportation users may feel safer walking and moving along these sidewalks, and education about alternative mobility options may encourage residents to try new modes of travel.
Existing plans and projects
San Bruno’s Walk ‘n Bike Plan includes wayfinding signage for cyclists to reach key destinations, and the city’s Safe Routes to School Plan includes bicycle safety education as a non-infrastructure recommendation to improve biking around schools.
Financial feasibility
These existing programs could be extended to include safe use signage and education through funding from SRTS, Road to Zero or similar grant programs.
Ease of implementation
Both cities have existing Safe Routes to School programming, and work with community partners who could help with outreach during education efforts. Implementation would require working with partners and securing funding and staff time.
C
PROJECT
Install a multi-use path with educational and safe use
signage for users of scooters and bicycles on First Avenue in San Bruno and Maple Avenue in South San Francisco. Pair installation with a safe use educational outreach campaign.
San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan 90 |
San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan | 91
Description
Several community members mentioned safety concerns near the Cypress and Pine intersection. A park sits on the northwest corner, and residents said they need safer crossings for pedestrians on the streets here.
Community benefits
Additional safety enhancements would potentially support safety and health outcomes of residents in this EPC.
Increased mobility and access
These improvements may make residents feel safer walking/traveling through and near this intersection. It may encourage more walking and use of the park.
Existing plans and projects
A recent transportation analysis done by Hexagon Transportation Consultants includes alternatives for installing speed tables or varying levels of street closures on Pine Avenue between Linden and Cypress Avenues.17 The city just added an accessible route to the park on 8th Lane, and added curb ramps at all intersections. The proposed park on Linden Ave is moving forward with changes to the street network.
Financial feasibility
Funding for street safety enhancements could come from the city’s Measure W funding or grants from programs such as Safe Streets for All (SS4A) or Road to Zero’s Community Traffic Safety Grants. Adding marked crossings could be done without additional grant funding.
Ease of implementation
Adding marked crosswalks could be done relatively quickly, after project approval and programmed into the CIP project calendar.
This might require review by the city’s Traffic Advisory Committee to determine appropriate treatments and approve installation.
C
PROJECT
Install safety improvements such as speed humps, curb
extensions, zebra crosswalks, and a stop sign (at Pine Ave) at or near the intersection of Cypress and Pine Avenues in South San Francisco.
17 Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Transportation Analysis for Linden Park in South San Francisco, California, p,2. Accessed from www.ssfca.gov/files/assets/public/v/1/parks-andrecreation/documents/capital-projects/lp-transportation-analysis.pdf? Description
Community members mentioned that the street pavement along El Camino Real was in disrepair, and potholes made it especially unsafe for those on scooters and bicycles, with smaller wheels. Others said that their comfort was affected when riding the bus.
Community benefits
Repairing El Camino Real may positively affect safety and health outcomes of EPC and other San Bruno and South San Francisco residents who drive, bike, ride the bus, or otherwise travel down the roadway.
Increased mobility and access
Smoother pavement may convince more community members to use the street, and additional improvements to pedestrian crossings may make it safer for those on foot.
Existing plans and projects
Caltrans plans to repair the pavement on ECR and make additional pedestrian improvements through its ten-year State Highway Operation and Protection Program (SHOPP).
Financial feasibility
These projects are funded by the federal Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act and Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, and SB 1 state transportation funding.18
Ease of implementation
This project is currently in the design phase and is set for completion in FY 2028/29.
C
PROJECT
Repair and repave the roadway along
El Camino Real.
18 Caltrans. SHOPP Ten-Year Project Book, FY 2024/25 Q4, accessed from https://dot.ca.gov/-/media/dot-media/programs/asset-management/documents/2025-q4-project-book-combineda11y.pdf San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan 92 |
San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan Description
Community members mentioned several places where the streets in San Bruno are in need of repair.
Community benefits
Additional safety enhancements would potentially support safety and health outcomes of residents in this EPC.
Increased mobility and access
Smoother pavement may reduce potential accidents and vehicle damage and may provide more access for EPC residents if they feel safer using the street.
Existing plans and projects
San Bruno’s Paving Program includes proposed paving on 2nd and Kains Avenues, and parts of Easton, Green, and Hensley Avenues.
Financial feasibility
The city of San Bruno’s local funding Measures G and Q provide funding toward street repairs.
Ease of implementation
Much of this work is already scheduled into the city’s Street Repaving Program, to be completed within the next five years.
C
PROJECT
Repair and repave the roadway on 2nd, Easton, Green,
Kains and Hensley Avenues in San Bruno.
| 93
Description
Community members in Paradise Valley mentioned that vehicle speeds along Park Way made it unsafe for walking and biking and asked for speed humps to be implemented.
Community benefits
Reducing traffic speeds may make it safer for other EPC residents to travel along Park Way.
Increased mobility and access
It may increase mobility and access, if current speeds prevent residents from getting where they need to go.
Existing plans and projects
South San Francisco’s Parkway Heights Walk Audit Report recommends curb extensions and sidewalk widening at the intersection of Park Way and Eucalyptus Ave.
Financial feasibility
Potential funding sources for speed humps, curb extensions or other traffic calming measures might be the city’s Measure W, Safe Streets for All (SS4A) or Road to Zero’s Community Traffic Safety Grants.
Ease of implementation
This would need review by the city’s Traffic Advisory Committee to determine appropriate treatments and approve installation.
C
PROJECT
Study and implement traffic calming measures such as speed humps along Park Way in South San Francisco.
San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan 94 |
Project Community
Benefit
Mobility and
Access
Financial
Feasibility
Ease of
Implementation
Add traffic calming measures to Cypress and Linden Avenues in Old Town South San Francisco to address street racing. 5 3 3 3
Install educational and safe use signage and provide safe spaces for users of scooters and bicycles on First Avenue in San Bruno and Maple Avenue in South San Francisco.
5 5 5 5
Install safety improvements such as speed humps, zebra crosswalks, stop sign at or near the intersection of Cypress and Pine Avenues in South San Francisco. 5 5 3 3 Repair and repave the roadway along El Camino Real. 5 3 5 3 Repair and repave the roadway on 2nd, Easton, Green, Kains and Hensley Avenues in San Bruno. 5 3 3 3
Study and implement traffic calming measures such as speed humps along Park Way in South San Francisco. 5 3 3 3
Figure 34: Improve Local Street Infrastructure and Safety, Project Evaluation Criteria Note: These four criteria are rated on a scale of 1, 3 or 5. The average of these is used to create a Project Legend: Priority Assessment Score, which is listed in the CBTP Projects Table, Figure 40, on page 123. 1 2 3 4 5
Least Benefit/
Hardest to Achieve
Greatest Benefit/
Easiest to Achieve
STRATEGY D
Improve transit
amenities
Maintain and expand bus stop
amenities such as shelters,
benches, restrooms at transit
stations, and improve pedestrian
and bicycle connectivity to bus
stops and transit centers to
enhance the rider experience and
encourage new ridership.
| 95
San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan 96 |
San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan | 97
Description
Community members say that there are many bus stops they use which need shelters that protect riders from weather, and lighting to make stops safer at nighttime.
Community benefits
Shelters help to ease the burden of waiting on riders, especially in bad weather or after dark.
Increased mobility and access
Enhancing comfort and lighting at bus stops may help to encourage more residents to use the bus.
Existing plans and projects
South San Francisco’s Active South City Plan emphasizes bus shelters as part of its design guidelines. SamTrans Bus Stop Improvement Plan (2024) includes shelters as a near-term improvement to 22 bus stops in South San Francisco and 13 bus stops in San Bruno. SamTrans was recently awarded 2025 TDM Cycle 3 funding for construction and amenities installation at several bus stop locations, including those listed here along Airport Blvd and El Camino Real.
Financial feasibility
At each of these locations, adding a shelter with lighting might cost approximately $10,000 or more, for equipment and installation.
Continued maintenance costs will also need to be considered.
Ease of implementation
SamTrans is planning for an upcoming round of bus shelter installation, which will include weatherization and lighting, and it should look to include this list of stops where feasible.
D
PROJECT
Add bus shelters with weather protection and lighting at the following locations:
Airport Blvd stops at Baden Ave, California Ave, Armour Ave, Grand Ave and at 200 Airport Blvd; bus stops along El Camino Real; bus stops on South Linden Ave; and bus stops near the Spruce Ave/ Tanforan Mall intersection.
Description
Community members have asked for additional bus stops on current routes 41 and 292.
Community benefits
These routes serve residents in EPCs in both cities. Additional bus stops may ease the amount of walking/traveling to and from current bus stops.
Increased mobility and access
These stops may make it easier for residents to get to bus stops and routes that may currently be out of reach due to distance or personal mobility issues.
Existing plans and projects
Reimagine SamTrans (2019-2022) proposed increasing daytime frequency to every 15 mins for Route 292.
Financial feasibility
SamTrans should determine if current ridership levels could support additional bus stops on these routes.
Ease of implementation
This project would require a review of route ridership data, potential planning time for route changes/additions, and if warranted, new bus stop installation and related equipment (such as signage, shelter, and lighting).
PROJECT
Study and implement if feasible new SamTrans bus stops
at the following locations: Route 41: at San Mateo Ave and Walnut Street, San Bruno; and Route 292: Airport Boulevard and Pine Avenue, South San Francisco.
D
San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan 98 |
San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan | 99
Description
Community members voiced concerns about personal safety when waiting for transit in poorly lit or isolated areas and suggested adding lighting to bus shelters to make them more visible after dark.
Community benefits
This project would make EPC bus riders feel safer when waiting for the bus after dark and may enhance visibility along the street for all sidewalk users.
Increased mobility and access
Enhancing residents perceived and actual safety while waiting for the bus may support their mobility and may also encourage others to use the bus.
Existing plans and projects
SamTrans plans to add lighting during an upcoming round of bus shelter installations but has not planned to retrofit existing shelters.
The City of San Francisco recently completed upgrades to street-level lighting in Old Town, which now have brighter LED fixtures.
Financial feasibility
There are lighting systems, like those that use solar power, that are designed for retrofitting existing shelters with new lights, without the need for a utility power connection. Solar lighting kits to retrofit existing shelters or bus stop poles equipment costs are approximately $1,500 each. These might be funded through FTA or TDA grants, or potentially San Mateo County Measures A and W.
Ease of implementation
There are approximately 16 bus stops in Old Town (on SamTrans Routes 130/130B and 141) which may be in need of lighting retrofits.
SamTrans current focus is on installing new shelters with lighting, which may extend the time period to implement this project. This work should include coordination with the City of South San Francisco to see if there are other potential street lighting improvements which could provide nearby lighting to bus stops, like the LED lighting upgrades recently completed along Linden and Grand Avenues.
PROJECT
Improve lighting inside existing bus shelters and at bus stops in Old Town South San Francisco. D
Description
Community members say they need more community safety officers at the Caltrain and BART transit stations in San Bruno.
Community benefits
Additional personnel may make residents feel safer and more willing to use transit.
Increased mobility and access
Improved perceptions of safety at transit stations may make residents more willing to ride BART and Caltrain. This would potentially enhance access to transportation services to EPC residents.
Existing plans and projects
Both BART and Caltrain have safety staff who patrol stations. BART’s ongoing Ambassador Program includes unarmed members of the BART Police Department who have received de-escalation and anti-bias training to patrol BART stations. The Transit Police Bureau on behalf of SamTrans and Caltrain is responsible for the safety and security of Caltrain stations and facilities.
Financial feasibility
The cost of this project would potentially include funding additional hours for safety staff to patrol the transit stations. Potential funding sources might be through TDA grants or San Mateo County Measures A and W.
Ease of implementation
Project implementation will be dependent upon interagency coordination between Caltrain, BART and the city of San Bruno. It will also be dependent upon availability of personnel and funding to cover additional work time.
PROJECT
Provide more community safety patrols at the San Bruno
Caltrain station and around the San Bruno BART station.
D
San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan | 101
San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan 100 |
Project Community
Benefit
Mobility and
Access
Financial
Feasibility
Ease of
Implementation
Add bus shelters with weather protection and lighting: • At Airport Blvd stops at Baden Ave, California Ave, Armour Ave, Grand Ave and at 200 Airport Blvd
•At bus stops along El Camino Real
•At bus stops on South Linden Ave
•At stops near Spruce Ave/ Tanforan Mall intersection
5533
Study and implement if feasible new SamTrans bus stops at the following locations of interest: : • Route 41: at San Mateo Ave and Walnut, San Bruno • Route 292: Airport and Pine, South San Francisco 5533
Improve lighting inside existing bus shelters and at bus stops in Old Town South San Francisco.
5531
Provide more community safety patrols at the San Bruno Caltrain station and around the San Bruno BART station.
5331
Figure 35: Improve Transit Amenities, Project Evaluation Criteria Note: These four criteria are rated on a scale of 1, 3 or 5. The average of these is used to create a Project Legend: Priority Assessment Score, which is listed in the CBTP Projects Table, Figure 40, on page 123. 1 2 3 4 5 Least Benefit/
Hardest to Achieve
Greatest Benefit/
Easiest to Achieve
STRATEGY E
Extend and adjust
transit service routes
and frequencies to
reflect the needs of
older adults, students,
and essential workers
Adjust transit and shuttle routes,
timing and frequency to reflect the
needs of community members who
need travel options in the evenings
and on the weekends.
San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan 102 |
San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan | 103
Description
Community members in the Paradise Valley EPC say they need additional bus service and connections to area BART stations.
Community benefits
An additional route connecting Paradise Valley to the South San Francisco BART station would serve an EPC community which does not have a lot of access to SamTrans bus routes, or easy access to transit stations. A route that goes from the BART station through Paradise Valley to Oyster Point would also serve a wide swath of communities in South San Francisco.
Increased mobility and access
This route would improve access to jobs in Oyster Point and provide a bus route to neighborhoods along Sister Cities Boulevard, Hillsdale Boulevard, and Chestnut Avenue that do not currently have access to SamTrans service.19
Existing plans and projects
Reimagine SamTrans proposed a new Route 126 which would run every 15 minutes during morning/evening peak from SSF BART to Oyster Point via Paradise Valley. Free South City Shuttle’s Green and Blue Routes provide service during peak hours along the west half of this proposed route, from the SSF BART station to Linden Ave, along Hillside in Paradise Valley.
Financial feasibility
This would be a brand-new service; SamTrans would need to consider potential ridership revenues to help cover costs of operation.
Ease of implementation
Implementing this project would require a review of route ridership data, and potential planning time if approved, for changes to the route’s schedule. Determining residents’ needs for service availability beyond Free South City’s current shuttle service and times would also be important.
E
PROJECT
Consider new route (Route 126) to provide additional bus service to BART stations and service in Paradise Valley.
19 Reimagine SamTrans, page 364-365.
Description
Community members in Old Town South San Francisco say they need bus service that is more frequent and extends into the evenings.
Community benefits
This would provide additional service to residents who live in South San Francisco EPCs.
Increased mobility and access
Additional and more frequent service would potentially provide more opportunities for residents to travel to key destinations.
Existing plans and projects
Reimagine SamTrans proposed extending service to midnight on weekends for Route 130.
Financial feasibility
This additional service may be dependent upon ridership or other sources of SamTrans funding which focuses on service to essential riders and/or residents in disadvantaged communities.
Ease of implementation
Implementing this project would require a review of route ridership data, and potential planning time, if approved, for changes to the route’s schedule.
PROJECT
Consider increasing frequency and extend evening service on bus routes that serve Old Town South San Francisco, such as Route 130.
E
San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan | 105
Description
Several community members mentioned an ongoing need for additional east-west bus service which would connect downtown San Bruno and the BART and Caltrain stations with residential neighborhoods to the west and to Skyline College.
Community benefits
Increasing Route 141’s frequency would provide more bus service through several South San Francisco EPCs and provide additional service for residents on the route west to Skyline College.
Increased mobility and access
This would provide access to additional bus services to residents who live in South San Francisco and San Bruno.
Existing plans and projects
Reimagine SamTrans proposed increasing frequency on Route 141 to every 15 minutes.
Financial feasibility
This additional service may be dependent upon ridership or other sources of SamTrans funding which focuses on service to essential riders and/or residents in disadvantaged communities.
Ease of implementation
This project would require a review of route ridership data, and potential planning time, if approved, for changes to the route’s schedule.
PROJECT
Consider increasing frequency on SamTrans Route 141 to every 15 minutes, to expand service options for east-west connections to Skyline College, downtown and transit hubs, as well as key destinations for older adults and low-income residents. E 104 |
Project Community
Benefit
Mobility and
Access
Financial
Feasibility
Ease of
Implementation
Consider new route (Route 126) to provide additional bus service to BART stations and service in Paradise Valley. 5 5 1 1
Consider increasing frequency and extend evening service on bus routes that serve Old Town South San Francisco, such as Route 130. 5 5 3 3 Consider increasing frequency on SamTrans Route 141 to every 15 minutes, to expand service options for east-west connections to Skyline College, downtown and transit hubs, as well as key destinations for older adults and low-income residents.
5 5 3 3
Figure 36: Extend and Adjust Transit Service, Project Evaluation Criteria Note: These four criteria are rated on a scale of 1, 3 or 5. The average of these is used to create a Project Priority Legend: Assessment Score, which is listed in the CBTP Projects Table, Figure 40, on page 123. 1 2 3 4 5
Least Benefit/
Hardest to Achieve
Greatest Benefit/
Easiest to Achieve
San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan | 107
San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan 106 |
STRATEGY F
Improve transit
reliability and
connectivity
Improve on-time performance of
existing transit services and ensure
riders in need of multi-route or
regional travel options can make
efficient connections between
transit routes and regional transit
systems.
106 |
Description
Community members talked about missed connections and unreliable bus service on El Camino Real (ECR), which in part is due to traffic congestion given its role as a major thoroughfare in the area. Signal policy changes could improve transit reliability and speed on ECR, and help the buses run on time. SamTrans has an existing signal priority pilot project on ECR, and has recently begun an evaluation of its use so far.
Community benefits
SamTrans’ bus route on El Camino Real accounts for 25 percent of the agency’s ridership, and most riders are from low-income households.
Enhancing the reliability of service on ECR would benefit many EPC residents, as well as others who live in the 13 cities along the route.
Increased mobility and access
This would potentially expand mobility for EPC residents and provide benefits to all bus riders along ECR.
Existing plans and projects
SamTrans’ ECR Bus Speed Reliability Study, funded by a Caltrans Sustainable Transportation Grant, provides recommendations for advancing bus lanes throughout South San Francisco and San Bruno.
Additional studies of ECR by led by the city of South San Francisco, and by C/CAG for San Bruno and Millbrae are taking place as part of the larger Grand Boulevard Initiative, which is a process to reimagine the ECR.
Financial feasibility
The Reliability Study found that implementing changes that make service faster and more reliable would potentially allow SamTrans to maintain its service frequency and expand ridership while using fewer buses. Signal coordination would be far less costly to implement than other potential options such as priority bus lanes.
Ease of implementation
Implementing improvements via signal coordination would require ongoing coordination between SamTrans and Caltrans.
PROJECT
Consider transit-friendly signal policy changes on El Camino Real.
F
20 SamTrans. El Camino Real Bus Speed and Reliability Study. Accessed from: www.samtrans.com/ECRStudy San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan 108 |
San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan | 109
Description
Many community members shared frustrations about consistently missing their connections between SamTrans buses, or between buses and trains. EPC residents who use the bus cannot afford to miss their scheduled connections, and some resort to expensive car shares to get to work on time. They suggested SamTrans review and adjust routes and transfer connection times so riders can make their connections to other routes or systems.
Community benefits
This project supports an urgent need among low-income riders, across communities served by SamTrans, who are struggling to get to work and other key destinations.
Increased mobility and access
This project would allow residents in EPCs and beyond to make more efficient use of their time and get to work, school, and appointments without worrying about incurring extra travel costs.
Existing plans and projects
SamTrans is currently assessing the impacts of Reimagine SamTrans, and building a framework for the agency’s next comprenhesive operational analysis based upon need gaps and opportunities identified during the Reimagine SamTrans evaluation.
Financial feasibility
This could potentially be funded as part of SamTrans’ regular operations and service reviews.
Ease of implementation
This project would include a review of service data and connection windows, planning to determine route updates, and implementing any adjusted schedules, which could take several months to more than a year. Changes to connections are typically grouped into SamTrans’ August service change.
PROJECT
Consider a review of transfer locations and times on all area SamTrans bus routes to ensure windows support riders making connections. F Project Community
Benefit
Mobility and
Access
Financial
Feasibility
Ease of
Implementation
Consider transit-friendly signal policy changes on El Camino Real. 5 5 3 3 Consider a review of transfer locations and times on all area SamTrans bus routes to ensure windows support riders making connections. 5 5 3 3 Figure 37: Improve Transit Reliability and Connectivity, Project Evaluation Criteria Note: These four criteria are rated on a scale of 1, 3 or 5. The average of these is used to create a Project Priority Legend: Assessment Score, which is listed in the CBTP Projects Table, Figure 40 on page 123. 1 2 3 4 5
Least Benefit/
Hardest to Achieve
Greatest Benefit/
Easiest to Achieve
San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan | 111
San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan 110 |
STRATEGY G
Expand options
for low- or no-cost
transportation services
Expand programs which reduce the
financial burdens of transit on lowincome residents.
110 |
Description
Programs like the 101 Express Lanes Community Benefits Program offer prepaid cards for qualifying residents to use for public transit, paratransit, bikes and scooters, as well as for tolls and express lanes costs. C/CAG and partners should encourage and help community members apply for these programs.
Community benefits
In addition to encouraging mode shift, this provides a service to low-income residents who often experience the greatest barriers to mobility.
Increased mobility and access
This allows for additional transportation access and expands mobility options for transit dependent residents.
Existing plans and projects
The San Mateo 101 Express Lanes Go Card Program helps cover transportation costs for San Mateo County residents whose individual annual income is at or below 60% of countywide median income.
Commute.org provides free shuttle services (Free South City Shuttle) in South San Francisco and offers free transit tickets to eligible San Mateo County residents who are riding transit for the first time (Try Transit Program).
Financial feasibility
This program is covered by revenues from the 101 Express Lanes.
Funding for coordination may come from this source as well.
Ease of implementation
C/CAG coordinates this effort, and with community and city partners can expand promotion and access to equity mobility programs.
PROJECT
Develop implementation strategies for equity mobility
programs that encourage mode shift, such as the 101 Express Lanes Community Benefits Program.
G
San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan 112 |
San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan | 113
Description
Several community members shared their frustrations at having to pay multiple fares for a bus trip which should have been covered by a free transfer. Many EPC residents who ride the bus have limited incomes and cannot cover the expense of paying multiple fares per one-way trip.
Community benefits
This would provide a needed benefit to low-income EPC residents, and all bus riders, who cannot afford to pay for additional fares.
Increased mobility and access
Wider transfer windows and fare limits could potentially expand mobility for residents, especially if they can travel farther on one fare.
Existing plans and projects
Regionally, there is an MTC-funded effort to coordinate transfers through the regional transit Clipper Card, which has recently been rereleased as Clipper 2.0. MTC is launching a pilot program for interagency transfers.
Financial feasibility
Clipper introduced reduced transfer fares and fare capping via Clipper 2.0 on Dec. 10, 2025. All transit riders will have access to a transfer window of two hours. For SamTrans, this would be about reducing double payment of fares, which might have a minimal effect on ridership revenues.
Ease of implementation
SamTrans may want to consider additional efforts such as regular service reviews to help prevent local bus riders from paying more than one fare due to missed connections.
PROJECT
Expand free transfer time frames and automatic fare capping on SamTrans routes to prevent riders from paying multiple times due to missed connections. G
Description
Many San Bruno community members suggested additional free or affordable shuttle services to help residents and employees travel to work, the airport and other San Bruno destinations.
Community benefits
Additional shuttle service, whether sponsored by the city, employers, or as a private-public partnership, would provide service to EPC and San Bruno residents who say they need more affordable local options to help get to key destinations.
Increased mobility and access
This project would provide additional transportation access and potentially expand mobility for low-income workers and transit dependent residents in San Bruno EPCs and other neighborhoods.
Existing plans and projects
SamTrans has a bus route that runs from downtown San Bruno to SFO Airport, that runs every 7 minutes. SamTrans recently operated the Bayhill shuttle, no longer in service, between the San Bruno BART station and San Bruno Business Park, jointly funded by the Bay Area Air Quality Management District, San Mateo County Transit District and area employers.
Financial feasibility
Shuttles such as South San Francisco’s Free South City Shuttle (funded in part by San Mateo County Measure A and the city’s local Measure A) offer an affordable local service which boosts access for residents living in neighborhoods not well served by SamTrans or other transit agencies. While San Bruno may not be able to operate its own shuttle service, recent services like SamTrans’ San Bruno Employer shuttle show that there is both a need and desire among local employers to help their workers and potential customers get to their locations. The coming Tanforan development and other local employers may be interested in helping to fund new shuttle services.
Ease of implementation
Implementation of this project will be dependent upon finding partners willing to share financing responsibility, and whether the route or routes serve enough riders to make it sustainable.
PROJECT
Expand San Bruno shuttle service partnerships with area employers to provide an additional shuttle loop service for workers and residents to access local commercial areas and the airport.
G
San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan 114 |
San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan | 115
Description
Community members, especially older adults and residents who do not speak English well, say they need more information and support to apply for and use transit discount programs. Developing a series of trainings with community partner organizations who can assist with curriculum development and recruitment ensures that residents in EPCs will have access to the support they are looking for to apply for transit discount programs.
Community benefits
This training series would support EPC residents who experience some of the greatest barriers to transportation use. These trainings, if recorded and posted on SamTrans and community partner websites, could reach many potential riders beyond the borders of the EPCs.
Increased mobility and access
This project would provide additional transportation access and expand mobility for transit dependent residents who may not understand, due to language or complexity, how to apply for and use transit discount programs.
Existing plans and projects
SamTrans Mobility Ambassador Program trains volunteers to work one-on-one or in small groups with seniors and veterans on expanding their awareness of available transit options and navigating through a transit trip.
Financial feasibility
This is a project which could be funded through MTC’s new CARE program grants to community organizations, working to improve mobility in EPCs.
Ease of implementation
SamTrans potentially has trainings already available and could partner with community advocates to facilitate multilingual trainings at key neighborhood locations. This project may take some planning and coordination time but could be something implementable in the near future.
| 114
PROJECT
Develop a multilingual training session series with trusted community partner organizations such as Rise South City to promote transit discount programs and educate EPC residents on how to apply for and use transit discount programs such as Clipper START, and Youth and Senior Clipper cards. G Project Community Benefit
Mobility and
Access
Financial
Feasibility
Ease of
Implementation
Develop implementation strategies for equity mobility programs that encourage mode shift, such as the 101 Express Lanes Community Benefits Program. 5 3 5 3 Expand free transfer time frames and automatic fare capping to prevent riders from paying multiple times due to missed connections. 5 3 5 3 Expand San Bruno shuttle service partnerships with area employers to provide an additional shuttle loop service for workers and residents to access local commercial areas and the airport.
5 5 3 3
Develop a multilingual training session series with trusted community partner organizations such as Rise South City to promote transit discount programs and educate EPC residents on how to apply for and use transit discount programs such as Clipper START, and Youth and Senior Clipper cards.
5 5 3 5
Figure 38: Expand Options for Low- or No-Cost Transportation Services, Project Evaluation Criteria Note: These four criteria are rated on a scale of 1, 3 or 5. The average of these is used to create a Project Priority Legend: Assessment Score, which is listed in the CBTP Projects Table, Figure 40, on page 123. 1 2 3 4 5
Least Benefit/
Hardest to Achieve
Greatest Benefit/
Easiest to Achieve
San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan | 117
San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan 116 |
STRATEGY H
Expand awareness
of transit and
transportation services
Promote transportation services
that are already available to
residents through ongoing
campaigns to grow awareness
among potential riders and
encourage mode shift.
116 |
Description
Community members and advocates mentioned an ongoing need for additional information about available transit services, available in paper, translated into multiple languages and accessible at locations where EPC residents frequently use.
Community benefits
Additional accessible information about available services will support residents in EPCs with some of the greatest barriers to mobility, and it will provide widespread benefits beyond EPCs.
Increased mobility and access
This project would provide additional transportation access and potentially expand mobility for low-income workers and transit dependent residents in San Bruno EPCs and other neighborhoods.
Existing plans and projects
South City Shuttle has an extensive and ongoing campaign to promote its services. SamTrans provides ambassador and how to ride services.
Financial feasibility
MTC’s CARE funding, and other sources can potentially be used to help expand promotional activities to reach more EPC residents.
Ease of implementation
Much of this promotional work already takes place; South San Francisco has an extensive list of outreach methods and activities it uses to promote the Free South City Shuttle. Working with key partners who are aware of the transit needs of their members and how best to reach the community will ensure this benefits transitdependent residents in EPCs in need of more information.
PROJECT
Partner with Rise South City and the YMCA Resource Center to develop a promotion and outreach program about existing transit and shuttle services, including Transit Ambassadors and “how to ride” programs, focusing on older adults, non-English speakers, seniors, students and families who use transit.
H
San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan 118 |
San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan | 119
Description
Several responses and questions from community members about available shuttle services highlight a need for more information about local on-demand shuttle services in San Bruno. The city should work with community partners and institutions which offer shuttles to collaborate on promotional activities to expand awareness about existing shuttle services.
Community benefits
Many residents without access to vehicles are in need of other means to get to local destinations in the city of San Bruno. Additional community shuttle services may also help to alleviate some of the parking congestion residents are experiencing in neighborhoods near downtown San Bruno, if workers and visitors can use a shuttle instead of driving.
Increased mobility and access
This has the potential to improve transportation access and expand mobility for those who need access to affordable transit services but are not currently aware of available programs or who need education on how to use them.
Existing plans and projects
The City of San Bruno’s website includes information about the on-demand Senior Center Bus service and pick up times.21 The Senior Center Bus runs solely for Seniors to get to and from home and activities at the Senior Center. Residents may be looking for information about additional shuttle services which would provide access to other key destinations in the city, like the Free South City shuttle does in South San Francisco. The Peninsula Rides website has information about local services. Commute.org has several shuttles with routes from area BART and Caltrain stations into neighborhoods in South San Francisco, and is funded in part by C/CAG’s congestion relief program.
Financial feasibility
MTC’s CARE funding, San Mateo County Measures A and W, can potentially be used to help expand access to information.
Ease of implementation
The city could supplement existing service promotions by providing additional publicity about existing shuttle services, and ensure information is available at community events.
PROJECT
Promote and provide more information about San Bruno Senior Center Bus and other available community shuttle services in San Bruno. H 21 City of San Bruno. Transportation. Accessed from: sanbruno.ca.gov/340/Transportation Description
Community members across all EPCs and outreach events mentioned the need for more and better access to real-time information about local transit services, for both SamTrans buses and local city shuttles.
Community benefits
Additional accessible information about timeliness of available services will support residents in EPCs with some of the greatest barriers to mobility, and it will provide widespread benefits beyond EPCs.
Increased mobility and access
Better access to information about routes and times may make it easier for more residents to use transit and shuttle services.
Existing plans and projects
SamTrans, through its Reimagine SamTrans plan, is working to improve real-time bus tracking information on its website and in trip planning apps used by riders. It is also exploring how to add information at bus stops.
Financial feasibility
This project may include costs to procure, install and maintain any digital signage at stops. Additional costs for printing signage and information about routes at key destinations may be an expansion of current efforts SamTrans and the cities already have to print route informational booklets and posters.
Ease of implementation
SamTrans and Free South City Shuttle already provide this information via their website and in trip planning apps. SamTrans is looking into displaying digital live information at key locations along routes.
Providing digital signage at bus stops, transit locations and key destinations may extend the timeframe of this project, however posting paper materials about routes and timetables at more locations where riders will see them could be an immediate step.
PROJECT
Provide real-time tracking and access to information about transit and shuttle routes, including multilingual printed information at stops and key community locations.
H
San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan | 121
San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan 120 |
Figure 39: Expand Awareness of Transit and Transportation Services, Project Evaluation Criteria Project Community
Benefit
Mobility and
Access
Financial
Feasibility
Ease of
Implementation
Expand promotion and outreach about existing transit and shuttle services, including Transit Ambassadors and “how to ride” programs, focusing on older adults, non-English speakers, seniors, students and families who use transit. 5 5 3 5
Promote and provide more information about San Bruno Senior Center Bus and other available community shuttle services in San Bruno. 5 5 3 5 Provide real-time tracking and access to information about transit and shuttle routes, including multilingual printed information at stops and key community locations.
5 3 3 3
Note: These four criteria are rated on a scale of 1, 3 or 5. The average of these is used to create a Project Priority Legend: Assessment Score, which is listed in the CBTP Projects Table, Figure 40, on page 123. 1 2 3 4 5
Least Benefit/
Hardest to Achieve
Greatest Benefit/
Easiest to Achieve
CBTP Project Matrix and
Implementation Plan
San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan 122 | | 123
CBTP Project Matrix and Implementation Plan
This CBTP Projects table lists all of the recommended projects described in the previous chapter. These suggested projects are organized by strategy and by average project score, from highest to lowest, which is the average of the four evaluation criteria used to assess each project (Community Benefit, Increased Access and Mobility, Financial Feasibility, and Ease of Implementation). These evaluation criteria ratings are listed in the tables at the end of each strategy section in the last chapter, which begins on page 67.
The other columns in the CBTP Projects table below include the EPC location(s) where this project would take place; an estimated cost range, estimated implementation timeframe and suggested lead agency, which are all described here; potential funding sources, which are discussed in the next section after the table, and related plans and planned improvements, which are described in detail in each project section in the previous chapter.
Suggested Lead Agency
Each project has a suggested designated lead agency or agencies who would need to serve as “project champion” to lead the work toward implementing the recommended project or program. Draft versions of these recommended project and program lists have been shared with local jurisdictions and SamTrans to get their feedback on the likelihood of projects or programs, potential timeframes for implementation, and possible funding sources. A few of these projects and programs are already in City of San Bruno or City of South San Francisco Capital Improvement Project (CIP) plans for the coming years or have been identified as priority projects through related planning efforts, as described in the previous chapter. All of these recommended projects will require City Council or other jurisdiction/agency approval and coordination and obtain funding before implementation can begin. Members of the City of San Bruno’s Complete Streets planning committee suggested looking first at projects which have a high average rating of these criteria and low potential cost estimates (see CBTP Projects table columns 4 and 5), to provide EPC communities with some early and visible mobility improvements.
Estimated Cost Range
The project team assessed the likely estimated cost of each type of project, looking at both the current estimated construction and material costs for each type of project, as well as any other costs that might be needed to implement the project, such as design and construction management.
Projects are organized by an estimated cost range in the chart below, of lowest cost ($) to highest ($$$$$), in the following range:
$ refers to projects that may cost approximately $25,000 or less; $$ projects with estimated costs of approximately $100,000 or less; $$$ projects with estimated costs from $100,000 to $300,000; $$$$ projects with estimated costs from $300,000 to $1,000,000; $$$$$ projects with estimated costs greater than $1,000,000.
Estimated Project Implementation Timeframe
The project team has also included an estimated implementation timeframe for each project, which estimates the range of time that a type of project may take to be completed, once a project is approved by local jurisdictions. Many of these are potential short-term projects, which are implementable within 1 to 2 years, or medium-term projects, implementable within 2 to 3 years. A few may take five years or more to fulfill.
Strategy/
Project
Number
Project EPC
Location(s)
Average
Project
Score
Estimated
Cost
Range
Estimated
Project
Implementation
Timeline
Suggested
Lead
Agency or
Agencies
Potential Funding
Sources
Related Plans,
Programs, and
Studies
Strategy A: Improve pedestrian safety and community access A1
Coordinate with the City of Millbrae and
the Millbrae Elementary School District to
implement traffic management measures, such
as speed humps near Lomita Park Elementary
School, along Santa Helena, San Antonio and
San Anselmo Avenues to slow traffic near the
San Anselmo/Santa Helena and San Antonio/
Santa Helena intersections and pedestrian
crossings.
Lomita Park/
Downtown San
Bruno
5 $$ 1 to 2 years City of San
Bruno
San Mateo County
Measures A & W; STEP
San Bruno Safe Routes to
School Plan
A2
Create a raised crosswalk across Huntington at
Pacific Ave for community members to safely
access San Bruno BART station.
Near San Bruno
EPCs
4.5 $-$$ 1 to 2 years City of San
Bruno
San Mateo County
Measures A & W; SS4A;
STBG
San Bruno Walk 'n Bike
Plan
A3
Evaluate the impacts to pedestrian
infrastructure from flooding near Belle
Air Elementary School and determine the
feasibility of design features and stormwater
management that could reduce impacts to this
infrastructure.
Lomita Park/
Downtown San
Bruno
4.5 $$$ 1 to 2 years City of San
Bruno
San Mateo County
Measures A & W; CDBG;
SRTS; STBG; STEP
San Bruno Safe Routes to
School Plan
A4
Provide safety and quality of life enhancements
to Centennial Way Trail, including more lighting,
emergency call boxes, benches, and marking
lanes for bicyclists and pedestrians.
Lindenville/
Orange Park 4.5 $$ 1 to 2 years City of South San
Francisco MTC-CARE; SS4A; STEP
South San Francisco
Centennial Way Trail
Master Plan
Figure 40: CBTP Projects
San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan 124 | | 125
Strategy/
Project
Number
Project EPC
Location(s)
Average
Project
Score
Estimated
Cost
Range
Estimated
Project
Implementation
Timeline
Suggested
Lead
Agency or
Agencies
Potential Funding
Sources
Related Plans,
Programs, and
Studies
Strategy A: Improve pedestrian safety and community access (continued) A5
Coordinate sidewalk repairs along East and
West San Bruno Ave in San Bruno and along
Maple Street in Downtown South San Francisco.
All EPCs 4 $$ 2 to 3 years City of San
Bruno; City
of South San
Francisco
San Mateo County
Measures A and W; San
Bruno Measures G and Q;
CDBG, STBG, STEP
A6
Enhance crosswalks with bulbouts (curb
extensions) and adjust bus stop locations at
the El Camino Real and San Bruno Avenue
intersection.
Lomita Park/
Downtown San
Bruno; San
Bruno Park
3.5 $$$$ 2 to 3 years Caltrans;
SamTrans
MTC-CARE; SS4A; STEP San Bruno Walk ‘n Bike
Plan; San Bruno Transit
Corridors Plan; SamTrans
Grand Boulevard Initiative
A7
Enhance lighting, bicycle facilities and
pedestrian walkways to the I-380 underpasses
at Huntington and San Mateo Aves, including
visible pathway connections to Huntington Ave
cycle track and to San Bruno BART station.
San Bruno Park 3.5 $$$ 2 to 3 years Caltrans; City of
San Bruno
MTC-CARE; SS4A; STEP San Bruno Walk 'n Bike
Plan
A8
Add pedestrian-scale street lighting to enhance
pedestrian safety in San Bruno along San Bruno
Ave, San Mateo Ave, Herman St, Kains Ave, and
on Angus Ave near Third Ave.
San Bruno Park 3 $$$$ 3 to 5 years City of San
Bruno
SS4A; Peninsula
Clean Energy Grant,
Strengthening Mobility
and Revolutionizing
Transportation
Grants (USDOT);
Energy Efficiency and
Conservation Block Grant
(USDOE)
San Bruno Walk ‘n Bike
Plan; San Mateo Ave
Streetscape Improvements
Plan
Figure 40: CBTP Projects (continued)
Strategy/
Project
Number
Project EPC Location(s)
Average
Project
Score
Estimated
Cost
Range
Estimated
Project
Im-plementation Timeline
Suggested
Lead
Agency or
Agencies
Potential Funding
Sources
Related Plans,
Programs, and
Studies
Strategy B: Expand bicycle network connectivity, safety and amenities B1
Provide additional bike parking, racks
and secure bike lockers along San
Mateo Avenue, 1st Avenue and Angus,
and in downtown San Bruno.
Lomita Park/ Downtown
San Bruno, San Bruno
Park
5 $ 1 to 2 years City of San
Bruno
MTC-CARE; ATP; SS4A;
STBG; STEP
San Bruno Walk 'n Bike
Plan
B2
Install a safe crossing for bicyclists and
pedestrians across Huntington Avenue
in San Bruno, which links the south
end of the Centennial Way Trail to the
San Bruno BART station.
San Bruno Park 4.5 $$ 1 to 2 years City of San
Bruno
Connecting project funded
by SMCTA through San
Mateo County Measures A
and W; ATP; SS4A
San Bruno Walk ‘n Bike
Plan
B3
Design a multimodal El Camino Real
in South San Francisco, incorporating
a continuous bikeway and wider
sidewalks.
Lindenville/ Orange Park 4 $$$ 3 to 5 years City of South San Francisco
San Mateo County Measure
W; SS4A; STEP
South San Francisco El
Camino Real Mobility
Plan; Grand Boulevard
Initiative
B4
Develop a protected bicycle lane
on San Bruno Avenue East which
connects the San Bruno Caltrain
station at Huntington Avenue to the
San Francisco Bay Trail.
San Bruno Park 3.5 $$$$$ 2 to 3 years City of San
Bruno
San Mateo County Measure
W; SS4A; STEP
San Bruno Transit
Corridors Plan; San
Bruno Walk n’ Bike Plan;
SMCTA’s Active 101 Plan;
SFO Bay Trail Gap Study
B5
Install bicycle repair stations at the
South San Francisco and San Bruno
Caltrain stations and at the South
San Francisco and San Bruno BART
stations.
San Bruno Park 3 $$ 2 to 3 years City of San
Bruno; City
of South San
Francisco; BART;
Caltrain
MTC-CARE; ATP; SS4A;
STBG; STEP
San Bruno Walk 'n Bike
Plan; BART's Bicycle
Program Capital Plan
Figure 40: CBTP Projects (continued)
San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan 126 | | 127
Strategy/
Project
Number
Project EPC Location(s)
Average
Project
Score
Estimated
Cost
Range
Estimated
Project
Implementation
Timeline
Suggested
Lead
Agency or
Agencies
Potential Funding
Sources
Related Plans,
Programs, and
Studies
Strategy B: Expand bicycle network connectivity, safety and amenities (continued) B6
Extend the planned Spruce Avenue
bicycle route south beyond Railroad
Avenue to connect to the San Bruno
BART station.
West Downtown/
Old Town South San
Francisco
3 $$$$$ 5 or more years City of South San
Francisco
MTC-CARE; ATP; SS4A;
STBG; STEP
South San Francisco
Active South City Plan
Strategy C: Improve local street infrastructure and safety C1
Install a multi-use path with
educational and safe use signage
for users of scooters and bicycles on
First Avenue in San Bruno and Maple
Avenue in South San Francisco. Pair
installation with a safe use educational
outreach campaign and policy
updates.
San Bruno Park; West
Downtown/ Old Town
South San Francisco
5 $ 1 to 2 years City of San
Bruno; City
of South San
Francisco
San Mateo County
Measures A and W; SRTS;
YATSG
San Bruno Walk 'n Bike
Plan; San Bruno Safe
Routes to School Plan
C2
Install safety improvements such as
speed humps, zebra crosswalks, stop
sign at intersection of Cypress and
Pine Avenues in South San Francisco.
Paradise Valley 4 $ 1 to 2 years City of South San
Francisco
San Mateo County
Measures A and W; SS4A;
STEP
Recent transportation
analysis conducted on
Pine between Linden
and Cypress
C3
Repair and repave the roadway along
El Camino Real.
Lindenville/ Orange
Park; Lomita Park/
Downtown San Bruno;
San Bruno Park
3.5 $$-$$$ 2 to 3 years Caltrans San Mateo County Measure W; SB1; SHOPP
Caltrans California
Transportation Plan
2050
Figure 40: CBTP Projects (continued)
Strategy/
Project
Number
Project EPC Location(s)
Average
Project
Score
Estimated
Cost
Range
Estimated
Project
Implementation
Timeline
Suggested
Lead
Agency or
Agencies
Potential Funding
Sources
Related Plans,
Programs, and
Studies
Strategy C: Improve local street infrastructure and safety (continued) C4
Repair and repave the roadway on
2nd, Easton, Green, Kains and Hensley
Avenues in San Bruno.
Lomita Park/ Downtown
San Bruno; San Bruno
Park
3.5 $$-$$$ 2 to 5 years City of San
Bruno
San Mateo County Measure
W; Measures G and Q; SB1
San Bruno Paving
Program
C5
Study and implement traffic calming
measures such as speed humps along
Park Way.
Paradise Valley 3.5 SS 1 to 2 years City of South San
Francisco
San Mateo County
Measures A and W; South
San Francisco Measure W;
SS4A
South San Francisco
Parkway Heights Walk
Audit Report
C6
Add traffic calming measures to
Cypress Avenue and Linden Avenue
in Old Town South San Francisco to
address street racing.
West Downtown/
Old Town South San
Francisco
3 $$ 1 to 2 years City of South San
Francisco
San Mateo County
Measures A & W; South San
Francisco Measure W; Road
to Zero; SS4A
South San Francisco
Active South City Plan
Figure 40: CBTP Projects (continued)
San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan 128 | | 129
Strategy/
Project
Number
Project EPC Location(s)
Average
Project
Score
Estimated
Cost
Range
Estimated
Project
Implementation
Timeline
Suggested
Lead
Agency or
Agencies
Potential Funding
Sources
Related Plans,
Programs, and
Studies
Strategy D: Improve transit amenities
D1
Add bus shelters with weather
protection and lighting:
• At Airport Blvd stops at Baden
Ave, California Ave, Armour Ave,
Grand Ave and at 200 Airport Blvd
• At bus stops along El Camino Real
• At bus stops on South Linden Ave
• At stops near Spruce Ave/
Tanforan Mall intersection.
All EPCs 4 $$ 1 to 2 years SamTrans Project has been funded:
SMCTA TDM (Transportation
Demand Management)
Funding, Cycle 3 (2025)
South San Francisco
Active South City Plan;
SamTrans Bus Stop
Improvement Plan
D2
Study and implement if feasible new
SamTrans bus stops at locations of
interest such as:
• Route 41: at San Mateo Ave and
Walnut, San Bruno
• Route 292: Airport and Pine, South
San Francisco.
All EPCs 4 $ 1 to 2 years SamTrans MTC-CARE; San Mateo
County Measures A and W
Reimagine SamTrans
D3
Improve lighting inside existing bus
shelters and at bus stops in Old Town
South San Francisco.
West Downtown/
Old Town South San
Francisco
3.5 $$ 2 to 3 years SamTrans MTC-CARE South San Francisco Shape SSF Mobility
Policy Framework;
SamTrans Bus Stop
Improvement Plan
Figure 40: CBTP Projects (continued)
Strategy/
Project
Number
Project EPC Location(s)
Average
Project
Score
Estimated
Cost
Range
Estimated
Project
Implementation
Timeline
Suggested
Lead
Agency or
Agencies
Potential Funding
Sources
Related Plans,
Programs, and
Studies
Strategy D: Improve transit amenities (continued)
D4
Provide more community safety
patrols at San Bruno Caltrain Station
and around San Bruno BART station.
San Bruno Park 3 $$ 1 to 2 years Caltrain, City
of San Bruno
(BART)
TDA; San Mateo County
Measures A and W; BART,
Caltrain
BART’s ongoing
Ambassador Program;
The Transit Police
Bureau on behalf of
SamTrans and Caltrain
Strategy E: Extend and adjust transit service routes, times and frequencies to reflect the needs of older adults, students and essential workers E1
Consider increasing frequency and
extend evening service on bus routes
that serve Old Town South San
Francisco, such as Route 130.
West Downtown/
Old Town South San
Francisco
4 $$$ 2 to 3 years SamTrans San Mateo County
Measures A and W; STEP
Reimagine SamTrans
E2
Consider increasing frequency on
SamTrans Route 141 to every 15
minutes, to expand service options
for east-west connections to Skyline
College, downtown and transit hubs,
as well as key destinations for older
adults and low-income residents.
Lindenville/ Orange
Park; Paradise Valley;
West Downtown/
Old Town South San
Francisco
4 $$ 1 to 2 years SamTrans San Mateo County
Measures A and W
Reimagine SamTrans
E3
Consider new route (Route 126) to
provide additional bus service to BART
stations and service in Paradise Valley.
Lindenville/ Orange
Park, Paradise Valley,
West Downtown/
Old Town South San
Francisco
4 $$ 1 to 2 years SamTrans San Mateo County
Measures A and W
Reimagine SamTrans
Figure 40: CBTP Projects (continued)
San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan 130 | | 131
Strategy/
Project
Number
Project EPC
Location(s)
Average
Project
Score
Estimated
Cost
Range
Estimated
Project
Implementation
Timeline
Suggested
Lead
Agency or
Agencies
Potential Funding
Sources
Related Plans,
Programs, and
Studies
Strategy F: Improve transit reliability and connectivity F1
Consider a review of transfer locations and times
on all area SamTrans bus routes to ensure windows
support riders making connections.
All EPCs 4 $$ 1 to 2 years SamTrans SamTrans MTC Plan Bay Area 2050+
F2
Consider transit-friendly signal policy changes on El
Camino Real.
Lindenville/
Orange Park,
Lomita Park/
Downtown San
Bruno, San
Bruno Park
4 $ 1 to 2 years City of South
San Francisco;
SamTrans;
Caltrans
San Mateo County
Measures A and W;
SHOPP; STEP
SamTrans ECR Bus
Speed Reliability
Study
Strategy G: Expand options for low- or no-cost transportation services G1
Develop a multilingual training session series with
trusted community partner organizations such
as Rise South City to promote transit discount
programs and educate EPC residents on how to
apply for and use transit discount programs such as
Clipper START, and Youth and Senior Clipper cards.
All EPCs 4.5 $$ 1 to 2 years SamTrans; MTC;
C/CAG
San Mateo County
Measures A and W;
MTC-CARE
SamTrans Mobility
Ambassador Program
Figure 40: CBTP Projects (continued)
Strategy/
Project
Number
Project EPC
Location(s)
Average
Project
Score
Estimated
Cost
Range
Estimated
Project
Implementation
Timeline
Suggested
Lead
Agency or
Agencies
Potential Funding
Sources
Related Plans,
Programs, and
Studies
Strategy G: Expand options for low- or no-cost transportation services (continued) G2
Expand San Bruno shuttle service partnerships with
area employers to provide an additional shuttle loop
service for workers and residents to access local
commercial areas and the airport.
Lindenville/
Orange Park,
Paradise
Valley, West
Downtown/ Old
Town South San
Francisco
4 $$$ 2 to 3 years City of San
Bruno;
SamTrans
San Mateo County
Measure A; potential
private employer
partnerships;
STEP; Silicon Valley
Community Foundation
Previous CBTP
mentioned the
relocated San Bruno
Caltrain station would
include off-street
shuttle loading zones
for shuttles
G3
Develop implementation strategies for equity
mobility programs that encourage mode shift,
such as the 101 Express Lanes Community Benefits
Program.
All EPCs 4 $ 2 to 3 years C/CAG;
Commute.org
101 Express Lanes Toll
Funds; San Mateo
County Measures A
and W
San Mateo 101
Express Lanes Go
Card Program;
Commute.org
provides free shuttle
services and the Try
Transit Program
G4
Expand free transfer time frames and automatic fare
capping to prevent riders from paying multiple times
due to missed connections.
All EPCs 4 $$ 1 to 2 years SamTrans San Mateo County
Measures A and W
Clipper Executive
Board introduced
reduced transfer fares
via Clipper 2.0, in
December 2025
Figure 40: CBTP Projects (continued)
San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan 132 | | 133
Strategy/
Project
Number
Project EPC
Location(s)
Average
Project
Score
Estimated
Cost
Range
Estimated
Project
Implementation
Timeline
Suggested
Lead
Agency or
Agencies
Potential Funding
Sources
Related Plans,
Programs, and
Studies
Strategy H: Expand awareness of transit and transportation services H1
Partner with Rise South City and the YMCA Resource
Center to develop a promotion and outreach
program about existing transit and shuttle services,
including Transit Ambassadors and “how to ride”
programs, focusing on older adults, non-English
speakers, seniors, students and families who use
transit.
All EPCs 4.5 $$ 1 to 2 years SamTrans; City
of San Bruno;
City of South
San Francisco;
Rise South City;
YMCA Resource
Center
San Mateo County
Measures A and W;
MTC-CARE; YATSG
SamTrans Mobility
Ambassador Program
H2
Promote and provide more information about
San Bruno Senior Center Bus and other available
community shuttle services in San Bruno.
San Bruno Park;
Lomita Park/
Downtown San
Bruno
4.5 $ 1 to 2 years City of San
Bruno
San Mateo County
Measures A and W
Peninsula Rides
hosted by SMCTD
H3
Provide real-time tracking and access to information
about transit and shuttle routes, including
multilingual printed information at stops and key
community locations.
All EPCs 3.5 $$ 1 to 2 years SamTrans, City
of San Bruno,
City of South San
Francisco
San Mateo County
Measures A and W
Reimagine SamTrans
Figure 40: CBTP Projects (continued) Available Funding Opportunities This section describes some of the funding programs that C/CAG and jurisdictions use or might use to help fund CBTP and related projects and programs.
MTC Funding Sources
Lifeline Transportation Program.22 One of the key sources of funding for past CBTP projects, MTC uses both state and federal funds to provide grants for projects that meet mobility and accessibility needs in Equity Priority Communities across the Bay Area. MTC has funded more than 300 projects throughout the region, from fixed-route bus service and community shuttles to pedestrian and bicycle access improvements and transit stop enhancements. MTC has announced a new funding program, the Community Action Resource and Empowerment (CARE) program, which will replace its Lifeline program in the coming months. CARE includes several rounds of funding, totaling $23 million of local, state and federal funds to support community-based transportation projects that have been identified as high priority by community members and organizations.23
One Bay Area Grant (OBAG).24 MTC uses this program to distribute Federal Highway Administration funding to help meet regional goals related to improving safety, encouraging economic development addressing climate change and improving air quality. This round (OBAG 3) includes more than $750 million in federal funding for projects from 2023 to 2026, including approximately $37 million for C/CAG nominated projects in San Mateo County.25 Federal Transit Administration (FTA) Grants. Distributed by MTC, FTA provides several types of State of Good Repair grants, which in San Mateo and South San Francisco can support transit capital investment projects and transit operations (FTA 5307: Urbanized Areas), Bus Rapid Transit system maintenance (FTA 5337: Transit Maintenance) and replacement, rehab and purchase of buses and related equipment or to build bus-related facilities (FTA 5339: Buses).26 FTA also provides several types of Transit Expansion Grants, including Rehab & Modernization (FTA 5307) which can be used for vehicle replacement and rehabilitation; planning and evaluation; security equipment, and bicycle-related projects and investments to comply with ADA and Clean Air Act FTA 5310: Mobility of Seniors & People with Disabilities provides grants for nonprofit agencies that provide transportation services to older adults or people with disabilities. FTA 5311: Rural Area Grants provides funding for transit capital projects and for transit operations in non-urban areas.
Additional State and Federal Funding Sources
Active Transportation Program. This California program draws from both state and federal funding sources to provide $320 million annually for bicycle and pedestrian projects, such as building bicycle/pedestrian paths, installing bike racks, and other projects and programs to make walking or biking easier, safer and more convenient.27
California Climate Investments Program.28 This program uses “Cap and Invest” auction proceeds to support projects which improve public health and the environment, reduce greenhouse gas emissions, provide economic 22 Metropolitan Transportation Commission. Lifeline Transportation Program. Accessed from mtc.ca.gov/planning/transportation/access-equity-mobility/lifeline-transportation-program 23 Metropolitan Transportation Commission. Community Action Resource & Empowerment (CARE) Program. Accessed from mtc.ca.gov/funding/funding-opportunities/community-action-resource-empowerment-careprogram 24 Metropolitan Transportation Commission. One Bay Area Grant 3 (OBAG 3). Accessed from mtc.ca.gov/funding/federal-funding/federal-highway-administration-grants/one-bay-area-grant-obag-3 25 Metropolitan Transportation Commission. MTC Resolution No. 4505, OBAG 3 Revisions. Accessed from mtc.ca.gov/sites/default/files/documents/2022-04/OBAG-3-Call-for-Projects-Guidance-MTC-Resolution-4505- Appendix-A-1.pdf 26 Metropolitan Transportation Commission. Federal Transit Administration (FTA) Grants. Accessed from mtc.ca.gov/funding/federal-funding/federal-transit-administration-fta-grants 27 Metropolitan Transportation Commission. Active Transportation Program. Accessed from mtc.ca.gov/funding/investment-strategies-commitments/climate-protection/active-transportation-program 28 California Climate Investments. Accessed from www.caclimateinvestments.ca.gov San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan 134 | | 135
benefits and support disadvantaged communities and low-income communities and households. The CCIP funds clean mobility options such as care shares, bike shares, van pools, and zero-emission transit vehicles. Through the STEP program (see below) CCI funds neighborhood accessibility improvements. All of the EPCs are within areas that are eligible for CCI funding.
Community Development Block Grant (CDBG).29 This is another potential federal funding source to help cover the cost of sidewalk projects, especially those that improve accessibility for local residents. San Mateo County uses CDBG funds to help make capital improvements in low-income neighborhoods.
Safe Streets and Roads for All Grant Program (SS4A).30 This is federal grant assistance funded through the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act for local safety planning and implementation projects such as pedestrian crossing improvements, traffic and streetlight updates and bicycle facilities safety improvements. Funding is available for one more year, through FY2026.31 State Highway Operation and Protection Program (SHOPP).32 This program funds “fix-it-first” repairs, preservation, safety improvements and operational improvements on the state’s highways. SHOPP works on a four-year planning schedule.
State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP).33 The State of California administers a five-year plan identifying specific projects for receipt of State transportation funds for State highway improvements, intercity rail, and regional highway and transit improvements. C/CAG coordinates the local call for projects for these funds.
Surface Transportation Block Grant (STBG).34 This federal funding program provides funds to states and local governments to preserve and improve the conditions of street, pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure. It can be used to fund sidewalk construction and accessibility improvements, as well as maintenance of existing recreational trails, projects to enhance travel and tourism and develop EV charging infrastructure.
Sustainable Transportation Equity Project (STEP).35 Coordinated by the California Air Resources Board with California Climate Investment financing, this project, provides grants to low-income communities to support active transportation projects such as bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure and multiuse paths; zero-emission fixed route transit and school bus service, including service improvements, expansion and subsidies for riders; and zero-emissions shared mobility projects, including bikeshare, ride-hailing, shuttles and microtransit. All six of the EPCs in San Bruno and South San Francisco qualify as CCI priority population areas for STEP grant funding, according to California Climate Investments Priority Populations mapping tool.36 Transportation Development Act (TDA).37 This California state funding source has two parts, Local Transportation Fund and State Transit Assistance 29 U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. Community Development Block Grant Program. Accessed from: https://www.hud.gov/hud-partners/community-cdbg#eg 30 US Department of Transportation. Safe Streets and Roads for All (SS4A) Grant Program. Accessed from www.transportation.gov/grants/SS4A 31 National League of Cities. Best Infrastructure Grants for Small Cities. Accessed from www.nlc.org/article/2022/06/14/best-infrastructure-grants-for-small-cities 32 Caltrans. State Highway Operation and Protection Program. Accessed from: dot.ca.gov/programs/financial-programming/state-highway-operation-protection-program-shopp-minor-program-shopp 33 California Transportation Commission. State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP). Accessed from https://catc.ca.gov/programs/state-transportation-improvement-program 34 Federal Highway Administration. Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act - Surface Transportation Block Grant (STBG) Fact Sheet. Accessed from www.fhwa.dot.gov/infrastructure-investment-and-jobs-act/stbg.cfm 35 California Air Resources Board. Sustainable Transportation Equity Project, Accessed from ww2.arb.ca.gov/our-work/programs/sustainable-transportation-equity-project 36 California Climate Investments. Priority Populations Mapping Tool 4.0. Accessed September 2025 from https://gis.carb.arb.ca.gov/portal/apps/experiencebuilder/experience/?id=5dc1218631fa46bc8d340b8e8254 8a6a&page=Priority-Populations-4_0
(STA) funds. LTF is funded through ¼ cent of the general sales tax statewide and returns revenues to counties based on how much sales tax is collected. These help to finance transit operations, bus and rail projects, special transit services for riders with disabilities, pedestrian and bicycle facilities and transportation planning. STA funds are given to MTC to coordinate regional support for transit operations and capital projects and may be used to help fund transit and pedestrian related projects.
Youth Active Transportation Safety Grants.38 The National Road Safety Foundation and the Governors Highway Safety Association have provided funding through State Highway Safety offices to community organizations to promote safe walking, biking and using a scooter among young people. Recent grants h ave been used to support Safe Routes to School and youth ambassador training programs.
Local Funding Sources
Measure A and Measure W. The San Mateo County Transportation Authority (SMCTA) coordinates funding in San Mateo County to support local transportation projects through Measure A and Measure W county sales tax measures. These measures generate revenue to help improve transit and relieve congestion and supports projects such as local street repairs and transit operations. SMCTA recently awarded $13.6 million to San Mateo County shuttle services as part of a broader funding program to support first- and last-mile connections, including Commute.org shuttles and the City of South San Francisco’s Free South City Shuttle.39 SMCTA also supports a shuttle to Skyline College through Measure A funding.
In recent calls for projects, the City of South San Francisco was recently awarded $4.9 million to make sidewalk and pedestrian safety improvements and add protect bicycle lanes at several schools. The City of San Bruno was awarded $2 million to complete construction of the Huntington Ave cycle track to provide connections for bicyclists to the San Bruno BART station.40 Commute.org (C/ CAG) bicycle educational programs was also a recent recipient of Measure A and Measure W funding.
Measure G. This is a one-half cent sales tax passed by voters in the City of San Bruno in 2019, to fund additional city services, including expansion of pothole and street hazard repair, and street maintenance.41
Measure Q. Approved by voters in 2024, Measure Q authorized the City of San Bruno to issue General Obligation bonds to fully fund the cost of maintenance and repair of city streets potholes, as well as other city stormwater and infrastructure repair needs. The city’s current year budget (FY2026) includes $20 million earmarked for streets and sidewalks.42
Measure W. This is a half-cent sales tax approved by City of South San Francisco residents in 2015 to fund local city services. Measure W funds many community services, including repairing potholes and streets, maintaining 37 Metropolitan Transportation Commission. Transportation Development Act (TDA) & State Transit Assistance (STA). Accessed from mtc.ca.gov/funding/regional-funding/transportation-development-act-tda-state-transitassistance-sta 38 National Road Safety Foundation. Grants. Accessed from www.nrsf.org/grants 39 San Mateo County Transportation Authority. TA awards more than $83 Million for transit and first/last mile improvements. June 2025. Accessed from https://www.smcta.com/news/ta-awards-more-83-million-transitand-firstlast-mile-improvements 40 San Mateo County Transportation Authority. SMCTA 2025 Measure A & W Calls for Projects Look Ahead. Accessed September 2025 from https://www.smcta.com/media/SMCTA2025CFPs 41 City of San Bruno. Enhancing Your San Bruno: Measure G. Accessed from https://www.sanbruno.ca.gov/866/Enhancing-Your-San-Bruno-Measure-G 42 City of San Bruno. Investing in the Future: Measure Q. Accessed from https://sanbruno.ca.gov/2250/Investing-In-The-Future-Measure-Q San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan 136 | | 137
neighborhood police patrols, and providing programming for older adults, residents with disabilities and youth.43
Additional Sources of Funding
Road to Zero Community Traffic Safety Grants.
44 This program supports traffic
safety projects which include evidence-based “countermeasures” to prevent traffic injuries and fatalities and promotes the larger goal of ending all deaths due to collisions on roadways by 2050.
C/CAG and partners may need to look locally and consider other related sources of funding and partnerships, such as with organizations which work on community health and wellness issues, accessibility for older adults and residents with disabilities, and activities for young people. San Mateo County Health, area hospital systems such as Kaiser Permanente and Sutter Health, and community foundations such as the Sand Hill Foundation, Silicon Valley Community Foundation, and WITH foundation, may be able to provide or supplement funding from other sources for priority projects and programs in EPC neighborhoods.
43 City of South San Francisco. Measure W. Accessed from https://www.ssfca.gov/Government/Measure-W 44 National Safety Council. Community Traffic Safety Grants. Accessed from: www.nsc.org/road/resources/road-to-zero/road-to-zero-grants Monitoring and Evaluating Progress
This CBTP update contains a diverse list of recommended projects, including capital improvements, programmatic studies, and informational campaigns. Each of these is associated with a unique set of funding challenges and opportunities. The manner in which the projects are integrated into local programming also differs, whether via inclusion in a Capital Improvement Program (CIP) or adoption as local policy. Limited staff resources and multijurisdictional coordination are historic challenges to CBTP progress across the project spectrum.
Implementation of this plan will require ongoing commitment by the local jurisdictions included in the CBTP study area and partner agencies to move recommendations forward. Success will also depend on the ability of C/CAG to regularly monitor CBTP progress, maintain a record of project milestones, and offer support to responsible agencies.
In order to facilitate monitoring by C/CAG, this CBTP contains an Annual CBTP Tracking Checklist (Appendix D) to be completed by each CBTP study area jurisdiction each year (beginning with the adoption date of the CBTP) and submitted to C/CAG.
San Bruno and South San Francisco staff will also present an annual update on the progress of projects to their Complete Streets and Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committees.
The Annual CBTP Tracking Checklist will help to: • Facilitate communication between CBTP jurisdictions and C/CAG. • Document individual project progress. • Tally all “In Progress” CBTP projects. • Evaluate overall CBTP implementation.
As shown in Appendix D, the Checklist begins with a summary of total recommendations in the CBTP. It allows staff to list all CBTP projects for which one or more milestones have been reached, “check” the category of each milestone, and briefly describe and date the milestone. The three categories of milestones are:
1. Funding. Examples of these milestones include grant
submissions, receipt or allocation of funds, completion of detailed expenditure plans and others.
2. Local Adoption/Programming. Examples of these milestones include the addition of project(s) into a Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) or budgetary document, formalization of a project as policy or action in a local planning document and others.
3. Implementation. These are milestones representative of upcoming or ongoing official use of project funds, such as RFP release; execution of outside contracts; and project kick-off, internal milestones and completion.
The Checklist closes with a tally of the total number of projects tracked for the year.
San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan 138 |
Appendices
Appendix A: Community Assessment Report of San Bruno and South San Francisco EPCs
Appendix B: Review of Previous CBTP Plan Strategies and Implementation Appendix C: Community Engagement Summary
Appendix D: Annual CBTP Tracking Checklist (Sample)