San Carlos weighs in on ECR ‘road diet’ plans

The 25-mile major street that runs throughout San Mateo County is broken up into a smaller plan; the Central El Camino Multimodal Plan covers the 8.5 mile segment in San Carlos, San Mateo, Belmont and part of Redwood City. 

Three alternative plans were presented by SamTrans Project Manager Cassie Halls to the San Carlos City Council for feedback and discussion Feb. 9. 

One option prioritizes faster bus service and separated bike lanes, one prioritizes wider sidewalks and more trees, and another prioritizes continuous bike facilities on the major thoroughfare. 

All reduce the current three southbound transit lanes down to two lanes, and will reduce the width of lanes from the current 12 feet down to 10.5 or 11 feet. 

Of the three proposals, the bicycle priority option, which includes continuous separated bike lanes and maintains parking on southbound El Camino Real, aligns most consistently with the city’s recently completed Downtown Streetscape Master Plan. 

“We did spend four years on our downtown plan, talking relentlessly about traffic and traffic flow,” Councilmember Sara McDowell said. “I’m glad our plans are reflected in [these] plans.” 

This bicycle-priority option would likely impact bus speeds negatively, by reducing the southbound lanes from three to two, and maintaining parking. 

Councilmember Neil Layton questioned if bicyclists would use the bike lanes on such a major traffic corridor that tends to see higher speeds than more local streets. The increase in electric bicycles also raised a concern about speed differentials using a designated bike lane. 

Alternatively, the transit-priority option would include separated bike lanes in both directions, but rather than provide parking southbound, there would be a bus-only lane. This model would allow for buses to travel more efficiently going south on El Camino Real, Halls said, and stay out of the two remaining traffic lanes. 

“Things are moving pretty well in San Carlos, but in the southbound direction we have some delays in our buses,” Halls said. 

McDowell said she wouldn’t be comfortable with establishing a bus-only lane. 

“I’d rather just have the lanes open to all,” McDowell said. “I think transportation is changing a lot in the coming decade … so we’ll have to see how mass transit looks.” 

The third option, the pedestrian-priority option, would include wider sidewalks, more trees and parking on both sides of El Camino Real. 

Layton said he would more likely favor wider sidewalks and pedestrian focus rather than establishing dedicated bike lanes that go unused. 

The designs will be brought back to the City Council in late summer for more discussion and finalized alternatives to be selected. 

Regardless of which option is pursued, councilmembers expressed concern over the road dieting. 

Councilmember Adam Rak said he has felt “lucky” with how San Carlos traffic flows on El Camino Real, compared to neighboring cities. 

“I feel like we have a sweet spot, so I’m always going to worry that we’re going to mess things up and not have the traffic flow that we have in San Carlos,” Rak said. 

The potential road diets and improved facilities won’t be made for some time, though. 

The final design for the Central El Camino Multimodal Plan is intended to be approved late 2027, and construction for the entire stretch of El Camino Real in the county will take approximately six years.