1 Agenda
City Council Regular Meeting
Folsom City Hall | City Council Chambers, First Floor
50 Natoma Street, Folsom, CA 95630
February 11, 2025, 6:30 PM
Welcome to Your City Council Meeting
We welcome your interest and involvement in the city’s legislative process. This agenda includes information about topics coming before the City Council and the action recommended by city staff. You can read about each topic in the staff reports, which are available on the city website and in the Office of the City Clerk. The City Clerk is also available to answer any questions you have about City Council meeting procedures.
Participation
If you would like to provide comments to the City Council, please:
Fill out a blue speaker request form, located at the back table. Submit the form to the City Clerk before the item begins. When it’s your turn, the City Clerk will call your name and invite you to the podium. Speakers generally have three minutes, unless the presiding officer (usually the mayor) changes that time.
Reasonable Accommodations
In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you are a person with a disability and you need a disability-related modification or accommodation to participate in this meeting, please contact the City Clerk’s Office at (916) 461-6035, (916) 355-7328 (fax) or [email protected]. Requests must be made as early as possible and at least two full business days before the start of the meeting.
How to Watch
The City of Folsom provides three ways to watch a City Council meeting:
In Person Online On TV
City Council meetings take place at
City Hall, 50 Natoma Street
Watch the livestream and replay past
meetings on the city website,
www.folsom.ca.us
Watch live and replays of meetings on
Sac Metro Cable TV, Channel 14
More information about City Council meetings is available at the end of this agenda
2 City Council Regular Meeting
Folsom City Hall | City Council Chambers, First Floor
50 Natoma Street, Folsom, CA 95630
www.folsom.ca.us
Tuesday, February 11, 2025 6:30 PM
Sarah Aquino, Mayor
Mike Kozlowski, Councilmember Barbara Leary, Councilmember Justin Raithel, Vice Mayor Anna Rohrbough, Councilmember
AGENDA
CALL TO ORDER
ROLL CALL:
Councilmembers: Raithel, Rohrbough, Kozlowski, Leary, Aquino The City Council has adopted a policy that no new item will begin after 10:30 p.m. Therefore, if you are here for an item that has not been heard by 10:30 p.m., you may leave, as the item will be continued to a future Council meeting.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
AGENDA UPDATE
BUSINESS FROM THE FLOOR:
Members of the public are entitled to address the City Council concerning any item within the Folsom City Council's subject matter jurisdiction. Public comments are generally limited to no more than three minutes. Except for certain specific exceptions, the City Council is prohibited from discussing or taking action on any item not appearing on the posted agenda.
CONSENT CALENDAR:
Items appearing on the Consent Calendar are considered routine and may be approved by one motion.
Councilmembers may pull an item for discussion.
1. Approval of January 14, 2025 Special and Regular Meeting Minutes
2. Approval of January 23, 2025 Special Meeting Minutes
3. Approval of January 28, 2025 Special and Regular Meeting Minutes
3 4. Resolution No. 11326 - A Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Execute a Contract Amendment with Ghirardelli Associates for the East Bidwell and Iron Point / US50 Onramp Improvement Project (Project No. PW2203) and Appropriation of Funds NEW BUSINESS:
5. Resolution No. 11327 – A Resolution Adopting the 2024 Local Road Safety Plan
CITY MANAGER REPORTS
COUNCIL COMMENTS
ADJOURNMENT
NOTICE: Members of the public are entitled to directly address the C ity Council concerning any item that is described in the notice of this meeting, before or during consideration of that item. If you wish to address Council on an issue, which is on this agenda, please complete a blue speaker request card, and deliver it to a staff member at the table on the left side of the Council Chambers prior to discussion of the item. When your name is called, stand to be recognized by the Mayor and then proceed to the podium. If you wish to address the City Council on any other it em of interest to the public, when the Mayor asks if there is any “Business from the Floor,” follow the same procedure described above. Please limit your comments to three minutes or less.
NOTICE REGARDING CHALLENGES TO DECISIONS: Pursuant to all applicable laws and regulations, including without limitation, California Government Code Section 65009 and or California Public Resources Code Section 21177, if you wish to challenge in court any of the above decisions (regarding planning, zoning and/or environmental decisions), you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing(s) described in this notice/agenda, or in written correspondence delivered to the City at, or prior to, the public hearing.
As presiding officer, the Mayor has the authority to preserve order at all City Council meetings, to remove or cause the removal of any person from any such meeting for disorderly conduct, or for making personal, impertinent, or slanderous remarks, using profanity, or becoming boisterou s, threatening or personally abusive while addressing said Council, and to enforce the rules of the Council.
PERSONS INTERESTED IN PROPOSING AN ITEM FOR THE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA SHOULD CONTACT A MEMBER OF THE CITY COUNCIL.
This meeting of the City Council is recorded with closed captioning. The recording will be cablecast on Metro Cable Channel 14, the local government affairs channel on the Comcast and DirecTV U -Verse cable system, and will be shown in its entirety on the Friday and Saturday following the meeting, both at 9 a.m. The recording will also be video streamed at metro14live.saccounty.gov.The City does not control scheduling of this telecast and persons interested in watching the televised meeting should confirm this schedule with Metro Cable TV, Channel 14. The City of Folsom provides live and archived webcasts of regular City Council meetings. The webcasts can be found on the online services page of the City's website www.folsom.ca.us.
In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you are a person with a disability and you need a disability-related modification or accommodation to participate in this meeting, please contact the City Clerk’s Office at (916) 461-6035, (916) 355-7328 (fax) or [email protected]. Requests must be made as early as possible and at least two full business days before the start of the meeting.
Any documents produced by the City and distributed to the City Council regarding any item on this agenda will be made available at the City Clerk’s Counter at C ity Hall located at 50 Natoma Street, Folsom,
4 California and at the Folsom Public Library located at 411 Stafford Street, Folsom, California during normal business hours.
File 034-21 25-001
Folsom City Council Minutes
January 14,2025
Gity Council Special Meeting
MINUTES
Tuesday, January 14,2025 5:45 PM
CALL TO ORDER
The special City Council meeting was called to order at 5:45 pm with Mayor Aquino presiding ROLL GALL:
CouncilmembersPresent: BarbaraLeary,Councilmember
Justin Raithel, Vice MaYor
Sarah Aquino, Mayor
Councilmembers Absent: Michael Kozlowski, Councilmember (arrived at 5:46 pm) Anna Rohrbough, Councilmember (arrived at 5:46 pm)
ADJOURNMENT TO CLOSED SESSION FOR THE FOLLOWING PURPOSES:
1. Conference with Labor Negotiator - Pursuant to Government Code Section 54957.6. Agency Negotiator: Vance Piggott. Employee Organization: Folsom Police Officers'Association Motion by Vice Mayor Raithel, second by Gouncilmember Leary to adjourn to closed session Motion passed by the following roll-call vote:
AYES: Kozlowski, Leary, Raithel, Rohrbough, Aquino
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
REGONVENE
City Attorney Steven Wang announced that no final action was taken during closed session
ADJOU MENT
There being no further business to come before the City Council, the meeting was adjourned at 6:35 pm.
Droft Not Official lJntil Approved by the City Council Poge 7
02/11/2025 Item No.1.
File 034-21 25-001
Folsom City Council Minutes
January 14,2025
SUBMITTED BY
Christa Freemantle, City Clerk
ATTEST
Sarah Aquino, Mayor
Draft Not Officiol lJntil Approved by the City Council Page 2
02/11/2025 Item No.1.
File 034-2125-001
Folsom City Council Minutes
JanuarY 14,2025
Gity Gouncil Regular Meeting
MINUTES
Tuesday, January 14,2025 6:30 PM
CALL TO ORDER
The regular City Council meeting was called to order at 6:36 pm with Mayor Sarah Aquino presiding ROLL GALL:
Councilmembers Present Michael Kozlowski, Councilmember Barbara Leary, Councilmember
Justin Raithel, Vice MaYor
Anna Rohrbough, Councilmember
Sarah Aquino, Mayor
Councilmembers Absent: None
PLEDGE OF LLEGIANCE
The pledge of allegiance was recited.
AGENDA UPDATE
City Attorney Steven Wang advised that there was additional information for items 16 and 17.
BUSINESS FROM THE FLOOR:
The following speakers addressed the City Council:
1. Larry Ladd
2. Branda and Dan McNeil
GONSENT CALENDAR:
Items appearing on the Consent Calendar are considered routine and may be approved by one motion Councilmembers may pull an item for discussion.
1. Approval of December 9,2024 Special Meeting Minutes
2. Approval of December 10, 2024 12PM City Council Special Meeting Minutes Droft Not Officiol IJntil Approved by the City Council Page 7
02/11/2025 Item No.1.
File 034-2125-001
Folsom City Council Minutes
JanuarY L4,2025
3. Approval of December '10, 2024 Special, Regular and Joint Meeting Minutes
4. Approval of December 16, 2Q24 Special Meeting Minutes
5. Resolution No. 1 1 312- A Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Amend Ihe 2024 Contract Between the City of Folsom and the Sacramento Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (SSPCA) for Shelter Services
6. Resolution No. 1 1313 - A Resolution Authorizing Submission of Folsom Transportation Development Act Claim for Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities Fiscal Year 2024-25 to the Sacramento Area Council of Governments
7, Resolution No. 11314 - A Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Execute an Amendment to the Agreement with Williams Scotsman, lnc. for the Lease of the Modular Building Occupied by the Waste and Recycling Division
B. Resolution No. 1 1315 - A Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Execute a Construction Agreement with Precision Emprise LLC, dba Precision Concrete Cutting for the District 4 Sidewalk Offset Repair Project
g. Resolution No. 1 1316 - A Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Execute an Agreement with Schaefer Plastics North America, LLC. for the Purchase of Residential Solid Waste Containers
'10. Resolution No. 11317 - A Resolution Approving a License Agreement Between the Sacramento- placerville Transportation Corridor Joint Powers Authority and the Placerville and Sacramento Valley Railroad, lnc. for Excursion Rail Operations
11. Pulled for discussion
Motion by Gouncilmember Rohrbough, second by Vice Mayor Raithel, to approve items No. {-10 of the Gonsent Calendar. Motion passed by the following roll-call vote:
AYES: Kozlowski, Leary, Raithel, Rohrbough, Aquino
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
CONSENT CALEN DAR ITEMS PULLED DISCUSSION:
'11. Resolution No. 11321- A Resolution lnitiating Proceedings for the Formation of a Landscaping and Lighting Assessment District to be known as the Natoma Station Maintenance Assessment District No. 2025-1
Councilmember Leary stated that she would be recusing herself from this item since she lives within the subject district.
Draft Not Officiat lJntit Approved by the City Council Poge 2
02/11/2025 Item No.1.
File 034-2125-001
Folsom City Council Minutes
January L4,2025
Lorraine Poggione requested this item be pulled to speak in support of the resolution.
Motion by Councilmember Rohrbough, second by Councilmember Kozlowskito approve Resolution No. 11321. Motion passed by the following roll-callvote:
AYES: Kozlowski, Raithel, Rohrbough, Aquino
NOES: None
ABSENT: Leary (ecusedl
ABSTAIN: None
PUBLIC HEARING:
12. Alder Creek West Large Lot Tentative Subdivision Map Project - Vicinity of White Rock Road and Oak Avenue Parkway in the Folsom Plan Area (SUBPM24-00233) i. Resolution No. 11318 - A Resolution Determining that the Alder Creek West Large Lot Tentative Subdivision Map Project is Exempt from CEQA and Approving Said Large Lot Tentative Subdivision MaP
Community Development Principal Planner Jessica Brandt made a presentation and responded to questions irom the City Council. Community Development Director Pam Johns provided additional information.
The public hearing was opened at 6:56 pm.
The following speaker addressed the City Council under this item Patty Soulsby
The public hearing was closed at 6:57 pm.
Motion by Vice Mayor Raithel, second by Gouncilmember Leary, to approve Resolution No. 11318. Motion passed by the following roll-callvote:
AYES: Kozlowski, Leary, Raithel, Rohrbough, Aquino
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
NEW BUSINESS:
13. Resolution No. 11320- A Resolution of the City Council Appointing Bryan Whitemyer as City Manager and Approving an Employment Agreement for Said Appointment City Attorney Steven Wang made a presentation to the City Council.
Motion by Gouncilmember Leary, second by Councilmember Kozlowskito approve Resolution No. 11320. Motion passed by the following roll-callvote:
AYES: Kozlowski, Leary, Raithel, Rohrbough, Aquino
Droft Not Official IJntil Approved by the City Council Page 3
02/11/2025 Item No.1.
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
None
None
None
File 034-21 25-001
Folsom City Council Minutes
January 14,2025
14. Resolution No. 11319- A Resolution Receiving Report from the Community Development Department on the Approval of a Parcel Map Waiver for the Sendero Residential Condominium Project
Community Development Principal Planner Jessica Brandt made a presentation and responded to questions from the City Council.
Motion by Gouncilmember Leary, second by Councilmember Rohrbough to approve Resolution No. 11319. Motion passed by the following roll-callvote:
AYES: Kozlowski, Leary, Raithel, Rohrbough, Aquino
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
15. At-Large Appointments to the Arts and Culture Commission, Historic District Commission, Landscaping and Lighting District Advisory Committee, Library Commission, Parks and Recreation Commission, Planning Commission, Traffic Safety Committee, and Utility Commission
Mayor Aquino thanked all the applicants for applying
The following speakers addressed the City Council under this item
1. Mark Menz
City Clerk Christa Freemantle made a presentation explaining the open ballot process for making commission appointments and distributed ballots to each councilmember.
Planning Gommission (two at-large seats)
Councilmember Leary voted for Justin Hurst and Tanya Morales.
Councilmember Rohrbough voted for Jim Ortega and Rachel Williams.
Mayor Aquino voted for Justin Hurst and Jim Ortega.
Councilmember Kozlowski voted for Tanya Morales and Anthony Nicolai Vice Mayor Raithel voted for Justin Hurst and Tanya Morales.
Justin Hurst and Tanya Morales were appointed to the Planning Commission Bill Barcellona- Leary Direct Appointment
Dianna Laney- Raithel Direct Appointment
Parks and Recreation Commission (two at-large seats)
Councilmember Leary voted for Hla Elkhatib and Alayna Wagner.
Councilmember Rohrbough voted for Jim Ortega and Alayna Wagner Droft Not Official lJntil Approved by the City Council Page 4
02/11/2025 Item No.1.
File 034-21 25-001
Folsom City Council Minutes
January 14,2025
Vice Mayor Raithel voted for Aaron Silva and Alayna Wagner.
Councilmember Kozlowski voted for Joanne Brausch and Kevin Goddard.
Mayor Aquino voted for Jeff Kernen and Alayna Wagner.
Vice Mayor Raithel, Mayor Aquino and Councilmember Kozlowski switched their vote to Jim Odega James Ortega and Alayna Wagner were appointed to the Parks and Recreation Commission.
Dean Williams- Leary Direct Appointment
Sandy Econome- Raithel Direct Appointment
Afts and Culture Commission (two at-large seats)
Councilmember Leary voted for Julian Sarafian and Lucinda Windward.
Councilmember Kozlowski voted for Mark Allaman and Lucinda Windward.
Vice Mayor Raithel voted for Mark Allaman and Robert Sumner.
Councilmember Rohrbough voted for Robert Sumner and Lucinda Windward Mayor Aquino voted for Mark Allaman and Lucinda Windward.
Marc Allaman and Lucinda Winward were appointed to the Arts and Culture Commission Alexis Goddard- Leary Direct Appointment
H istoric District Commission
City Clerk Christa Freemantle confirmed with Mayor Aquino that they are voting for the Historic District Commission Architect and Business Representative (outside Sutter Street). City Clerk Christa Freemantle also explained that the Planning Commission has a meeting tomorrow night and they will nominate commissioners to serve on the Historic District Commission and those nominations will come back before the City Council at the January 28 meeting.
Councilmember Leary voted for Jennifer Cabrera and John Felts.
Councilmember Rohrbough voted for Jennifer Cabrera and John Felts.
Unanimous from everyone, Jennifer Cabrera and John Felts were appointed to the Historic District Commission.
Landscaping and Lighting District Advisory Committee
There was one applicant for each of the Landscaping and Lighting Districts and the following applicants were appointed:
Allen Brown was appointed to American River Canyon North. lan Cornell was appointed to Williow Creek Estates South (Lexington Hills) David Doty was appointed to Cobble Ridge.
Mark Klovee was appointed to American River Canyon#2.
Benjamin Mattocks was appointed to Prospect Ridge.
Robert Milstrey was appointed to Willow Springs.
Patty Soulsby was appointed to Blue Ravine Oaks.
Joanna Stanfield was appointed to Sierra Estates.
Draft Not Official Until Approved by the City Council Page 5
02/11/2025 Item No.1.
File 034-2125-001
Folsom City Council Minutes
January 14,2025
Motion by Councilmember Rohrbough and second by Mayor Aquino to approve all applicants under the Landscaping and Lighting District Advisory Gommittee. Motion passed by the followi ng roll-call vote:
AYES: Kozlowski, Leary, Raithel, Rohrbough, Aquino
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
Library Commission (two at-large seats)
Councilmember Rohrbough voted for Robert Deutsche and Sarah Norberg.
Councilmember Leary voted for Kathryn Allaman and Vijay Jonnalagadda.
Councilmember Kozlowski voted for Kathryn Allaman and Benjamin Osipov Vice Mayor Raithel voted for Kathryn Allaman and Vijay Jonnalagadda.
Mayor Aquino voted for Kathryn Allaman and Vijay Jonnalagadda.
Kathryn Allaman and Vijay Jonnalagadda were appointed to the Library Commission Bonnie Landon- Leary Direct Appointment
Traffic Safety Gommittee
Mayor Aquino confirmed that they are voting for one Bicycle and Pedestrian Safety Representative and two Citizen Representatives. City Clerk Christa Freemantle fufther clarified.
Councilmember Leary voted for Joanne Brausch, Kevin Goddard, and Anthony Nicolai.
Councilmember Rohrbough voted for Joanne Brausch, Rick Cogil and Kevin Goddard.
Councilmember Kozlowski voted for Joanne Brausch, Raymond Garcia and Kevin Goddard.
Vice Mayor Raithel voted for Joanne Brausch, Rick Cogil and Kevin Goddard.
Mayor Aquino voted for Joanne Brausch, Rick Cogil and Kevin Goddard.
Joanne Brausch was appointed to the Traffic Safety Committee as the Bicycle/Pedestrian Safety Representative.
Rick Cogil and Kevin Goddard were appointed to the Traffic Safety Committee as Citizen Representatives.
Utility Commission (two at-large seats)
Mayor Aquino stated that Amy McBride was listed on the master spreadsheet but not listed on the ballots. City Clerk Christa Freemantle confirmed that her emailwent into the city's spam filter, but she did apply before the deadline. Mayor Kozlowski commented on the importance of attending the Utility Commission meetings.
Councilmember Leary voted for Mark Menz and Jag Nagendra.
Councilmember Kozlowski voted for Mark Menz and Julian Sarafian Droft Not Official IJntil Approved by the City Council Page 6
02/11/2025 Item No.1.
File 034-2125-001
Folsom City Council Minutes
JanuarY 1-4,2025
Vice Mayor Raithel voted for Mark Menz and Aaron Silva.
Councilmember Rohrbough voted for Mark Menz and Jag Nagendra.
Mayor Aquino voted for Mark Menz and Amy McBride.
There was no quorum for the second seat, and Mayor Aquino explained why she was voting for Amy McBride. The Vice Mayor stated his direct appointment will be Aaron Silva, so he switched his vote to Amy McBride. Councilmember Kozlowski also changed his vote from Julian Sarafian to Amy McBride.
Amy McBride and Mark Menz were appointed to the Utility Commission.
Aaron Silva- Raithel Direct Appointment
Vice Mayor Raithel made the following as his direct appointments:
Robert Sumner - Arts and Cultural Commission
Solomon Chis-Library Commission
City Clerk Christa Freemantle thanked all the applicants and everyone for their patience.
Councilmember Rohrbough thanked the applicants, spoke about the number of applicants and asked them to reapply or apply again and to also meet with the councilmembers.
Councilmember Leary spoke about the number of applicants and thanked everyone for applying. She also encouraged everyone to get engaged in organizations.
16. Consideration of Draft City Council Travel Policy and Direction to Staff Mayor Aquino presented the item for Council consideration.
Finince Director Stacey Tamagni provided additional information. The Council requested that this item be returned at a future meeting for approval, with the inclusion of language relating to per diem reimbursements.
17. Appointment of City Council Representatives to Regional Boards/Commissions Mayor Aquino presented the item, and the Councilmembers agreed to the regional assignments. One change was made as follows regarding the Sacramento Transportation Authority:
Vice Mayor Raithel- Primary Representative
Mayor Aquino- Alternate Representative
CITY MANAGER REPORTS
lnterim City Manager Dan Haverty recognized the EnvironmentalWater Resources Department for working during the weekend to find a water leak; he spoke about the Water Vision Project meeting, and the Folsom t-ight nait 1S-minute service. Also, he recognized the Folsom Police Department and Communications Director Christine Brainerd and staff regarding the e-scooter, e-bike, and e-motorcycle public education in partnership with Folsom Unified School District and the meetings with businesses and faith-based groups in the community. He acknowledged those who obtained 20 years of service for the City in 2Q24, starting with the Police Department, including Warner Herndon Jr, Jeana Marendt, Roman Kehm, Andrew Bates, Lou Wright and Police Chief Rick Hillman, who celebrated 30 years of Droft Not Officiot lJntit Approved by the City Council Poge 7
02/11/2025 Item No.1.
File 034-21 25-001
Folsom City Council Minutes
January 14,2025
service. ln the Environmental Water Resources Department, this included Chris Robinson, and Glen Caldwell. ln the Public Works Department, this included Greg Bakken, Sandra Munoz, and Tim Jones ln the Fire Department, this included Bill Woody Woodward. He also spoke about the State of the City for 2025 that will be held at Lakeside, the CAPS and CERT volunteers that the city is seeking, and the Police Department Foundation's donation of $3,000 to fund a new fireplace in the children's reading area at the library. He also mentioned that he will be reading a book to the children at the library in the upcoming week.
COUNCIL COMMENTS
Councilmember Kozlowski had no comments.
Vice Mayor Raithel attended the State of Public Safety held by the District Attorney's Office regarding the fentanyl program and thanked the Folsom Police Department and Sergeant Canepa for their work in that area. He also spoke about the homeless crisis and thanked the HOT team and Police Department for cleaning up the homeless camps. He thanked HART for the winter shelter, and spoke about the Folsom Athletic Association crab feed, and thanked those willing to serve on the Commissions.
Councilmember Rohrbough acknowledged former Councilmember Chalamcherla in the audience and congratulated him on the swearing-in with the school board. She also spoke about asking the Community Development Department Director Pam Johns regarding the building of condos; she thanked lnterim City Manager Dan Haverty for his work, the homeless encampments on fish and wildlife property, and setting up another meeting in the future with Josh Hoover's office, an upcoming Economic Development meeting and revenue options for the city, and CAP 2 CAP in May.
Councilmember Leary thanked the Police Department regarding the youth on motorcycles and snatch and grab crimes, and she also thanked all departments for their work. She wants to hear from departments to see what kind of volunteers they can use. She spoke about HART and Jake's Journey Home; she also attended the State of Public Safety held by the District Attorney's Office regarding the fentanyl program and thanked the Folsom Police Department and Sergeant Canepa for their work in that area; slre thanked Mayor Aquino and staff with issues in her district and the lnterim City Manager for his guidance.
Mayor Aquino spoke about Milton Neshek, who passed away on January 5th at 94. Mick was the man who brought Kikkoman to Folsom and opened the Folsom factory with 29 employees in 1998. Mayor Aquino extended her condolences to Mick's wife Nancy and the entire Neshek family.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business to come before the City Council, the meeting was adjourned in the memory of Milton "Mick" Neshek at 8:15 pm.
SUBMITTED BY:
ATTEST:
Sarah Aquino, Mayor
Droft Not official lJntil Approved by the City council
Christa Freemantle, City Clerk
Poge 8
02/11/2025 Item No.1.
File 034-2125-001
Folsom City Council Minutes
January 23,2025
City Council Special Meeting
MINUTES
Thursday, January 23,2025 12:15 PM
CALL TO ORDER
The special City Council meeting was called to order at 12.15 pm with Mayor Aquino presiding ROLL CALL:
Councilmembers Present Barbara Leary, Councilmember
Justin Raithel, Vice Mayor
Anna Rohrbough, Councilmember
Sarah Aquino, Mayor
CouncilmembersAbsent: MichaelKozlowski,Councilmember
SPECIAL P NTATION:
1. Mayor's 2025 State of the City Address
Mayor Aquino presented the 2025 State of the City Address
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business to come before the City Council, the meeting was adjourned at 12:35 pm.
SUBMITTED BY:
Christa Freemantle, City Clerk
ATTEST
Sarah Aquino, Mayor
Draft Not Officiol IJntil Approved by the City Council Page L
02/11/2025 Item No.2.
This page is intentiono.lly left blonk
to facilitote double- side d printing
qnd minimize PaPer trse.
CITY CF
DISTINCTIVE B.Y NATURE
FOLSOl\{
02/11/2025 Item No.2.
File 034-21 25-001
Folsom City Council Minutes
January 28,2025
Gity Council Special Meeting
MINUTES
Tuesday, January 28,2025 5:30 PM
CALL TO ORDER
The special City Council meeting was called to order at 5:30 pm with Mayor Aquino presiding ROLL CALL:
Councilmem bers Present: Barbara Leary, Councilmember
Justin Raithel, Vice Mayor
Anna Rohrbough, Councilmember
Sarah Aquino, Mayor
Councilmembers Absent: Michael Kozlowski, Councilmember (arrived at 6:10 pm) ADJOURNM NT TO CLOSED SESSIO N FOR THE FOLLOWING PURPOSES:
1. Conference with Labor Negotiator - Pursuant to Government Code Section 54957.6. Agency Negotiator: Vance Piggott. Employee Organization: Folsom Police Officers'Association Motion by Vice Mayor Raithel, second by Gouncilmember Rohrbough to adjourn to closed session. Motion passed by the following roll-callvote:
AYES: Leary, Raithel, Rohrbough, Aquino
NOES: None
ABSENT: Kozlowski
ABSTAIN: None
RECONVENE
City Attorney Steven Wang announced that no final action was taken during closed session
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business to come before the City Council, the meeting was adjourned at 6:31 pm.
Droft Not official lJntit Approved by the City Council Poge 1
02/11/2025 Item No.3.
File 034-2125-001
Folsom City Council Minutes
January 28,2025
SUBMITTED BY:
Jennifer Jimenez, Deputy City Clerk
ATTEST:
Sarah Aquino, Mayor
Droft Not Officiol lJntil Approved by the City Council Page 2
02/11/2025 Item No.3.
File 034-2125-001
Folsom City Council Minutes
January 28,2025
Gity Council Regular Meeting
MINUTES
Tuesday, January 28,2025 6:30 PM
CALL TO ORDER
The regular City Council meeting was called to order at 6:31 pm with Mayor Sarah Aquino presiding ROLL GALL:
Councilmembers Present Michael Kozlowski, Councilmember Barbara Leary, Councilmember
Justin Raithel, Vice Mayor
Anna Rohrbough, Councilmember
Sarah Aquino, Mayor
Councilmembers Absent. None
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
The pledge of allegiance was recited.
AGENDA UPDATE
City Attorney Steven Wang advised that there was additional and revised information for item 6 BUSINESS FROM THE FLOOR:
The following speakers addressed the City Council:
1. YK Chalamcherla
2. Naomi Machado
3. Lisa Ladd
4. Orrin Heatlie
5. Scott Machado
6. Sarah Norberg
Councilmember Kozlowski made a brief statement under this item SCHEDULED PRESENTATIONS:
1. Recognition of the 2Q24 Folsom Holiday Lights Contest Winners Draft Not Officiol IJntil Approved by the City Council Poge 7
02/11/2025 Item No.3.
File Q34-21 25-001
Folsom City Council Minutes
January 28,2025
Mayor Aquino introduced this item on behalf of the Communications Department.
Folsom Times Bill Sullivan thanked Communications Director Christine Brainerd, Communications Officer Chris Shepard, and the business community. Also, he thanked City of Folsom and the community for decorating for the holiday spirit.
Mayor Aquino announced the winners and thanked those who participated in the following categories:
Clark Griswold - use of Holidav Liohts
Brian Moss at 1530 Freswick Drive
Selected by Mayor Aquino but he was not present to receive the award, so she took a picture with Folsom Times Bill Sullivan.
Hollvwood Christmas - Best use of Theme and/or Fictional Characters Jillian, Dale, and Bentley Gonzalez at 105 Ledgemont Court Selected by Mike Kozlowski but they were not present to receive the award Illuminate the Block - Best Multi-House Displav
The Escamillas and Roger and Diana Curtis at 1730 Darvel Court Selected by Vice Mayor Raithel and he presented the award.
Hollv Jollv Residence - Best Overall Residenee
Ashley and Johnny Brown at 530 Flower Drive
Selected by Councilmember Leary and she presented the award.
Merrv and Briqht Business - Festive Commercial Business Displav (lncludes Window Paintinq) Judy Collinsworth, Mike Dickenson, Joan and Kevin McGinnis, Roberta and Larry Lawmen, and Jim Snook at Sutter Street, Historic Folsom
Selected by Councilmember Rohrbough and she presented the award.
CONSENT CALENDAR:
Items appearing on the Consent Calendar are considered routine and may be approved by one motion.
Councilmembers may pull an item for discussion.
2. Mayor's Appointment and Confirmation by the City Council of Planning Commissioners to Serve on the Historic District Commission
3. Resolution No. 11323 - A Resolution Approving the Preliminary Engineers Repoft, Declaring the lntention to Order the Formation of the Natoma Station Maintenance Assessment District No. 2025-1, to Levy and Collect Assessments, to Provide Notice of Public Hearing and Direct the Mailing of Assessment Ballots Within the Proposed District in the City of Folsom
4. Resolution No. 11324- A Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Execute an Agreement with Barnum & Celillo Electric for the Replacement of the Existing Electrical Service Panels (2) at the Folsom Rodeo Grounds
5. Resolution No. 11325- A Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Execute an Agreement with Capra Environmental Services Corp for Managed Grazing Services Within the City of Folsom
Droft Not Official Until Approved by the City Council Page 2
02/11/2025 Item No.3.
File 034-2125-001
Folsom City Council Minutes
January 28,2025
Motion by Councilmember Kozlowski, second by Vice Mayor Raithel, to approve items No. 2-5 of the Gonsent Galendar. Motion passed by the following roll-call vote:
AYES: Leary, Raithel, Rohrbough, Kozlowski, Aquino
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
PUBLIC HEARING:
6. Folsom Town Center North LLTSM
i. Resolution No. 1 1322- A Resolution Determining that the Folsom Town Center North LLTSM Project is Exempt from CEQA and Approving Said Large Lot Tentative Subdivision Map Community Development Associate Planner Josh Kinkade made a presentation and responded to questions from the City Council. Community Development Director Pam Johns provided additional information.
The public hearing was opened and closed at 7:00 pm being no requests to speak under this item.
The following speaker addressed the City Council under this item after the public hearing was closed
1. Greg Stozer
Councilmember Leary thanked staff for answering questions and addressing the email regarding this item.
Motion by Gouncilmember Kozlowski, second by Vice Mayor Raithel, to approve Resolution No. 11322. Motion passed by the following roll-call vote:
AYES: Leary, Raithel, Rohrbough, Kozlowski, Aquino
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
CITY MANAGER REPORTS
lnterim City Manager Dan Haverty thanked and congratulated Mayor Aquino for the State of the City event and her speech; he also thanked the Communications group and the Police and Fire staff members who are developing an outreach program to raise awareness of wildfire risks; he spoke about the Fire Department's acquisition of two Braun ambulances, the Kids Play Park new play structures that should be completed in the second quarter of 2026, the Owl Be Your Valentine event at the Folsom City Zoo, and the Lego Building contest being held at the library.
COUNCIL COMMENTS
Councilmember Kozlowski congratulated Mayor Aquino for her State of the City speech.
Vice Mayor Raithel spoke about the Sac Sewer board meeting and the latest update on the capital project and thanked his mom from Goodyear, Arizona for coming to the council meeting.
Councilmember Leary spoke about attending an opening of a Kaiser and PACE facility.
Droft Not Official lJntil Approved by the City Council Page 3
02/11/2025 Item No.3.
File 034-21 25-001
Folsom City Council Minutes
January 28,2025
Councilmember Rohrbough spoke about Mercy of Folsom celebrating 35 years, attending a SacRT meeting, and an upcoming meeting regarding issues on South Lexington.
Mayor Aquino thanked the Communications staff including Communications Director Christine Brainerd, Communications Officer Chris Shepard, and Social Media Coordinator Andrew Eggers, for helping her prepare the State of the City speech.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business to come before the City Council, the meeting was adjourned at7:14 pm.
SUBMITTED BY
Jennifer Jimenez, Deputy City Clerk
ATTEST
Sarah Aquino, Mayor
Droft Not Officiol tJntil Approved by the City Council Page 4
02/11/2025 Item No.3.
i l+ i -l:i'r'l
Folsom City Council
Staff ort
MEETING DATE: 2ltu202s
AGENDA SECTION: Consent Calendar
SUBJECT: Resolution No. 1 1326 - A Resolution Authorizingthe City Manager to Execute a Contract Amendment with Ghirardelli Associates for the East Bidwell and Iron Point / US50 Onramp Improvement Project (Project No. PW2203) and Appropriation of Funds FROM: Public Works Department
RECOMMENDATION / CITY COUNCIL ACTION
The Public Works Department recommends that the City Council pass and adopt Resolution No. 11326 - A Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Execute a Contract Amendment with Ghirardelli Associates for the East Bidwell and Iron Point / US50 Onramp Improvement Project (Project No. PW2203) and Appropriation of Funds.
BACKGROUND / ISSUE
In January 2024,the City Council approved Resolution No. 1 ll52 - A Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Execute a Contract with Ghirardelli Associates for the East Bidwell and Iron Point / US50 Onramp Improvement Project (Project No. PW2203) and Appropriation of Funds' Subsequently, the City of Folsom entered into an agreement with Ghirardelli Associates to provide Construction Management Services for the East Bidwell and Iron Point / US50 Onramp Improvements Project
As the project progressed, unforeseen delays occurred, primarily due to pole manufacturing lead times. Additionally, Caltrans Encroachment Permit and Oversight requirements necessitated an additional electrical inspector to ensure proper compliance with ramp metering installations. These factors resulted in a longer-than-anticipated construction period and an increased need for inspection services. Consequently, the originally allocated budget for construction management services has been fully utilized.
1
02/11/2025 Item No.4.
Currently, the project is in the close-out phase, with remaining tasks necessary to ensure final project completion. To cover the additional hours expended due to the prolonged construction period and the required inspections, an amendment to the original contract is requested in the amount of $17,224.88. This amendment will cover the added services rendered as well as the original close-out activities required to bring the project to completion.
Approval of this amendment is necessary to finalize all project-related work and to ensure full compliance with Caltrans and City requirements.
POLICY / RULE
Section 2.36.080, Award of Contracts of the Folsom Municipal Code states, inpart, that contracts for supplies, equipment, services, and construction with an estimated value of $75,049 or greater shall be awarded by City Council.
ANALYSIS
City staff has reviewed the Ghirardelli Associates scope and fee to provide additional services to cover the additional hours expended due to the prolonged construction period and the required inspections.
Staff will use the City's standard Construction Agreement in a form acceptable to the City Attorney.
F'INAN IMPACT
The original contract with Ghirardelli Associates was authorized for $75,142.29. Staff is requesting anamendment to the contract for the amount of $17,224.88 for an updated total not-to- exceed contract amount of $92,367.17.
Staff is also requesting an appropriation of funds in the amount of $I7,224.88.Sufficient funds are available in the Transportation Improvement Fund (Fund 446) for the appropriation.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
This project has been deemed categorically exempt from environmental review.
ATTACHMENT
Resolution No. 11326 - A Resolution Authorizingthe City Manager to Execute a Contract with Ghirardelli Associates for the East Bidwell and Iron Point / US50 Onramp Improvement Project (Project No. PW2203) and Appropriation of Funds
2 Page 24
02/11/2025 Item No.4.
Submitted,
Mark Rackovan, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR
J Page 25
02/11/2025 Item No.4.
RESOLUTION NO. 11326
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A
CONTRACT AMENDMENT WITH GHIRARDELLI ASSOCIATES FOR THE EAST BIDWELL AND IRON POINT / USsO ONRAMP IMPROVEMENT PROJECT (PROJECT NO. PW2203) AND APPROPRTATTON OF FUNDS
WHEREAS, construction on the East Bidwell and Iron Point Road / US50 Onramp Improvement Project is completed and required full time construction inspection staff and materials testing; and
WHEREAS, staff previously selected Ghirardelli Associates, Inc. based on proposed project staff, project understanding, and experience with similar types of projects, for a not to exceed amount of $75,142.29; and
WHEREAS, additional inspection services were required to finalize all project-related work and to ensure full compliance with Caltrans and City requirements due to unforeseen delays occurring, primarily in pole manufacturing lead times; and WHEREAS, Caltrans Encroachment Permit and Oversight requirements necessitated additional electrical inspector to ensure proper compliance with ramp metering installations; and WHEREAS, Sufficient funds are available in the Transportation Improvement Fund (Fund 446) inthe amount of $17,224.88 to be appropriated for an updated total not-to-exceed contract amount of $92,367.I7; and
WHEREAS, the agreement will be in a form acceptable to the City Attorney:
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Folsom authorizes the City Manager to execute a contract amendment with Ghirardelli Associates for the East Bidwell and Iron Point / US50 Onramp Improvement Project (Project No. PW2203) in the amount of$I7,224.88.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Finance Director is authorized to appropriate 517,224.88 in the Transportation Improvement Fund (Fund 446) for the East Bidwell and Iron Point / US50 Onramp Improvement Project (Project No. PW2203), for an updated total not-to- exceed contract amount of $92,367 .17 .
pASSED AND ADOPTED this 1lth day of February 2025,by the following roll-call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Councilmember(s):
Councilmember(s):
Councilmember(s):
Councilmember(s):
Resolution No. 11326
Sarah Aquino, MAYOR
02/11/2025 Item No.4.
ATTEST:
Christa Freemantle, CITY CLERK
Resolution No. 11326
Page2 of2 Page 27
02/11/2025 Item No.4.
This page is intentionally Ieft blonk
to facilitate double- side d printing
and minimize PaPer ttse.
CITY OF
DTSTINCTIVE B.Y NATURE
FOLS()l\[
02/11/2025 Item No.4.
i t+ l,:J{-i':\'l
rl .,trrr 1,.4 a 1 :: tr ri
Folsom City Council
Staff Re rt
MEETING DATE: 2trU2025
AGENDA SECTION: New Business
SUBJECT: Resolution No. 1 1327 - A Resolution Adoptingthe 2024 Local Road Safety Plan
FROM: Public Works Department
RECO ON / CITY COUN ACTION
The Public Works Department recommends that the City Council pass and adopt Resolution No.
II327- A Resolution Adoptingthe2024 Local Road Safety Plan.
BACKGROUND / ISSUE
ln2}I9,the Public Works Department applied for and secured a$72,000 grant from the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) to develop the City's first Local Road Safety Plan (LRSP). The LRSP is a data-driven approach that identifies high-risk intersections and roadway segments with the highest incidence of fatal and severe injury collisions. It also analyzes the contributing factors to these collisions and recommends corrective measures to enhance roadway safety.
The City Council formally adopted the previous version of the LRSP in June of 2021, and the plan served as the foundation for submitting grant applications to Caltrans under the Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) during Cycle 10. As a result, the City successfully obtained three HSIP grants totaling $2.9S million. These grants funded critical safety improvements, including the Folsom Lake Crossing Median Barrier Project and the Traffic Signal Safety Project, furthering the City's commitment to enhancing traffic safety for all road users.
The City routinely updates the Local Road Safety Plan to reflect evolving traffic patterns, emerging safety concerns, and the latest best practices in roadway safety. These updates ensure that the City continues to identiff and prioritize high-risk locations and proactively pursue funding opportunities for necessary safety improvements. By maintaining an up-to-date LRSP, the City 1
02/11/2025 Item No.5.
strengthens its ability to secure additional grant funding and implement effective measures to reduce collisions and enhance safety for motorists, cyclists, and pedestrians.
The City Council approved a consultant contract with Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. on March 26,2024, as authorized by Resolution No. 11178, to develop the 2024 Local Road Safety Plan.
The firm prepared the draft LRSP, solicited input from the public, and received a recommendation to approve the LRSP from the Traffic Safety Committee. Staff is seeking approval from the City Council to approve the final plan.
POLICY / RULE
Caltrans requirements for a Local Road Safety Plan include a requirement that the local governing body must adopt the plan before it can be considered final.
ANALYSIS
The LRSP is a data-driven, analytics-based tool for identifring the location, associated factors, and potential corrective measures of fatal and severe injury G+SD collisions. The LRSP relies on data contained in the traffic collision reports prepared by local law enforcement, which is then submitted to the Califomia Highway Patrol for inclusion in the Statewide Integrated Traffic Records System (SWITRS). Using SWITRS, the consultarf analyzed four years (2020-2023) of collision reports to determine collision trends and high-risk locations.
Some of the key trends that were identified in the analysis were:
. Of the 2,07 6 total collisions reported between January I , 2020, and December 3 1 , 2023 , 13 were fatal and 54 were severe inju.y crashes (F+SI)
. Top causes of all crashes: Unsafe speed (27%), red-light running (I4%), DUI (10%) o Peak crash times: 4:00 pm - 6:00 pm
o Most crashes occur at intersections (80%) with the remaining 20%o occurring along roadway segments
o 28Yo of total collisions involved fixed objects or parked cars o 20Yo of the F+SI collisions involved bicyclists or pedestrians o Aggressive driving was a contributing factor for 40o/o of all crashes in the study period (835 total), resulting in three (3) fatal crashes and twenty-three (23) severe injury crashes.
Aggressive driving crashes include behaviors such as unsafe speed, following too closely, or disregarding traffic signals and signs. Aggressive driving crashes occurred most commonly at intersections.
The analysis of the City of Folsom's Fatal and Severe Injury (F+SD crashes compared to statewide data has identified key areas where the City experiences higher or lower crash rates. This data- driven insight will help guide safety improvements, funding applications, and strategic interventions.
2 Page 30
02/11/2025 Item No.5.
Areas Where Folsom Has Higher F+SI Crash Rates
The following crash types occur at a higher rate in Folsom than the statewide average, indicating areas that need targeted interventions:
1. Aggressive Driving: 53.5% in Folsom vs.33.lYo statewide (+20.4%)
2. Impaired Driving: 395% in Folsom vs.25.3o/o statewide (+I4.2%)
3. Lane Departure Crashes:49.7oh in Folsom vs.43.3Yo statewide (+6.4%)
4. Young Driver Involvement:17.2o/o in Folsom vs.13.loh statewide (+4.I%)
5. Intersection Crashes: 26.8% in Folsom vs. 23 .6%o statewide (+3 .l%)
6. Aging Driver Involvement:73.4Yo in Folsom vs.I2.4Yo statewide (+1.0%) 7 . Distracted Driving: 5.lYo inFolsom vs. 5.0% statewide (+0.1%) Implications & Recommendations
Focus on aggressive driving and impaired driving through enforcement strategies, public education campaigns, and roadway design improvements.
Address lane departure crashes with countermeasures such as rumble strips, enhanced lane markings, and shoulder widening.
Improve intersection safety through signal timing adjustments, enhanced crosswalks, and sight distance improvements.
Implement educational programs targeting young and aging drivers to improve safety awareness.
Public Outreach Summary for the LRSP
Public engagement for the LRSP was conducted through a multi-faceted approach, ensuring broad community participation. Outreach efforts included discussions held during regularly scheduled Traffic Safety Committee Meetings, in-person engagement at the Folsom Farmers Market, and online surveys to collect input from residents and stakeholders.
The2024 outreach effort resulted in437 survey responses and382 mapped public safety concerns, reflecting a substantial increase in public participation compared to the 2021 effort. which received 62 responses from 54 unique respondents.
The expanded public outreach has provided valuable insights into community priorities, ensuring that the LRSP remains data-driven and responsive to the transportation safety concerns of residents. The most frequently identified safety concerns from the responses include:
a
a
a
a
aJ Page 31
02/11/2025 Item No.5.
. Aggressive driving (speeding)
. Red-light running
o Distracted driving
o Pedestrian and bicycle safety
o East Bidwell Street traffic congestion
The City completed this Local Road Safety Plan (LRSP) to guide future transportation safety improvements for years to come. Through a data-driven analysis, the City has identified crash types, primary crash factors, and high-crash locations. Additionally, key emphasis areas have been established to inform further safety evaluations of the City's transportation network. These emphasis areas will help shape corridor improvements, education programs, and capital projects aimed at enhancing transportation safety.
With the insights gained from the LRSP, the City can:
Pursue Grant Funding - Apply for future grants to support infrastructure improvements across the City.
Secure Additional Funding - Actively seek alternative funding sources to enhance safety for all road users.
Enhance Collaboration - Work with stakeholders, safety partners, and neighboring municipalities to create a cohesive and safer transportation network.
Continuously Evaluate and Improve - Iteratively assess current and proposed safety programs and capital improvements to refine the City's transportation network.
Next Steps
. City Council Approval: Formal adoption by the City Council. o Plan Updates: In accordance with Caltrans guidelines, the LRSP will be reviewed and updated within five years (by 2029 or earlier).
. Implementation of Safety Improvements.
The report identifies three categories of safety improvements: Near-Term Improvements (0-3 Years), Mid-Term Improvements (3-5 Years), and Long-Term Improvements (5+ Years). Near- term improvements consist of improvements that are relatively low cost and can be implemented most readily. Mid-Term improvements are higher cost improvements, while Long-Term improvements are the highest cost and may require engineering design and permitting to implement. Some examples of these improvements are
Near-Term Improvements
o Install retroreflective backplates and/or additional signal heads o Install pedestrian countdown signal heads
. Implement Leading Pedestrian Intervals
o Implement All-Way-Stop Control at intersections
o Install dynamic speed warning signs
O
a
a
4 Page 32
02/11/2025 Item No.5.
Mid-Term Improvements
o Install raised median
o Install Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacon at pedestrian crossings o Install rumble strips (edge line and centerline)
Long-Term Improvements
o Convert high-risk intersections into full roundabouts o Construct pedestrian bridges or underpasses at critical crossings . Implement road diet strategies to improve multimodal safety o Install high-friction surface treatments (HFST) on curves o Install separated bike lanes
This structured, multifaceted approach will ensure a safer, more efficient, and well-connected transportation network for all road users in the City.
The Traffic Safety Committee discussed the draft LRSP at their December 12,2024 meeting and recommended that the LRSP be adopted with additional revisions included in the final draft before the City Council.
FINANCIAL IMPACT
There is no direct financial impact associated with adopting the LRSP.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
None required.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Resolution No. 1 1327- A Resolution Adoptingthe 2024 Local Road Safety Plan
2. Draft 2024Local Road Safety Plan
3. Meeting Minutes - Traffic Safety Committee, December 12,2024 Submitted,
Mark Rackovan, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR
5 Page 33
02/11/2025 Item No.5.
ATTACHMENT 1
02/11/2025 Item No.5.
RESOLUTION NO. II327
A RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE 2O24LOCAL ROAD SAFETY PLAN
WHEREAS, the City of Folsom has prepared a2024 Local Road Safety Plan (LRSP); and WHEREAS, the LRSP analyzestraffic collision data to determine the causes and solutions for fatal and severe injury collisions; and
WHEREAS, the LRSP has identified the highest priority intersections and road segments and the corrective measures that could reduce collision frequency at those locations; and WHEREAS, the LRSP is integral to successfully applying for funding from the Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) that is administered by the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans); and
WHEREAS, Caltrans requires that each public agency's LRSP be adopted by the agency's governing body.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Folsom hereby adopts the 2024 Local Road Safety Plan.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 1lth day of February,2025, by the following roll-call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Councilmember(s)
Councilmember(s)
Councilmember(s)
Councilmember(s)
Sarah Aquino, MAYOR
ATTEST:
Christa Freemantle, CITY CLERK
Resolution No. 11327
02/11/2025 Item No.5.
ATTACHMENT 2
02/11/2025 Item No.5.
@@@@
02/11/2025 Item No.5.
2024
City of Folsom
LOCAT ROAD SAFETY PI.AN
lanuary 2025
Copyright @2025 Kimtey-Horn and Associates, lnc'
GrrY oF FoLsoM
LOCAL RONDWAY
SnFETY Pmru
02/11/2025 Item No.5.
2024
City of Folsom
TOCAT ROAD SAFETY PLAN
LOCAL ROADWAY SAFTEY PLAN
Prepared for:
City of Folsom
Fotsom City Hatt
50 Natoma Street
Folsom, CA 95630
Prepared by:
Kimtey-Horn and Associates' lnc
555 Capitot Matt
Suite 300
Sacramento, CA 95814
91 6-858-5800
This document, together with the concepts and designs presented herein, as an instrument of service, is intended only for the specific purpose and client for which it was prepared. Reuse of and improper reliance on this document without written authorizatian and adaptation by Kimley-Horn and Associates, lnc. shall be without Iiability to Kimley-Horn and Associates, /nc. @ January 2025
Folsom LRSP 01.14.2025.docx
Page ii
City of Fotsom
)anuary 2025
02/11/2025 Item No.5.
2024
City of Folsom
tOCAt ROAD SAFETY PIAN
AcTTowLEDGEMENTS
The City of Fotsom emptoyees and partners were instrumentat in the development, review, and refinement of this Technicat Memorandum. The City of Fotsom's Engineering Department and Kimtey-Horn woutd tike to express their appreciation to the supporting staff and partners for their partici pation a nd contributions.
City of Fotsom
Zach Bosch (Senior Civit Engineer, Traffic)
Ryan Chance (Engineering Manager)
Matt Washburn (Traffic Safety Committee)
Scott Baitey (Traffic Safety Committee)
Kevin Goddard (Traffic Safety Committee)
Mathew McGee (Traffic Safety Committee)
Tim Gatovich (Traffic Safety Committee)
Joanne Brausch (Traffic Safety Committee)
Brett Botinger (Senior Traits Planner)
Consultant Team
Robert Paderna
MattWeir
Luke Lazzarini
Zachary Ramatingam
Brandi Chitdress
Kristen Mei
SraruroRY NortcE
S U TVCVS
Notwithstanding any other provision of [aw, reports, surveys, schedutes, lists, or data compiLed or cottected for the purpose of identifying, evatuating, or ptanning the safety enhancement of potentiaL accident sites, hazardous roadway conditions, or raiLway- highway crossings, pursuant to sections 130, 144, and 148 of this titte or for the purpose of devetoping any highway safety construction improvement projectwhich may be imptemented utitizing Federat-aid highwayfunds shatLnot be subjectto discovery or admitted into evidence in a FederaLor State court proceeding or considered for other purposes in any action for damages arising from any occurrence at a location mentioned or addressed in such reports, surveys, schedutes, tists, or data.
City of Fotsom
Januaty 2025
Fo[som LRSP _01.1 4.2025.docx
Page iii
02/11/2025 Item No.5.
2024
City of Folsom
1 tOCAt ROAD SAFETY PIAN
Tael-e oF CoNTENTS
Severity levet..........
City of Fotsom Historic K+Sl Crashes Compared to Statewide ................'.
Office of Traffic Safety (OTS) Rankings .....'......
Primary Cottision Factor........
Highest Occurring Crash TyPes
4.6. Aggressive and lmpaired Driving Crashes
4.7. Vutnerabte Road User Crashes.....
4-7.1 - Pedestrian Crashes ....
4.7.2. Bicycte Crashes
Crashes by Lighting Condition
Crashes byTime of Day.........
4.10. Crashes byYear.......
1.2. Commute Patterns
1.2.1. Commute Modes
1.2.2. Commute TravetTime ..
....3
3.1. Guiding Materiats.
3.1.1. Locat Roadway Safety Manual
3.1.2. Highway Safety ManuaI
3.2. Anatysis Techniques ...............
3.2.1. Crash Anatysis
3.2.2. Network Screeni ng Analysis.......
3.3. Critical Crash Rate (CCR)Anatysis.....
3.4. Equivatent Property Damage Onty (EPDO).......
.......3
2. 3.
4.1. 4.2.
4.3. 4.4.
4.5. 4.8.
4.9. 5.1.
5.2. 5.3.
..25
.,.,,,,..26
.,',..,,,32
5. PuBLrc Eruc4oevrruT...............
32 32
34 34
35 37
.37
.39
.39
.39
.40
.40
lntroduction
ln-Person Event Summaries ..........
5.2.1. Historic Fotsom Farmers Market - September7,2024
5.2.2. Historic Fotsom Farmers Market - October 19,2024 ..
Ontine Community Survey Responses
5.3.1. Ontine Map & Survey Engagement
Folsom LRSP 01.14.2025.docx
Page iv
City of Fotsom
)anua(y 2025
02/11/2025 Item No.5.
2024
City of Folsom
6. GourureRveASURES .................47
TOCAL ROAD SAFETY PIAN
6.1. Engineering Countermeasures
6.1.1. Crash Modification Factors and Crash Reduction Factors
6.1.2. E ngi neering Cou ntermeasu res Tootbox .........
6.2. Non-lnfrastructure Countermeasures .
PRoJEcT LOCATIONS..
IMPLEMENTAflON GUIDE
8.1. Evatuation ...........
8.2. lmptementation
8.2.1. Near- and Mid-Term Focus Areas
8.3. Poticy Update
8.4. Updates to the Local Road Safety Ptan..'.......
8.5. Fundin9................
8.5.1. Highway Safety lmprovement Program (HSIP)
8.5.2. Cattrans Active Transportation Program (ATP)
8.5.3. State Transportation lmprovement Program (STIP) ......
7. 8.
9 ........47
.47
.48
52 tro
..........59
..........60
..........61
.....................61
...............'...'.62
.................,,'.62
8.5.4. Catifornia Senate Bitt 1 (SB 1)............... ........63
8.5.5. Catifornia Office of Traffic Safety (OTS) Grants...'..'........' ..'...............63 Nexrsre ps ...........64
Fo[som LRSP 01 .14.2025.docx
Page v
City of Fotsom
Januaty 2025
02/11/2025 Item No.5.
2024
City of Folsom
tOCAt ROAD SAFETY PLAN
Lrsr or Apperuotces
lntersection Network Screening Resutts
Segment Network Screening Resutts
Online Survey Comments
ln-Person Tabting Map Comments
Project Sheets
Poticy Update
Appendix A
Appendix B
Appendix C
Appendix D
Appendix E
Appendix F
Lrsr or Frcunes
Figure 1 - Location of Fotsom
Figure 2 - Citywide Criticat Crash Rate Map ..
Figure 3 - Citywide lntersection Roadway Segment EPDO Map Figure 4 - Crashes by Severity (Fatat and Severe)
Figure 5 - Crashes by Severity (Other lnjury, Comptaint of Pain, & Property Damage Onty) ..
Figure 6 - lnjury Crash Map...........
Figure 7 -lnjury Crash Heat MaP...
Figure B - Fatat and Severe lnjury Crash Map............'.....
Figure 9 - Crashes by Primary Cottision Factor
Figure 10 - K+Sl Crashes by Primary Cottision Factor.'...' Figure 1 1 - Crashes byTYPe....
Figure 1 2 - K+Sl Crashes by TYPe
Figure 1 3 - Aggressive and lmpaired Driving Crashes'.....
Figure 1 4 - Aggressive Driving Crash M ap ...........
Figure 15 - lmpaired Driving Crash Map ..........
Figure 1 6 - Vulnerabte Road User Crashes .................'...
Figure 17 -Vulnerabte Road User Crashes....
Figure 18 - Crashes by Lighting Condition .....
Figure 19 - Crashes by Time of DaY
Figure 20 - Crashes by Year (2020 - 2023)......
Figure 21 - Crashes by Year (2025 - 2023) ......
11 14
16 16
18 19
...,,.20
.23
.24
.25
.25
.26
.28
.30
.32
.33
.34
.35
.35
.36
Folsom LRSP 01 .14.2025.docx
Page vi
City of Fotsom
)anuary 2025
02/11/2025 Item No.5.
TOCAT ROAD SAFETY PTAN
Figure 22 - Sociat Pinpoint Website Statistics
Figure 23 - Sociat Pinpoint Community Map Ontine lnterface Figure 24 - Pubtic Comments Compited with Crashes ......'....'...
Figure 25 - CMF Catcutation
Figure 26 - CMF Method Sampte Calcutation
Figure 27 -CRF Catcutation
Figure 28 - Case Study Locations...
Figure 29 - Case Study Locations and Pubtic Comments
Ltsr or Taeles
Tabte 1 - Crashes bY SeveritY.
Tabte 2 - City of Fotsom K+Sl Crashes Compared to Statewide K+Sl Crashes ......
Tabte 3 - Folsom OTS Ranking(2021)
Tabte 4 - Fotsom Engineering Cou ntermeasures Tootbox.....
Tabte 5 - city of Fotsom Non-lnf rastructure countermeasures Tootbox ...
Tabte 6 - Project Locations
Tabte 7 - Near-Term, Mid-Term, and Long-Term lmprovements................ 2024
AASHTO
ADT
ARIDE
Cattrans
CCR
CHP
CMF
CRF
DRE
EPDO
FHWA
GIS
City of Folsom
Lrsr or AcnoNvms
American Association of state Highway and Transportation officiats Average DaityTraffic
Advanced Roadside lmpaired Driving Enforcement
Catifornia Department of Transportation
Criticat Crash Rate
Catifornia H ighway PatroI
Crash Modification Factor
Crash Reduction Factor
Drug Recognition Expert
Equivatent Property Damage OntY
Federat H ighway Admi nistration
Geographic lnformation SYstem
..............40
AA
..............46
..............47
...47
...48
...54
...55
Fotsom LRSP -01.
1 4.2025.docx
Page vii
City of Fotsom
)anuary 2025
02/11/2025 Item No.5.
2024
City of Folsom
LOCAT ROAD SAFETY PIAN
High Friction Surface Treatment
Highway Safety ManuaI
Fatatand Severe lnjury Crashes
N ationat H ighway Traff ic Saf ety Ad ministration
Property Damage Onty
Rectangutar Rapid Ftashing Beacon
Strategic Highway Safety Ptan
Statewide lntegrated Traffic Records System
HFST
HSM
K+SI
NHTSA
PDO
RRFB
SHSP
SWITRS
Fotsom LRSP 01.14.2025.docx
Page viii
City of Fotsom
)anuary 2025
02/11/2025 Item No.5.
2024
City of Folsom
TOCAL ROAD SAFETY PIAN
1. lrurnooucloN
The City of Fotsom Locat Roadway Safety Ptan has several notabte purposes. The first is to identify traffic safety improvements based on a review of crash data and input f rom City staff , stakehotders, and the community. This project atso provides the City with a foundation for a decision-making f ramework so that it can identify, prioritize, and imptement proven safety countermeasures f rom the city,s tootbox in the fottowing years. This report can also serve as an ongoing resource as city staff identify and pursue funding through various programs to imptement the identified safety improvements.
This Locat Roadway Saf ety Ptan summarizes the existing safety context f or the City of Fotsom based on crash records obtained from the Catifornia Highway Patrot (CHP) Statewide lntegrated Traffic Records System (SWITRS) database. This data has been used to identify Citywide safetytrends, high- crash locations, and locations with u nusuat crash patterns or high-crash severities. The anatysis was conducted using a network screening process f or the City-maintained roadway system using crash records spanning a four-year period from January 1,2020 through December 31,2023. Section 3 of the report describes the anatysis techniques that were used and why these methods were chosen.
1.1. Background
The City of Fotsom is tocated in nofthern Catifornia and is in northeast Sacramento County (see Figure 1). Situated east of Sacramento, Fotsom residents tive within 25 mites of Catifornia's capitot.
Fotsom is home to over 84,000 residents (as of Juty 1, 2023). There are two high schools serving Folsom residents: Fotsom High Schoot and Vista det Lago High Schoot. Major retail destinations within the City inctude the Pattadio outdoor mat[, Fotsom Premium Outtets, the Fotsom Central Business District, and the Fotsom Historic District. Fotsom is home to many jobs, with the largest emptoyers being lntet, Catifornia lSO, and Micron.
Fotsom has an extensive transpoftation network that ranges from [oca[ access via neighborhood streets and cottectors, to regionat access via highways through the City. U.S Highway 50 (US-50) runs east-west through the southern hatf of the City and connects Fotsom to rest of Sacramento CountytothewestandEtDoradoCountytotheeast. EastBidwettStreetisamajorafterialthatruns east-west through Fotsom, connecting the Fotsom Centrat Business District to the rest of Fotsom, and continues to the new devetopment on the south side of US-50. Due to its tocation and broad connectivity, East Bidwettstreet corridor is often congested during peak periods of travet, resutting in vehicte queues and detay onto adjacent City streets. Other major afterial roadways in Fotsom providing connectivity inctude Btue Ravine Road, Oak Avenue Parkway, Folsom Boutevard, and lron point Road. Additionatty, major devetopment on the south side of US-50 within Fotsom is expected to increase mutti-modat traff ic. Major roadways in this area inctude East Bidwetl Street, Atder Creek Parkway, Mangini Parkway, Prairie City Road, and White Rock Road.
For pubtic transportation, Sacramento Regionat Transit (SacRT) operates tight rait service atong Fotsom Boutevard corridor from the Fotsom Historic District to the Fotsom Premium Outtets. The tight rait line continues into downtown Sacramento. SacRT atso operates [oca[ bus routes within Folsom.
City of Fotsom
)anuaty 2025
Fotsom LRSP -01.1 4.2025.docx
02/11/2025 Item No.5.
2024
City of Folsom
tOCAt ROAD SAFETY PLAN
Figure 1 - Location of Folsom
I-BO
sR-99
flW'"
S
n
^'n'"'Placer
44,-fthan Rav n'l
County
6ranite 8ay
j
Oran
{
gesi
]30h
F5
14 Doradonltts ".-.
Trrils
El Dgirado
,,,,,n CountY
US-50
I-80
ity of
lsb
+tr !l#1a Co
Dlamond
Sprln9s
US-50
SR-T6
Amador ''f'"
v a Iley
Cdunty
to
.J'
Co
a
r-5
sR-99
Fotsom LRSP -01 .1 4.2025.docx
City of Fotsom
Januaty 2025
02/11/2025 Item No.5.
2024
City of Folsom
tOCAt ROAD SAFETY PIAN
1.2. Commute Patterns
Based on the US Census Bureau American Community Survey (ACS) data trom2023, the City of Fotsom has the fottowing commute trends:
1.2.1. Commute Modes
Mode of Travet o/o
Biking O.4o/o
Taxicab, motorcycte, or Other O.60/o
Pubtic Transit 1 .3o/o
Watking 1.3o/o
Auto Passenger (carpoot) 6.40/o
Worked from home 25.8o/o
Private auto 64.1o/o
Source: US Census Bureau ACS 5-yeat 2018-2022
The majority of the working poputation in Fotsom drive to work atone. An additional 25.80/o of the workingpoputationworkfromhomeand6.4o/ooltheworkingpoputationcarpoot. Therefore,tess lhan 4o/o of the working poputation witt use atternative modes of transportation to driving a car (both alone and carpoot).
1.2.2" Commute Travel Time
commute Time towork o/o
Less than 10 minutes 13.60/o
10 to 14 minutes 14.8o/o
15 to 19 minutes 12.9o/o
20 lo 24 minutes 15.4o/o
251o29 minutes 7.2o/o
30 to 34 minutes 12.4o/o
35 to 44 minutes 8.5o/o
45 to 59 minutes 7.8o/o
More than 60 minutes 7.3o/o
Source: US Census Bureau ACS s-year 2O18-2022
Asshownabove,themeantravettimetoworkforFolsomresidentsis26.l minutes,withover63% of residents having a commute trave[ time of less than 30 minutes.
City of Fotsom
January 2025
Fotsom LRSP _01 .1 4.2025.docx
02/11/2025 Item No.5.
2024
CW of Folsom
TOCAT ROAD SAFETY PLAN
This report is organized into the fottowing sections:
r Section 1 presents an introduction to the technicaI memorandum. r Section 2 presents the data sources used in the anatysis. r Section 3 describes the guiding materiats and anatysis techniques for the data anatysis.
I Section 4 provides a summary of safetytrends.
. Section 5 provides an overview of the pubtic engagement process and community feedback
r Section 6 includes potentiat engineering and non-infrastructure countermeasures. 'section 7 tists the project locations identified and the recommended countermeasures r Section 8 describes howthe safety plan can be imptemented and monitored. r Section 9 describes next steps for the safety ptan.
. Appendices
City of Fotsom
Januaty 2025
Fotsom LRSP _0'1. 1 4.2025.docx
02/11/2025 Item No.5.
2024
City of Folsom
tOCAt ROAD SAFETY PLAN
2. Dera SouRces
The fottowing data was obtained f rom the City for use in crash data analysis.
2.1. Roadway Network
The crash anatysis, which is described in detait in Section 3 (Data Analysis), used Catifornia Department of Transportation's (Cattrans') roadway ctassification system. The roadway network ctassification was assigned to each corridor roadway segment as either a major arteriat, minor arteriat, coltector, or tocat road to devetop crash rates specific to the functionaI design and capacity.
Comparative statistics were stratified by roadway ctassification (i.e., onty major arteriats are compared to major afteriats).
2,2. lntersections
lntersections throughout the City were grou ped by controt type as either signatized or non-signatized ' The safety anatysis is simitarty stratified with simitar contro[ types (i.e., signatized intersections are onty compared to signatized intersections). Note that intersection crashes include those which reportedty occurred within a 250-foot radius of the intersection; att other crashes are considered to be segment crashes in the safety data anatysis.
2.3. Crashes
Crash data for the four-year period f rom January 1,2020 through December 31,2023 was used for the network screening anatysis. Using data for the past four-year period is sufficient in identifying potentiat trends in crashes by tocation and type, white not being outdated as to have data that would inctude tong-term technotogy and cutturat/environmentat changes. Crash data from two different datasets was used to provide a comprehensive anatysis of the city's safety trends.
The city,s crossroads crash database was used in this LRSP update. The city's crash database includes crashes of att severity inctuding property damage onty (PDO) crashes. ln totat, the City's crossroads database recorded 2,076 crashes on the City's transportation network from January 1' 2O2Oto December 31,2023.The city's crash database was used to generate figures regarding crash types and contributing f actors. However, due to timited geospatiat information in the City's dataset, crash data from TIMS was used to generate crash maps and for geospatiat anatysis.
The Transportation lnjury Mapping system (TIMS), maintained by the Safe Transportation Research and Education Center (SafeTREC) at UC Berketey, maps att injury crashes in California using data obtained through swlTRS. This dataset inctudes injury crashes but does not inctude property damage onty (PDO) crashes. The tatest provisionat data avaitabte from SWITRS was used in the geospatiat anatysis (ending in Decembe r 2023) as it typicattytakes CHP 12-18 months to upload and process the crash data. The crash data from TIMS was used for crash mapping, network screening, and tocation specific anatysis. The TIMS crash dataset inctuded 575 injury crashes.
2.4. AnnuatAverage DailYTraffic
Traffic votume data was cottected from muttipte sources provided by the City. Primarity, ADT data was f rom an Engineering & Traffic Survey conducted by TJKM in 20191. Other sources of ADT data 1 Engi neering & Traffic Survey, TJKM, November'1 B, 2019 City of Fotsom
)anuaty 2025
Fotsom LRSP 01.14.2025.docx
02/11/2025 Item No.5.
2024
City of Folsom
tOCAt ROAD SAFETY PIAN
inctuded the City's traffic camera system atong East Bidwett Street. This data inctuded average daity traff ic (ADT) vatues for roadway segments throughout the City f or use in devetopment of c ras h rates.
City of Fotsom
)anua(y 2025
Folsom LRSP _01.1 4.2025.docx
02/11/2025 Item No.5.
2024
CiW of Folsom
IOCAI ROAD SAFETY PIAN
3. Darn AruelYsts
Using a network screening process, [ocations within the City that woutd most tikety benefit from safety enhancements were identified. The outcome of this anatysis hetps inform the identification and prioritization of engineering and non-infrastructure safety countermeasures that are most [ikety to improve roadway safety in the City of Fotsom. This method was setected because it is wett estabtished and condusive to [arge-scate safety anatyses, such as citywide safety assessments.The network screening process ranks intersections and roadway segments by the number of crashes that occurred at each tocation over the anatysis period, and then identif ies areas that had more of a given type of crashes than woutd be expected for that type of tocation. Anatysis methods such as the criticat crash rate and equivatent property damage onty were atso used to determine crash f requency and severity at each location. Using historic crash data, crash risk factors for the entire City were exptored. The fottowing sections describe the data anatysis process.
3.1. Guiding Materiats
3.1.1, Local Roadway Safety Manuat
The Local Roadway Safety Manual: A Manual for California's Local Road Owners (Version 1.6, Aprit 2022) purpose is to encourage tocat agencies to pursue a proactive approach to identifying and anatyzing safety issues, white preparing to compete for project funding opportunities. A proactive approach is defined as anatyzingthe safety of the entire roadway network bythrough either a one- time, networkwide anatysis, or by routine anatyses of the roadway network.2 These methods are focused on identifying systemic issues that can be addressed through countermeasures that are apptied more universatty than just apptying spot treatments every time there is a crash. This process aims to match the identified issues with potentia[ countermeasures.
Each countermeasure comes with a Crash Modification Factor (CMF), a muttipticative factor used to compute the number of expected crashes after the imptementation of a given countermeasure.
The CMFs are used to calcutate benefit/cost ratios.
3.1.2. Highway Safety Manual
The f irst edition of the Highway Saf ety Manual (HSM) was pubtished by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officiats (AASHTO) in 2010. The HSM presents numerous methods for quantitivety estimatingthe f requency and severity of crashes at a variety of road and intersection types.3 This four-part manuaI is divided into Parts: A) lntroduction, Human Factors, and Fundamentats, B) Roadway Safety Management Process, C) Predictive Method, D) Crash Modification Factors.
Chapter 4 of Part B of the HSM discusses the Network Screening process. The Network Screening Process is a toot f or a n agency to a natyze their entire network a nd identify/ra nk locations that (based on the imptementation of a countermeasure) are most tikety to teast tikety to realize a reduction in the frequency of crashes.
The HSM identifies five steps in this process:a
2 Locat Roadway Safety Manual (Version 1.3) 201 6. Page 5. 3 AASHTO, Highway Safety Manuat, 2010, Washington D.C., http://www.highwaysafetymanua[.org/Pages/About.aspx 4MSHTO. Highway Safety ManuaL 2010. Washington, DC. Page4-2 City of Fotsom
January 2025
Fotsom LRSP 01 j4.2025.docx
Page-l
02/11/2025 Item No.5.
2024
City of Folsom
tOCAt ROAD SAFETY PIAN
1. Estabtish Focus: ldentify the purpose or intended outcome of the network screening anatysis. This decision witt inftuence data needs, the selection of performance measures and the screening method that can be apptied.
2. ldentify Network and Estabtish Reference Poputations: Specify the types of sites or facitities being screened (i.e., segments, intersections, geometrics) and identify groupings of simitar sites or facitities.
3. Select Performance Measures: There are a variety of performance measures available to evatuate the potential to reduce crash frequency at a site. ln this step, the pedormance measure is setected as a function of the screening focus and the data and anatytical toots avaitabte.
4. Setect Screening Method: There are three principat screening methods described in this chapter (i.e., ranking, stiding window, peak searching). Each method has advantages and disadvantages;the most appropriate method for a given situation shoutd be setected.
5. Screen and Evaluate Results: The finat step in the process is to conduct the screening and anatysis and evatuate the resutts.
The HSM provides several statisticat methods for screening roadway networks to identify high risk tocations based on overatl crash histories. ln addition to ftat crash quantities, the method used in this study is referred to as Criticat Crash Rate (CCR).
3.2. AnalysisTechniques
3.2.'1. Crash Anal,ysis
The initiat steps of the crash anatysis invotved estabtishing sub-poputations of roadway segments and intersections that have simitar characteristics. For this study, intersections were grouped by their controt type (Signatized and Unsignatized) and segments by their roadway category (Major Arteriat, Minor Arterial, Cottector, Other). lndividuat crash rates were catculated for each sub- poputation. The poputation tevet crash rates were then used to assess whether a specific location has more or fewer crashes than expected. These sub-poputations were also used to determine typicat crash patterns to hetp identify tocations where unusua[ numbers of specific crash types are identif ied.
3.2.2. Network Screening Anatysis
The networkscreeningprocess ranks intersections and roadwaysegments bythe numberof crashes that occurred at each tocation over the anatysis period, and then identifies areas that had more of a given type of crashes than woutd be expected for that type of location. These crash type factors were 1)crash injury (fatat injuries, major injuries, othervisibte injuries, comptaint of pain) 2)crash type (broadside, rear-end, sideswipe, head-on, hit object, overturned, bicycte, pedestrian, other), 3) environmentat factors (lighting, wet roads), and 4) driver behavior (impaired and aggressive driving). with these additionat factors, the tocations were further anatyzed and assigned a new rank.
From the resutts of the network screening anatyses, a short-tist of locations was chosen based on crash activity, crash severity, crash patterns, [ocation type, and area of the Cityto provide a variety of tocations covering a wide cross section of safety chattenges and improvement opportunities' The intent is to poputate the safety countermeasure tootbox with mitigation measures that witt be City of Fotsom
Januaty 2025
Fotsom LRSP _01.1 4.2025.docx
02/11/2025 Item No.5.
2024
City of Folsom
IOCAI. ROAD SAFETY PLAN
appticabte to most of the crash activity in the City. Twenty-five locations have been selected for mitigation anatysis and project sheets with site-specific improvements were devetoped. Section 8 presents the priority tocations and the tisted improvements, which are found in greater detait in Appendix E.
The resutts of the network screening anatysis are shown in Appendix A and Appendix B. Appendix A presents att of the intersections with three or more crashes, and Appendix B presents the roadway segments with three or more crashes. The appendices are cotor-coded to hightight crash trends and emphasis areas for further study and countermeasure devetopment.
3.3. Criticat Crash Rate (CCR) Anatysis
The Highway Safety Manuat (HSM), devetoped by AASHTO, describes the CCR method, which provides a statisticat review of tocations to determine where risk is higher than that experienced by other simitar locations. lt is atso the first step in anatyzingfor patterns that may suggest systemic issues that can be addressed at that location, and proactivety at others to prevent new safety chattenges f rom emergi ng.
The CCR analysis compares the observed crash rate to the expected crash rate at a particutar tocation based on facititytype and traffic votume using a tocatty catcutated average crash rate for the specific type of intersection or roadway segment being anatyzed. Based on traffic votumes and a weighted Citywide crash rate for each facitity type, a critical crash rate threshotd is estabtished at the g5o/o confidence tevel to determine tocations with higher crash rates that are untikety to be random. The threshold is catcutated for each tocation individualty based on its traffic votume and the crash profite of simitar facitities. A CCR differentiat vatue of greater than zero reftects a [ocation that has a higher crash rate than facitities with simitar votumes, white a negative CCR differentiat vatue signifies a below-average crash rate. lt shoutd be noted that the CCR does not reftect the severity of the crashes occurring at the location, but rather the number of crashes for the given votume.
Figure 2 presents the intersections and roadway segments according to their crash rate.
The top three roadway segments with the highest CCR diff erentiaI vatues were:
o E Bidwetl st, between orchard Dr and wates Dr, with a total of 3 crashes and a [oca[ criticat crash rate differentiat of 0.35.
r E Natoma St, between Briggs Ranch Dr and Hancock Dr, with a total of 3 crashes and a [oca[ criticatcrash rate differential of 0.26.
. prairie City Rd, between US 50 and the road 2800' North of White Rock Rd, which has a total of 5 crashes and a tocat criticat crash rate differentiat ol0.21.
The top three intersections with the highest CCR differentialvalues were:
o lron point Rd and Dry Creek Rd, with 3 crashes and a tocaI criticaI crash rate differentiat of o.78.
. lron point Rd and Pique Loop, with a totat of 5 crashes and a [oca[ critical crash rate differentiat of 0.20.
. Natoma St and Scott St, with a totat of 5 crashes and a tocal critical crash rate differentiat of
0.13 City of Fotsom
Janua(y 2025
Fotsom LRSP _01 .1 4.2025.docx
Page I
02/11/2025 Item No.5.
2024
Cify of Folsom
tOCAt ROAD SAFETY PLAN
Criticat Crash Rate Formu[a
Rr,i: Ra I
Where,
R",i = Criticat crash rate for intersection i
R" = Weighted average crash rate for reference population P = P-vatue for corresponding confidence level
MEVi = Mittion enteringvehictes for intersection i
Source: Highway Safety Manual
Data Needs
CCR is catculated using:
. Daity Entering Votume (DEV) for intersections, or Vehicte Miles Traveled (VMT) for roadway segments
. lntersection control types to separate them into [ike poputations . Roadway f unctionat ctassif ication to separate them into tike poputations . Crash records in Geographic lnformation Systems (GlS)ortabutarform inctuding coordinates or tinear measures
Strengths
. Reduces lowvolume exaggeration
. Considers variance
' Establishescomparisonthreshotd
Weaknesses
. Does not account for regression to the mean bias
['"ffi].[r*-J
City of Fotsom
Januaty 2025
Fotsom LRSP 01 .14.2025.docx
02/11/2025 Item No.5.
2024
City of Folsom
tOCAt ROAD SAFETY PIAN
Figure 2 - Citywide criticat crash Rate Map (2o2O-2O231 liine
[ake
I .?
4 N
A*
I
Mrddle
El Dorado Hil
I
ls
a:b
o
ts
E
Orangevale
itg tt
*-L
Natural
c
9l
Ranch
Ce
t
T
0 a
t
o
&
I,q
q. t
I
I
I
I
a
,
St
f,Y
UI g
;
c
m
go
g
a
Q(
o
o
b
Mississippi
Bat
,j. rb
Gl e nboro ugh
1.:
I
I
r
I
I
t
I
s'Et
\
LoSt
r' eek PIwv
.o
I
:
:
School
Lentral rict
Folsom
{'l$tte
(l
i,
0 Intersection Crash Rates
. Below Average
o Average Crash Rate
e
O Above Average
2 Miles
Segment Crash Rates
-
Below Average
Average Crash Rate
-
Above Average
0,5 1
!rlrool
A
,r9(J
School St O..
&
":";
Brduvetl
I
I
C€ntral
Shopprng
Cent€r(t\ Folsom Central
Business District
t€mbiPark
.3-/-/-L lL ..f:/ f:f ->'-l - - - - -
I
t\
k
a'
I
A.l
iffi
T
Fotsom LRSP 01.14.2025.docx
City of Fotsom
)anuaty 2025
02/11/2025 Item No.5.
2024
City of Folsom
LOCAT ROAD SAFETY PIAN
3.4, Equivatent Property Damage Onty (EPDO)
The Equivatent Property Damage Onty (EPDO) method is described in the Highway Safety Manual (HSM). This method assigns weighting factors to crashes based on injury [eve[ (fatat, severe injury, other visibte injury, comptaint of pain) to devetop a property damage onty score. An EPDO score attows for a fair comparison of crash severity across years or study periods, as this normatized unit takes into account inftation and cost escatation. For example, the cost to society for att injury crashes increased by 12.7o/o between the 2020 edition of the LocaI Roadway Safety ManuaI and the 2022 edition Using the EPDO methodotogy normatizes the data and accounts for the increase in cost from inftation. ln this anatysis, the injury crash costs were catcutated for each location (based on the tatest Cattra ns injury costs). This vatue is then divided by the injury cost for a property damage onty crash. The resutting number is the equivatent number of property damage only crashes at each site. This value a[[ows att tocations to be compa red based on inju ry crash costs (HSM, Chapter 4).
EPDO_Formuta:
EPDO:
(Nr * Ns) * 2,843,000 + (No x 159,900) + (Nc x 90,900)
14,900
Where,
EPDO = Equivatent Property Damage Onty (in units of crashes) Nr = Number of fataI crashes
Ns = Number of severe injury crashes
No = Number of othervisibte injury crashes
Nc = Numb€r of comptaint of pain crashes
The cost to society for each crash type atong roadway segments is as fottows:
o Fatat: $2,843,000
. Severe: $2,843,000
o OtherVisibte lnjury: $159,900
r Complaint of Pain: $90,900
. Property Damage Onty: $14,900
Source: Highway Safety ManuaI
Locations with fatat and severe injury crashes witt have a higher EPDO vatue compared to locations with less severe injury crashes.
Figure 3 presents the EPDO value of intersections and roadway segments in the City.
City of Fotsom
January 2025
Folsom LRSP _01 .14.2025.docx
02/11/2025 Item No.5.
2024
City of Folsom
TOCAL ROAD SAFETY PIAN
The top three intersections with the highest EPDO vatues are:
. The intersection with the highest EPDO value was Wittow Creek Dr and Oak Avenue Pkwy, with an EPDO vatue of 573 (3 Crashes totat: 1 Fatat Crash, 2 Severe lnjury crashes). o Greenback Ln and Fotsom Btvd/Fotsom Auburn Rd, with an EPDO vatue of 304 (11 Crashes totat: 2 severe injury crashes, 2 other visibte injury, 7 comptaint of pain). o E Bidwett St and Orchard Dr, with an EPDO value of 219 (4 Crashes totat: 1 severe injury crash, 2 other visibte injury, 1 comptaint of pain).
The top three roadway segments with the highest EPDO vatues are:
. The roadway segment with the highest EPDO vatue was Prairie City Rd between US 50 and the road 28OO' North of White Rock Rd, with an EPDO value of 358 (5 Crashes totat: 1 severe injury crash, 2 other visibte injury, 1 comptaint of pain). . Fotsom Lake Crossing between Gun Range Rd and Fotsom Dam Rd, with an EPDO vatue of 377 (3 Crashestotat:1 Fatat Crash, 1 severe injury crash, and 1 comptaint of pain) o Fotsom Lake Crossing between Gun Range Rd and Fotsom Auburn Rd, with an EPDO vatue of 193 (3 Crashes totat: 1 severe injury crash, 1 other visibte injury, and 1 comptaint of pain) City of Fotsom
January 2025
Folsom LRSP _01.1 4.2025.docx
02/11/2025 Item No.5.
2024
City of Folsom
tOCAt ROAD SAFETY PIAN
Figure 3 - Citywide lntersection Roadway Segment EPDO Map Line
^F
Orangevale
!
rjp,tl
!:i
/..ex Pkwy
"s
!\anqlLrr rr
e'-
_t
t
I 00,5 1
El Dorado Hills
I
2 Miles
rq
ti
lr
l:
I
I
f,
r
3 1.
a
ir
'o
s
a
T
o
c
l4I
o+"
Misslssipp i
Bat
n
t
{)
rn,
lh
:,1
i'
-:i,a${nt"gd249 lt
-ras3
td/,
'e
Glenborough I
o
po
_US50
i--i County Boundary
i--j Folsom City Boundary
tl
Intersection EPDO
'6-20
" 2I-40
o 41-100
o 101 - 300
t 301 - 575
Segment EPDO
-6-12
-13-404L - 100
101 - 200
-
201 - 360
q ors 84
Fotsom LRSP 01.14.2025.docx
City of Fotsom
January 2025
02/11/2025 Item No.5.
4. SnrerY TReruos
The fottowing sections contain the resutts of the safety data analysis process which include evaluation of the City of Fotsom's fatat and severe injury (K+Sl) crashes compared against the statewide K+Sl crashes. Other evatuations inctuded are crashes by cause, pedestrian and bicycte crashes, and primary cottision factor. This is a general comparison of the Citywide tevel to the statewide to gauge the generaI trends within the City.
4.1. Severity Level
Knowing the impacts of the crash (the injuries or type of damage which occurred) is a key part of assessing the environment and safety factors around the site of the crash. The Nationat Safety Councit devetoped the "KABCO" injury scale, which is frequentty used by taw enforcement for ctassifying injuries. The KABCO scale is referenced betow:
. K- Fatat
r A-Severe injury
r B-OtherVisibte lnjury
r Q - Comptaint of Pain
r O - No injury (property damage onty)
Tabte 1 presents crash severity by facitity type-intersections and roadway segments. Eighty percent (80o/d of crashes occurred at intersections. The remaining 2Oo/o of crashes occurred atong roadway segments. This trend is typicat for urban areas with high traffic votumes and more densely spaced intersections.
Tabte 1 - Crashes by Severity (2020'20231
Source; Statefude tntegrated Traffic Records System (2020 - 2023).
One percent (10lo) of crashes recorded in the study period were fatal, and 3o/o resulted in severe injuries. Crashes resutting in the various severity tevels are presented in Figure 4 and Figure 5.
City of Fotsom
)anuaty 2025
1o/o 13 1o/o<10/o 5Fatal
5o/o 54 3o/o2o/o 23Severe lnjury 31
17o/o 242 120/o1Oo/o 70OtherVisibte
lniury 172
24o/o 551 250/o250/o 102CompLaint of Pain 408
61o/o223 53o/o 1,2571,O34 630/oProperty Damage
OntY
2,076, i00%'90% 424 20%11659Toral
lntersection
Crashes o/o
Roadway Segment
Crashes o/o
Totat
Crashes
Severity
o/o
Fotsom LRSP 01.14.2025,docx
02/11/2025 Item No.5.
Figure 4 - Crashes by Severity (Fatat and Severe)
35 30
25 20
15 10
31 23
5 So urce.' Sta tewi d e t nte gr at e d Tr aff i c R ec o r d s System ( 2 0 20 - 202 3 ). 5 0 I
Fatal lnjury
I lntersection
Severe injury
r Roadway Segmen:
Figure 5 - Crashes by Severity (Other lnjury, CompLaint of Pain, & Property Damage Onty) 1034
223
L02
408
172
1200
1000
800
500
400
200
I I I
70 I
Other Visible lnjury Complaint of Pain
I lntersection I Roadway Segment
Source.' Statewl d e t n te gr at e d Tr affic Records Sys te m ( 20 20 - 202 3 )' 0 Property Damage Only
Foisom LRSP 01.14.2025.docx
Page '16
City of Fotsom
)anuary 2025
02/11/2025 Item No.5.
2024
City of Folsom
LOCAT ROAD SAFETY PIAN
Figure 6 on the fottowing page ittustrates the injury crashes throughout the City, and Figure 7 presents the same crash data in a heat map format. Figure I ittustrates the fataland severe injury crashes.
The top three roadway segments with the highest number of crashes are:
o Greenback Rd (Fotsom Btvd to Scott SU - 5 Crashes
r Prairie City Rd (US 50 to the road 2800' North of White Rock Rd) - 9 Crashes . Fotsom Lake Crossing (Fotsom-Auburn Rd to Gun Range Rd) - 4 crashes The top three intersections with the highest number of crashes are:
r lron Point Rd and E Bidwett St - 12 Crashes
o lron Point Rd and Prairie City Rd - 12 Crashes
. Greenback Lane and Folsom Blvd/Folsom Auburn Rd- 11 Crashes City of Fotsom
)anuary 2025
Fotsom LRSP -01.1 4.2025.docx
02/11/2025 Item No.5.
2024
City of Folsom
LOCAT ROAD SAFETY PIAN
Figure 6 - lnjury Crash Map (202O'2O23)
I
t
I
I
o? N
A$
Line e
I
0 0.5
El Domdo Hills
2 Miles
qb
Orangevale
Miss,ssrpp,
Bat
c)
+----'--
! I
c o
s
&
I
o
a+-
L
;
L
T
o
1 ,
+q
a
p
o"
Sr.lle
I
I
_t
Folsom Historic District
Leqend
City of Folsom Roads . Crashes (TIMS Data,
- Major Arterial 2020-2023)
-
Minor Arterial -
US 50
- Collector ;--' Folsom City Boundary
*- Local Road l-'County BoundarY
,a
o
"ee
( Pl'w/
l\ldP*
I'l
(/)
Folsom LRSP 01 j42o25.docx
City of Fotsom
Januaty 2025
02/11/2025 Item No.5.
2024
CiW of Folsom
TOCAT ROAD SAFETY PLAN
Figure 7 -lnjury Crash Heat Map (2020-2023)
I
I
I
I
N
At
0 0.5 'l
El Dorado Hills
2 Miles
tb
Orangevale
:c
{>
E
o
3 -e
!.
a
o
t
2 l,
I
b
o--
l
t
L
;
Mississrppi
Bat
+q
Rainbow -g
o
=:0
r)
EStare
Rodea Park
Folsom Historic
I
I
------l
District
city of Fotsom *ouo, %h Heatmap (TIMS
-
Major Arterial Data, 2020-2023)
- Minor Arterial sparse
-Collector ; 'Dense
-- Local Road i r Folsom City Boundary
-US 50 r'CountY Boundary
€&,,f..8:E'
'G
E
rLre
college
Folsom
..j
"PFu l rr'',
a dc* m
TE
o:o
t
Fotsom LRSP 01.14.2025.docx
City of Fotsom
)anuaty 2025
02/11/2025 Item No.5.
2024
City of Folsom
tOCAt ROAD SAFETY PIAN
Figure 8 - Fatat and Severe lnjury Crash Map (202O-20231 Line
I
I
I
I
N
A'
00.5 1
El Dorado Hills
2 Miles
+b
leOrangeva
L ,E
s
;
a
;\
.!
6 g rr
o
tf
,
,
t
I
I
I
I
b
o-
J-
Mississippi
8ar
Glenborough
249 ft sd
.\ Rd.,1o'
City of Folsom Roads
-
Major Afterial
-
Minor Afterial
-* Collector
-- Local Road
-US50
O Fatal Crash
o Severe Injury Crash
lii Folsom City Boundary
t- -i County Boundary
4q
e.s. $
F'
.o
E
d
=:o
-i+
Fo
€&/itE:Ei
Lake
gs
E
E
Ra rrh
Ce
St
Folsom Lake
'Collegc
€
, , eEl P{L!y
Rd
m
th+
Folsom LRSP _01.1 4.2025.docx
City of Fotsom
)anuary 2025
02/11/2025 Item No.5.
the'clw of Folsom
20.453.533.1Aggressive Driving
14.239.52s.3lmpaired Driving
6.449.743.3Lane Departure
4.117.213.1Young Drivers
3.126.823.6lntersections
1.013.412.4Aging Drivers
0.'r5.0 5.1Distracted Driving
Percentage of K+Sl Crashes Lower in Folsom
0.08.38.3Bicyctists
-0.21.31.4WorkZones
-1.919.121.0Motorcyctists
-3.82.56.4CommerciatVehicl.es
-4.010.214.2Occupant Protection
-7.112.119.2Pedestrians
-15.49.324.7Driver Licensing
Cal.ifornia SHSP Chattenge Areas Statewide Average
Percentages
Percentage
DifferenceCity of Fotsom
4.2. Gity of Fotsom Historic K+Sl Grashes Compared to Statewide The Catifornia Strategic Highway Safety Ptan (SHSP)focuses on 16 chattenge areas identified by the SHSP Executive Leadership and Steering Committees after an in-depth anatysis of Catifornia K+Sl (fatat and severe injury) crash data as wett as an extensive statewide outreach process that involved hundreds of diverse traffic stakehotders around the state. Tabte 2 contains a comparison of the city of Folsom's K+Sl crashes to the statewide K+Sl crashes based on SWITRS data f rom the 2010-2019.
Tabte 2 presents that the City of Fotsom has historicatty been higher than the statewide average in the fottowing emphasis areas: aggressive driving, impaired driving, and lane departures. The City of Fotsom has also been above the statewide average by a smatler margin for the fottowing: young drivers, intersections, aging drivers, and distracted driving. Tabte 2 also presents the summary of the chattenge areas and percentages for the City and statewide averages.
Tabte 2 - City of Fotsom K+Sl Grashes Compared to Statewide K+Sl Crashes Source: Traffic Record 18).
Nofesi
1 . percentages witt not add up to 1OO%, as a fatatity or severe injury could have involved multiple Challenge Areas (i.e., a young diver that was i m pai red an d u n restrai n ed)
Z. Cilfornia SHSp does nof h ave reported crash data for the fotlowing two chaltenge areas: Emergency Response and Emerging Technology *Diver Licensing data avaitabte for fatat crashes onty trom the Fatality Analysis Repofting Sysfem (FARS) City of Fotsom
Januaty 2025
Fotsom LRSP -01
. 1 4.2025.docx
02/11/2025 Item No.5.
2024
City of Folsom
TOCAT ROAD SAFETY PIAN
4.3. Office of Traffic Safety (OTS) Rankings
The Catifornia Office of Traffic Safety (OTS) pubtishes annua[ reports ranking agencies of simitar size bytheir crash profite. Tabte 3 presents howthe City of Fotsom ranked inthe2022 OTS rankingss. The ZO22OTS rankings tisted 104 cities in the state in order of number of crashes in each category. OTS notes that "Number 1 in the rankings is the highest, or'worst"' and that cities are onty compared to other cities that are within the poputation group. Compared to other cities of simitar size (50,0001 to 100,000 peopte) in 2022, Fotsom ranked among the top hatf in crashes invotving motorcycles, underage drinking, and speed related crashes.
Tabte 3 - Fotsom OTS Rankinge0zzl
4.4. Primary Gol.tision Factor
The teading crash causes during the study period were unsafe speed (542,260/o.1, traffic signats and signs viotations (282, 1 3%), u nknown (236, 11 .4a/o), and d riving u nder the inf [u ence (207 ,10%). These trends are presented in Figure 9 and are consistent with Tabl,e 2, which identified aggressive driving as the top emphasis area.
s City of Fotsom 2022 OTS Rankings, Catifornia Office of Tratfic Safety, Accessed )anuary 2025 € db /fr,. F :E;
273 73/104Totat Fatat and lnjury
69t10429Atcohol lnvotved
2611044Had Been Drinking Driver < 21
62110414Had Been Drinking Driver 2'l -34
51110418Motorcyctes
10011045Pedestrians
77/1041Pedestrians < 1 5
76t1042Pedestrians 65+
88t10411Bicycte
101t1040Bicyctist < 15
66/104'135Composite
43110454Speed Retated
78110423Nighttime (9:00pm - 2:59am)
87/104
861104
Hit and Run
DUlArrests
11 243
Victims Kitted & lnjured OTS Ranking
Fatat & lnjury Crashes OTS Ranking
OTS RankingArrestsType Of Arrests
Crash Category
Crash Category
Fotsom LRSP _01.1 4.2025.docx
City of Fotsom
January 2025
02/11/2025 Item No.5.
2024
City of Folsorn
tOCAt ROAD SAFETY PIAN
Figure 9 - Crashes by Primary Cottision Factor
Not Stated, 51 ,20/o
Unsafe Stafting or Backing,
52,30/o
Unsafe Lane Change,
102,50/o
Other lmproper
Driving, 116,60/o
Other Than Driver, 26, 1 o/o
Wrong Side of Road, 26, 1o/o
Unsafe Speed, 542,
27o/o
Auto R/W Viotation,
173,90/o
lmproper Turning,
197 ,100/o Traffic Signats and
Signs,282,14o/o
Driving Under
lnfluence,207,
1Oo/o
Unknown, 236,
120/o
Source.'Sfatewl de Integrated Traffic Records Syste/?? (2020 - 2023).
The fottowing crash causes accounted for tess than 1olo of crashes individualty and 3.2% in totat:
pedestrian violation, pedestrian ROW viotation, other hazardous movement, fottowing too ctosely, improper passing, other, and hazardous parking.
The primary cottision factors which contributed to K+Sl crashes are presented in Figure 10 betow.
The most common PCFs are consistent with the PCFs observed in crashes of a[[ severity: unsafe speed, traffic signats and signs, and unknown'
City of Fotsom
)anuary 2025
Fots om LRSP _01 .1 4.2025.docx
02/11/2025 Item No.5.
Figure 10 - K+Sl Crashes by Primary Cottision Factor
OtherThan Driver,
1 ,2o/o
Wrong Side of
Road,1,2o/oNot Stated, 1, 2olo
Unsafe Starting or
Backing,3,4o/o
Unsafe Lane
Change, 3,5%o
Other lmproper
Driving,4,60/o
Auto R/W
Violation,5,7%o
lmproper Turning,
5,7o/o
Driving Under
lnftuence, 6,9%o
Unsafe Speed, 1 9,
28o/o
Traffic Signats and
Signs, 13,19o/o
Unknown, 6,9%o
Folsom LRSP 01.14.2025.docx
City of Fotsom
)anuaty 2025
02/11/2025 Item No.5.
4.5. Highest Occurring Crash Types
Accordingto the City's crossroads database, approximately 2,076 crashes occurred within the City of Fotsom during the f our-year study period. As shown in Figure 11, the most common crash types were rear ends, fotlowed ctosety by broadsides and hit object crashes. Approximately 1o/o of crashes did not have a reported crash type. The most common K+Sl crash types, shown in Figure 12, were hit object crashes and broadsides. Vutnerabte road users (pedestrian and bicyctes) accounted for 2Oo/o of K+Sl ciashes.
Figure 1 1 - Crashes by Type (2020'20231
600
500
400
300
200
100
0 15
10 (
0 545
467
405
361
100
Source.' Stateu/ide tntegrated Traffic Records System (2020 - 2023).
Figure 12 - K+Sl Crashes by Type (2020'2023)
"/ .oot. ."."" ".."'* auot" .'"-* ."..t'"
^(
ctf ,-e "^u.&
..l* +*-
38 I
53 I
71 I
18 18
I
0 20 19
13 Source.'statewide tntegrated Traffic Records System (2020 - 2023). 88 7 6
3 2
-"."- "."t. ..."." a"t" "uu'-
.'"'$ ..""3 "...* ""' *f'"'
Fo[som LRSP _01 .1 4.2025.docx
Page25
City of Fotsom
Januaty 2025
02/11/2025 Item No.5.
2024
City of Folsom
tOCAt ROAD SAFETY PIAN
4.6. Aggressive and lmpaired Driving Crashes
Aggressive driving was a contributing factor tor 4Oo/o of all crashes in the study period (835 totat), resutting in three fatat crashes and twenty-three severe injury crashes. Aggressive driving crashes inctude behaviors such as unsafe speed, fottowing too closety, or disregarding traffic signats and signs. Aggressive driving crashes occurred most commonty at intersections.
The three intersections with the most aggressive driving crashes are:
o E BidwettSt and Broadstone Pkwy (9)
r lron Point Rd and Prairie City Rd (9)
o E Bidwett St and Broadstone Pkwy (8)
The three roadway segments with the most aggressive driving crashes are:
o White Rock Rd between OakAve Pkwy and E Bidwett St (4) r Prairie City Rd between US 50 EV Ramps and Dwy N/O Mangini Pkwy (3) o White Rock Rd between OakAve Pkwy and E Bidwett St (2) lmpaired driving crashes inctude att crashes where there was any evidence of drug or atcohol use by the driver. This is different from impaired driving statistics in that drivers do not need to exceed the tegatty defined threshotd of intoxication to be considered. Caltrans considers any [eve[ of atcohot consumptionto havethe potentiatto impact driver responsiveness and decision making. Therewere 221 impaired driving crashes between 2O2O and 2023, three of which were fatal and 12 of which resutted in severe injuries. Figure 13 betowshowsthe distribution of aggressive and impaired driving crashes across intersections and roadway segments.
Figure 13 -Aggressive and lmpaired Driving Grashes
618
Aggressive
I lntersection t Segment
Source.' Statewl d e I nte gr ated Tr aff i c R eco r d s System (2020 - 2023). lmpaired
The three intersections with the most impaired driving crashes are:
. Wittow Creek Rd and OakAve Pkwy (3)
. Ritey St and Sutter St (2)
o Blue Ravine Rd and RiteY St (2)
There were fourteen roadway segments, each of which had one impaired driving crash 800
700
600
s00
400
300
200
100
I57
I
159
62 I
g&,A.ElE;
Fotsom LRSP _01 .1 4.2025.docx
City of Fotsom
)anuary 2025
02/11/2025 Item No.5.
2024
City of Folsom
TOCAL ROAD SAFETY PLAN
Figure l4presentsa map of aggressive drivingcrashesthroughouttheCitywhite Figure 15 represents this data as a heat map. Figure 16 presents a map of impaired driving crashes in Fotsom white Figure 17 represents this data as a heat map. Aggressive and impaired driving crashes can be seen occurring atongthe primary arteriats inctuding E BidwettSt, lron Point Rd, and Fotsom Btvd.
€ db /fr.. ffi :E;
City of Fotsom
)anuary 2O25
Fo[som LRSP -01.1 4.2025.docx
02/11/2025 Item No.5.
2024
City of Folsom
LOCAL ROAD SAFETY PIAN
Figure 14-Aggressive Driving Crash Map (2O2O'2O23)
l-ine,
a:b
Glenborough
219 ft
I
I
I
I
N
Ar
'o
El Dorado Hills
Orangevale
E'
I
ac
o
-
&
>
,
a
I
,
l
p
l!
;
Miss iss ippi
BaI
Lak€
lu'%,
'o
-tr
d
6'
o€xo-
4 e
€l
.ruto
,
,
I 00.5 1 2 Miles
.lo($ !d
City of Folsom Roads
-
Major Arterial
-
Minor Arterial
-
Collector
-
Local Road
_US50
I --,Folsom City Boundary
; r County Boundary
Aggressive Driving
o Crashes (TIMS Data,
2070-2073)
g&,di.Figi
[ake
d
.ii
F
Ran.h
Ce
Sf
Folsom Lake
college
Rd
' 'cek PiwY m
g
o-
€(D.
(./l
Fotsom LRSP _01.1 4.2025.docx
City of Fotsom
Janua(y 2025
02/11/2025 Item No.5.
2024
CiW of Folsom
tOCAt ROAD SAFETY PLAN
Figure 15 - Aggressive Driving Crash Heat Map (2020'2023) Line,
I
I
I
o@
N
A$
Mississippt
Bar
LalSe
Natural
00.5 1
El Dorado Hills
2 Miles
+'!
Orangevale
<a
P>
I
I
o
o
s
a
b
a'
a
14 ;
I
I
I
I
I
,
Il
=U-
f
F;
'.:
I
I
I
I
I
,
Ae.o/aa
Qo
Glenboraugh t
^249ft ^sd .)
=no
Rd
City of Folsom Roads
-
Major Arterial
-
Minor Arterial
-
Collector
-- Local Road
_US50
Aggressive Driving Crashes
Sparse
, , Dense
i- j Folsom City Boundary
r--l County Boundary
€&,,6:,..8:E;
.:
.o
E
Folcom L
college
,Pe' FlwY m
g
CL
€g
a
Folsom LRSP _01.1 4.2025.docx
City of Fotsom
)anuary 2025
02/11/2025 Item No.5.
2024
City of Folsom
TOCAT ROAD SAFETY PLAN
Figure 16 - lmpaired Driving Crash Map (202O-2O23)
Co Line,
N
A$
4 I
0 0.5
El Dorado Hills
2 Miles
rb
It
Orangevale
c
i
3 o
e
o
t
-e
E.
sb
d
o
=
t
I
t
I
I
I
,
Miss issipp i
Lo k€
I
.?q
Gle nbo rough
249 lt qd
rouriarta
., Ral
aq
Fr
u-,
€
F
,
I
I 1
City of Folsom Roads
-
Major Arterial
-
Minor Arterial
-
Collector
-
Local Road
-US50
I l, Folsom City Boundary
,- -'County Boundary
^ Impaired Driving Crasheso lrius Data, 2oio -zoz3)
€&,,fi.fii9:
!ake
Natrrral
$
rc
Y
F
Ran(h
St
Folsom Lake
Colleqc
.rcek FiwY fn
eo-
:q
(n
!'Inn!!llli PY+{
Fotsom LRSP -01
.1 4.2025.docx
City of Fotsom
)anuaty 2025
02/11/2025 Item No.5.
2024
City of Folsom
tOCAt ROAD SAFETY PIAN
Figure 17 - lmpaired Driving Crash Heat Map (2020-2023) I
I
I
"? N
A'
Line
+b
El Dorado Hills
Orangevale
s
Nat!rdl
Ranrh
00.5 1
a
t
s
a
7-
T
o
o
g
\bq'
Missrssippi
Ber
'e
clenborough \!s
I
uf'
oq
Fo
gd24e lt
2 Miles
City of Folsom Roads
-
Major Arterial
-
Minor Arterial
-
Collector
-- Local Road
-US50
Impaired Driving Crashes
Sparse
, Dense
iij Folsom City Boundary
i--l County Boundary
g&,,*.rEigi
[ake
.-\
F
Ce
sr
Folsom Lake
Cotiege
Rd
' , ceB Pk'!Y rn
@
d€g
(t)
Fotsom LRSP 01.14.2025.docx
City of Fotsom
)anuary 2025
02/11/2025 Item No.5.
4.7. Vutnerabte Road User Crashes
Figure 18 presents a breakdown of vulnerabte road user crashes. Pedestrian and bicycte crashes were most common at intersections, though bicycte crashes occurred on roadway segments more frequentty than pedestrian crashes did.
Figu re 1 8 - Vu tne ra bte Road U se r C ras h es (202O'20231 54 46
17 Pedestria n
r lntersection I Segment
Source: Statewide tntegrated Traffic Records Sysfem (2020 - 2023).
Bike
Figure 19 ittustrates the tocations of vulnerabte road user crashes within the City. Additionat information on pedestrian and bicycte crashes is provided in the foltowing sections. Bicycte and pedestrian crashes accounted tor 2Qo/o of att K+Sl crashes though they make up 60/o of at[ crashes in the study period.
4.7.1. Pedestrian Crashes
Over the span f rom 2O2O to 2023, atotat of 53 pedestrian-invotved crashes occu rred across the City.
Of the pedestrian-invotved injury crashes, 2 were fatat, 6 were repofted with severe injuries, 21 with othervisibte injuries, 15 with comptaints of pain, and 9 with property damage onty.
4.7.2. Bicycte Crashes
There were 71 bicycte-invotved crashes that occurred across the City over the study period. Of the bicycte-invotved injury crashes, 2werefalal,4 were reported with severe injuries, 29 with other visibte injuries, 26 with comptaints of pain, and 10 with property damage onty.
City of Fotsom
)anua(y 2025
7 60
50 40
30 20
10 0
Fo[som LRSP _01.1 4.2025.docx
02/11/2025 Item No.5.
2024
City of Folsom
TOCAL ROAD SAFEIY PLAN
Fi gu re 1 9 - Vu tn e ra bte Road U se r C ras h es (2O20'20231 ne
-\r--
\
\\
I
I
I
I
n?
'o
N
ls
Orangevale
:i:5
1'
Mississippi
Bat
City of Folsom Roads
-
Major Arterial
-
Minor Arterial
-
Collector
** Local Road
-us50
El Domdo Hills
2 Mileg
I sicycle Crashes
ft eedestrian Crashes
? r Folsom City Boundary
l":! Counfy Boundary
qb
E
3 + o
7 sI
t
B
o
g
\-ib\
€
.ia
t
0 0,5
Legend
I
\t'
I
I
lrl-"4 *_
Lembi Park
g d6 ,,fir F iE;
take
,&
io
E
I
,
I
ludah
Elementa.y
Scho ol
CteEY I'kwy rfl
@
o€o=t,
\Ia ngr n
ons Minr
Walmart
Central
Shopping
Center
Folsom Central Business District
Folsom LRSP 01.14.2025.docx
City of Fotsom
)anuary 2025
02/11/2025 Item No.5.
4.8. Crashes by Lighting Gondition
The majority of crashes occurred during daytight (70o/o), fottowed by crashes occurring at night but with tighting present. A minority of crashes occurred during dark conditions with no tighting present.
Figure 20 presents a breakdown of crashes by tighting conditions' Figure 20 - Crashes by Lighting Condition (2020'20231
Dusk - Dawn, 46 Dark - Street Lights Not Functioning, 4 Dark - No Street Lights, Not Stated, 2
Dark - Street
Lights, 516
Daytight, 1459
Source: Statewide tntegrated Traffic Records System (2020 - 2023)'
4.9. Crashes by Time of DaY
Crashes were ptotted based on the time of day. The frequency of crashes peaks in the afternoon hours between 4PM and 6PM. The number of fatat and severe injury crashes peaks between 3PM and 5PM. Figure 21 presents the percentage of crashes occurring by time of day.
City of Fotsom
January 2025
Fotsom LRSP 01.14.2025.docx
02/11/2025 Item No.5.
, ),( ]1,,,1 i 'ri;-'trr': "''"r'l
| ,'' ' ,', I Ii llij(fl] lll0)lNi,,s:y;{lllrlil! lPl 'Nil .g & ,,{i. ffi :gi
Figure 21 - Crashes by Time of Day (2020'20231
1,4%
12%
t0%
8%
6%
4%
2%
0%
1. 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1"0 1.1 12 L3 14 15 16 17 18 1-9 2021 222324 Time of Day
-Crashes -
K+Sl Crashes
Source: Statewi d e t ntegr ated Traffi c Records System (2020 - 2023).
4.10. Crashes byYear
The number of annua[ crashes has increased during the study period. Year 2020 experienced the fewest crashes of anyyearwithin the study period, with crashestrending upwards between 2020 and 2023.The number of annual K+Sl crashes atso increased from 2020 to 2023, increasing from 10 in 2O2Oto24in2023.lt is possibtethatthe returnto pre-pandemictraffic patterns in202l inftuenced the number of crashes occurring. Figure 22 presents crashes by year inctuding crash totals from the previous LRSP study period (2015-2019).
Figure 22 - Crashes by Year (2015 - 20231
615
575
CJ
-c.
(o
IJ
3 (D
o
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
620
!7
I
484
2021
397
573
Il,
575
2017
609
20L6
t4
I0
2015
Source: City of Folsomt Crossroads Traffic Collision Database (2015-2023). 2018
I Crashes
2019 2020
I K+Sl Crashes
2022 2023
Folsom LRSP -01
. 1 4.2025.docx
City of Fotsom
)anuary 2O25
02/11/2025 Item No.5.
2024
City of Folsom
tOCAt ROAD SAFETY PIAN
Annuat crash data from the 2021 LRSP was reviewed to provide more perspective on the City's crash trends. Annua[ crashes were graduatty dectining f rom 2015 to 2018; there was a stight increase in 2019, fottowed by a nearty 3olo reduction in 2020. The number of annual crashes has graduatty increased back to 2015 tevets since the 2020 COVID-19 pandemic and lockdowns' The number of annua[ K+Sl crashes varied f rom 2015 to 2018, peaking in 2019. K+Sl crashes reached their minimum vatue in2O2O and increased annuatty untiI peaking again at a highervalue in 2023. Figure 23 represents the percent of totat crashes that occurred in each year.
Figure 23 - Crashes byYear (2015 -2023)
tB%
1,6%
L4%
1.0%
B%
6%
4%
0%
2023
%
2015 2016 2017 2071, 2,0222018
*Crashes
7019 2020
*K+Sl Crashes
E&,,fi.8i8:
Fotsom LRSP 01.14.2025.docx
City of Fotsom
)anuary 2025
02/11/2025 Item No.5.
2024
City of Folsom
TOCAT ROAD SAFETY PIAN
5. Pualtc ErucaceMENT
5.1. lntroduction
Kimtey-Horn's Pubtic Engagement Ptan f or the City of Fotsom's LocaI Roadway Safety Ptan included strategies and activities to reach a broad cross-section of the community throughout the City. The ptan inctuded one round of engagement, focused on identifying intersection/corridor needs and opportunities which is further detaited in this report' Priorto taunchingthe pubtic-facing effort, the City of Fotsom and Kimtey-Horn teams met to discuss and ptan out key project detiverables and how pubtic engagement woutd inform and support these efforts.
The outreach occurred between August and October 2024 and consisted of two main components:
1. ln-person pop-up events (Historic Fotsom Farmers Market)
2. Ontine pubtic input (September 7, 2024lhrough November 5,2024) a. Fotsom Traffic Safety Study - Survey & lnteractive Map hosted on Social Pinpoint Pu btic enga gement off i ci a tty [au nch ed on Septem b er 7, 2024, with the first pop-up event hetd at the Fotsom Historic District's Farmers Market. The in-person engagement
activities consisted of two pop-ups during September and October at two occurrences of the farmers market event.
Kimtey-Horn staff supported att the in-person events. Staff engaged with attendees of the farmers market to gather
feedback and capture community concerns on comment
cards and encouraged feedbackthrough the ontine survey' An interactive map poster board was stationed at in-person events, attowing pafticipants to visualize the study area and ptace numbered dots where they experienced traffic related chattenges or woutd benefit from safety improvements in those areas. An additionat poster board was stationed at in- person events that presented various traffic retated
chattenges for input. Attendees coutd ptace stickers on these chattenges to signify that they experience those chattenge(s) throughout the city.
The ontine survey, provided in muttipte languages, and interactive mapping toot was atso made pubtic on Septemb er 7 ,2024 and remained open for eight weeks, until November 5,2024.
The ontine survey was promoted through the City's various communication channets, inctuding a webpage, e-newstetters, anci the patm cards/poster boards created for the pop-up events.
City of Fotsom
January 2025
SHARE YOUR INPUT ON FOLSOM
TRAFFIC SAFFTY STUDY
Trr.roi.r'rc.l:n \r'irktD,ro,r,( r.!l,,.rvili!. rnl,:lrir!r.::. l,rrjilr''n'i, r rr.lrn r,iful, nrll irI: o,-,od,L.r'trj I drr " i. ilrrr { :. rilr,! :it n lr;r,' iD.n ro.r x! r!,rielr!4t;r4!i er(p€r.: i:;: d.rrr: irr! ni. \1: irLr:. ir ij n:
rthrriGr:ro[:xor, rno::: r, ! olr:il
aor:,rn!rit/ntrrr . r, fr,, -*r. rrr:b.iddr., !l t r,:ii'r', J'.li lrri ,odo !,.r i;r,r i I.r,jn Lr:$rr ),.jrl"n('rrixf,,,irintcractivcn.Pi \r-r: 1c_11s(ruey'"., d,or: :1t r_D \vebs{rd.|1 rr':{.+' i iini:.: /arl. uo:.h 6izbosrhi!folsom..o.!r.
lr,;
- ...!
I
Folsom LRSP 01.14.2025.docx
02/11/2025 Item No.5.
2024
City of Folsom
tOCAt ROAD SAFETY PIAN
Take the
Traffie Safetlr Suwelt
Take the
Traffic Safety Sur,veY
The City of Folsom is develoPrng a
Local Roadway Safety Plan
to eliminate fatalities and
severe injuries.
Have Traffic Safety concerns?
Help inform the City of Folsom
liii" ."r-r.ity ievelops a safety Plan.
5xJIrr )roJr iclaihicL rn ir':l: t!.-;lr) : rirflLric:: Ji hltllt l/.irBnPtkh rry:lllc.llFinllLl!4t lalrltllllom ll :p or by :;(:,innrng thtr ili? i{ld? \a-iiN i sllrJlpholle aJfilu..l I' i-.llak lln1i.
E
Scan Herel
Fi Iro.r: ..il.ririir:r'r ibr:LI il.! ar:; t,i ! tl:t,ir - fi:,ri https://www.folsom.€a.us/LRSP IJr ir!rLr., Zach Bosch r' [email protected] ),'(,,D. @)'tg)
FOLSOM TRAFFIC
SAFETY STUDY
F()LS()lt{W
Citv ol Folsorn
@rere@
LOCAL ROAD
SAFETY PLAN
Fotsom LRSP 01.14.2025.docx
City of Fotsom
January 2025
02/11/2025 Item No.5.
2024
City of Folsom
tOCAt ROAD SAFETY PIAN
5.2. ln-Person Event Summaries
The fottowing is a detaited account of the two in-person pop-up events hetd throughout the service area.
Pop-up event at Folso m Farmer's Market 9/7/2024 Pop-up event at Folsom Farmer's Market 1 0/1 9/2024
5.2.'1. Historic Fotsom Farmers Market - September 7,2O24 8:00 am- 1:00 pm
Kimtey-Horn kicked off the engagement pop-ups for the City of Fotsom at the Historic Folsom Farmers Market. A targe proportion of attendees at this event were Fotsom residents. The two poster boards were up on disptay and had moderate engagement. Engagement yietded:
. Approximatety 50 totat peopte surveyed
o 32 poster board map interactions
o 33 poster board category interactions
r A handf ut of very passionate residents with muttipte concerns and suggestions o Distributed over 40 postcards with a QR code to the ontine survey
5.2.2. Historic Fotsom Farmers Market - October 19'2024 8:00 am - 1:00 pm
The second pop up event was simitar in nature to the first, attracting primarity Folsom residents who were atready in attendance of the farmer's market. Unmarked versions of the same two poster boards were on disptay at the event and received stightty lower engagement. This event turned out the fottowing engagement:
o 35 totat peopte surveYed
o 22 poster board map interactions
c 17 poster board category interactions
. Distributed roughty 15 postcards with a QR code to the ontine survey City of Fotsom
)anuary 2O25
€&,,6:rffi:Ei
e!6lla r!'c E ( 5--
aiEaE:6
ilqE;
l.
Fotsom LRSP -01
.1 4.2o25.docx
02/11/2025 Item No.5.
2024
City of Folsom
TOCAI ROAD SAFETY PIAN
5.3. Online Community Survey Responses
The in-person and ontine engagement resulted in a total of 437 survey respondents. Pop-up events at the f armers market yietded mostty in-person responses, white the ontine survey received the most input after the emait to Fotsom residents was sent out with tinks to the website and survey. Over 800 unique users visited the interactive website, with an additionat 349 on-tine surueys taken and 382 site-specif ic comments recorded.
5.3.1 Online Map & SurveY Engagement
1,21 1 T o't al site vi sits
809 Unique visitors
349 Totat surveys compteted
382 Community map contributions
Figure 24 - Sociat Pinpoint Website Statistics
Performance Summary :
1,444 1,211 809 731 352
Visits Visitors Contributions Cgntributors Followers
a
a
a
a
0 200
150
100
50 0
Jul 08 JLI 15 )u122 iul 29 Aug 05 Aug 12 Auq '19 Aug 25 Sep 02 Sep Og S€p 16 Sep 23 5€p 30 Od 07 0't 14 O't 21 Od 28 Nov U4 Nov 1 1 + Vie\6 + Visits + Visitors -i;. Contributions + Conkibutors + Followers The ontine su rvey cottected f rom various eff orts revealed that most respondents (920ld indicated that they reside within the 95630 zip code.
Survey respondents were asked to choose the top three chattenges theyf ace while traveltingthrough Fotsom. The top three chattenges experienced by survey respondents were: 1)aggressive driving (speeding), 2) stop sign or red-tightviotations, and 3) distracted driving. Many of the other chatlenges tisted on the ontine survey received [arge numbers of votes.
The fottowing charts show the responses of the survey questions. lt shoutd be noted that question three attowed respondents to setect three chattenges they faced but did not ask respondents to rank them. Therefore, the totat number of responses is shown and is more than the totat number of compteted surveys for the aforementioned reason.
City of Fotsom
Januaty 2025
Fotsom LRSP 01.14.2025.docx
02/11/2025 Item No.5.
2024
City of Folsom
tOCAt ROAD SAFETY PLAN
1. What is your connection to the City of Folsom?
I live in Folsom.
I work or volunteer in Folsom.
My child attends a school in Folsom.
Other fType your answer]
I shop or visit social or recreational destinations in Folsom.
I travel through Folsom with a destination outside of the'..
None of the above
I go to school in Folsom.
299
Itt
Irs
6 6
L
0 0
300 400100 200
2. How do you typically travel throughout the City of Folsom? Drive alone
Carpool with others
Walk
Bike or scooter
I use a mobility device (like a walker or wheelchair)
Light rail, bus, or Paratransit
T : I zsa
72 Iro
lq
0 0
3001500 50 100 200 2s0
3. Please identify the top three e hallenges you face when traveling in the City of Folsom, (Respondents are presented with a drop-down of the following options).
Aggressive drivi ng (speeding)
Stop sign or red-light running violations
Distracted driving
Traffic signals (poor visibility, signal timing, conflicts with...
Electric mobility (e-bikes, e-scooters, etc') (unsafe and...
Pedestrian crossings (long crossing distance, deteriorated...
Other [Type your answer]
Bicycle lanes (narrow/missing bike lanes at intersections...
Signage and striping (unclear or faded, additional signage...
Street Lighting (nighttime visibility)
ADA accessibilitY
I 252
2, 2
148
LII
I I 97
n .s7
51 I3:
-23I19
2 500 100 150 200 250 300
Fotsom LRSP -01.1 4.2025.docx
City of Fotsom
)anuaty 2025
02/11/2025 Item No.5.
2024
City of Folsom
tOCAt ROAD SAFETY PLAN
White
I prefer not to answer
Asian, Pacific lslander, or Native Hawaiian
HisPa n i c/Lati no/a/x
Native American or Alaska Native
Middle Eastern/Arab
African American/Black
Something else ITYPe Your answer]
I I
-
lI 208
I80
n3l
2t
ls
lq
2 0
4. Choose all that describe You:
200 2s0100 1500 50
35 to 49
50 to 64
65 or older
I prefer not to answer
18 to 34
Under L8
T T T r 36
I
I
I
I
L03
I I laz
I lzs
I 6
0 5. How old are you?
r20 140 16060 80 10020 400
Female
Male
I prefer not to answer
Gender non-conforming or non-binary
Something else [Type your answer]
198
I rro
Iss
1. 0
6. What is your gender?
250150 2000 50 100
Folsom LRSP -01.1 4.2025.docx
City of Fotsom
)anuaty 2025
02/11/2025 Item No.5.
2024
City of Folsom
tOCAt ROAD SAFETY PIAN
5.3.1.1 . KeyThemes from the Survey Question
Ontine surveys cottected from various efforts reveated that over ninety percent of the respondents tive within the City of Fotsom (ZlP Code: 95630). Most respondents noted that they mainty depend on vehictes as their primary mode of travet. When asked to identify their top three traffic safety chattenge areas when it came to traveting throughout Fotsom, most individuals noted concerns with aggressive driving, stop sign or red-tight runningviotations, and distracted driving. Other keythemes from the 349 compteted surveys are as fotlows:
j.. Aggressive Driving and Speeding - Concerns about speeding drivers, especiatty on main roads and near residentia[ areas.
Z. Need for lmproved Traffic Signat Management - lssues with traffic tight timing and the prevalence of red-tight running.
3. Safety in Neighborhoods and Near Schoots - Concerns about traffic near schoots and neighborhoods, specificalty near etementary schoots.
4. Bicycle and Fedestrian Safety - lnterest in improved bike lanes, pedestrian paths, and safe traits.
5. East Bidwett Street Traffic - A recurring mention of issues with traffic and speed on East Bidwett Street.
6. Enforcement of Traffic Rutes - Suggestions for stricter enforcement, particutarty around speeding and traffic tight viotations.
7. lntersection and Signage lmprovements - Recommendations for ctearer signage and better intersectio n controt.
8. Pubtic Transit and Atternative Transportation - Support f or more pubtic transit options and inf rastructu re for non-car travet.
g. Dangerous Driving Behavior - Specific concerns about recktess or distracted drivers on major roads.
10. Road Maintenance and lnfrastructure - A need for better road quatity and safe infrastructure for at[ road users, especiatty at high-traffic points.
5.3.1.2. Community MaP
The ontine pubtic engagement website atso contained a community map where respondents setected locations within the City where they experienced traff ic safety issues and setect the specific issue(s) f rom a tist of pre-poputated chattenges or type a more specific issue. The community map received 382 posts, f rom 145 unique contributors.
City of Fotsom
)anuaty 2025
Fotsom LRSP -01.1 4.2025.docx
02/11/2025 Item No.5.
2024
City of Folsom
tOCAt ROAD SAFETY PIAN
Figure 25 - Sociat Pinpoint Community Map Ontine lnterface @
Folsom Traffic Safety StudY
Do you live or work in the ctty oi Solsont? tf so. we would like to hpar about your experiences {irivjng, bikin&,walking, cr usinB otiler trdnrportdtlotr mcdes u,/lthin work to arld.!ss the saf ety {llallen8es that t ed u:ers fd(e Vou caB profide input ln two Yvays:
2. Take 0ur surrr'ey down trelol/u \ryfiitl.l takes about 5 ullnutes to complete Allresporrsesv/illremainconfidential. ThankyouforyourtimeandvdluableinFutiTtothisinlpottdtltfrfetysttrdy! For ntore tn{ormation dnd del:dils about thtS effoft (ontact zacl] Bosth dt zbosch@folsom,ca.us. @
e e e F:,i!: ,1 jdltre:: <",
=a
Citr!s Heights
a
+
a
€tDorado Hllts
@
@
r'
i
I
P
I
El
t''l
o
Ol
The community map received a totat of 382 contributions. A few areas within the city saw concentrated responses from residents. The fottowing tocations were among the areas with the highest density of map pins placed.
- Turn pike Drive between Natoma Station Drive and Ashcat Way/Fantages Way - East Bidwett Street between lron Point Road and US-50 - East Bidwett Street and OakAvenue Parkway
- Ritey Street between Rainbow Bridge and Sutter Street ln addition to the pre-defined issues, the community map attowed contributors to setect "Other" as an option when ptacing a marker at a specific tocation on the map. Below is the summary of responses to the question asked to contributors when ptacing a marker.
City of Fotsom
)anuaty 2025
i Req 4s
&
@@
Fd!9om
29 l6
##
ffi
B,us" rblf
;,1: i g,,
; .,ttrr:::
::_ i]lX]l;
.. , !0'
Folsom LRSP -01.1 4.2025.docx
02/11/2025 Item No.5.
2024
CiW of Folsom
tOCAt ROAD SAFETY PIAN
From the "Other" comments received from the on-line map, key areas of focus and themes were as fottows:
1 . Speeding in Residential Areas: Many respondents are worried about vehicles exceeding speed Iimits, especially near homes and schoo/s.
2. tJnsafe lntersections: Certain intersections are frequently mentioned as hazardous due to poor signage, lack of traffic srgnals, or obstructed views.
3. Pedestrian Saf ety: /ssues with crosswalks being ignored by drivers, insufficienf crosslng times at signals, and a lack of sidewalksin some areas.
4. Cyclist Safety: Concerns about inadequate bike Ianes, drivers not sharingthe road properly, and unsafe conditions for cyclists.
5. Distracted Driving: Reports of drivers using mobile devlces or being othenuise inattentive, Ie a d i n g to u n s afe d rivi n g c o nditions.
6. Aggressive Driving Behavior: tncidents involvingtailgating, abrupt lane changes without signaling, and road rage.
7. poor Road Conditions: Complaints about potholes, uneven surfaces, and inadequate street Ii ghti ng aff ecti n g safetY
8. Traffic SignatTiming: Srgnals not synchronized properly, Ieadingto congestion and risky behaviors Iike running red Iights.
9. Heavy Traffic Near Schools; Congestl on during drop-off and pick-up times creating unsafe situatlons for children and pedestrians.
I0. tnsufficientTraffic Law Enforcement: A perceived need for increased police presence to deter speeding and other violations.
City of Fotsom
Januaty 2025
What traffic safety challenge(s) do you experience at this location? Select all that aPPIY.
Aggressive Driver Behavior (speeding, running stop signs,...
Pedestrian Safety (e.g. no sidewalk, long crossing distance) Other. Please type your response below'
Traffic signal (congestion, signal timing, poor visibility) Distracted Driving
Bicycle Safety (e.g. no bike lanes, narrow bike lanes,'..
Signage/Stripi ng (lacki ng, unclear)
Si ght Distance (blocked/obscured)
Street lighting
Not ADA Compliant
Construction Work Zone SafetY
I I 2s6
144
J tzi
;9
I I 79
I 275
IS:
227
l7
'J.
0 0 50 100 150 200 250 300
Fotsom LRSP 01 .14.2025.docx
02/11/2025 Item No.5.
2024
City of Folsom
tOCAt ROAD SAFETY PLAN
Att feedback received from the ontine map was cross referenced with the crash locations for signatized intersections, non-signatized, and roadway segments and was used to inform recommended safety treatments presented in the fottowing sections of the report.
Figure 26 - Pubtic Comments Compited with Crashes
Line,
I
I
N
A'
0 0.5
El Dorado Hills
2 Miles
hq-
Orangevale
i
!
3 4
q
n(
t*
o-
!-
&
!
o
t
fs
!I
Miss,ssrppi
Bar
Lott"
/. Pfl Pl Y'i m
qc
ag
tn
aentrdl
Shopping
C€ntel
Crashes (2020-2023)
I , SParse
?
Dense
Online Public CommentFolsom Central
Ii
I,
I'
k
t Business District
A'-c-l-L )-: -C>.::;v-- I - - - - -
A.- ._r
_:;l
,d
E
T
0:.0
a)
f,.o
fl
''l
I
GlenboroJqh
Fotsom LRSP _01. 1 4.2025.docx
City of Fotsom
Januaty 2025
02/11/2025 Item No.5.
2024
City of Folsom
TOCAL ROAD SAFETY PLAN
6. CoUTTeRMEASURES
The fottowing sections provide more information on potentiat engineering and non-infrastructure safety countermeasures that might address conditions that were observed to contribute to crash activity in the City.
6.1. EngineeringCountermeasures
White there are many safety countermeasures that coutd be used to systemicatty improve roadway safety, the fottowing sections provide countermeasures for consideration by the City of Fotsom. The fottowing sections contain a description of Crash Modification Factors (CMFs) and Crash Reduction Factors (CRFs) associatgd with the engineering countermeasures tootbox.
6.1.1. Grash Modification Factors and crash Reduction Factors When identifying potentiat systemic safety improvements, it is important to look at CMFs for the proposed improvements. The CMF Method is found in Part D of the HSM. CMFs are defined as the ratio of effectiveness of one condition in comparison to another condition and represent the relative change in crash frequency due to a change in one specific condition. ln other words, a CMF is a muttipticative factor used to compute the expected number of crashes after imptementing a given countermeasure at a specific site. Countermeasures with CMFs less than one are expected to reduce crashes if apptied, white those countermeasures with CMFs greater than one are expected to increase crashes. Figure 27 ittustrates the definition of CMFs.
Figure 27 -CMF Calculation
#&SF *,
i_ Xtrl._( j1 [ Li {,; ft A5t-i i.ij
WITH l'l-li:i'.TMi irj I
t.'l{ itri::{il i: !.) il llii5jl-l t-*
WITHOUT f ti[id L4l-:i'.1 I
Expected to have no impact on safety
Expected to reduce crashes
CMF = 1.0
cMF < 1.0
CMF > 1.0
I
I
I
l
l
I
I
I
Expected to increase crashes
The CMF Method is used to catcutate the expected number of crashes by taking the observed number of crashes and muttiptying those crashes by the appticabte CMF for the proposed countermeasure. lt is recommended that cMFs be apptied to a minimum of three years of crash data for urban and suburban sites and five years of crash data for a rural site. Figure 28 is a sampte catcutation of the CMF method with one CMF being apptied to a particular site for a singte year.
Figure 28 - CMF Method Sampte Calculation
10.1 crashes / year x 0.91 (CMF) =
9.2 crashes / Year:
a reduction of 0.9 total crashes per year and a CRF of 9% Fotsom LRSP -01 .1 4.2025.docx
City of Fotsom
Janua(y 2025
02/11/2025 Item No.5.
2024
City of Folsom
LOCAI. ROAD SAFETY PIAN
A CRF is simitar to a CMF but stated in different terms. A CRF is defined as a percentage of crash reduction that might be expected after the imptementation of a given countermeasure at a specific site. Figure 29 shows how a CRF is calculated in retationship to a CMF.
Figure 29 - CRF Gatcutation
CRF-(1 -cMF) xloo
Caution shoutd be used in the setection of appropriate CMFs. The fottowing guidance shoutd be considered when setecting CMFs for predictive crash anatysis:
. CMFs shoutd be setected from the HSM Part D, The Local Roadway Safety Manual: A Manual for California's Local Road Owners (Version 1 .5, Apri[ 2020), or f rom the Federat Highway Administration's (FHWA) CMF Ctearinghouse website (http ://www. cmf ctea ri n ghou se. o rg).
. Read the countermeasure abstract to determine if the cMF is appticabte to the proposed improvement.
. Onty CMFs with a four-star rating or higher should be considered for use in anatysis. r Be sure the setected CMF is appticabte to the set of crash data being used for anatysis.
Some CMFs may onty be appticable to a subset of the crash data. r The apptication of muttipte CMFs can overestimate the expected crash reduction. Unless each CMF addresses independent crash types, muttipte CMFs shoutd not be used. lt is suggested that no more than three independent cMFs be apptied to a particutar site.
The countermeasures proposed in this document were chosen because of their effectiveness in reducing crashes.
6.1.2. Engineering Countermeasures Toolbox
The systemic improvements identified as most tikety effective for Fotsom are listed in TabLe 6, and inctude a wide range of countermeasures that can be imptemented in phases where appropriate.
Many of these proposed countermeasures have atready been implemented in the City, inctuding but not timited to signat timing coordination, protected teft-turn phasing, pedestrian countdown signat heads, conversion of stop-controtted intersections to roundabouts, installation of speed feedback signs, and enhanced visibitity signing (i.e. LED enhanced signs) and stripingtreatments.
The CMF indicates how effective the countermeasure is at reducing crashes. CMFs and CRFs have been provided for reference to aid the City of Fotsom in understanding potentiat reductions from crashes by different countermeasures. Cattrans funding levets for each countermeasure is atso provided. lf the CMF or CRF is tisted as "Not Availabte", this means there is insuff icient data, a study does not exist, the countermeasure is new or emerging, orthe countermeasure was not evaluated for a safety impact.
City of Fotsom
lanuary 2025
Fotsom LRSP _01.1 4.2025.docx
02/11/2025 Item No.5.
2024;Hl5ilffi"*-
Table 4
- Folsom Engineering Countermeasures Tootbox
$$
$
$
$
$
$$
$$
$$
n
$
$$$
$
$
$$$
$$$
$$
$
$$
$$$
$$
$$
$
$$
$
$$
$$$
$$
900/o
9Oo/o
90o/o
9Oo/o
900/o
9Oo/o
9Oo/o
90%
900/o
90%
90%
N/A
N/A
9Oo/o
N/A
904/o
-
90o/o
500/o
9Oo/o
90 o/o
9Qo/o
9Oo/o
9Oo/o
90o/o
9Oo/o
9Oo/o
X
X
X
T
x
x
X
X
X
T
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
x
X
X
X
X
504/a
Varies
150/o
25o/o
550/o
250/o
350/o
25o/o
40o/o
15o/o
600/o
60/o
150/o
37o/o
Not Avaitabte
4Oo/o
150/o
1 5o/o
55%
300/o
30%
Varies
Varies
1 0o/o
3Oo/o
40o/o
o.75
0.75 0.6
0.85 0.4
0.94 0.85
0.63 Not Avaitabl.e
0.6 rc
0.5 Varies
0.85 0.7
Veries
Varies
0.9 0.7
0.45 0.75
0.65 0.6
0.85 0.85
0.45 o.7
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
T
lnstaLt/u pgrade intersection warning/regutatory signs
Upgrade pavement markings
Pedestrian countdown signaL heads
Pedestrian scramble
Advanced stop bar before crosswatk and bicycte box
14odify signatto provide a Leading Pedestrian lnterval
(LPr)
Ftashing yetl.ow arrow
Signat ahead warning signs
Curb extensions
Add intersection tighting
lnstatt a raised intersection
lnstatl. att-way sToP controt
Convert intersection to roundabout
Protected teft turn phase
Convert signat from pedestat-mounted to mast a rm
Convert intersection to roundabout (from signat)
Convert intersection to mini/compact roundabout
(from signaL)
lnstatt raised pavement markers and striping
Instatt signs with LED borders as advanced warning
lnstatt High Friction surface Treatment (HFST)
lnstatl. raised median on approaches
lnsta[t pedestrian median fencing on approaches
lnstatl intersection tighting
Retroref [ective backplates
lmprove signaI timing (coordination)
lnstatl. LeftTurn Lane. Add LeftTurn Phase
Atso Addresses
Pedestrian Bicyc[e
Crash
Modification
Factor (CMF)
Crash Reduction
CRF Appties to
Nighttime Pedestrian Cattrans Funding Cost to lmplementCountermeasure Factor (CRF) Att and Bicycte lntersections
$$$ Requires design and construction of extensive infrastructure improvements $$ Requires procurement and/or minor construction activities
city of Fotsom
)anuary 2025
02/11/2025 Item No.5.
2024 o#l#ltrk'.'
$$
$
$$$
$$$
$$
$$
$$$
$$
$
$$$
$$
$$
$$
$$$
$$
$$$
$
$$
$$
$$
$
$$$
$$
$$
$$
90%
90o/o
9Oo/o
900/o
900/o
9Oo/o
9Oo/o
900/o
9Oo/o
9Oo/o
N/A
N/A
N/A
9Oo/o
T
9Oa/o
9 0olo
9Oo/o
90%
9Oo/o
9Oo/o
9Oo/o
9Oa/o
9 0olo
900/o
90% (if beacons
90%
r
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
n
X
X
X
X
I
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
35o/o
25o/a
35o/o
350/o
35o/o
55%
Not Avaitabl.e
40o/o
390/o
Not Avaitabl.e
N ot Avail.abte
Not Avaita b te
354/o
55%
4Oa/o
250/o
5Oa/a
5Oo/o
2Oo/o
350/o
450/o
354/o
1 5o/o
3Oo/o
2Oa/o
Not Avail.abLe
0.6 0.61
0.63 Not Avaitabte
Not Avaitabte
0.65 Not Avaitable
0.65 0.75
0.65 0.65
0.5 0.5
0.8 0.65
0.55 0.65
0.65 0.45
0.85 o.7
0.8 0.55
0.6 o.75
X
X
x
X
T
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Retroreflective striDs on sign posts
Crosswatk Lighting
Cotored bicycte tanes
Curb extensions
lnstat[ a raised intersection
PartiaL street ctosure or diagonat diverter
Add segment Lighting
FutI street ctosure
Remove or rel.ocate fixed object outside of Ctear
Recoveru Zone
lnstat[ impact attenuators
lnstatL pedestrian median fencing
lnstatt bike tanes
Directionat median openings to restrict turning
Reduced Left-Turn Conf tict (R-CUT) intersections
lnstal.t right-turn tane
lnstat[ left-turn tane
Pedestrian refuge istand
lnstatl./upgrade pedestrian crossing with enhanced
safetv features
Rectangutar Rapid Ftashing Beacon (RRFB)
Pedestrian Signat or Pedestrian High lntensityActivated Crosswatk (HAWK)
lnstatt ftashing beacons at stop-controtled
intersections
lnstaLt ftashi ng beac ons as advanced wa rning
Ctear sight triangtes
lnstatt High Friction surface Treatment (HFST)
lnstatl. sptittetristands on minor road approaches
lnstatl raised median on approaches
Also Addresses
Pedestrian Bicycl.e
Crash
Modification
Factor (CMR
Crash Reduction
CRF Appties to
Nighttime Pedestrian
and Bicycte
Caltrans Funding Cost to lmptementcountermeasure Factor (CRF) Atr RoadwaySegments
$$$ Requires design and construction of extensive infrastructure improvements $$ Requires procurement and/or minor construction activities
City of FoLsom
January 2025
02/11/2025 Item No.5.
2024 Hffii:#*'"-
$$$
$$
$
$
$$
$$$
$$
$$
$$
$$
$$
$
$
$$
$$
$$
N/A
N/A
N/A
9Oa/o
90o/o
900/o
900/o
9Oo/o
900/o
900/o
9Oa/a
9Oo/o
9Oo/o
900/o
900/o
Opportunity for
OTS funding
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
x
X
X
X
X
X
X
Not Avail.abLe
Not Avaitabte
Not Avaitabte
40o/o
25o/o
30%
2Oo/o
1 Sa/a
55%
3Oa/o
150/o
1 So/a
350/o
3sak
350/o
Not Avaitabl.e
0.85 0.45
o.70
0.85 0.85
Not Avaitabte
Not Avaitabl.e
Not Avaitabte
0.65 0.65
0.65 Not Avail.abte
0.60 0.75
0.70 0.80
X
X
X
x
X
X
X
X
X
lnstat[ centertine rumbl.e strips/stripes
lnstatt edgetine rumbte strips/stripes
lmprove pavement friction (High Friction Surface
Treatment)
lnstatt dynamic/variabte speed warning signs
lnstatt/U pgrade signs with new ftuorescent sheeting
(regutatory/warning)
lnstatt detineators, reflectors and/or object markers
lnsta[[ [ane narrowing treatments (extend curb
inward/extend median)
lnstatt a chicane, deviation, or angted stow point
lnstatL speed hump
$$$ Requires design and construction of extensive infrastructure improvements $$ Requires procurement and/or minor construction activities lnstatt/upgrade pedestrian crossing (with enhanced
safety features)
lnstatt raised pedestrian crossing
lnsta[[ rectangu[ar rapid ftashing beacon
Speed feedback signs (mobite orfixed)
lnsta[[ chevron signs on horizontaI curues
lnstat[ curve advance warning signs
lnstatt curve advance warning signs (ftashing beacon)
Also Addresses
Pedestrian Bicycte
Crash
Modifieation
Factor (CMF)
Crash Reduction
Faetor (CRF)
CRF Appties to
Nighttime Pedestrian
and Bicycte
countermeasure Att
Caltrans Funding Cost to lmptement
Folsom LRSP 01.14.2025.docx
City of Fotsom
Janrary 2025
02/11/2025 Item No.5.
6.2. Non-lnfrastructure Gountermeasures
The Nationat HighwayTraffic SafetyAdministration (NHTSA) Countermeasures thaf Work, Ninth Edition, is a reference to assist safety stakehotders in setecting effective, science-based non- infrastructure traffic safety countermeasures for major highway safety problem areas. White many of the countermeasures are more appropriate to appty at the state-tevel or require tegistative modifications to imptement, Table 5 contains countermeasures that have demonstrated effectiveness and coutd be apptied at the City levet. Access to Drug Recognition Experts (DREs) and Advanced Roadside lmpaired Driving Enforcement (ARIDE)trainingfor law enforcement is not inctuded in the document but is something that coutd atso be considered for the City.
Tabte 5 - Gity of Fotsom Non-lnfrastructure Countermeasures Toolbox Effectiveness:
***** Demonstrated to be effective by several high-quality evaluations with consistent results **** Demonstrated to be effective in ceftain situations Cost to lmplement:
$$$ Regulres extensive new facilities, sfafi equipment, or publicity, or makes heavy demands on current resources $$ Regulres so me additionat staff time, equipment, facilities, and/or publicity $ Can be implemented with current staff, perhaps with training; Iimited costs for equipment, facilities, and publicity +
Can be covered by income from citations
Use.'
High: More than two-thirds of Sfafes, or a substantial maiority of communities Medium: Between one-third and two-thirds of States or communities Low. Less than one-third of Sfafes or communities
Unknown: Data not available
Time to tmptement: Long: More than 1 year; Medium: More than 3 months but less than 1 year; Short: 3 monfhs or /ess $$$' Medium MediumAutomated enforcement systems
$$$ Medium ShortPubticized Sobriety CheckPoints
$$ High ShortHigh-Visibitity Satu ration Patrots
Occ'upant
$$$ Medium MediumShort-term high visibitity
enforcement
Unknown Medium$$$lntegrated nighttime seat belt
enforcement
Dlstracted Driving
Low Medium$$$
H igh visibitity cetlphone/text
messaging enforcement
Cost to
lmptement
Time to
lmplementUseEffectivenessCountermeasure
Fotsom LRSP *01. 1 4.2025.docx
City of Fotsom
)anuaty 2025
02/11/2025 Item No.5.
2024
City of Folsom
TOCAT ROAD SAFETY PLAN
7. Pnouecr LocATtoNS
As a result of the Citywide network screening analysis, 13 project locations were selected f or f urther anatysis and devetopment of site-specific safety improvement recommendations. Project sheets were developed to provide a menu of potentiat safety cou ntermeasures that the City can chose f rom when apptyingforfunding. These [ocations were identified through the anatysis process based on their crash histories, the observed crash patterns, and their differing characteristics to provide the most insight into potentiat systemic safety countermeasures that the city can emptoy to achieve the most cost-effective safety benefits.
Each project sheet inctudes tocation maps with a crash data summary, notes, and tist of recommended safety countermeasures with corresponding CMFs, number of crashes anticipated to be reduced, 1o-yearcrash reduction estimate and benefit, and ptanningtevel construction cost estimates. The potentiat safety countermeasures identified reflect safety improvements that can be apptied to reduce the tiketihood of future crashes. Countermeasures were subjected to a benefit/cost assessment to determine their potentiat return on investment. These case studies can be used to setect the most appropriate countermeasure(s), and to potentiatty phase improvements overthe [onger-term. The potentiat benefit of these countermeasures at locations with simitar design characteristics can then be extrapolated regardtess of crash history. These project sheets can atso be used to position the Cityforfuture grant funding oppoftunities.
Tabte 6 presents a summary of the potentiat safety countermeasures identified for each of the projcct locations and corresponding benefit/cost. A project sheet was developed firr each of the priority tocations containing additionat information and are inctuded in Appendix E.
Figure 30 betow shows the project tocations identified and ptaced over citywide crashes. Figure 31 shows the project locations identified and ptaced on a map with att the community map contributions submitted as part of the pubtic engagement website.
City of Fotsom
Januaty 2025
Fotsom LRSP 01 .14.2025.docx
02/11/2025 Item No.5.
2024
City of Folsom
TOCAT ROAD SAFETY PIAN
Figure 30 - Case Study Locations
Line
I
I
I
I
N
A'
*?
e
orangevale
+b
El Dorado Hills
jt
g.
00.5 1
E
ts t
D
'e
T
o
a
d
a-
:-
Mrssissippl
Bat
I
I
I
t
I
I
Lalte
2 Miles
Folsom Central
Business District*
LembrPark
LJ -/-L -E -!V JY->/'- i - - - - -
@ Case Study Intersection
-
Case Study Segment
Crashes (2020-2023)
, Sparse
I
I
t
Walmart
LenIrdl
Shopping
CenterIt\
t
r'
t.I
A_l
-'5i'J
T
g.
:.o
O.?
rfl
q
o-
{a.
LN
I' !)
, , eu! P(!y
Glenb0 ro ug []
24\j
Folsom LRSP 01.14.2025.docx
Dense
City of Fotsom
Januaty 2025
02/11/2025 Item No.5.
2024
CiW of Folsom
TOCAT ROAD SAFETY PLAN
Figure 31 - Case Study Locations and Pubtic Comments
d^ N
l-ine, 4
As
*b
El Dorado Hills
It
Orangevale
l-
=-o'3
atLrral
0 0.s
n?
o
&-
T
o
1 t"!
t4
Mrssissippi
Bar
Lok€
2 Mil€s
o Case Study Intersection
n Qs5s Study Segment
Y Online Public CommentWalmart
fenrral
Shopping
Ce'ttet(
t\
I
t\
kt.
Folsom Central
Business DistrictLr-/-\ -}/- J\/, -/X -
N.l
-5L:
:d:
:o
F
ll
1rf,.l}
-.. ( PLwY m
@
€g
Gienborouqh
School
Fotsom LRSP 01.14.2025.docx
LE|rbi Pirk
City of Fotsom
lanuary 2025
02/11/2025 Item No.5.
2024
City of Folsom
SAFETY PLAN
Tabte 6 - Project Locations
City of Fotsom
January 2025
2.7 0.0
0.0 36.0
1.1 91.0
45.0 112.5
4.0 58.5
$2,ooo,ooo
$11,200
$s,ooo
$32,500
$2,000,000
$15,000
$55,000
$35,000
$42,400
$se,soo
Convert intersection to roundabout
(from signal.)
lnstat[ advance stop bar before
crosswatk (Bicycte Box)
Modify signal. phasing to imptement a
Leading Pedestrian lntervat (LPl)
lmprove signal. hardware: [enses,
back-ptates with retroref [ective
borders, mounting, size, and number
Convert intersection to rou ndabout
(f rom stop or yietd control on minor
road)
lmprove signaI hardware: [enses,
back-ptates with retroref Iective
borders, mounting, size, and number
lmprove signal. hardware: lenses,
back-ptates with retroref [ective
borders, mounting, size, and number
Modify signat phasing to implement a
Leading Pedestrian lntervat (LPl)
lnstat[ advance stop bar before
crosswatk (Bicycte Box)
Add intersection tighting
Modify cycle to include a Leading
Pedestrian lnterval
I nsta [[ new retroref [ective
backptates and additionat signat
heads
lnsta [[ new retroref [ective
backplates
Co nvert intersection to
roundabout controI
lnstat[ Bike Boxes
Modify cycte to inctude a
Leading Pedestrian lntervaI
lnstatt Bike Boxes at Blue Ravine
Rd @ Prairie City Rd and Btue
Ravine Rd @ Fotsom Btvd
Convert intersection to
roundabout controI
I nstat[ intersection tighting
I nsta [[ retroref [ective backptates
1 . Greenback Ln & American River
Canyon Dr
1. E BidweLt St & Orchard Dr
1. E Bidwett St &WaLes Dr
'l . lron Point Rd & Prairie CitY Rd
2. FoLsom-Auburn Rd & Greenback Ln
3. Fotsom Btvd & BLue Ravine Rd
4. BLue Ravine Rd & Prairie CitY Rd
5. E Bidwett St & lron Point Rd
6. Oak Ave Pkwy & S Lexington Dr
7. Ritey St & GLenn Dr
1. lron Point Rd & Prairie CitY Rd
2. Folsom-Auburn Rd & Greenback Ln
5 4
J
1 2
Project Locations Recommendation Countermeasure Total Cost BIC* Fotsom LRSP _01.1 4.2025.docx
02/11/2025 Item No.5.
2024
City of Folsom
D SAFETY PLAN
* B/C is the benef it to cost ratio for each project, calcutated by taking the cra sh reduction benefit and dividing by the estimated cost of the proposed project's imptementation
City of Fotsom
)anuaty 2025
29.9 108.9
332.4
221.6
202.4
147.7
64.4 30.5
$46,000
$77,ooo
$4,ooo
$12,000
$s,zoo
$g,ooo
$64,625
$+,zoo
lnstatt ftashing beacons as advance
warning (S.1.)
lmprove pavement f riction (High
Friction Surface Treatments)
lnstatl./Upgrade signs with new
fluorescent sheeting (regutatory or
warning)
lnstall dynamic/variable sPeed
warning signs
lnsta[[ centertine ru mbte
strlps/stripes
lnstatt edgetine rumbte strips/stripes
lmprove pavement f riction (High
Friction Su rface Treatments)
lnstatt detineators, reflectors and/or
object markers
lnstat[ ftashing beacon on WB
approach curve
lnstatt high friction surface
treatment on curves
Upgrade existing signs and instat[
new MUTCD compliant warning
signs
lnstatt dynamic speed warning
slgn
lnsta[[ centerline rumbte strips
lnstatt edgetine rumble striPs
lnstatt high friction sudace
treatment on curves
lmprove bike lanes and prevent
risky merging behaviors by
instatting bike [ane detineators on
west [eg after SBR
1. Prairie City Rd from US-50 to DWY
N/O ManginiPkwy
1. lron Point Rd from Prairie City Rd to
Grover Rd
1. E Natoma St from Cummings WY to
Green Vattey Rd/Btue Ravine Rd
6 7
8 Fotsom LRSP -01.1 4.2025.docx
02/11/2025 Item No.5.
The countermeasures in Appendix E can be considered as near-term, mid-term and long-term improvements. Near-term improvements are lower cost and can be implemented most readity. Mid- term improvements are higher cost improvements, white tong-term improvements are the highest cost and may require engineering design and permitting to imptement.
Tabte 7 - Near-Term, Mid-Term, and Long-Term lmprovements r lnstat[ teft turn [ane and
add left turn phase
r Convert signat from
pedestat mounted to
mast arm
. lnstatlhigh-friction
surface treatment
. lnstatl signat
. Curb extensions and
butb-outs
o Remove/retocatefixed
object out of ctear
recovery zone
. lnstat[ separated bike
[anes
. lnstat[
acceterati on/d eceterati on
[anes
. Add two-way left turn
tane/lmptement road diet
. lnsta[[ pedestrian refuge
island or raised
pedestrian crossing
o Convert intersection to
roundabout
lnstatt rumble strips
(ed getine and centertine)
lnstatt intersection
tighting
I nstat[ emergency vehicte
preemption
lnstatt protected left turn
phase
lnstatt raised median
Create directionaI
median openings
I nstatt ftashi ng beacons
in advanced warning or
curve or intersection
lnstatt pedestrian median
fencing
lnstatt sptitter islands on
minor road approaches
lnstatt RRFB
lnstatt bike tane
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
o lnstatlretroreftective
backptates and/or
additionat signat heads
. lnstattretroreftective
strips
. lnstatl raised pavement
markings and striping
. lnsta[[ pedestrian
countdown signat heads
. Advanced stop bars
(bicycte box)
o lmprove signattiming
r lmptement Leading
Pedestrian lntervaI
. lmplementAtt-Way-Stop-
Control at i ntersection
. lnstatl/upgrade
intersection
warning/regutatory signs
o Clear sight triangtes
. lnstalt/upgrade
pedestrian crossing
o Cotored bicycle [anes
. lnstatt/upgrade signs with
new ftuorescent sheeti ng
(regutatory orwarning)
. lnstat[ delineators,
reftectors and/or object
markers
. lnstat[ dynamic speed
warning signs
Nea r-Term I mprovements
(0-3 Years)
Mid-Term lmprovements
(3-5 Years)
Long-Term I mprovements
(5+ Years)
Fotsom LRSP 01.14.2025.docx
City of Fotsom
January 2025
02/11/2025 Item No.5.
2024
CW of Folsorn
LOCAT ROAD SAFETY PIAN
8. luplervleNTATloN Gulor
8.1. Evatuation
The success of the LRSP witt be evatuated using the pretiminary process outtined betow. This process witt be usef ut to ensure proper imptementation of goats and to determine when updates are needed.
. Progress meetlngs are recommended to be conducted to track the implementation of the ptan. In addition, the success of the plan will be evaluated on a reoccurring basis. . An update to the ptan shoutd be considered after no more than five years. . Continued monitoring and recordingof traffic incidents on local roadways by law enforcement.
. Maintain a list of focus areas where there are transportation safety concerns, based on historical crash data.
8.2. lmplementation
lmptementation of the LRSP can be accomptished through several avenues inctuding devetopment of improvement projects, the estabtishment of new poticies and programs, and d evetopment/strengthe ni ng of retati ons h i ps with sta kehold ers.
With regard to projects, the fottowing identif ies potentiat f ocus areas for the City in the near-to-mid- term,
8.2.1 Near- and Mid-Term Focus Areas
The opportunities identified in this LRSP provide more of the systemic countermeasures that can be apptied within the city. over the next three to f ive years, it is recommended that the city concentrate its efforts on the fottowing emphasis areas:
' Aggressive Driving
. Hit Object Crashes
. Pedestrians and Bicyctes
Anatysis conducted at the citywide tevet indicated that these factors were some of the most f requent inftuences contributing to K+Sl crashes within the City. The countermeasure opportunities previousty discussed in this safety ptan for both systemic and project-specific improvements can be used as a basis f or devetoping projects at tocations where addressing these focus areas woutd be of the most benefit. Projects that address these focus areas can be devetoped with a high benefit-to- cost ratio (by apptying citywide crash rates), attowing competitive projects to be devetoped even at sites with tittte to no direct crash history, but with conditions that might contribute to f uture crashes.
8.3. Poticy Update
The city has taken meaningfut steps to prioritize road safety and has successfutly integrated these approaches into numerous Cit'ywide programs, poticies, and practices. This LRSP inctudes an assessment of both the City's existing and the identified opportunities to enhance programs' poticies, and practices to address road safety more comprehensivety. Appendix F provides a City of Fotsom
Januaty 2025
Fotsom LRSP -01
.1 4.2025.docx
02/11/2025 Item No.5.
2024
CiW of Folsom
tOCAt ROAD SAFETY PTAN
summary of the existing programs, poticies, and practices, as wetl as the recommended enhancements. The City and stakehotders shoutd cottaborate to discuss these poticy modifications and set tangibte goats for imptementation.
8.4. Updates to the Locat Road Safety Ptan
The fottowing steps outtine the process for updating the LRSP after no more than 5 years. 1) Access necessarydata
. Roadway and intersection classification/configurations . Average DailyTraffic Volumes (Collected from counts where available) . Co/llslon history
2) Netvvork screening
. Calculate the CCR for each roadway functional classification and intersection control type . Rank for each facility type
i) Roadway Segment
(1) Primary
(2) SecondarY
(3) Local
ii) Intersection
(1) Signalized
(2) Unsignalized
3) Select locations
. tdentify the location with a higher CCR than what is typical of comparable facility types within City
. Analyze the collision history and work with local officials to understand any significant exterior influences on the location
4) countermeasures
. LJsingthe En$neering countermeasures Toolbox (Appendix D) and Non-lnfrastructure Toolbox flabte 4), identify potential countermeasures that can be apptied to the local to enh an ce safetY featu res
S) Calculate the benefit and the cost of each applicable countermeasure using Highway Safety lmprovement Program (HStP) tool and identified countermeasures. lf those are not available, refer to other resources such as fhe CMF Clearinghouse and follow a similar calculation (using 20-year cost and benefit numbers).
Additionat items the City can do to keep the LRSP current are:
1) When new or reconstruction projects arise, use the data processed to identify |ocations with similar characterlstlcs and apply countermeasures which proved effective 2) Proactively update its roadway and transportation design standards to incorporate systemic safety improvements identified in the Citywide LRSP
City of Fotsom
Januaty 2025
Fo[som LRSP 01.14.2025.docx
02/11/2025 Item No.5.
2024
Ciry of Folsom
LOCAT ROAD SAFETY PIAN
8.5. Funding
Competitive funding resources are avaitabte to assist in the devetopment and implementation of safety projects in the City of Fotsom. The City shoutd continue to seek avaitabte funding and grant opportunities from locat, state, and federat resources to acceterate their abitity to imptement safety improvements throughout Fotsom. The fottowing is a high-tevet introduction into some of the main funding programs and grants for which the City can appty.
8.5.1. Highway Safety lmprovement Program (HSIP)
The Highway Safety lmprovement Program (HSIP) is a Federat program housed under Fixing America's Surface Transportation (FAST) Act. This program apportions funding as a [ump sum for each state, which is then divided among apportioned programs. These f texibte funds can be used for projects to preserve or improve safety conditions and performance on any Federat-aid highway, bridge projects on any pubtic road, facitities for non-motorized transportation, and other project types. Safety improvement projects eligibte f or this f unding include:
. New or upgraded traffic signals
' UPgraded guardrails
. Marked pedestrian crossuzalks
Catifornia's tocat HSIP focuses on inf rastructure projects with national recognized crash reduction factors. Normatty HSIP catt-for-projects is made at an intervat of one to two years. The appticant must be a city, a county, or a tribat government federatty recognized within the State of Catifornia.
Additionat inf ormation regarding this program at the Federal [eve[ is avaitabte at:
https://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/hsip/. Catifornia specific HSIP information - inctuding dates for upcoming catt for projects - is avaitabte at: http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/LocatPrograms/hsip.htmt.
8.5.1.1 . HSIP Analyzer
As of 2021 , the preferred way to catcutate the BCR forthe HSIP program uses Caltrans HSIP Anatyzer toot in the form of an active PDF. The PDF toot contains 4 sections which are used to calcutate the Benefit Cost Ratio for the Highway Safety lmprovement Program.
This toot can be accessed on the Caltrans website:
https://dot.ca.gov/programs/tocat-assistance/fed-a nd-state-pro9rams/highway-safety- i m p rovement- p rogra m/a p p [y-n ow
Projects appropriate for other state grant programs can be anatyzed usingthe Life-Cycte Benef it Cost Anatysis Modet (CatB/C) which has a much more comprehensive benefit assessment tool set.
8.5.1.2. HSIP Etigibitity
per Chapter 9 of the Highway Safety lmprovement Program, funds are etigible for projects that improve the safety of its users on any pubtic road or pubticty owned bicycte or pedestrian pathway or trait, or on tribat [ands for general use of tribal members.
HSlp tooks f or safety projects that can be designed and constructed expeditiousty and do not require signif icant acquisition of rights-of-way. Proposed projects shoutd not require extensive City of Fotsom
)anuaty 2025
€&,,6i.ffi:E'
Folsom LRSP _01 .1 4.2025.docx
02/11/2025 Item No.5.
2024
CW of Folsorn
LOCAT ROAD SAFETY PIAN
environmentat review and mitigation. Additional information on the HSIP project selection criteria can be accessed ontine:
' Benefit Cost Ratio Apptications
https://d ot.ca.gov/-/med i a/d ot- med i a/progra ms/tocat- assista nce/documents/hsi p/2020lhsipanatyzerinstructions2020bcr. pdf . Funding Set-asides (Non-Benef it Cost Ratio Applications) https://d ot.ca. gov/-/med iald ot-med i a/p rogra ms/toca[- assista nce/d ocu ments/hsip/2020lhsipanatyzerinstructions2020sa. pdf HStp project etigibitity is subject to the Catifornia SHSP. The SHSP identifies statewide chattenge areas that correspond to safety concerns at the statewide [eve[ and potentiat countermeasure to address them and determine HSIP project etigibitity. sHSP's are devetoped in comptiance with FHWA requirements. A tist of etigibte project types can be seen in the current HSIP Analyzer' More information can be accessed ontine at the Cattrans HSIP grant website:
i m p rove me nt-P rogra m/a PPIY-now
8.5.2. Cattrans Active Transportation Program (ATP)
Cattrans Active Transportation Program (ATP) is a statewide funding program, created in 2013, consotidatirrg severaI feclerat and state programs. The ATP funds projccts that encourage increased mode share forwatking and bicycting, improve mobitity and safetyfor non-motorized users, enhance pubtic heatth, and decrease greenhouse gas emissions. Projects etigibte for this funding include:
. Bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure projects
. Bicycle and pedestrian planning projects (e.9. safe routes to school) . Non-infrastructure programs (education and enforcement) This program funding is provided annuatty. The ATP cattfor projects typicatty comes out in the spring. lnformation on this program and cyctes can be found ontine:
http://www. d ot. ca.gov/h q/Loca IProgra ms/atp/
8.5.3. State Transportation lmprovement Program (STIP)
The State Transportation lmprovement Program (STIP) provides state and federat gas tax money for improvements both on and off the state highway system. sTlP programming occurs every two years.
The programming cycte begins with the retease of a proposed fund estimate, fottowed by Catifornia Transportation Commission (CTC) adoption of the fund estimate. The fund estimate serves to identify the amount of new f unds avaitabte for the programming of transpoftation projects. Once the fund estimate is adopted, Cattrans and the regionat ptanning agencies prepare transportation improvement ptans for submittat. Cattrans prepares the lnterregionaI Transportation lmprovement program (lTlp) using lnterregionat lmprovement Program (llP)funds, and regional agencies prepare Regionat Transpoftation lmprovement Programs (RTlPs) using RegionaI lmprovement Program (RlP) funds. The STIP is then adopted by the CTC.
City of Fotsom
)anuary 2025
g d6 ;frl. E iE;
Fo[som LRSP -01.1 4.2025.docx
02/11/2025 Item No.5.
2024
City of Folsom
LOCAT ROAD SAFETY PIAN
8.5.4. Catifornia Senate Bitt 1 (SB 1)
sB 1 is a transportation investmentto rebuitd catifornia byfixing neighborhood streets, freeways and bridges in communities across Catifornia and targetingfundstoward transit and congested trade and commute corridor improvements.
Catifornia's state-maintained transportation infrastructure witt receive roughty hatf of SB 1 revenue:
$26 bittion. The other hatf witt go to tocat roads, transit agencies and an expansion of the state's growing network of pedestrian and cycte routes. Each year, this new funding witt be used to tackte def erred maintenance needs both on the state highway system and the locat road system, inctuding:
. Bike and Pedestrian Projects: $t OO mittion
o lhls funding wilt go to cities, counties, and regional transportation agencies to build or convert more bike paths, crossuza/ks, and sidewalks. /tis a significant increase in subsidy for these prolecfs through the Active Transportation Program (ATP)' . Local Planning Grants: $ZS miUion
8.5.5. Cal,ifornia Office of Traff ic Safety (OTS) Grants This program has funding for projects retated to traffic safety, inctuding transportation safety education and encouragement activities. Grants apptications must be supported by tocat crash data (such as the data anatyzed in this ptan) and must relate to the fotlowing priority program areas:
. Alcohol lmpaired Driving
. Distracted Driving
. Drug-lmpaired Emergency Medical Serulces
. Motorcycle Safety
. Occupant Protection
. Pedestrian and Bicycle Safety
. Police Traffic SerYlces
. Public Relations, Advertising, and Marketing Program
. Roadway Safety and Traffic Records
8,5.6. Safe Streets and Roads for Atl' (SS4A)
The SS4A Grant Program is a federat program estabtished bythe Bipartisan lnfrastructure Law. A totat of $S Uittion are avaitabte f rom 2022-2026 in the form of ptanning grants and imptementation grants. Grant apptications for projects that imptement the safe systems Approach, such as those retated to speed management, improvements in underserved communities, and vutnerabte road users, are encouraged. lmptementation grant projects must be identified in an appticant's quatifying Safety Action Ptan. The SS4A Setf-Certification Etigibitity Worksheet describes the required etements of an Action Plan and can be accessed at:
Worksheet.pdf
Additionat information about imptementation grants can be found at:
https ://www.tra nsportati on. gov/gra nts/ss4a/i mplementation-gra nts g&;ii.E:E
Folsom LRSP _01.1 4.2025.docx
City of Fotsom
Januaty 2025
02/11/2025 Item No.5.
2024
City of Folsom
tOCAt ROAD SAFETY PLAN
9. Nexr Sreps
The City has compteted this LRSP to guidethe process of futuretransportation safety improvements for years to come. The data-driven anatysis process identified crash types, retated primary crash factors, and locations of crashes. Atso as part of this process, emphasis areas were identified to inform and guide further safety evatuation of the City's transportation network. These emphasis areas wit[ guide corridor improvements, education programs, and capitat improvements forthe City.
Using the anatyzed data and outputs f rom this LRSP, the City can:
. Appty for future grant fund ing to imptement inf rastru ctu re improvements throughout the City e Activety seek other f unding oppoftunities to improve saf ety for att modaI users . cottaborate with estabtished stakehotder, safety partners and neighboring municipatities as improvements are made to create a cohesive transportation network r lterativety evatuate existing and proposed transportation safety programs and capitat improvements to design a safer transportation network in the city The City atso ptans to have the City Councit formatty approve and adopt the Local Road Safety Ptan (LRSp) in 2025. Based on cu rrent Cattra ns gu idetines, the City witt ptan to u pdate the LRSP within f ive years (in 2029 or eartier).
City of Fotsom
)anuaty 2025
Fotsom LRSP 01.14.2025.docx
02/11/2025 Item No.5.
2024
City of Folsom
tOCAt ROAD SAFETY PLAN
APPENDIX A
lrureRsecroN NerwonK ScREENING Resulrs
Fotsom LRSP -01
.1 4.2025.docx City of Fotsom
)anuaty 2025
02/11/2025 Item No.5.
NB
MB evaluation.crashes, potential bike
broadsides involve NB and Wgvehicles.
TS improvements. The severe crash was DUl, UM; otheruise crash rate is closeto EPDO; low cresh rate. Potential projectto control wrong-waY driving :PDo, acgressive, broadsides. Potential signal mod projed learends. broadsides. verv busv intersedioh
dark crashes
totential bike box/trail connedion improvement proj€d
:PDo, crash Rate. Proj€ds should be €onsistentwith cBD Planning effods EPDO, Head Ons, Aggressive Driving. Shared ROW with County. undeMay, including transit preemption.
X
X
X
x
x
X
X
0 o
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 o
0 o
0 1
0 1
1 1
1 o
1 I
1 1
0 0
0 1
1 0
1 1
0 0
o
2 0
o
1 0
0 0
0 3
1 2
0 0
0 0
0 2
3 3
0 0
0 1
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 1
0 0
0 1
0 0
1 1
1 0
0 0
1 1
1 0
0 o
1 1
0 1
0 o
o
0 0
1 0
1 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
o
0 0
o
2 0
1 1
0 0
4 0
1 3
1 1
3 4
6 3
3 5
4 4
4 4
1 9
9 6
1 5
4 5
6 0
0 1
0 0
0 1
0 0
0 1
0 0
0 o
0 0
1 0
o
1 0
0 o
I
0 1
1 o
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 o
0 0
o
0 7
o
0 0
0 0
o
I
0 0
0 I
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 o
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 o
0 0
0 0
0 0
o
0 o
0 0
o
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
o
0 0
0 0
o
0 0
o
1 0
0 0
1 0
0 0
0 0
0 o
0 0
0 0
0 o
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 o
0 o
0 0
t
0 0
0 0
o
0 1
0 0
0 0
0 o
o
0 0
o
0 0
1 0
x
1 1
0 0
o
0 1
I
1 0
o
1 0
0 0
0 1
1 0
0 o
o
0 o
0 1
0 1
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 1
2 o
0 0
0 0
0 1
3 1
1 0
I
1 2
1 2
3 310
4 x
L
2 1
I
3 1
6 0
o
0 olo
1 0
o
1 0
1 1
o
0 0
o
2 2
1 0
0 1
1 x
0 0
1 1
0 1
0 0
0 2
2 1
0 1
2 1
1 1
2 2
1 0
2 5
4 5
3 5
5 0
3 3
3 2
3 3
1 2
5 5
7 4
5 4
5 4
5 5
4 3
10 10
7 8
7 2
2 0
2 0
1 1
1 1
2 2
1 3
o
L
1 1
1 1
1 1
2 2
1 2
I
1 4
2 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 o
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
o
o
0 o
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
o
0 o
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
40 30
198
183
29 1a8
29 29
192
34 53
67 52
56 36
41 26
4t
41 35
194
40 236
a2
70 59
214
73 216
-0.02
0.01 -o.o2
o.o1
0.m
-0.08
-0.04
0.01 "0.03
-0.04
-0.02
{-04
,0.03
o.09
0.01 -0.01
o.m
-0.01
o.o5
{.02
-0.02
0.05 -0.02
-0.01
0.04 o.o1 I 393
o.o2 I *
o.o2
0.02 6
5 5
5 5
4 4
4 4
4 4
4 9
9 9
8 8
0.028
7 7
5 6
5 6
lz
11 10
10 :OLsOM AUBURN RD & FOtrOM DAM RT'
}LUE RAVINE RD & RILEY ST
i BIDWETLST & CREEKSIDE DR
:OBOM BLVD & NATOMASTATION DR
:060M AUBURN RD & FO6OM UKE CROSSIN6
]AKAVENUE PKW & S LEXINGTON DR
! BIDWELT5T & VIA FELICT
: BIDWELTST & PLACERVILLE RD
:060M BTVD & PARKSHORT DR
5 |OIOM AUBURN RD & OAK AVENUE PKWY
RON POIffi RD & WILURD DR
RON POINT RD & MCADOO DR
ilHITE ROCK RD & PRAIRE CMY RD
SREENBACK LN & AMERICAN RIVER CANYON DR
OAKAVENUE PruY & AMERICAN RVER CANYON DR
RILTY sI/GREENMCK LN & sCOfiST
: BIDWELLST & IRON POINT RD
:OsOM ELVD & GRTTNBACK LN
i BIDWTTLST & OAKAVENUE PKWY
i BIDWELLST & BROADSTONI PffiY
]LUE RAVINE RD & PRAIRIE CN RD
i BIDWITLST & WALES DR
: NATOMA ST & GREEN VALLEY RD
3REENBACK LN/UKE NATOMA DR & MADISON AVE
E BIDWTTLST & BLUI RAVINE RD
BLUI RAVINE RD & OAKAV€NUI PXW
FO6OM BLVD & BLUT RAVINE RD
RII.EY ST & GLENN DR
ic
E-gi3EsEii:*!tsBEeo
I
o
signalized lntersections
o
111
t2/3/2024 Kimley>Horn
02/11/2025 Item No.5.
1 Crash 2020,2 Crashes 2021si8ns installed on [on Pt Rd in I Bike crashes.Trail ends here
ofcrashes involv€ vehicles making e SBT movement and being struck by making wBT movement. Potential fortrafrc calming improvehenB in Zozll2o22lcrashes in 2020,1 crash in 2022. Road
EPDO; potential iorcoridor imprcvementsalong E Bidwell in the CBD :I
X
0 1
0 0
1 0
x
0 o
1 0
0 0
0 1
0 0
T
0 0
0 1
0 1
0 0
1 1
T
0 0
1 0
0 0
0 0
0 1
0 1
1 o
0 0
1 0
1 0
0 0
0 o
0 0
I
0 1
0 1
0 0
1 0
0 0
0 0
0 1
0 0
0 0
0 0
I
0 0
x
0 1
1 o
1 0
1 r
0 o
0 1
0 0
0 1
1 2
1 2
0 0
I
x
1 2
1 2
I
1 0
0 2
3 0
90-LOOo/o
80-90%
7\-aoo/o
0 0
o
0 1
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
1 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 o
1 o
I
0 o
0 0
0 I
0 0
0 0
0 1
0 0
0 0
0 0
o
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 o
0 D
0 o
0 o
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
I
0 o
0 0
0 0
0 o
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
I
o
0 o
0 0
D
0 0
0 0
0 o
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
I
0 0
0 1
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
1 o
0 0
0 0
I
0 0
0 1
0 0
o
0 0
0 0
0 0
1 0
L
> 1.0
0.33 - 1.0
< 0.33
0 0
1 0
1 1
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
o
0 0
0 0
0 1
1 0
2 0
1 1
1 0
2 1
0 1
1 2
0 1
1 0
T
0 0
7 o
I
0 o
0 o
0 0
0 1
0 o
0 0
1 0
0 0
o
1 0
1 2
0 1
o
1 0
2 0
2 0
2 1
0 0
1 7
1 1
0 0
1 2
1 2
2 0
z
1 3
1 2
2 2
2 1
T
4 3
3 3
2 0
2 2
0 1
1 0
1 2
1 0
2 0
I
1 x
x
T
1 !
I
0 0
0 0
o
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 >0 KSI Collisions
o
0 o
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 T
0 o
0 0
o
0 0
0 0
0 o
Fatal/Serious lnjury
01100012
Collisions
o
nd
LCCR Differential
Probability of Collision
Exceeding Threshold
Proportion
0 0
o
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
38 34
192
24 2Z
23 494
23 27
27 18
23 23
23 189
43 19
29 24
18 18
23 18
27 o.zl
o.o2
o.o2
0.02 o.o5
o.03
0.01 o.M
0.10 o.03
0.0x
0.78 "0.05
-0.05
-0.04
-o.os
-0.04
{.05
-0.05
-0.04
-0.06
4.04 -0.@
0.m
-0.05
3 3S
181
0.13 -o.o23
5 5
4 4
4 4
4 3
3 3
3 3
4 3
3 3
3 3
3 3
3 3
4 4
trILLOW CREEK DR & OA(AVE PKW
/ASOLE & IRON POINT RD
MHITE ROCK RO & SAVANNAH P(W/PAY€N RD
RON POINTRD & DRYCREEKRD
)AKAVENUE PKWY & CREEKsIDE DR
i BIDWELTST & CURKsVITTE RD
: BIDWELLST & WHITE ROCK RD
IATOMAST & SCOT 5T
RON POINTRD & PIQUE LOOP
|OSOM BLVD &WOODMERE RD
sREENBACKLN& FO6OMRANCHDR
FO6OM AUBURN RD & OA(ACE/VANCE LN
E BIDWELT5T & ORCHARD DR
E BIDWIILST & HARRINGTON WAY
FOSOM AUBURN RD & STUEBIRD LN
E NATOMAST & BRIGGs RANCH DR
: BIDWELLST & COTTEGI PXW
: BIDWETLST & POWER CENTER DR
RON POINT RD & PAThDIO PKW
:O6OM BLVD & IRON POINT RD
;060M BLVD & BIDWELLST
:OLSOM AUEURN RD & PINEBROOK DR i3
tILEYST&EBIDWELLST
FO6OM AUBURN RD & FOSOM DAM RD
E EIDWELLST & MONTROSE DR
IRON POINT RD & GROVER RD
E NATOMA ST & FOSOM BKE CROSSING
\-
Fi$EiE*sfE*EEsEge"EI5**s+
o
Unsignalized lntersections
4o
6-.!g
o
1. Local Critical Crash Rate Differential
2. Equivalent Propefry Damage only Crcshes
2/2
t2/3/2024 KimleyDHorn
02/11/2025 Item No.5.
2024
City of Folsom
tOCAt ROAD SAFETY PLAN
APPENDIX B
SecueruT NETWoRK ScREENING Resulrs
Folsom LRSP _0'l .14.2025.docx City of Fotsom
)anuary 2025
02/11/2025 Item No.5.
)ike.rashes; potential Projed
tevious study identif ied improv€menb
tevious *udy identifi ed improvements
Uajority ofcrashes related to unsafe speed
lesudaed. Above averag€ CCR Broadsides and Head Ons
'ot€ntial projectfor speed management; median b.rier
noied to be construded 2025.
lya school, severe. All wB crashes, tuo aggtessive driving 'elated. Potential speed management cotrido.. Pedestiian Tedian fencint proj*t Planned.
rurningrelated crashes by Kohl's drivewav
tevere broadsidecrashj potential drivewayEccess
rbied and head on crashes
-
?otentjal projectr lmprovem€nts alonglhe curueto address hit T
T
X
T
x
T
x
0 o
0 o
o
o
0 0
1 I
1 o
o
1 o
0 1
o
0 o
1 o
1 o
o
o
0 0
o
o
0 o
0 1
0 0
1 I
1 o
o
o
o
0 0
0 I
0 o
0 0
o
2 0
2 2
0 o
2 0
o
2 o
90-100%
80-90%
7O-aO'/o
z
T
3 0
0 o
0 0
o
0 o
o
o
T
o
0 o
o
o
0 0
o
0 I
o
0 o
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 o
o
0 o
0 0
0 o
o
0 0
q.
T
0 o
0 t
0 o
0 o0
1 1
o
I
0 0
o
.i2'
1 o
0 o
0 0
0 o
1 o
> 1.0
0.33 - 1.0
< 0.33
o
1 o
o
0 r
0 o
I
0 0
o
1 2
0 o
0 o
0 0
o
o
T
0 o
o
0 o
1 0
1 1
0 1
0 0
T
0 o
2 2
z
1 2
1 1
1 0
o
1 1
1 0
1 1
7 0
T
2 1
o
0 o
o
o
o
0 o
0 >0 KSI Collisions
0 o
0 0
0 0
Probability of collision
Type Exceeding Threshold
Proportion
LCCR Differential
1 00
02o
0 0
oo0
1 1
01 21
o
1 2
3 o
00 o
Fatal/Serious Iniury
Collisions
o
0 0
0 0
23 28
taz
23 18
335
177
T
40 18
T
358
29 29
193
11 23
777
-0.05
-0.03
0.02 {.01
-0.05
o-01
-0.03
I
0.22 -0.o1
0.15 o-03
-0.o5
o.o5
4.OZ
0.16 5
I
3 3
3 3
3 3
3 3
3 3
5 I
4 4
DR
BLW
DAM RD
$/scofr sr
lus so we mupsUS50 EB RAMPS
ORCHARD DR l*nres o*
'MIRIE CITY RD RD
i","**
lorruu oa.EMBI DR
SREENBACK LN Ittrosoonrr sr
l*'ur* *o., o^WESTERN CIfl LIMITS
lerur navrur noTcarrr varrrv no.UMMINGSW
!croura wvFOSOM UKE CROSSING
leuru nrnoe noFO6OM DAM RD
N/O MANGINI PKW50 E8 RAMPS
BIDWEL[S
: BIDWELLST
I
lcRossrNG wY
lcneerueecr ruWESTERN CIfl LIMITS
lur" *"or roFOSOM AUBURN RD
:O6OM BLW
IDWELLST
RON POINT RD
ilLEY $
:OLSOM BLVD
3REENBACK LN
\ATOMA ST
:OLsOM UKE CROSSING
GREENBACK LN {RAINBOW BRIDGE}
FO6OM AUBURN RD
ilHITE ROCK RD
,RAIRIE CIW RD
3LUE RAVINE RD
VADIsON AW
FO6OM LA(E CROSSING
lc
:3F
Eii:{i*€s:e;eeEItE':ii::s;c!:ig$i=*n3
ou
'a
o=
UU
Cross Street 2Cross Street 1
Maror Arterial
aFacility
Expressway
1. Loel Critical Crash Ratp Differential
2. Equivalent Property Damage Only Crashes
1/L
L2/312024
KimleyDHorn
02/11/2025 Item No.5.
2024
City of Folsom
LOCAI ROAD SAFETY PIAN
APPENDIX C
Or,r r-r ru e Su nvev Gomrvlerurs
Fotsom LRSP -01 .1 4.2025.docx City of Fotsom
Januaty 2025
02/11/2025 Item No.5.
2024
City of Folsom
tOCAt ROAD SAFETY PIAN
Community Map
7. B.
o
10. 11.
12. 13.
14. 15.
16. 17.
18 19
20. 21.
22. 23.
24. 25.
1 What traffic safety chaltenge(s) do you experience at this location? (Other Answers) None at my home except when exiting Pinebrook Vittage at the traff ic signat. People run red tights. lt's a chronic issue.
Periodic water drainage issues. Lack of street cteaning.
Safer and more convenient connection f rom park to school to bike path peopte just ride over grass
Aggressive merging traff ic f rom E Bidwett St. onto Ritey. Not yietding but aggressive behavior.,
Vist HS needs more on-site student parking. Too many cars on the street There needs to be a wayto turn teft out of ln N Out area. This is causing peopte to do ittegat u-turns at lron Pt
The street curves sharpty and not att the cars are ready for that. This is a hazard Visibitity of curb in the street is difficutt when turning teft on Ritey f rom Persifer Needs traffic tight
Att of East Bidwett is a nightmare because of congestion Sideshow activity.
Sideshow activitY.
Sideshow activity.
Sideshow activitY.
Sideshow activity.
Sideshow activitY.
Curves in the road design and speed of drivers make the access to Lembi Park watkway dangerous
Too many cars ignore this crossing and approach at high speeds - especiatty heading towards Btue Ravine. Many young chitdren use this crossing going to Oak Chan I see so many drivers not stopping when kids are waiting, and even some close catts with kids atready in the crosswatk. lt doesn't not hetp that drivers are coming around a curve and just crossed an additionat crosswatk probabty 100 feet prior.
This crosswatk is very dangerous as kids on e bikes do not stop for on coming traff ic. For drivers it has a btind spot where you can't see what's coming down the trait. There are now stop signs on the trait but no one abides by it. There needs to be a stop sign on the street atso.
Merge confusingfor manY drivers
Speeding to avoid roundabouts on parkway dr
Bridge fatting apart
Bridge fatting apart
Need ramp from bike path to road. Without it bikes ride on sidewatkto next ramp creating conftict
The change in signat timing at the intersection of Oak Avenue and Fotsom-Auburn Road creates a very tong backup on eastbound Oak Avenue. Very few cars approach the intersection f rom the other direction, and yet the signat is now timed to attow that side to go first, creating a huge backup on the eastbound side. Ptease consider changingthe
2. 3.
4. 5.
6. Fotsom LRSP _01.1 4.2025.docx City of Fotsom
January 2025
02/11/2025 Item No.5.
2024
City of Folsom
tOCAt ROAD SAFETY PLAN
timing on this signat to accomodate the heavier traff ic coming f rom the eastbound direction. ThankYou.
26. Needs exit ramP
27. Buitd the exit.
28. Finish the barrier.
29. This shoutd have an over/underpass forthe pedestrians. There is terribte visibitity due to trees.
30. New apartments shoutd exit on Cavitt. Congestion is atready bad enough. Pedestrian crosswatks witt f rustrate drivers and be dangerous in this overly congested area.
31. Curbs need to be painted to reftect existing no parking zones on either side of cross watk.
Many cars ignore the signs making it dangerous for pedestrians to cross due to lack of sight regarding oncoming traff ic..
92. Etectric bikes and scooters creating pedestrian safety issues
33. Roundabout is confusing as it has stop signs. Roundabouts should not have stop signs.
34. Peopte use Meredith as speedway to bypass roundabouts on parkway dr
35. ExcessivespeedandstopsignrunningattatongBatdwinDamRoad. Postedspeedis 25mph, but major issues with speeding, and many ctose catts with atmost getting rear- ended when stopping at stop signs because peopte are accustomed to btowing through the stop signs.
36. Drivers consistentty run the stop sign at OakAvenue and Batdwin Dam Road, makingthis intersection very dangerous for residents trying to turn on oak Avenue f rom Batdwin Dam.
Traffic enforcement at this intersection woutd be appreciated.
97. There needs to be a 4way stop at this btind intersection
38. lntersection needs a roundabout. Thetraffic is generattyvery tight and stop control is ineff icient. There is more than enough right-of-way to instalt roundabout with dedicated right turns and singte through [anes. lf property designed to account for eventua[ devetopment on the SE corner it woutd be more than adequate.
39. lncrease the merge tane distance on EB lron Point from NB Prairie City
40. Was a poor choice to instatt stop controts. This intersection was beggingfor a rou ndabout.
41 . Left turn f rom Knopfter to EB Haverhitt is terribte. Bushes, vegetation on north side of Haverhitt comptetety obstruct view. Driver WB on Haverhitt speed creating unsafe conditions. solutions, remove vegetation, posting signage of upcoming "T" intersection, or painting/striping crosswalk f rom bike trait on southerty side of Haverhitt to northerty side. Speed humps or other physicat modifications woutd be dangerous.
42. traffic is unabte to do a u-turn on bidwett. as a resutt some drivers witt make the uturn regardtess sometimes resutting in a near cottisions with those making a right turn.
43. EB lron Point to SB E. Bidwett needs a dedicated right tu rn lane to WB 50.
44. FMS students not using the crosswatk, cutting in f ront of cars to go down stanton court to access FMS.
45. Fotsom Middte Schooters cross f rom the corner of Btue Ravine & Ftower and skip the crosswatk by shooting across Ftower to stanton court to access the FMS thru the track fietd accessibte at the end of the Stanton Coutt. So many ctose catts!
46. Drivers not paying attention to pedestrians or cyctists.
City of Fotsom
January 2025
Fotsom LRSP 01.14.2025.docx
02/11/2025 Item No.5.
2024
City of Folsom
47 50.
51. 48.
49. 52.
53. 54.
55. 56.
57. 58.
IOCAI. ROAD SAFETY PIAN
Majority of peopte try to go to north bound E Bidwett ctogging up the hi$hway exit. I wish there is dedicated right turn tand beginning eartier to hetp those drivers to make the right tu rn
Ittegat u-turnsl!!!
Three lane off tamp meeting Prairie city road. two teft lanes turn right on to the north bound Prairie city road but drivers on right most [ane often turning into the 2nd [ane of prairie city. The right most [ane can onty go to the right most [ane, reminder is needed or the guide lane on the Pavement
Earty warning signs to indicate the 3rd lane witl onty turn right This traff ic tight is a part of heavy traff ic on e bidwett during the rush hour. Ptease consider providing intet/outtet f rom other street and/or disabte the signat during the rush hour. Left turn into the business f rom south bound e bidwett cause too much societaI impact.
Earty sign for the 3rd tane for nofth bound is onty for peopte entering east bou nd 50 Poor pavement
This crosswatk tacks visibitity and endangers the chitdren.
The entire tength of OakAve from Hinkte Creek Nature Center to McDonatds is extremety dangerous f or pedestrians & bike riders - no sidewatks, bike [ane is narrow and in some spots, one side of bike tane has a serious drop off . This is an extremely poputar area for watkers & bike riders who want to access the nature trait and access the Am Rvr Parkway Witt the new proposed overcrossing connect to the HumbugWittow Creek TraiI without a street crossing?
Reatty a ctarif ication to "aggressive drive behavior": clrivers turttirrg riglrt f ronr Bidwett to northbound Oak commonty fait to yietd to pedestrians - consider addingwarning signs, f tashing yettow crossing tights, or other protection.
poputar area f or deer to cross. lt woutd hetp if the Parkway HOA woutd prune the bushes low so that drivers can see the deer before they dart into the road.
Lack of Sidewatks and bike [ane on Sibtey
Lack of sidewatk makes it hard to get to bike trait safety.
Stop sign creates conf usion and impedes traff ic ftow - consider convefting to traffic circte sibtey st. has become Fotsom Btvd. commuter traff ic almost att day long or cars racing from stop sign at Bidwett to stop sign at Natoma. There are 1O houses on this btock, in Historic Fotsom. Needs residentiat and historic signs at both corners. Traffic won't let me out of my driveway or pass me ittegatty when I try to exit. cars speed by even with orange cones. I have to warn atl workers on the transformer tetephone pote in front of my house to watch the road or get hit by cars. Cars need to be detoured to Gtenn which is not residentiat. Sibtey needs to be protected as residentiat. Commuter traffic and speeders need to use Fotsom Btvd.
Another spot where speeding cars/trucks have no indication that there are pedestrians crossing over to trail on the other side'
Need proper signage & a pedestrian traffic for drivers speeding downhitt or uphitt to slow down. This is the crossing for residents to cross over to horseshoe trail.
Needs a crosswatk/stoP sign
This is a high traff ic crosswatk f or kids who attend Natoma Station Elementary. Cars speed here and do not pay attention to those watking. Need to find a way to control
59. 60.
61. 62.
63. 64.
65. 66.
Fotsom LRSP 01.14.2025.docx City of Fotsom
)anuary 2025
02/11/2025 Item No.5.
2024
City of Folsom
68. 69.
70. 71.
67 72
TOCAT ROAD SAFETY PIAN
speeders. Have witnessed muttipte chitdren nearty get hit. Light up watk sign? Speed bump on BOTH sides of the road? Something must be done! chattenging to turn teft onto Broadstone from Schotar because so many drivers don't f ottow right-of-way laws and take turns at the stop sign' Btind spot when trying to make a right turn.
Speeding
Speed, traffic on Ritey at Timson intersection
The ftow of traffic/congestion with so many pedestrians and young chitdren getting to schoot is extremety dangerous. Cars drive too fast, don't make comptete stops, etc.
A tot of peopte use this intersection for schootdrop off and pickup. Many cars run the stop signs putting chitdren's tives in danger.
Crosswatk needs ftashing tights/signage to make it more visibte to drivers.
Asphatt needs complete resu dacing.
Lack of stop signs is dangerous. Everyday I see chitdren and adutts tryingto cross this street and cars fty through without stowing down or stopping.
Drivers making right turn do not yietd to pedestrians or cyctists. Drivers do no yietd to cars making u turns
This is a poputar intersection for red tight runners. I wish the city coutd instatl cameras and fine red tight runners.
Difficutt to turn right because there is a btind spot in front of Jack in the Box, and cars are speeding down E Bidwett St.
It's nearty impossibte to turn into this shopping center, traveting West on E Natonra St because merging cars don't seem to be aware that peopte might be trying to turn right into the parking tot.
Att of the pattadio's intersections have the stop sign too far back. Drivers have diff icutty figuring out whose turn it is to go.
Twice I have seen a car in the right tane wait for a bike to cross in the cross watk, and then another car go teft around the waiting car to make a right-hand turn and atmost hit the bike rider. There shoutd onty be one right-hand turn [ane. lgnoring stop sign and sPeeding
There is a bike trail entrance on the south side of Fotsom Auburn Road. Trying to cross over, either on foot or on bike, f rom the nofth side is a big chattenge due to the amount and speed of traffic on Fotsom Auburn. A traffic controtted crosswalk woutd be a huge benefit
Peopte speeding terribty and not stopping at stop signs Many of the decorative rocks in the center divide are loose. I had one hit my car and it did $1500 in damage.
Very hazardous for bikes/peds to cross Btue Ravine going NB at the trait heads. Cars approaching intersection with the intention of making a "right turn on red" often do not stop before turning or look for bicyctists/peds. Atso, raitroad equipment btocks the trait entrance on the NB side of Btue Ravine.
Excessive speed by motorists. Constant red tight running. Dangerous to cross on a bike. cross over f ree way traff ic to reduce cross traffic and congestion. or, add roundabout add roundabout
73 74
75 76.
77. 78.
79. 80.
81. 82.
83. 84.
85. 86.
87. 88.
89. Fotsom LRSP _01.1 4.2025.docx City of Fotsom
)anuary 2025
02/11/2025 Item No.5.
2024
City of Folsom
93. 94.
95. 96.
97. LOCAL ROAD SAFETY PIAN
90 91
make a roundabout
Daity troubte with aggressive drivers who "own" the road even though there is a designated bike tane atong Ritey towards Sutter Middte Schoot Natoma street f rom Ritey to Ritey street is 25 mph nobody is driving the post speed timit no potice presence or tickets being given. Cross watk saftey big issue crossing natoma on foot very dangerous cars not yietding to pedestrians tickets need be written and laws enforced.
Ctass ll bikeway has no buffer and is adjacent to road with cars often speeding in excess of 45mph speed timit. This bikeway is used as a primary and direct route to a number of businesses and preschoots in the Natoma Station Shopping Center.
Needs improved visibitity or crossing enhancements to direct drivers to the presence of pedestrians using the crosswatk. Drivers witt continue through white kids are crossing.
Most drivers going toward Btue Ravine on Ritey do not reatize cars turn onto cruickshank.
They atso hardty notice when pedestrians are trying to cross the street making it very dangerous to bike or watk across Ritey onto Cruickshank.
Speed timitWAYTOO LOW
This pin is f or the whote East Natoma/Fotsom Lake Crossing corridor. Speeding is a huge issue.
92 98. We need a muttiusebridgeortunnettogetto LeWtrail gg. No crosswatkwhere traiI crosses the road. Cars often speed through there 1OO. Signindicatingthat"Duringschootdropoffhours,attvehictesmakearightturnwhen dropping off their students."
101 . cars speed in the area right next to the schoot and park. Detivery drivers go so fast down greentaw way. Residents drive tike its not right next to a school and park 102. Need cops everyday mornings to catch speeders
1 03. Peopte speed and never stop almost got hit many times 104. Merge tane into the entrance of the apaftments
105. cars racing and burnouts at nighttime
106. cars btocking driveways during school pickup/dropoff 107. The speed here is much too high for a busy pedestrian/bike crossing. Additionat pedestrian safety measures are need, especiatty since the outlets and rait station are nearby.
108. Red light runners
109. Red light runners
110. studentsaggressivetycrossingagainstredtightscausingtraffictomisstheirgreentights 1 11. More notice [ane ends. Drivers aggressivety nnerge at tast possibte second. 1 12. lttegat U-turns
113. Why has a dedicated turntane stitt not been added comingfrom Broadstone Parkway from Vista HS to turn right onto Gotf Links Dr. The road was buitt to accommodate it but yet it stitt has not been done.
114. Speeding
1 15. Bicycte/Pedestrian faitures to stop, as required, before crossing - too many just dart across with no regard for safetY
City of Fotsom
)anuary 2025
Fotsom LRSP 01.14.2025.docx
02/11/2025 Item No.5.
2024
City of Folsom
1 16.
tOCAt ROAD SAFETY PLAN
Student behavior in this intersection, and unsafe cutting across N. Lexinglon after they cross, as they disperse in att directions to reach home lnappropriate use of merge tane - aggressive cut across Oak Avenue to get to gym pedestrians crossing uncontrotted here, to access a trait, where they should not be crossing
Unsaf e pedestrian/bicycte crossing to traiI access
Street Racing
Major traff ic congestion during the High SchooI release times Can't make a U-turn from the E Bidwett northbound lanes to get onto the westbound Highway 50 on-ramp
Major traffic congestion during drop off and pick up times at the Middte Schoot please identify the top three challenges you face when traveling in the City of Folsom (other responses)?
Drivers turning [eft across doubte yettow tines.
Vegetation and signs on corners btocking seeing oncoming traffic.
Traffic congestion on East Bidwettfrom Savannah Parkwaythrough lron Point Parkway. lt severety backs up and is getting worse the more it fitts in south of Hwy 50.
Traffic
The increasing/high number of vehictes with front windows (and some windshietds!) btackout tinted. I can't tett if they can see me when putting out in front of me. lsn't this tinting ittegat??
Red tight runners, and drivers not abiding by no U turn signs' Too many cars and PeoPte in Fotsom.
Too much traffic on 1-Zlane streets. Too much congestion at major intersections. Fotsom Btvd under constant construction so traffic on Sibtey St is att commuters speeding. Sibtey St is residentiat, but utitized tike a major Btvd.
Drivers do not make comptete stops 1) right turn on red tight 2) at stop signs Just A LOT of Traffic in the citY
Drivers not f ottowi ng traff ic rutes
Unsafe watking conditions for chitdren near schools.
left turn signats shoutd be on untit [ane is empty
No signs regarding parkwith chitdren at ptay
Many kids going to school
Too much devetoPment
Poorty designed and dated intersections
Drivers turning right often failto see/yietd to pedestrians. Cyctists frequenttyfait to stop at intersections when required'
putting out from btack diamond drive onto iron point road can be scary. Visibitity is very timited and cars go zooming down iron point. I strongty recommend a stop tight at that intersection.
117
118
1 19.
120.
121.
122.
123.
Survey
1. 2.
3. 4.
5. 6
7 8
9. 10.
11. 12.
13. 14.
15. 16.
17. 18.
19 Fotsom LRSP 01 .14.2025.docx City of Fotsom
)anuary 2025
02/11/2025 Item No.5.
2024
City of Folsom
20. 21.
22. 23.
24. 25.
26. 27.
28. 29.
30. 31.
32. 33.
34. 35.
36 tOCAt ROAD SAFETY PIAN
Our roads, were not designed for the number of vehictes traveting on them.
No traffic issues
Takes tonger to get on East Bidwet[ f reeway
Btind spots when tryingto turn right and merge into the lane Stow drivers, cars parked in bike lanes, cars using bike tanes for right turns Signat staying red when no one is coming.
CONGESTION
Too many stop signs and traffic tights too ctose together; Ptants btocking visibitity; too many cross watks going down Gotf Links
bad timing of traff ic tights. rou ndabout or other easy f tow traff ic to make it smoother going Poor ptanni ng attogether
None
Pedestrian saftey huge issue historic district natoma street to sibtey Traffic congestion
Peopte drive too stow, not the speed timit
Nothing etse
I have tived here since 1987. The potice don't write tickets! They think they are to speciat for that. No consequence for bad driving, why care?
East Bidwett and lron Point intersection. Too many cars a[[ the time because it is the primary access to Hwy 50 and South of 50.
Hometess in the street or their dogs in the street
Stop signs can be reptaced with traffic tights on Broadstone parkway. Stop signs are confusing at peak hour and cause detays.
Too much traffic and smatt roadsforthe amount of growth seen in Folsom Just getting around the town because of traff ic and congestion. So much new buitding with tittte regard to the existing roads and the additionat drivers. unf ortunately, it's getting easier to drive to Rosevitte. We've tived in Fotsom almost 40 years and the charm is gone.
Comptetety u nsafe to rid e a bike or ru n on the street. My chitd ren must ride on the sidewatk! Cars don't yietd to bikes or pedestrians in crosswatks! The major intersections cross traffic is not visibte when another car stops next to yours. pedestrian traffic notvisibte Either. The pedestrian crossing stripes need to be diamond shape across the intersection versus as they are now , which is rectangutar . Hard to exptain in words but a drawing woutd exptain much better . Exampte of bad intersections , btue ravine and east natoma, east natoma and gotf tinks Too much traffic for
Too many intersections in a short distance create backups. Poor ptanning Too many stoptights
Areas in need of a traffic tight, specif icatty, Lembi and Ritey.Atso another stop sign on Lembi at the first Gitded Rock circte or at Atso nct enough accessible parking spots.
Too many peopte for the streets. Why is this survey coming out now, it can't be fixed now.
Horribte!
waytoomanyintersectionsunabteto handtethecurrentftowoftraffic-wettbeyondsignat timing
Peopte use parkway drive as a speedway. Put in street bumps to slow them down.
37. 38.
39. 40.
42 41
43. 44.
45. 46.
47. 48.
49. Fotsom LRSP _01 .1 4.2o25.docx City of Fotsom
Januaty 2025
02/11/2025 Item No.5.
2024
City of Folsom
tOCAt ROAD SAFETY PTAN
50. Cars merging into traffic from shopping areas, without concern for traffic. Unctear (or misused) [ane requirements (turn onty [anes, upcoming change). These are driver issues, not city issues, reatty.
51. mutti-use paths (bike & pedestrian) not ctearty marked to indicate where pedestrians shoutd watk (on the teft side).
Is there anything else you woutd tike to share related to this suruey?
1. I am most concerned about peopte driving agressivety and intentionatly running red tights' I see it EVERYWHERE in Fotsom (and cA). lt is an extreme danger to drivers, pedestrians, bicyctists -- anyone usingthe roadways.
2. When I travel down Fotsom the tights turn red when tight rail comes through even though we are both traveting in the same direction. Additionatty we shoutd not have a cross walk at iron point tet atone 2. Let them drive to the bike trail tike the rest of .
3. The traffic on Bidwett from montrose to mangini is horrific. I drive it everyday twice a day to get to my babysitter. I tived in mt. View for a short white and itfeets like I'm driving down e[ camino. The tights are not synchronized the ftow is terribte
4. Woutd be nice if there was a way for the city to recoup money through att the traffic viotations. Atso woutd be nice if there was better ptanning to provide room on the roads for the amount of peopte expected to tive in this city.
S. American River Canyon Drive has many speeding cars especiatty going North from the four way stop at Crow Canyon and Canyon Rim. lt's a pretty straight shot f rom there to the crest of hitt in front of the Canyon Terrace Apartments. And stop sign runners
6. Support Pubtic transit oPtions
7. Very concerned about the congestion everywhere, especiatty E Bidwett. The intersection of Schoot St and Blue Ravine is very dangerous.
g. Too much congestion. There isn't enough infrastructure to accommodate the number of vehictes in the city. lt's inf uriating to drive here.
g. South of 50 needs more access points to cross to the north. The proposed new over crossings need to be PrioritY.
10. We need more potice officers on motorcyctes
11 . Fotsom has done a good job connecting traits for recreation, but has comptetety faited to connect housing to shopping/work destinations.
12. lf you station traffic potice at some of our busier intersections, you coutd easity hand out severaI red tight running tickets with atmost every tight change to increase revenue. 1 3. Du ring schoot hou rs in morning few ca rs don't stop in stop sign inspite of seeing the chitdren crossing.
14. peopte are constantty speeding and being distracted drivers through neighborhoods
15. Golf cafts, mini bikes and dirt bikes on traits
1 6. Thank you for the su rvey. Fotsom is congested a nd tacking exits f rom the f reeway. lt woutd be nice to see Fotsom expand it's roadways as quickty as the devetopments. lt seems tike the devetopments are taking president over the traffic safety and ftow.
17. We do have issues with extended red tights white then enough street doesn't have a car in sight. Sensors may need to be recatibrated or if tights are on a timer they need to be adjusted awaY from Peak hours.
18. The map woutdn't work for me - but the intersection of Gtenn Dr and Oxburough Dr is a terribty btind corner that woutd greatty benefit from a simpte stop sign @ Glenn City of Fotsom
Janua(y 2025
Fotsom LRSP _01. 1 4.2025.docx
02/11/2025 Item No.5.
2024
City of Folsom
tOCAt ROAD SAFETY PIAN
1g. Remove the stop sign controls at Ctarksvitte Road and Bundrick Drive and instat[ a roundabout. lnstatt a roundabout at Ctarksvitte Drive and Broadstone Parkway. Both intersections has retativety tight traffic ftows and roundabouts woutd be more efficient.
20. 21.
nla
Not enough FPD presence. Peopte are too comfortabte breaking the speed timit. On Btue Ravine fotks are going 10-20 mph over! You rarely see anyone get putted over.
One of the biggest probtems I see is the timing/ sensors on traffic tights. Cars get frustrated catching every tight and eventuatty get mad and run tights- speeding or blocking the intersection for those with the green tight.
The traffic tight to the business where in n out contributes targe part of a traffic jam in rush hour. Ptease consider disabting that traff ic tight during rush hours or create a diff erent intet/outlet to the business not f rom east bidwett
Additionat traffic enforcement officers are needed.
It is dangerous for my chitdren to cross the sidewatk by Natoma station elementary ln generat, I think Folsom traffic is not that bad. My main probtem both as a pedestrian and a driver is turning right on red from Fotsom Boutevard to Btue Ravine road. lt is hard to see the pedestrians and even bicyctists on that crossing' About 6 years ago I sent a letter to both the Fotsom City Council and the Fotsom Potice department regardingthe runningof red tights at major intersections thruoutthe city. lt was and stitt is a question of WHEN, not lF, a major tragedy occurs.
I tove the bike traits and the beautif ut scenery! Traffic is getting very crowded - both driving on the streets and bikes, watkers, and joggers on the bike paths. euestion 2 shoutd attow muttipte answers we drive with others and oursetves. We bike we watk. Traffic is very heavy on Carter st on weekends for games at Livermore park some guests block driveways thankYou
Ctose Via Bartogio. No where etse in Fotsom is there a connecting street that enters the city into a neighborhood. This street onty benef its EDH, and not the tong time residents of Hitdebrand Circte.
There have been many near misses and an actual pedestrian was hit by a car in my neighborhood. Drivers constantty rott through the stop signs in our neighborhood.
What does race or gender have to d o with a traff ic study? Asking for this inf ormation is incredibty ignorant and offensive. This is why peopte have tittte trust in govt.
Hate driving in Fotsom and onty take back roads to work. lt's gotten worse over the years and the roads are not targe enough to control att the traffic. We moved out of Fotsom because of the congestion 1 3 years ago'
The intersection of Turn Pike Drive and Btue Ravine needs improvement. There have been several accidents due to drivers attempting to turn onto WB Btue Ravine f rom Turn Pike Drive. This is not safe, especiatty during morning and evening rush hours.
Speeding and red tight viotations are out of control citywide.
Ritey Street cuts historic fotsom neighborhood in hatf and onty safe ptace to cross is at Natoma (uncomfortabte due to narrow sidewatk tight to street) or Sutter Street lwatk my dog every morning and every morning, we are encountering either a distracted driver or someone who doesn't stop at stop sign. Coupte of times, we atmost got hit by a carwhich is not an outcome I want f rom my morningwatks Love tiving in Fotsom, thanks for making a difference here 37 22.
23. 24.
25. 26.
27. 28.
29. 30.
31. 32.
33. 34,
35. 36.
38 Fotsom LRSP 01.14.2025.docx City of Fotsom
)anuary 2025
02/11/2025 Item No.5.
2024
40. 41.
City of Folsom
39. tOCAt ROAD SAFETY PIAN
At every tight at teast 2 or 3 red tight runners constantty easy money f or the city and stop signs in neighborhoods nobody stops some peopte don't even slow down!! Red tight running every tight stop signs in neighborhoods are atways run!!!!! This has more personat questions than traffic questions. Seriousty, who wrote this? lt's missing about 20 questions regardingtraffic. The resutts of this witt inf orm you of nothing.
Waste of my time and yours. Why does a traff ic survey need to know rsee, ls there anything that coutd be done to improve traffic ftow on East Bidwett? Signat asynchrony at tight rait crossings, and on Bidwett. Many, many f [agrant stop sign viotations in the Natoma Station neighborhood'
Traffic signats shoutd be synchronized to ease congestion near major arteries/freeways We need more traffic enforcement. We have asked f or traff ic enforcement on "Turnpike Raceway" and have been met with inaction or no response to our request.
Schoot traffic by Natoma Station Etementary school is dangerous Who ever retimed the traffic signats recentty has made the traffic 10 times worse than it was before. lt takes more time to get out of Fotsom to Highway 50 than it took me to drive att the way to downtown Sacramento for work. You now get stop a red tight Near Natoma Station Etementary, frequent stop sign runners at Ashcat and Turnpike, putting chitdren and adutts at risk.
Speed breaker
Fitt pot hotes, repave roads, Reptace stop signs with signats, Stop peopte from thinking red tight is just another cotor tight, stow down signage in neighborhoods, ctearty marked pedestrian crosswatks
Too many btatant viotations - speeding, jumping red tights, stop signs. The speed limit on many of Fotsom roads shoutd be reduced by at teast Smph. Woutd be good to install red tight cameras in vitat intersections to enforce comptiance.
Need more attention paid to streets and stop signs around Natoma Station Etementary - NSE
Enforce NO STOPPING on Grover north of lron Point to pick up students. Someone is goingto be injured. The citywitt be partiatty tiabte due to tack of enforcement None
No
I didn't find this survey particutarty hetpfut as to identify my concerns or echo others.
School safety zones need to be enforced
I think giving out very expensive tickets f or peopte speeding woutd be a good start.
American River Canyon Drive and Bob White REALLY needs a stop sign for pedestrians! Drivers coming f rom Greenback cannot see if there is a person attempting to cross.there isap
Rougue drivers and speedingyoung chitdren on scooters and bikes without hetmets or reftective gear have exponentiatty increased on the roads causing great difficutty. They are at risk and putting the drivers at risk too, especiatty south of 50.
Construction doesn't clean up after work. Often there is debris on the roads and ftat tires have been my biggest concern.
Kids without hetmets wearing dark cotored ctothing zoom down the streets on e-bikes.
They do not stop at stop signs.
42 43
44. 45.
46 47
48. 49.
50. 51.
52. 53.
54. 55.
56. 57.
58. 59.
60. 61.
62. Fotsom LRSP 01 .14.2o25.docx City of Fotsom
January 2025
02/11/2025 Item No.5.
2024
City of Folsom
TOCAL ROAD SAFETY PLAN
63. More and targer speed timit sign especiatty on Ritey. I tive in that area and atmost daity witt just about get rear ended by a speeder when I take a right onto Levy. Give more speeding tickets!
64. There needs to be a stop sign or tights for the crosswatk on Natoma Station at Coventry Circte. Too many drivers drive way too fast through that stretch and don't even see the peopte in the cross walk
65. Drivers thinkthe stop assign is a "suggestion"
66. Att around Natoma Station Etementary Schoot needs hetp with drop off and pick up traffic
67. Stop sign runners amount is increasing, especiatty atong Turn Pike at any stop sign.
68. parents at muttipte schoots are unsafe and speed. More monitoring needed at schoots
69. Ptease hetp schoot zones safe during student arrivaI and dismissat.
70. Poor survey...
71. lronpoint at Broadstone (headed toward Bidwett) goes from 2 tanes to 5 lanes. Suggest painting a straigh arrow in the #3 [ane. Drivers think by moving left one tane they are in a left turn [ane.
72. putting out from btack diamond drive onto iron point road can be scary. Visibitity is very timited and cars go zooming down iron point. I strongty recommend a stop tight at that intersection.
73. Red tight runners are off the charts. Time to put cameras in for red tight viotations' There are so many accidents due to this. lt has to stop.
74. Unsafe driving around the schoot natoma station etementary prevents me f rom watking
75. Need digitat speeding signs. Crosswatks. Speed humps on turn pike drive in Natoma station
76. A stop sign shoutd be added where Coventry Circte meets Natoma Station. Chitdren are constantty trying to cross the street and cars don't stop. Kids are stuck in the middte of the crosswatk because Natoma Station is used as a corridor to Fotsom Btvd.
77. The roads are f ree of pothotes, tights and signs work wett, but no one is going to have a good driving experience if the city continues to add more and more residences. City planners need to take five and rethink. Especiatty around our schoots.
78. Traffic cameras surrounding schools for everyone's safety!
79. Shoutd have some potice officers monitoring speeding before and after school on Natoma Station Drive
g0. our schoots need funded and specific support at drop off and pick up! g1. Woutd appreciate improved safety near Natoma Station Etementary- particutarthe cross watk on Natoma Station near Ernie Shetdon park. Woutd atso love a pedestrian crosswalk across Ritey Street connecting Arbuckte Ave & the neighborhood across the street g2. I watktwice daity, I feet the fast scooters and bikes are often ridden in an unsafe manner.
This is atso true on the roadway. Doubte riders and cutting in and out
93. Speeding around Natoma Station Etementary- need ftashing schoot zone signs ptease g4. Motorized bikes on the traits are a probtem and drivers running red tights are out of controI
85. Stow the traff ic down
g6. More aggressive code enforcement for residentia[ tree, branches hanging over public roads
87. Ptease stop buitding apartments in this beautifut city.
City of Fotsom
)anua(y 2025
Fotsom LRSP _01.1 4.2025.docx
02/11/2025 Item No.5.
2024
City of Folsom
tOCAt ROAD SAFETY PLAN
88. I avoid East Bidwett if I can - it's just tike Sunrise Btvd. Overatt, I expect to be abte to drive without stopping at stop tights if I'm going the speed timit. lt is unctear what to do on right turns where it tooks like a merge lane
89. Concern for safety - Fotsom Middte School drop off and pickup.
90. I atso Bike atot... the traits are wonderful but some of the streets tike Bidwett are u nbikabte.
91 . I think the speed timits in residentiat areas are too high, especialty around schools.
92. Time the tights on East Bidwett. Vote for Justin Raithel, he witt get it done!
93. lt might hetp if the city instatted cameras and fined cars that ran red tights.
94. Speedinge-bikes areahazard.
95. Drivers not paying attention to pedestrians in the cross watk or when they have the protected watk signat. Nearty been hit way too many times.
96. Fotsom reatty needs designated "safe routes to schoot" for students who watk and bike to schoot. See city of Davis for exampte.
97 . Many residents are simpty going too fast on streets tike lron Point, Prairie City and East Bidwett especiatty. Speed timits shoutd be reduced and speeders ticketed.
98. Speed Limits are "att" setwayto high!!
gg. The City needs to have a traffic division and needs to enforce stosp street viotators (typicat atong Sitberhorn Dr) and speeders. Atso, the excessive number of mutt=famity buitdings has caused egregious traffic jams atong East Bidwett. 1 00. The red tight running is out of controt. You reatty have to hesitate and look to make sure you're not goingto get hit before enteringthe roadway.
101. I Watk atot - bicyctists of Lert tlotl't use the bike lanes but the sidewalk 102. Speeding and red tight viotations are out of controt. lgnoring stop signs in neighborhoods is common.
103. we need btinking yettow turn arrows on low travetted streets and during off hours. lt doesn't make any sense to stop and wait when zero cars are coming/or are around. 104. Construct alternate route besides Ritey! lt's HORRIBLE! Outtaw left turns from Riley, southtand, onto Sutter St.!!!
105. lt is dangerous to turn teft (across traffic) from Btack Diamond on to lron Point Road. I have tived in the Natoma Station neighborhood for over 30 years and that intersection gets more dangerous every year. There needs to be a tane for merging traff ic. 1 06. Yes, there was a man in a pickup truck who basicatty cut me off using the right tane of a turntane on East ridgewett and btue ravine.There was a man in a Testa who cut me off .Basicatty, by putting his Testa super ctose to my passenger side of my truck.ln 107. The traffic in Fotsom makes me want to move out of Fotsom. Fotsom makes it very difficutt to travel around with too many signats and stop signs so ctose together. There are too many peopte for the amount of roads. The probtems cause driver f rustration 10g. Distracted white driving, specificatty tooking at a phone is the most egregious driving conduct that I encou nter.
109. ThereistotsoftrafficonSibteyandsometimesit'sdifficutttogetoutofthedriveway 110. probtems with Type2 and Type 3 e-bikes and etectric scooters on bike/watking paths as wett on streets. They appearfrom nowhere and do not fottow rules of the road. 1 11 . My main concern are the peopte on etectric bikes and scooters. They have no regard for safety. More of them witt be injured or kitted, and I don't want to be the one to hit them because of their recktess behavior. lt hust stop!
City of Fotsom
lanuary 2025
Folsom LRSP _01.1 4.2025.docx
02/11/2025 Item No.5.
2024
City of Folsom
tOCAt ROAD SAFETY PTAN
1 12. East Bidwett and 50 is a nightmare and something needs to be done 1 13. Many drivers in Fotsom make the roads unsafe. Red tight runner at atmost every tight. cars do not wait their turn at stop signs, if they stop at alt. Adutts texting driving in school zones. Kids aren't obeyingtraffic signats on bikes/ scooters. 114. The amount of aggressive drivers, red tight and stop sign runners, ittegal u-turns and people on their phones is staggering. The young peopte who drive speed around and are reatty rude. The traffic tights are poorty timed and short yettow tights. 115. ln Fotsom, it seems stop signs are merety a suggestion for many, many drivers. 116. Afewtimesamonthlamconfrontedbyadriverthatbetievesbicyctesarenotattowed"in the road". This usuatty occurs when I am riding in a designated bike tane. Lack of education about bikes/bike [anes is my greatest adversary on my commute. 117. poor ptanning for att intersections from 50 down Bidwett! South of 50 is a traffic nightmare.. tike southern california
1 18. Thankyou
1 19. East Bidwett is a traff ic NIGHTMARE! Especiatty between highway 50, lron Point and Broadstone. And pretty much att of East Bidwett to Fotsom Btvd. Red tight runners is ridiculous. This is not the same Fotsom that I moved to 25 years ago. 120. Fotsom drivers continuatty run red tights. Does Fotsom have red light cameras at the [arger intersections?
121. Theworse intersection in town is East Bidwett and lron Pt. lnstead of tryingto atteviate the probtem our city councit tet a devetoper change his property f rom commercia[ to residentiat and buitd a gigantic apaftment comptex right at that intersection. 122. There is a dlstinct tack of trattic uirctes irr Fotsonr that woutd aid in travet ftow. The rutc of thumb is the opposite to the stop signs. Keep going and give way to traffic coming f rom the [eft,
123. lron point/east bidwett, oak avenue/btue ravine, blue ravine/east bidwett are the signat intersections I frequent. Drivers speed to cross and one or muttipte vehictes fottow through on the red tight.
124. The use of e-bikes on the traits and no speed timit signs posted for e-bikes or regutar bikes on traits especiatty Wittow Creek Trait
125. Why does it seem like there is no ticketing for traffic viotations? I have never seen anyone stopped for speeding or other viotations.
126. E scooters and bicyctes on sidewatks, speeding, stop sign viotations, on Ritey St between Btue Ravine and oakAve Parkway. Parking/btocking bike lanes with "No parking/Stopping" signs Grover Rd at battfietd Amos Cattin Parkwkends and Fotsom High wkdys
1 27. ptease start enforcement for speeding/ recktess and not yietding to pedestrians 128. Something reatty needs to be done about East Bidwett from Adter Creek north through lron Point Drive. There are too many traff ic tights in that area that cause massive back ups in both directions.
129. FpD needs to crack down on phone use white driving instead of ignoring it 130. East Natoma is tike a f reeway. Drivers drive way too fast. 131 . Reatty appreciate the timing change f or the tight at Fotsom Auburn Oak. I f eel so much safer.
1 32. Need a bridge or tunnel to get mutti use trait to Levine trail f rom the loop across f rom Mesquite.
City of Fotsom
)anuary 2025
Fotsom LRSP 01.14.2025.docx
02/11/2025 Item No.5.
2024
City of Folsom
tOCAt ROAD SAFETY PLAN
133. Traffic congestion is horribte, yet housing density is increasing exponentiatty. Growth ptanning is terribte - what a terribte tegacy to leave. 134. City of overpoputated stop buitding every and preserve the distinctive by nature. Atso, get rid of tight rail, we never needed it and damn sure didn't need an upgrade to it 135. NA
136. There needs to be consequences for bad actions. write so tickets and you witl see improvement!
137. Needtorepairroads...pothotes.repairedareas,unevenroadways.ltistikedrivingona ro[ter coaster, not heatthy f or cars or people!
138. the roads are a mess and need repaving especiatty on e. bidwett 13g. Timing of tights that stop dozens of drivers on main streets to tet oNE car out off a side street, by winco for exampte, just makes many drivers f urious and aggressive, and peopte speed to make the next tight before it might happen again. Dangerous! 140. I appreciate the interconnected traits throughout Fotsom. I see lots of peopte watking, bike riding and scootering on the traits safety. lt's the roads which present the greatest safety concerns, especiatty at corners where cars turn right 141 . we need more potice and taws against att the motocyctes - aka e-bike and scooters. 142. Stop the red tight and stop sign runners! Looks tike it's becoming a habit in Folsom 143. Bidwett/lron Point intersection is horribte ptanning. This intersection needs to be updated to ref tect the heavy f tow of traffic as one of the main entrances/exits of the town 144. Speeding is a probtem as wett, but coutd onty setect three. ti 145. Thenumberofdriverswhorunredtightsisunbetievabte.Whyarethereneveranypotice around watching these wett known areas where peopte are known for rurtttittg ted tights? peopte know they can get away with it and Fotsom Potice witt do nothing about it 146. Fotsompoputationexpandedfastintastsyrs,buttheinfrastructurehasremainedthe same. City needs to ptan for better infrastructure development and maintenance. To minimize traff ic congestion city needs to ptan f or better ways to manage it. Thanks 147. The City has done a horrific job with adding a ridicutous amount of apartments on one of the busiest streets in town without any fore thought to it's current residence and how it impacts this city.
148. Thankyou for asking
149. Daity red tight viotations on East Bidwett St
150. Too much traffic especiatty on bidwett
151 . yes tightrait shoutd stay at outtets less crime and hometess and why does it go to tate times tike 13
152. Wish peoptewoutd just enjoytheir drive and not drive reckless 153. Hopefutty somethingwitt be donefor speeding
154. Expand inner roads and make some as one way roads
155. The etectric bikes and scooters on the traits pose a serious threat 156. Watkabitity in Fotsom is abysmat; our roads are wide and too high of speed; our crosswatks are tong, slow, and exposed; our "bike [anes" are basicatty shoulders with some paint; and there aretar too many cars on our roads. 157. I woutd tike to see more traffic enforcement in town. 158. Waytoo many housing complexes on E Bidwettto handtetraffic! City of Fotsom
Januaty 2025
Fotsom LRSP 01.14.2025.docx
02/11/2025 Item No.5.
2024
City of Folsom
TOCAL ROAD SAFETY PIAN
15g. Stop buitding untit you figure out the inf rastructure f or getting around this now city. seems that was never given any thought prior to attowing att the new apartments and home' Traffic around Sutter Middte School is insane!
160. Doesn't matter because nothing witt be done about it anyways!! 161. LostfaithinthemanagementofFolsom.lusedtotovetivinghere,tookingtomovenow.l hope it's not too late to save Folsom
162. I have been nearty hit accidentatty or detiberatety at least 10 times. Crossed Oak Ave at Ritey is death defying! The cars never stop, yield, or even took for peopte in the crosswatk! And, they are typicatty going 50-60 mph coming f rom East Bidwett. 163. This survey shoutd have been conducted years ago. The traffic in town is awfut. 164. Ptease add sidewatks on att streets near schoots for the saf ety of the chitdren watking and biking to schoot.
165. more ticketing for inf ractions to viotators
166. Ftashing stop signs woutd hetp especiatty at night due to tow visibitity 1 67. So much traff ic on E. Natoma, hard to get out of the neighborhood 169. traffic signats that attow side-street drivers to stop main-thoroughfare drivers (Btue Ravine has tots of this) frustrate drivers to such a degree that speeding and aggression come next.
169. students at FHS crosswalks taking up att tanes and watking against red tights causing vehicles to miss their green tights.
170. Widen Bidwelt, timit access f rom so many side streets, force a better ftow and time the street tights from Btue Ravin down past US50 so traffic can flow 1 /1. Roads need to be expanded/witjerred to atowfor nlore cars to pass through light so there witt be tess speeding and red tight running.
172. There is too much traffic congestion throughout Folsom, but especiatty at the intersection of lron point and Bidwett. Too many peopte, waytoo many new apartment complexes and houses which witt just continue to make the roads/traffic even worse. 173. Stop buitding more high density housing projects. That's the biggest reason for our congested traffic.
174. Drivers often speed through parking tots.
175. Lembi coutd also use a center [ine.
176. lt is criminal what has happened to this city. Can you fit any more apartments into this town???
177. Traffie is backed up constantty on E. Bidwett and Hwy 50. Ptease connect Oak Avenue a[[ the way or do something etse to retieve the congestion. lt is terribte! 178. There is a LOT of red tight running in this town and to be honest, so much of it is due to horribty congested roads and tights. East Bidnretl is an absotute disaster to drive down.
The East bidwett onramp to 50 is a comptete nightmare, from att ways! 179. There are too many tong streets that run through Parkway- specificatty parkway drive and humbug creekwhere there needs to be street bumps or etse peopte wit[ continue to use those streets as speedways. Many chitdren ride their bikes to OC and FMS. 180. Poputation/use has increased and roads are more impacted. Some fotks wittfind this inconvenient.
181 . Bidwett & lron Point - ittegat U turns!!!
City of Fotsom
Januaty 2025
Folsom LRSP 01 .14.2025.docx
02/11/2025 Item No.5.
2024
City of Folsom
182
183
184.
1 85.
1 86.
187.
1 88.
1 89.
190
LOCAT ROAD SAFETY PIAN
The traffic in Fotsom has become unbearabte! Especiatty in the area around East Bidwett and 50. Why were att of the houses south of 50 attowed to be constructed without updatingtheroadsandamenitiestoaccommodate. Thisoncetovetytownisruinedl I think the City of Fotsom is trying to be safe. Thank you for asking f or citizen input. I appreciate it.
Buitd bridges over Bidwett for pedestrians and bikers!!! To dangerous crossing Bidwett Traff ic tights are not bike f riendty. Don't respond to bike waiting to cross.
It's time to change your street standards. Pretty embarrassing that streets buitt in the tast year need traffic catming (Fotsom ranch) because they were designed to encourage speeding
Speeding on TurnPike dr
Traffic tight tuming shoutd be tooked at and improved.
Lights shoutd be timed and turn [ane sensors updated!!! Left on yettow shoutd be a[towed.
North Lexington Dr is a speedway. There's an etementary schoot headed east and is a major thoroughfare f or the middte schoot headed west. Cars f ty up and down the street atl day with no care of consequence. They say no speed bumps, maybe another stop.
Too many traff ic tights with poor coordination
l'm a 37 year resident and I've seen some very poor ptanning by the city. Many streets are designed for speed. So many roadways with bends in road at unsafe speeds. So much congestion in areas due to this poor ptanning. The growth has affected traffic! Concern about the f requency of the new tight tine trains at Glenn, Btue Ravine . 191.
192.
1 93.
Fo[som LRSP _01 .1 4.2l25.docx City of Fotsom
)anuaty 2025
02/11/2025 Item No.5.
2024
City of Folsom
tOCAt ROAD SAFETY PIAN
APPENDIX D
lru-PensoN TABLING MAP Govtuerurs
Fo[som LRSP _01 .1 4.2025.docx City of Fotsom
)anuary 2025
02/11/2025 Item No.5.
2024
City of Folsom
LOCAT ROAD SAFETY PIAN
Septernber 7, 2024 - Farmers Market Tabling Map Comments Marker
ID Location What safety chattenge(s) do you encounter at this location:
7 Everywhere Red tight running; stop sign running by their house; E bikes bad 10 White Rock Rd east
of E Bidwett What's the ptan for buitding it out? Better [ocation gas station 2 White Rock Rd When witt construction be done? By the RR tracks? 6 Madison &
Greenback
Are scooters street tegat? Students on etectric bikes; on sidewalk, road, around schoots; red runni
3 By Vista det Lago Biking. To stay on bike have to go in the street' Fast cars. Ramp on both sides of the trail
4 Pkwy drive bridge Peds on the bridge. When tight rait construction done? 5 Fotsom Btvd bike
trail Transition is weird. Folsom btvd no light, cars don't stop b Light stowto change SB
1 Parki @ Gardner & Stewart; can't see; school traff ic 1 Prairie City Needs improvements
NA Fotsom Btvd lrritation about tight rait construction. Get rid of it 30 Light viotations & driving on the crosswatk (poor visibitity of tight); good that bike lane has sensor - woutd be good to have rnure
29 atd att over, by
Pattadio too
Merging [anes;these mini on-ramps; OakAve & Bidwett people want to utups S
27 Natoma Station
neighborhood
Pooty done resurfacing, a dangerous left turn
28 When interchange?
26 Sibtey; Lembi&
Bidwett
Speeding; btow thru stop sign; tembi speeding; no sidewatk on sib
24 LT lane use as
23 Ped access to trait. No sidewatk. LT Fotsom-Auburn to Berry Creek pocket too short; Got rear ended at 50 h
21 Serpa
22 16 TraiI access on
Fotsom-Auburn Rd
School, mobite home park; no SRTS from tight; no sidewatk. 17 Peopte cross by rainbow bridge
18 Bridge is fatting apart
19 Bike trait drops , cross road watkto Crawdads dangerous 20 lnstatt RABS on
15 Berry Creek Rd
Want a tight; trait access; LT lane narrow; motorcyctist kitted; terribte access to trait ust North and South of there
13 OakAve & E Bidwett Merge issues
Folsom LRSP -0
1 .1 4.2o25.docx City of Fotsom
)anua(y 2025
02/11/2025 Item No.5.
2024
City of Folsom
TOCAL ROAD SAFETY PIAN
October 19, 2024 - Farmers Market Tabling Map Comments
9 Btue Ravine & Oak
Ave
Bicycte school traffic, crossing ped intersection
8 CBD, E BidwettSt,
Hana Waiting @ Red tight
12 Livermore Park
Marker
ID Location What safety chattenge(s) do you encounter at this location:
31 Riley & McAdoo Lack of stopping/onty one crosswatk to cross ritey 33 Ptacervitte Rd/Hwy-50 Lack of pedestrian facitities going under HWY 50 19 Ritey & Sutter No protected teft off ritey onto sutter 32 lron Point & Carpenter Hitt Drivers usin bike tane ittegatty 34 OakAve & Btue Ravine Red tight viotations
4 Oak Ave & Creekside Trait
Crossing
Aggressive driving/red tight viotations, for peds crossing 10 Fotsom Btvd & lron Point Peopte in cars not yietding to bikes/Peds 11 Btue Ravine & Natoma
Station Peopte in cars not yietding to bikes/peds
2 Fotsom Auburn &
Pinebrook
No ped crossing and poor traiI along west side of auburn- fotsom headi north
3 Fotsom Auburn & Berry
Creek
Peopte NB making u-turns at berry creekto make
entrance into deveto south w/ tn
5 E Bidwetl Congestion on East Bidwett
13 Ptacervitte Rd/l n'N'Out Traffic backups into ptacervitte Road 12 Prairie City Road Merging on road that goes f rom 2 lanes to 1 lane I Auburn Fotsom between
OakAve and Greenback Agression/speeding
16 Signs ftashing beacons for visibitity at the crossing, one fatati
15 Fotsom-Au burn & Traiter
Park
Hard to turn in off natoma WB because of concrete
median
18 Ritey St Missing sidewatks between Sutter and Otd Fotsom 17 REDACTED Resident is crazy! Ptease arrest!!Tweaker!!! Fotsom LRSP -01
.1 4.2125.docx City of Fotsom
Januaty 2025
02/11/2025 Item No.5.
2024
City of Folsom
tOCAt ROAD SAFETY PIAN
September 7, 2024 - Farmers Market Tabling Map Board
Add a pin on the map where you encounter sofety challenges in the city.. i I
1.i
I
NOTIO 8CAL8
*
To leam more obout the Laco! ltoad Sofety plan project ond to toke the salely survey visit the link below or scan the eR cade
I ttt tt s.: / I w w w. I ol stt rt. t u. t t s/ L R S p ffi Folsom Local Road Safety Plan Safety Map
Fotsom LRSP _01 .1 4.2025.docx City of Fotsom
lanuary 2025
02/11/2025 Item No.5.
2024
City of Folsom
TOCAL ROAD SAFETY PIAN
September 7, 2024 - Farmers Market Tabling Safety Question Board ldentify the sofety challenge you experience the most by placing o sticker on it' To leorn more about tl,e Locot Rood Solety plon Noject ond to toke the sofety survey vlslt the llnk below or scon the QR code
hn ps://w ww. Iolsom. co. u s/ LRSp
ffi6ffi
Traffc Signalsi
Train Crossings
!;
fili],,lll. i1.
i!: \
Aggressive Driving
r.fuff
*"p:
s
**
*+
+
*
*
*
+
t**++
* * +.{- X
Bicycle Lanes 5ignage & Striping
AHEAD
Folsom Local Road Safety Plan Safety Question
Fotsom LRSP -01
.1 4.2025.docx City of Fotsom
)anuaty 2025
02/11/2025 Item No.5.
2024
City of Folsom
tOCAt ROAD SAFETY PLAN
October 19, 2024 - Farmers Market Tabling Map Board
Add a pin on the mdp where you encounter safety chollenges in the city'..
To learn more obout the Local Road Sofety Plan project and to take the sofety survey visit the link below or scan the QR code
htt p s : //w w w. t'ol so n. c a. u s/LRS P ffi
I'i
a
..j
,t6 *
$
''|u
I
I
ri
.L
NOT TO SCALE
*
Fotsom LRSP _01.1 4.2025.docx City of Fotsom
January 2025
02/11/2025 Item No.5.
2024
City of Folsom
tOCAt ROAD SAFETY PLAN
October 19, 2024 - Farmers Market Tabling Safety Question Board tdentify the safety challenge you experience the most by placing a sticker on it, To learn more about the Local Rood Safety Plon project ond to take the sofety survey visit the link below or scon the QR code
httPs :/lwww'fo lso m, ca. us/ LRS P
ffidffi
Traffic Signals/
Train Crossings
i:'i
n,rir'lt''
Aggressive Driving
*
* **
*
ri
Bicycle Signage & StriPing
rS^-
Distracted Driving
ls
R0A0 cLotio
Road Closures/Work
t,'F..
Ele(tric Mobility (mlsuse) lmpaired Driving
Folsom Local Road Safety Plan Safety Question
Fotsom LRSP -01.
1 4.2025.docx City of Fotsom
January 2025
02/11/2025 Item No.5.
2024
City of Folsom
LOCAI. ROAD SAFETY PLAN
APPENDIX E
Pno.lecr SHEETS
Fotsom LRSP _01. 1 4.2025.docx City of Fotsom
Januaty 2025
02/11/2025 Item No.5.
Signalized lntersectionsCity of Folsom
Ldon: Prai& Crty Rqron Point Rd & Fobm Bldcffib&k h
AgencyName: cilyorFols
Tobl Benelit 3
Total Cost 3
combined BcR
8,004,525
t't 3,500
70.53 Efiil: [email protected]
67 28.1
n.6
51o,m
s s8,5m
s stm97so/
S2s
$ 2o,m
S f,sm
2 controllerSignal
Ihing Mods
3 Luminaires
40 Eackplates & 10
Signal Heads
46s4ms
3,35O,625s
2,6m,Ss
2.432.250
173 1fiq
701.29q
193,ms
r10m
110,m
2.162.m
$,0m
2.152.m
1m.ms510
om
3.m
0.s
2.m
0.m
1.13 0.m
0 o
o
o.4s
2.55 0
o.45
0 o
3 17
FATAL
SEVERI
COMPLAINTOF PAIN
pDa
FATAI
SFVFR'
OffER USIBLI
PDC
COMPLAINTOF PAIN
FATAI
SEVERI
ONER USIBLI
COMPTAINTOF PAIN
pDa
984
9W6
5V/.
0.50 o.85
o.85
zo
10 stolNT
5l02
lmprove sisnal timing (coordihation,
phaset red, yellow, oropention)
Add int€Eection lighting
lmprove signal hardware: lenses,
back-plates with r€trorefl ective
borders, mounting, sizq and number
lndall retrorefi ecttue backplates
.nd newsiSnal heads
lmprove signal timing
Dark
Ail
Ail
NUMBER OF
HrfoRtc
CRASH€5
REDUCED
XO-YEAR CRAsH
REDUTION
EsTIIIATE
1O.YAR CRASH
CRASH REDUCTION
SEVERIN COST 8INEFIT
{2022 s}
TOTAI IO"YEAR CRASH
REDUfrION 8€NEFIT
(?022 5)
CMFRTCOMMENDATION
ilPE
coLLrstoN
NOTES
ilNIT COST COST ESTIMATE EENETIT/COSf
LRsM//CMF COUNTERM€AsURE IRSM 6
QUANTITY/ NUMBER
OF UN'TS
NUMgER OF CRASHES
(20?C2OZ3)
GITRANS
FUNDING
Kimley>Horn
02/11/2025 Item No.5.
htion: Mufripl. {s mp/a.ri.b)
AgemyName: CilyofFdsm
Total Benefit $
Totalcost $
Combined BGR
5,763,750
77,4O
7447
Effa: [email protected]
1 I
&
I
z
I
'm'0
,{
1)
0 I
5 Signalized lntersectionscity of Folsom LRSP
152.9S 3s,m
5 42,4W
s s,m
S8
Upgrad€s
53mSquare Feet
t3so,sms
412,29s2a9 Sq
E
1.M7.5@
2.62.ms
s 18,@
110.m1i3
5.m
o.m
o.m
1.9 0.m
0 0
o
0.6 0
o
1SEVEREI
OTHFR VISIBIE 5
COMPLAINT OF PAIN 4
oPDOI
FATAII O
SFVEREI o
COMPLAINTOF PAIN
90%
9VA
0.€
0.85 to
10 st22PA
st21PB
Modifi signal phasingto implementd
LeBding Pedestdan lnterual (LPl)
cro$walk {siqcle Box)
Modifocycleto include a
teading Pdestrian lnterual
lnst.llAdvanced stoP Bar and
Bike Boxes atBlue Ravine Rd @
Prairie City Rd, Blue Ravine Rd
@ Folsom BIvd, and Rilq st @
GlAhh D. ^fi.it ..rirl<
Bike+Ped
Bike+Ped
NUMBER OF
HrsToRlc
CRASH€5
REDUCED
lGYEAR CRAsH
REDUCTION
ES'INlATE
1O.Y€AR CRA5H
CMSH REDUflION
SEVERIfl COS1 BENEFIT
TOTAL IO-YEAR CRASH
REOUflION B€NEFIT
(2022 s)
NUMg€R OF CRASHE5
(2020'2023)CMFR€COMMENDAfION
flPE
COLLISION
NOT€S
UNIT COST COST TSTIMATI EENEFIT/COs]
LR5M/CMF COUNT€RM€AsURE LRSM T
QUANTIw/ NUMgER
OF UNITS
GLTEANS
FUNDINGLife {Years)
Kimley>)Horn
02/11/2025 Item No.5.
LGtlon: E Btfiell strcd and odad DdG & E Bldwdl sl fm orchad Ddw b 6bm stEt AgencyNam: cltyolfdsoh
cond Nam: z&n tusch
E-ml[ [email protected]
Total BeneJit
Total cost
Combined BCR
2,130,794
2,000,000
1.1 4
2 o
I
,
8 0
I
9 o
0 I
o
I
2 o
I
0 3
0 I
o
I
3 1
I
o
PDO
Unsignalized lntersection/Roadway SegmentCity of Folsom LRSP
1.1 67.7
s 2,m,0o0
S 118,800
S 2,om,mo
935 per fi
SeSmert (road
diet)
I Roundabout
33m ffSegment
(road diet)
2,r2o,794
&037,0@
r 287 mO{
5.350.4@s
3 [email protected]
193,mOs
193,000
18.m
$.oms
0.00 7.20
It70
o
0.9 5.85
o
1 1
2 1?
0 .OMPI AINT OF PAIN
SEVERE
OTHERVISIBLE
.OMPIAINTOF PAIN
pDo
SEVERE
OTHERVISIBLE
PDO
90%
90%0.55
20 20
NSOSRA
R34PB
Conveft inteFe€tion to roundabout
{from stop oryield control on minor
road)
Cooved E Bidwell St @ Orchard
Drive intersection to
roundabout control
lnstall quick build {restriping,
flexible bollardsl road diet.
Remove *2 lane in each
dkedion and replacewith
ail
AN
NUMBER Of
HisToRtc
CRASHTS
RTDUCED
lGYTAR CRASH
REDUCTION
ESTIMATE
1&YEAR CRNH
CRASH REDUCTION
SEVERIil COST BENEFtr
t2022 5i
TOTAL lO.YTARCMSH
RTDUCTION BTNTFIT
(?o2) 5)
cMtRECOMMINDATIONNOTES
uNtr cosr cosT [sTrMAT[ BtNrFlTlCOS-t
LRSM/CMI COUNTERMEASURE LRSM f
QUANTNI
NUMBTR OF UNIT5
NUMBER OF CRASH[5
{2020-2023)
CALTRANS
TUNDING
Expected
Lire lYears)
coLilstoN
WPE
Kimley>)Horn
02/11/2025 Item No.5.
Signalized lntersectionCity of Folsom LRSP
Total Benefri $
Total Cos $
Combined BCR
2,343,750
36,200
64.7 AgscyNam: CltyotFdsm
Cdld Nare: kh &sch
Effil zbcn@bbm€.us
0.09 I
7 o
I
0 0
I
o
I
o
I
1 1
ldubledProo.tu hm@0nlv
omdaht of Paln
PDO
@
MOn
Other
@
Blilde
E
lmirod
r
Dark
..
lj
2*.4
7a.t
0.0 0.0S 5,ooo
$ s,mo
s $,m0
S 1L2m
Ss,ooo
S 2o,m
S 7so
s
1 Controller Signal
Timing Mod
20 Retrorefledive
Backplates
1400 Square Feet
1 LPI Controller
1,771,815
\17r,475s
410.750
72,373
248.750
t
a10.750s) 161 06
)162ffi
$3,m0
2.162.m
110,m
2.162.W
1q? om
1f.om
2.162.W
f,0m
1a.m
110.m
193_mq
o.3a
om
o.m
2.63 0.m
o.m
o.m
0.m
o.m
0.m
o.m
0.m
0.1s
0 0
0 0
o.15
o
1 1
0 0
o
0 0
OTHER
COMPhINT
COMPhINT OF
90%
90%
9004
50%
o.a5
0.0 0.85
0.85 10
10 10sto3
st02
5t21PB
st22PB
crosswalk {Biqcle Box)
Modify signal phasingto implement
a Leading Pedestrian lnterval (LPl)
lmprove signal timing (coordinetion,
phas€s, red, yellow, or operation)
lmprcve sigfial hardware: l€nses,
back-plates with retrorefl €dive
borders,
mounting, !ize, and number
lmprove signal timing
lnstall new retrorefl edive
backplates
lnstrll aike Boxes
Modifucycle to include a
Leading Pedestrian lnteru.l
Ail
AII
Bike+Ped
Bike+Ped
NUMBER OF CRASH€S
l2o2s2o23J
NUMBER OT
HtSTORIC
CRASHES
REDUCED
1O-YEARCRASH
REDUCTION
ISTIMATT
lO'Y[AR CRASH
CRASH REDUCTION
SEVERIW COST BINEFN
{2022 S}
IOIAL lO,YEAR CRAsH
RTDUCTION BENTFIT
t2022 s)
cMfRECOMMEilDATIONNOTCS
UNtr COST COS1 E5TIMATE BENEFIT/COSI
LRSM/CMF COUNTERMEASURE LRSM f
QUANTR/
NUMBIR OF UNITs
CALTRANS
TUNDING
txpe€ted
tite (Years)
cotLlSloN
TYPE
Kimley>)Horn
02/11/2025 Item No.5.
Signalized lntersectionCity of Folsom LRSP
Effil:
cEenbact Lane ad hden ruErcnFn DdE
Zmh Bosh
zbsch@dsm€Js
Tolal Benefit S
Total cos I
Combined BCR
2,803,500
78,500
35.7 1
1 3
o
o
I
0 o
I
o
I
1B
o
o
I
Hii
a,8
{.5
t,2N,5
5 32,5m
I 46,m0
$ 1,m0
s730/
$2sm
I 46,m
ssm
20 Retrorefledive
Backplates & 7
signal Heads
1 Flashing Be.con
2 Post Mounted
Sisns
934,5m
1"869,0m
1.240,5W
747 aDO
1 115 750
123.750
1.621.500
810,750
s
s
q)16rffiq
8_m
2.974.W
t9?.om
1m,om
f3,0m
2.762.W
2 162.W
1a.mt
$3.0msom
o-m
1.13 om
o.m
2.25 om
0.38 1_13
0.m
o
0 0.45
0.3 o-9
0 o_ 15
0 0
o
1 0
1 0
0 o
SryERE
90%
9VA
90%
0.85 0.85
0.70 10
x0
10 st02
5r09
lnstall/Upgrade signs with new
fl!orescent sheeting (regulatory or
warnincl
lmprove signal herdware: lenses,
back-plates with retrorefl edive
borders,
mounting, size, and number
lnstall flashing bea€ons as advance
warnins (s.1.)
lnstall new retrorefl edive
backplates and additional siBnal
lnstall ffashing beacon on WB
epproach cutre
lnstall neww3-3 warnihg siEns
on SBand EB approach
Ail
All
All
additional case
NUMBTR OF
HISTORIC
CRASHES
REDUCED
lO.YEARCRASH
RTDUfrION
ESTIMATf
1O-YTAR CRffH
CRASH REDUCT{ON
SEVERN COST BENTftr
(2022 si
TOTAT 1O-YEAR CRAsH
RIDUCTION BINEFIT
12022 $)
CMFRECOMMfNDATIONilOTES
UNIT COST COST ISTIMATE BENEFII/CO5T
TRSM/CMF COUNTERMEASURE tRSN1 #
QUANTINl
NUMBER Of UNITS
NUMEER OF CRASHES
{2020-2023}
CALTRANS
FU NDING
Expeded
tife {YeaE)
coLLrsroN
WP€
KimleyDHorn
02/11/2025 Item No.5.
Roadway SegmentCity of Folsom LRSP
@bn: pdde CttyR@d tEm U$0 to WY Mo Manglnl Pky
Agscy Nare: Clly ol Fdsom
conH Nam: kh &scn
E-ml[ zbsdedsm.eJs
Tohl Benetit S
Total Cost $
combined BCR
21,775,5OO
I 10,760
196.6
m
3S.3
28.4 1X5.2
504.9
413
s 4,m0
s ?,m
s 8,750
5 9,000
s 77,m0
s 5,000
s 1.20
S 2o,ooo
s 2.75
sm
2Solar Variable
Speed Sign
7300 LF of
Centerline Runble
Strip
$m [F of
Edgeline Rumble
Strips
28,m0St of HFST
8 Post-Mounted
signs
2,419,5ms
8,871,5m
2,419,5m
4,839,000$
3,226,OOOs1qt ooo
2 2t? 500
41 ?tO
8.189.500
151 250
IM.750
s
289_5ms
s
55_ms
2.233.500E?974mc
t10mI
193.0m
, E7a.m
D3,m
18 0m
2.978.0m
[o.0m
2,978,m
8,0m
193.0m
8_ms
193.mq
2.97A.ffis
2.974.m{
om
1.m
1.m
o.m
0.m
o_7s
0.m
2.75 1.38
o_m
o.3a
1.50 o.75
11 ot
o3
o
o
0 0.15
0 o.5s
0.3 o.15
0.6 0
o4
0.4 o
2 o
1 o
2 0
2 COMPIAINTOF PAIN
.OMPI AINT OF PAIN
FAIAI
SEVERI
PDC
SEVERI
OTHERVISIBLI
PDC
SWFRI
OTHERVISIBLI
PDC
OTHFRVISIBTI
COMPhINT OF PAII
SEVTRE
PDO
90%
90%
90%
90%
o.45
0.8s
0.70 0.80
0.85 10
10 10
20 R25
R30
R31
R21
lnstall/UpBrade signs with new
fluorescent sheeting kegulatory or
warnins)
lnstall dynamic/variable speed
warning signs
strips/stripes
lnstalledgeiine rumblestrips/stripes
lmprove pavement fridion (High
Friction Sutrace Treatments)
lnstall centerline rumble striPs
lnstall edgeline rumble strips
lnsbll high friction sudace
Upgrade existing sighs and
install new MUTCD compliant
warning signs
lnstall dvnamic speed warning
sigh
All
Ail
All
Ail
All
NUMEER Of
HTSTORIC
CRASHTs
REDUCED
10.YIAR CRASH
REDUCTION
E5TIMATE
IO.YEAR CRA5H
CRASH REDUCTION
SEVERIil COsT SENEFIT
\202291
IOTAL IO.YEAR CUSB
R!DUCTION BENEFIT
(2022 S)
CMFRECOMMINDAlIONNOT€5
UNIT COST COST ESTIMATE BENEFIT/COST
LRSM/CMF COUNTfRMTASURf IRSM S
QUANTIfl/
NUMSFR Of UNITS
NUMB[R Of CRASHES
{2020-2023)
CALTRANS
FUNDING
Expeded
Life {Years)
coIrsroN
TYPT
KimleyDHorn
02/11/2025 Item No.5.
Roadway SegmentCity of Folsom LRSP
btion: lEn tulnt M tEm Pdde Clty Rdd b GFwr M
Asency Nam: qty d Fdsom
Total Benefit
Total Cosl
Combined BCR
4,397,2s0
64,625
68.0 Eftll: zbseHffie.us
o.o
68.0 L19,3s Lmo
S 54,m
S 64,52s
S32 per LF
buftr€d bike
lane
5 2.7s
5sm
20m FSegment
lbutrered bike lane)
235m SF ofHFST
2 Post-Mounted
signs
4,397,250
x,199,2s0
4 0q4 750
g
q
42.5mI
193 m
? 97AM
2-978-Om
193,ms
110 mq
$3,m
8,m
110-ms
2.978.0mg
f.ms
om
om
om
o.m
0.00 o.m
om
o.m
o55
o
o
o
0 0
o_3
0 0
0 o
2 o
OF
90%
90%
90%
0.85 0.55
0.45 10
zoR34P8
R21
R22
lnstall/Upgrade signs with new
fluorescent sheeting {regulatory or
warning)
lnstall Separated Bike Lanes
lmprove pavement fridion (High
Fridion Sudace Treatments)
lnstall buffered bike lane by
restriping lanes {redue lane
widths bV 1 footeach)
lnstall high friction surfuce
lnstell new MUTCD compliant
audewarning signs
Bike + Ped
AI
AII
ilUMB€R OF
HtsToRtc
CRASHES
REDUCED
lO.YEARCRASB
RTDUCTION
€STIMATI
lO.YTAR CRASH
CRASH REDUCTION
SEVERITY COST BENEfIT
(2022
')
TOTAL lO.YEAR CRASH
R[DUCTION BTNTFIT
12022 5)
cMfRECOMMENDATIONNOTfS
UNtrCOST COSTISTiMATE BENEFIT/COST
L&SM/CMF COUNT€RMIASURt LRsM d
qUANTN,/
NUMBTR OF UNITS
NUMEER OF CRASHES
\2O2O-2O23J
CALTRANS
IUNDING
Expected
l.ire iYears)
coLLlsroN
wPt
KimleyDHorn
02/11/2025 Item No.5.
Roadway Segmentcity of Folsom LRSP
Ldion: E.st Mffi stEel tEm cumingswryto GEn vdhyR€drHue kune R€d Agency Nam: cllyol Fdsom
conH Nam: &h &sch
E-mlt zbsdoHsm.€.us
Toial Benefii
Tobl Cost
combined BcR
r54,875
4,200
35.9 2
o
I
1 0
0 0
I
2 I
o
I
0 0
36.9 15.5
s 4,200
S $,mo
s 70.m
5 60 FleixbleSurface
20mSF Green
Thermoplastic265,125
154,475q
16A,875
s
42.5mg
q
110 m
? 97a.On
2.978.0m
18.m
D3.ms
0.38 o.m
0.m
oaa
0.88 o-m
o
o_35
0 o
o.s
0 1
0 0
1 0PDO
90%
gea
0.85 0.65
10 zo
R27
R33PB
lnstall delineators, reflectors and/or
objed markers
lmprove bike lanes and prevent
risky meBing behaviors by
installing bike lane delineators
on west leg afterSBR
lnstall green bike lane
treatment in conflid zones
Ail
Bike + Ped
txpeded
Life (Years)
NUMBER Of
HrsToRlc
CRASHES
REDUCED
lO.YTAR CRASH
REDUCTION
fSTIMATE
lO.YIAR CRNH
CRASH RIDUCTION
SEVERW COST EENEFTT
TOTAL IO-YEAR CRASH
RTDUCTION BTNEFIT
12022 5)
NUMBER OF CRASHTS
l2o2G2O23l
CMFRfCOMMENDATIONNOItS uNtT cos-t cosT ESTIMAT€ BtNErlr/cosTLRSM/CMf COUNTIRMEASURT LRSM #
AUANTRI
NUMBIR OT UNTS
CALTRAN5
FUNDING
coLilsloN
ilPt
Kimley>)Horn
02/11/2025 Item No.5.
2024
City of Folsom
tOCAt ROAD SAFETY PIAN
APPENDIX F
PolrcY UpoRre
Folsom LRSP -01 .1 4.2o25.docx City of Fotsom
)anuary 2025
02/11/2025 Item No.5.
Table 1: Summary of Programs, Policies, and Practices for the City of Folsom It is recommended that the City of
Folsom continue to enforce the
compete street goal, especially in
new developments south of US 50.
Goal M1.1.1 in the CitY's
General Plan states that the
City will develop streets in a
manner consistent with
complete streets principles.
Gomplete Streets PolicY
Consider safety impacts and
potential projects that enhance
safety for future fee updates.
City charges city imPact fees
according to the General Plan
Policy 11.6. See rePort for
details.
Traffic lmpact Fees
Engage with the communitY and
seek grant funding opportunities to
create a SRTS plan.
Goal M 2.1.16 in the CitY's
General Plan states that the citY
is seeking public particiPation
and funding to construct SRTS.
Safe Routes to School
Funding
Work with education and PD to
develop traffic safety education
programs in public areas and
schools (including bicycle and
pedestrian components).
Folsom PD conducts traffic
safety education. The CitY
conducts traffic safety education
on a project basis.
Traffic Safety Ed ucation
Set up formal program for reviewing
crash activity at a fixed time interval
(1 or 2 years); Update database for
future LRSP analyses & uPdates.
The Folsom Traffic SafetY
Commiftee provides CitY
Council with traffic safetY
recommendations as stated in
Section 10.02.010 in CitY's
MunicipalCode.
Program for Reviewing
Grash Activity
Collect GPS coordinates for crashes
so that the crash database can be
used for analysis in GlS.
City of Folsom uses Crossroads
Database.
Crossroads Database
Updates
City transportation division should
engage with PD in enforcement and
education at strategic locations
based on collision patterns,
community events, and safetY
priorities.
Anyone under 18 is required to
wear a bike helmet C.V.C.
21212.
Gity Enforcement on
Bicycle Rules
City transportation division should
engage with PD in planning and
implementing sobriety and & seatbelt
checks based on collision patterns,
community events, and safetY
priorities.
Conducted by City Police
Department.Sobriety / Seatbelt Ghecks
City Law Enforcement should
continue to work with adjacent
jurisdictions.
As stated in Comm-Link,
coordinate with adjacent
jurisdictions.
Gity Law Enforcement
Coordinate with Adiacent
Jurisdictions
lmplement or EnhanceCurrent StatusTopic
02/11/2025 Item No.5.
Continue to implement regular speed
surveying as required by California
Vehicle Code; Review new guidance
from Assembly Bill43.
Speed surveys are conducted
at regular intervals (speeds
were lowered on three arterials
in2024).
Speed Surveys
Continue to update as required by
California Vehicle Code; Exercise
context-based fl exibility offered
under Assemblv Bill 43.
Speed Limits
Speed Limit Regulation can be
found in Folsom Municipal Code
10.08. Continue to implement traffic
calming strategies as appropriate
The City's Traffic SafetY
Committee reviews traffic
calminq requests, consistent
with M4.1.10 of the General
Plan. The 2021 LRSP identified
a traffic calming toolkit.
Traffic Galming Policies
Continue to accommodate bicycles
on transit to promote multi-modal
trips.
Bikes are permitted on SacRT's
buses and CAF liqht rail.
Transit Vehicles
Accommodation of
Bicycles
Continue coordination; Work to
identify areas for improvements
particularly with first and last mile
connections.
The City coordinates closelY
with SacRT on light rail service.
Goordination of Transit
Providers and Gity Staff
Update the Bikeway master plan to
reflect current conditions. Continue
tracking bike and pedestrian
crashes, and implementing identified
projects with high need and high
feasibilitv.
2013 Bikewav Master Plan.Bicycle and Pedestrian
Master Plans
Continue to implement
recommendations under General
Plan; Regularly assess progress and
areas for improvement; Promote
projects that prioritize multimodal
safety while also providing
operational improvements.
Policies in Section 3 of General
Plan are a result of a multi-
modalsystem.
General Plan Addresses
Multimodal Traff ic SafetY
Continue to maintain and grow
bicycle, pedestrian, parking and
other facilities.
Yes, as stated in the Bikewav
Master Plan.
Inventory of Bicycle,
Pedestrian, Parking, and
other facilities
Adopt the FHWA RSA quidelines to
ensure consistency in field reviews
and safety assessments.
No formal RSA guidelines
adopted.
Road Safety Audit (RSA)
Guidelines
Continue engaging emergency
response in transportation planning
processes; lnclude membershiP in
additional projeclspecific technical
advisory comm ittees where
aPProPriate.
The Traffic Safety Committee
includes representatives from
PD and FD. The city
coordinates with EmergencY
Responders as stated in the
Active Transportation Plan
Coordination between
Emergency Response and
Gity Transportation
Planning
lmplement or EnhanceCurrent StatusTopic
02/11/2025 Item No.5.
Not posted online.
Continue engaging local health
agencies in transportation planning
processes; lnclude membership in
project technical advisory
com mittees where appropriate.
Goordination between
Local Health Agencies and
City Transportation
Planning
Yes, comment form available on
City website.
Continue to seek out resident
feedback; Review comments for
trends and patterns that may
suggest opportunities for systemic
safety improvement.
Resident Feedback
Continue regular maintenance of
roadway surfaces; integrate safety
improvements such as bike lanes
and advanced stop bars.
City identifies CIP projects for
roadway surfacing.
Maintenance of Roadway
Surfaces
Coordinate with city planning,
transportation agencies and
community member to create a TDM
program
Transportation Demand
Management
Policies/Programs
Folsom is included in the
SACOG SACSIM model.
ldentify areas where infill
development will require safety
improvements; Coordinate with
County to ensure connectivity and
continuation of safety amenities with
other municipalities.
City follows direction in SB 743
to reduce VMT.
Use of overlays, specific
plans, redevelopment
areas to encourage infill
developmentto reduce
VMT
Require bicycle and pedestrian
counts as part of routine traffic
counting policies for the City when
traffic impact studies or
environmental documents are being
developed.
On a case-by-case basis.
Regular Collection of
Traffic / Bicycle /
Pedestrian Volumes
Ensure that preferred routes to key
destinations signed to avoid cut-
through traffic in residential areas.
Program for Installing
Wayfinding Signage
Goal LU 9.1 .7 in the general
plan suggests the use of
wayfinding signage and site-
specific historic themes to
promote district identities.
Continue to use CA MUTCD
warrants; \A/here frequent citizen
requests are not covered by existing
warrants, consider developing local
warrants to facilitate decision
makinq.
Warrants for Traffic
GontrolDevices Uses CA MUTCD
Continue enforcement of road safety
in school zones; Seek grant funding
opportunities for additional personnel
in school zones, or funding for
schools to make safety
improvements.
School Zone Safety
City recently installed
pedestrian median fencinq by
Folsom High School.
Enforcement is conducted bv
PD.
lmplement or EnhanceCurrent StatusTopic
02/11/2025 Item No.5.
Formalizing a crossing guard
program for the Folsom Cordova
School District. lncrease
enforcement of safe driving and
active transportation behaviors near
busy crosswalk locations; Update
pedestrian crossing design
standards in accordance with latest
best practices Seek grant funding for
additional enforcement near high
oedestrian activitv locations.
The City does not oversee a
crossing guard program.
02/11/2025 Item No.5.
ATTACHMENT 3
02/11/2025 Item No.5.
Traffic Safety Gommittee Meeting
Meeting Minutes
City Council Chambers 150 Natoma Street, Folsom CA 95630 December 12,2424
4:00 PMFOLS()D,[
I CALL TO ORDER
Chair Bailey called the meeting to order at 4:01 pm.
ROLL CALL:
PRESENT: S. Bailey, Z. Bosch, J. Brausch, T. Galovich (arrived at4:24), K. Goddard, M. McGee, M. Washburn
ABSENT: None
3. MINUTES
Approval of the Minutes of the October 24,2024, meeting. Goddard proposed two edits to the Meeting Minutes. The first was to correct the page numbers at the bottom of each page. The second was to add the word "signage" to the end of the motion for item 5c.
Brausch motioned to accept the minutes with the two edits.
Goddard seconded the motion.
Motion caruied with the following vote:
AYES: Bailey, Bosch, Brausch, Goddard, McGee, Washburn
ABSTAIN: None
ABSENT: Galovich
5. BUSINESS FROM THE FLOOR/GOOD OF THE ORDER
Public comment made by Adi Sharma, Raghul Madra, and YK Chalamcherla regarding a stop sign request at Golf Links Drive and Woodglen Drive. Bosch provided information regarding next steps.
ACTION/DISCUSSION ITEMS
The order of these items was changed by Chair Bailey to: 5b, 5c, 5a. b. Evaluation of improvements on South Lexington Drive to reduce speeding Public comment made by Konnor Delong and Kathleen Kinsey. 2 4.
02/11/2025 Item No.5.
The Traffic Safety Committee recommends the Public Works Department install flashing stop signs on South Lexington Drive. Further that the city begin the process of engaging the community in the potential trial of "phase t horizontal deflection measures" as shown in the City's Neighborhood Traffic Calming Manual. They recommend that the Folsom Police Department increase enforcement to once per month in the corridor.
Brausch proposed the motion.
Goddard seconded the motion.
Motion carried with the following vote:
AYES: Bailey, Bosch, Brausch, Galovich, Goddard, McGee, Washburn
ABSTAIN: None
ABSENT: None
c. Bus routes on Mangini Parkway, Rock Creek, and Sycamore Creek Way and how they relate to crosswalks and students walking to school safety
YK Chalamcherla from the Folsom Cordova School Board was in attendance for this item.
Traffic Safety Committee member Matt Washburn began by explaining the process of how school transportation is developed when a new school is opened. Two Folsom Cordova Unified School District Employees spoke, Cathelean Jones, Director of Transportation and Ron Prasad, Dispatcher/Scheduler (Special Education). They explained how transportation works in this corridor and how students are assigned to the North or South side of the road. Brausch asked that the Public Works Department keep this area near Mangini Ranch Elementary on their radar and monitor traffic flow and collisions. No motion was made. a. Draft Final 2024 Local Roads Safety Plan
The Committee suggested the following edits to the draft 2024Local Roads Safety Plan (LRSP):
o Regarding how often the LRSP is done, edit pages 57 & 58, so the time period is expressed the same way on both pages.
r Page 42 atthe bottom there is a misspelling. There should only be one "t" on Riley Street. o Page 22. Consider changing to make it clear that Folsom does not have an office of Traffic Safety. Explain the 105 number on the chart. Consider adding a link or addendum showing the other cities that the 105 number references.
. Edit section 4.4 and Table 9 to match each other by including the number or percentage, or number and percentage on each. The committee recommends number and percentage. o Page 48, Provide some kind of explanation as to why it says "not available" and an explanation as to why not.
r Table 6 on page 54, explain what b/c means. Create an easy to find answer * o Figure 21, page 34, it should say 2015 not 2025 in the title.
Approval of the 2024Draft Local Roads Safety Plan. The Committee proposed the above edits to the draft document.
Brausch motioned to accept the Draft Local Roads Safety Plan with the proposed edits.
Washburn seconded the motion.
Motion carried with the following vote:
2
02/11/2025 Item No.5.
AYES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
Bailey, Bosch, Brausch, Galovich, Goddard, McGee,
Washburn
None
None
6. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS
a. Traffic Safety Committee action item updates
Bosch provided a progress report on the projects identified on the chart provided in the staff report. Chair Bailey asked that the Folsom Lake Crossing Phase 2 Barrier Project be added to the action item updates chart.
b. Upcoming Traffic Safety Committee items
o Request for a stop sign at Dehone Circle and Pleasant Ravine Drive o Speed studies on Mangini Parkway, Grand Prairie Road, Alder Creek Parkway, and East Bidwell Street
o All way stop sign request at Stewart Street and Grover Road o Crosswalk request at Blacktail Way/Quail Meadow Way and Alder Creek Parkway o Request for evaluation of line of sight at Willow Bridge Drive and Iron Point Road Bosch confirmed that the above items are possible future agenda items.
7. ADJOURNMENT
Meeting Adjourned at6:12 pm.
J
02/11/2025 Item No.5.