San Carlos panel backs near‑term US‑101/Holly bike‑ped safety package, recommends Alternative 1 to City Council

The San Carlos Planning and Transportation Commission voted unanimously on Aug. 4 to recommend that City Council select “Alternative 1” as the preferred midterm bicycle and pedestrian safety package for Holly Street at U.S. 101.

The resolution, supported by Chair Clemens and Commissioners Bundy, Anand, Tapias and Kennasty, directs staff to advance a design that emphasizes separated bikeways where feasible, high‑visibility crosswalks and user‑activated flashing beacons at freeway on‑ and off‑ramps. Allison Mills, senior engineer with Tool Design Group, told the commission that “Alternative 1 can be constructed the most quickly of the three alternatives” and was intentionally sized to avoid lane reductions or other elements that would trigger extended Caltrans review.

Staff described the recommendation as a midterm, implementable solution that sits between short‑term warning and striping work Caltrans completed in July and the long‑term plan for a separated bike and pedestrian overcrossing. Tracy Scrimmalia, the city’s assistant public works director, said the city pursued the midterm option after community concern following a bicyclist fatality at the intersection last November and after Caltrans agreed to immediate, limited improvements earlier this year.

Cost and timing were central to the debate. Staff estimated Alternative 1 at about $3–4 million and said it would move faster through Caltrans permitting than the larger options. By contrast, Alternatives 2 and 3 were pegged at approximately $6–8 million and would add two to four years to the Caltrans review period because they include lane reductions, traffic/bike signals or concrete barrier work.

Commissioners pressed staff on safety at transition points where protected facilities would end, enforcement and whether elements of more robust alternatives could be layered on later. Allison Mills and city staff cautioned that some changes (for example, restriping that alters lane widths) can trigger additional Caltrans studies or resurfacing and therefore complicate later phasing, but they said some elements — such as targeted bike signals or added warnings — might be phased in over time.

Public outreach informed the recommendation. Staff reported a July 17 community meeting with roughly 30–40 attendees and an online survey; participants overwhelmingly favored Alternative 1 for its speed, cost and near‑term benefit, while voicing continued concern about yielding at ramp crossings and protection for vulnerable users. "There's clearly urgency in improving the bike‑pedestrian safety in this reach," Commissioner Bundy said during deliberations.

One in‑person public commenter, John Hoffman of San Carlos, told the commission he supports Alternative 1 as the most practical interim step while the overcrossing is pursued. "The only solution to the problem, of course, is the flyover," Hoffman said, "but taking a step now is sensible and alternative one is the only viable interim alternative."

Next steps: staff will present the commission’s recommendation to City Council on Aug. 25. The city plans to apply for San Mateo County Transportation Authority (SMCTA) funding in September; staff said a successful grant award could arrive as soon as December 2025. The commission’s action was advisory; final approval of the preferred midterm design and funding decisions rests with the City Council and grantors.

Action recorded: motion to recommend City Council approval of Alternative 1 was moved and seconded and passed by roll call (Chair Clemens, Commissioners Bundy, Anand, Tapias and Kennasty — all yes).