Rancho Cordova City Council
January 16, 2024

CITY OF RANCHO CORDOVA

CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Tuesday, January 16, 2024
5:30 PM – Regular Meeting
David B. Roberts Council Chambers
City Hall
2729 Prospect Park Drive, Rancho Cordova
Join the Meeting Via Zoom Link:
https://cityofranchocordova.zoom.us/j/84986107771?pwd=Vu3fzWnij01i4CRA4HwyxiISXxUJjQ.w6ASU0IK0eRR3xyl Join the Meeting via the Zoom Phone Number
Zoom Phone Number: +1 669 900 6833, +1 253 215 8782
Webinar ID: 849 8610 7771
Password: 578969
Instructions to Make Public Comment
Submitting Public Comment via Email
Members of the public who wish to provide public comment via email will need to submit written comments to [email protected] no later than 2:00 p.m. on Tuesday, January 16, 2024. Written comments received no later than 2:00 p.m. will be distributed to the Council, filed in the record, and will not be read aloud. All comments submitted later than 2:00 p.m. will be distributed to the Council.

Listening to a Zoom Meeting by Zoom Video Conference
To make a public comment using the Zoom platform, please use the “raise hand” feature at the bottom center of the screen. Please make sure to enable audio controls once access has been given by the City Clerk’s office to speak. Please wait to be called upon by the City Clerk.

Listening to a Zoom Meeting by Phone Only
You can join a Zoom meeting via teleconferencing/audio conferencing using a cell phone or

Rancho Cordova City Council - AGENDA
Regular Meeting of Tuesday, January 16, 2024

traditional landline phone. To request to make a public comment by phone press *9 to raise your hand. Please wait to be called upon by the City Clerk.

All public comments will be limited to three minutes.

If you have questions related to the City Council Meeting or the use of Zoom, please contact the City Clerk’s Office at (916) 851-8720 before Tuesday, January 16, 2024, at 2:00 p.m.

AGENDA

1. REGULAR MEETING - CALL TO ORDER/ROLL CALL
Council Members Linda Budge, Garrett Gatewood, Siri Pulipati, Donald Terry, and Mayor David Sander

2. METRO CABLE TV TELEVISION ANNOUNCEMENT
The Clerk will announce the meetings video recording and playback schedules.

3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
The Mayor will call on someone in attendance to lead the Pledge.

4. INVOCATION
Isabella Eulie, student with St. John Vianney Catholic School will give the invocation.

5. PRESENTATIONS

5.1. Introduction of New Professional Services Company to the City of Rancho Cordova.

5.2. Overview of the Community Enhancement & Investment Fund’s New Software and the Fiscal Year 2024-2025 Grant Timeline.

5.3. New Employee Introduction: Austin Miller, Assistant Civil Engineer by Drew Hart, Senior Transportation Planner.

6. PUBLIC COMMENT
Citizens wishing to address the Council for any matter not on the agenda may do so at this time via teleconference or by completing and submitting a Speaker Card to the City Clerk.

If you want to make a public comment via teleconference, please use the “raise hand” feature at the bottom center of the screen. If you are participating by telephone and you want to make a public comment, please press *9 to raise your hand. For those participating by Zoom or telephone, please wait to be called upon by the City Clerk.

For items on the agenda, speakers will be called by the Mayor at the point on the agenda when the item will be heard. Speakers are encouraged to keep comments to three minutes or less and to state name and community of residence.

Under the provisions of the California Government Code, the City Council is prohibited from discussing or taking immediate action on any item not on the agenda unless it can be demonstrated to be of an emergency nature or the need to take immediate action arose after

Rancho Cordova City Council - AGENDA
Regular Meeting of Tuesday, January 16, 2024

the posting of the agenda.

7. COUNCIL REPORTS

8. CITY MANAGER'S REPORT

9. CONSENT CALENDAR ITEMS - ROLL CALL VOTE

9.1. Subject: Meeting Minutes from the Regular City Council Meeting of December 18, 2023.

Recommendation: Adopt the minutes.

9.2. Subject: A Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Execute Contract No. 2023-263 with Mark Thomas & Company, Inc. in an Amount not to Exceed $580,500 for Planning and Preliminary Design of the Rossmoor Bar Trail Enhancements Planning Project.

Recommendation: Adopt the Resolution.

9.3. Subject: A Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Approve the Final Map of The Ranch Village 1, Subdivision No. FM-2021-002-14 and Execute Subdivision Improvement Agreement Contract No. 2023-255 with K. Hovnanian at Jaeger Ranch, LLC.

Recommendation: Adopt the Resolution.

9.4. Subject: A Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Execute Contract Amendment No. 2021-299-03 to Increase the Contract Amount by $30,928.00 to an Amount not to Exceed $395,178.00 with Wood Rodgers Inc. for the Engineering Design and Right of Way Acquisition Support Services for the White Rock Road Phase 3 - Macal Drive to City Limits Project.

Recommendation: Adopt the Resolution.

9.5. Subject: A Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Execute Contract Amendment No. 2021-336-02 to Increase the Contract Amount by $29,970.39 to an Amount not to Exceed $109,862.75 with Dewberry Engineers Inc. for Design Services for the Mather Field Road Enhancements Project.

Recommendation: Adopt the Resolution.

10. CONSENT PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS - ROLL CALL VOTE
None.

11. PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS

11.1. Subject: Mine Shaft Digital Billboard Signs - Conditional Use Permit, Minor Design Review, and Operating Agreement (Mitigated Negative Declaration Prepared Pursuant to Article 6 of the California Environmental Quality Act) - Project PLND-0822-0047 - 2300 Mine Shaft Lane; APN: 072-0231-014-0000.

Recommendation: Continue the proposed project to the February 5, 2024, City Council Meeting.

11.2. Subject: A Resolution Approving the City of Rancho Cordova's Adjusted Storm Drainage Impact Fee Schedule for 2024, which is Paid by Developers to Mitigate for their Project Impacts on the City’s Drainage System.

Recommendation: Adopt the Resolution.

12. REGULAR CALENDAR ITEMS

12.1. Subject: Presentation on the Proposed Renaming of Poopenaut Court in the Sunridge Park

Rancho Cordova City Council - AGENDA
Regular Meeting of Tuesday, January 16, 2024

Community.

Recommendation: Receive direction from City Council on the preferred street name.

12.2. Subject: Presentation Regarding the Citywide Roundabout Feasibility Study and Implementation Plan.

Recommendation: Receive presentation and provide feedback on the Citywide Roundabout Feasibility Study and Implementation Plan.

12.3. Subject: A Resolution Approving an Incentive Payment for 2023 Performance and a Salary Increase for Micah Runner for Service as City Manager, and Adjusting the Full Time Employee Salary Schedule for the Position of City Manager.

Recommendation: Adopt the Resolution.

13. COUNCIL REQUESTS FOR FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS

14. ADJOURNMENT

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
Special Meetings listed below are subject to change/cancellation without further notice.

Unless the Council adopts a motion to extend the meeting, any item that is not initiated before 11:00 p.m. will be continued to the next day at 5:30 p.m. or scheduled on the next regular meeting agenda of the Council.

Public documents related to items on the open session portion of this agenda, which are distributed to the City Council less than 72 hours prior to the meeting, shall be available for public inspection at the time the documents are distributed to the Council. Documents are available for inspection at the City Clerk's office located in Rancho Cordova City Hall.

The agenda items are accessible on the City’s website at www.cityofranchocordova.org on Thursdays or Fridays prior to the Regular City Council Meeting.

UPCOMING MEETINGS
January 23, 2024 5:30 PM Special Meeting/Work Session
February 5, 2024 4:00 PM Special Meeting/Regular Meeting February 20, 2024 5:30 PM Regular Meeting
February 27, 2024 5:30 PM Special Meeting/Work Session
March 4, 2024 4:00 PM Special Meeting/Regular Meeting
March 18, 2024 5:30 PM Regular Meeting
March 26, 2024 5:30 PM Special Meeting/Work Session
If you have any technical questions related to the agenda items, please contact City Hall at (916) 851- 8700.

Rancho Cordova City Council - AGENDA
Regular Meeting of Tuesday, January 16, 2024

The Rancho Cordova City Council meeting will be videotaped in its entirety and will be cablecast without interruption on Metro Cable 14, the Government Affairs Channel on the Comcast, Consolidated Communications and AT&T U-Verse Systems. Closed Captioning will be available on the playback cablecast. A DVD copy is available from the City Clerk’s Department and a webcast of this meeting will be available for viewing via video streaming from the City’s website within 48 hours of adjournment of this meeting.

In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need a disability-related modification or accommodation, including auxiliary aids or services, to participate in this meeting, please contact the City Clerk’s Office at (916) 851-8720 at least 48 hours prior to the meeting.

CERTIFICATION OF POSTING OF AGENDA
I, Stacy Leitner, City Clerk for the City of Rancho Cordova, declare that the foregoing agenda for the January 16, 2024 Regular Meeting of the Rancho Cordova City Council was posted and available for review on January 11, 2024, at City Hall of the City of Rancho Cordova, 2729 Prospect Park Drive, Rancho Cordova, California, 95670. The agenda is also available on the city website at www.cityofranchocordova.org.

Signed January 11, 2024, at Rancho Cordova, California.

Stacy Leitner, CMC
City Clerk

ITEM 9.1. ATTACHMENT 1

CITY OF RANCHO CORDOVA

CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday, December 18, 2023
5:30 PM – Regular Meeting
David B. Roberts Council Chambers
City Hall
2729 Prospect Park Drive, Rancho Cordova

DRAFT MINUTES

1. REGULAR MEETING - CALL TO ORDER/ROLL CALL
Mayor Sander called the Regular meeting to order in the David B. Roberts Council Chambers at 5:33 p.m.

Council Members Present: Linda Budge, Garrett Gatewood, Siri Pulipati, and Mayor David Sander
Council Members Absent: Donald Terry
Staff Members Present: Haley Arata, Stacy Leitner, Adam Lindgren, and Micah Runner

2. METRO CABLE TV TELEVISION ANNOUNCEMENT
The City Clerk read the meetings recordings and playback schedule.

3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Sheriff Jim Cooper led the pledge.

4. INVOCATION
Deacon Walt Little from St. John Vianney Catholic Church gave the invocation.

5. PRESENTATIONS

5.1. Introduction of New Professional Services Company to the City of Rancho Cordova.

5.2. Presentation of Proclamation to Code Enforcement Officer Michael Rodriguez in Honor of his Retirement.

ITEM 9.1. ATTACHMENT 1
Rancho Cordova City Council - DRAFT MINUTES
Meeting of Monday, December 18, 2023

5.3. New Employee Introductions: Kathryn Spuur, Customer Service Representative by Russell Ducharme, Neighborhood Services Manager, Kevin Velazquez, Assistant Civil Engineer by Drew Hart, Senior Transportation Planner, and Veronica Seward-Aponte, Assistant Civil Engineer by Dalia Fadl, Principal Engineer.

6. PUBLIC COMMENT
Mayor Sander opened the public comment period. The following individuals addressed the Council or submitted public comment via email:

1. Jim Cooper

2. Helen Whelan-Bashaw

3. Valerie Knippschild

4. Michael R. Boyd

5. Marilyn Metzger
Mayor Sander closed the public comment period.

7. COUNCIL REPORTS
Council reported on events since the last meeting.

8. CITY MANAGER'S REPORT
City Manager Micah Runner gave his report.

Mayor Sander opened the public comment period. The following individuals addressed the Council or submitted public comment via email:

1. Sara Dahle
Mayor Sander closed the public comment period.

9. CONSENT CALENDAR ITEMS - ROLL CALL VOTE
Mayor Sander opened the public comment period. Seeing no speakers, Mayor Sander closed the public comment period.

ACTION: Motion to approve items 9.1 through 9.11 by Budge second by Pulipati; Motion passed with a 4:0 vote.

AYES: Budge, Gatewood, Pulipati, and Sander
NOES: None
ABSENT: Terry
ABSTAIN: None

9.1. Subject: Meeting Minutes from the Regular City Council Meetings of November 6, 2023, and December 4, 2023, and the Special Meetings of November 13, 2023, November 28, 2023, December 6, 2023, and December 12, 2023.

Recommendation: Adopt the minutes.

9.2. Subject: Treasurer's Report - September 30, 2023.

Recommendation: This report is informational only. It is recommended that the City Council receive and file the September 30, 2023, Treasurer’s Report.

9.3. Subject: Second Reading of an Ordinance Amending Title 23, Chapter 23.325 Overlay Zoning Districts, Chapter 23.716 Landscaping, Chapter 23.719 Parking and Loading, Chapter 23.734 Accessory Structures, Chapter 23.743 Signs, and Chapter 23.1104

ITEM 9.1. ATTACHMENT 1
Rancho Cordova City Council - DRAFT MINUTES
Meeting of Monday, December 18, 2023

Definitions (CEQA Exemption Found in Guideline Section 15061(B)(3)).

Recommendation: Waive the second reading and adopt the Ordinance.

9.4. Subject: A Resolution Making Certain Findings and Determinations Related to, and Accepting, the Fiscal Year 2022-23 Development Impact Fee Report for Assembly Bill No. 1600 Development Fees.

Recommendation: Adopt the Resolution.

9.5. Subject: A Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Execute Contract No. 2023-257 in an Amount not to Exceed $750,000 with the Sacramento Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (SPCA) for Animal Shelter Services for a Term of January 1, 2024, to December 31, 2025.

Recommendation: Adopt the Resolution.

9.6. Subject: A Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Execute Contract No. 2023-256 in an Amount not to Exceed $150,000 with Sacramento Regional Transit District for Design Support for the U.S. 50/Rancho Cordova Parkway Interchange Project.

Recommendation: Adopt the Resolution

9.7. Subject: A Resolution Authorizing the Continued Use of Military Equipment for Law Enforcement .

Recommendation: Adopt the Resolution

9.8. Subject: A Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Execute Contract Amendment No. 153-2019-2 with R3 Consulting Group Inc. for On-Call Solid Waste Consulting Services to Extend the Term from June 30, 2024, to June 30, 2026, and Increase the Contract Budget from $777,400 to an Amount not to Exceed $1,277,650.

Recommendation: Adopt the Resolution.

9.9. Subject: A Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Execute a Contract with the Sacramento County Sheriff's Office for a Term Starting December 1, 2023, and Ending June 30, 2026, for the Supervision of the Sheriff's Work Project Program, Inmate Crew, for Flood Control and Landscaping Maintenance in an Amount not to Exceed $254,945.

Recommendation: Adopt the Resolution.

9.10. Subject: A Resolution Declaring City-Owned Property at 2875 Kilgore Road, APN 072- 0490-024, as Surplus Land and Authorizing the City Manager to Proceed with the Surplus Land Act Process for Site Disposition.

Recommendation: Adopt the Resolution.

9.11. Subject: A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Rancho Cordova Approving the Fifth Amendment to the First Restated Agreement for Legal Services between the City and Meyers Nave.

Recommendation: Adopt the Resolution.

10. CONSENT PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS - ROLL CALL VOTE
None.

11. PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS
None.

12. REGULAR CALENDAR ITEMS

12.1. Subject: A Resolution Authorizing the Issuance of Special Tax Bonds for and on Behalf

ITEM 9.1. ATTACHMENT 1
Rancho Cordova City Council - DRAFT MINUTES
Meeting of Monday, December 18, 2023

of the City of Rancho Cordova Grantline 220 Community Facilities District No. 2023-1, Improvement Area No. 1 Approving and Directing the Execution of a Fiscal Agent Agreement, Approving the Form of Preliminary Official Statement, Approving Sale of Such Bonds, and Approving Other Related Documents and Actions.

Recommendation: Adopt the Resolution.

Mayor Sander opened the public comment period. Seeing no speakers, Mayor Sander closed the public comment period.

ACTION: Motion to approve item 12.1 by Budge second by Pulipati; Motion passed with a 4:0 vote.

AYES: Budge, Gatewood, Pulipati, and Sander
NOES: None
ABSENT: Terry
ABSTAIN: None

12.2. Subject: Chase Drive American River Parkway Connection Project Update.

Recommendation: Receive the presentation and provide feedback.

Mayor Sander opened the public comment period. Seeing no speakers, Mayor Sander closed the public comment period.

ACTION: Input was received regarding the Chase Drive American River Parkway Connection Project update.

12.3. Subject: Discussion and Potential Direction of Planning Commissioner Appointments and Qualifications.

Recommendation: Receive a report on Planning Commission qualifications and two applications received to fill a vacant at-large member seat. Upon conclusion of the discussion and public comment, provide staff with any feedback or direction on the information presented and any future code amendments to Chapter 2.30 Planning Commission to address Council's direction and how to proceed with the two at-large applications received.

Mayor Sander opened the public comment period. Seeing no speakers, Mayor Sander closed the public comment period.

ACTION: Input was received regarding the discussion and potential direction of Planning Commissioner appointments and qualifications.

12.4. Subject: Approval of Council Member Appointments to Regional Boards, Commissions, and Committees.

Recommendation: Confirm commitments to serve on other agency boards, commissions, and committees.

Mayor Sander opened the public comment period. Seeing no speakers, Mayor Sander closed the public comment period.

ACTION: Motion to approve Council Member appointments to regional boards, commissions, and committees, with the following changes: remove Gatewood and designate Pulipati as the alternate for the Sacramento Area Sewer District and Regional San, add Pulipati as alternate for the Greater Sacramento Economic Council and the Sacramento County Criminal Justice Cabinet, remove Gatewood and designate Pulipati to the Golden State Water Company Ad-hoc Committee, and reinstate the Gateway Signage AdPage 9 of 357 ITEM 9.1. ATTACHMENT 1
Rancho Cordova City Council - DRAFT MINUTES
Meeting of Monday, December 18, 2023

hoc Committee by Gatewood second by Budge.

Motion passed with a 4:0 vote.

AYES: Budge, Gatewood, Pulipati, and Sander
NOES: None
ABSENT: Terry
ABSTAIN: None

12.5. Subject: A Resolution Adopting the 2024 City Council Meeting Schedule.

Recommendation: Adopt the Resolution.

Mayor Sander opened the public comment period. Seeing no speakers, Mayor Sander closed the public comment period.

ACTION: Motion to approve item 12.5 by Budge second by Gatewood; Motion passed with a 4:0 vote.

AYES: Budge, Gatewood, Pulipati, and Sander
NOES: None
ABSENT: Terry
ABSTAIN: None

12.6. Subject: Appointment of Labor Negotiators.

Recommendation: Appoint Mayor David Sander and City Attorney Adam U. Lindgren as Labor Negotiators for negotiations with the current City Manager.

Mayor Sander opened the public comment period. Seeing no speakers, Mayor Sander closed the public comment period.

ACTION: Motion to approve item 12.6 by Gatewood second by Pulipati; Motion passed with a 4:0 vote.

AYES: Budge, Gatewood, Pulipati, and Sander
NOES: None
ABSENT: Terry
ABSTAIN: None

13. COUNCIL REQUESTS FOR FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS

1. Sister cities and potential for Ukrainian partnership with the State Department.

14. ADJOURN TO CLOSED SESSION
Mayor Sander adjourned to closed session at 7:33 p.m.

15. CLOSED SESSION - CALL TO ORDER/ROLL CALL
Mayor Sander called closed session to order at 7:35 p.m.

Council Members Present: Linda Budge, Garrett Gatewood, Siri Pulipati, and Mayor David Sander
Council Members Absent: Donald Terry
Staff Members Present: Adam Lindgren and Micah Runner

16. CLOSED SESSION
Council met in closed session to discuss the following items:

ITEM 9.1. ATTACHMENT 1
Rancho Cordova City Council - DRAFT MINUTES
Meeting of Monday, December 18, 2023

16.1. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL – EXISTING LITIGATION (pursuant to California Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(1)) 350 Sacramento, a California nonprofit benefit corporation; and Oscar Balaguer v. City of Rancho Cordova, a general law city; City Council for the City of Rancho Cordova, and DOES 1 to 10, inclusive.

Sacramento Superior Court Case No. 23WM000101.

16.2. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL – ANTICIPATED LITIGATION: Significant Exposure to Litigation Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(2)(One case, based on a letter dated October 24, 2023, to the Mayor and Council from Matthew Henderson of Miller Starr Regalia and testimony by Mr. Henderson at the October 24, 2023 City Council meeting opposing and threatening litigation on the proposed Ordinance amending sections of the Villages of Zinfandel Special Planning Area) (One case).

16.3. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL – EXISTING LITIGATION (pursuant to California Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(1)) DPML Bear Hollow, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company and DPML Stonecreek, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company v. City of Rancho Cordova, City Council of Rancho Cordova, and DOES 1 through 25, inclusive. Sacramento Superior Court Case No. 23WM000122.

16.4. CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS: Pursuant to Government Code Section 54957.6. Agency Designated Representatives: Mayor David Sander and City Attorney Adam U. Lindgren; Unrepresented Employee: City Manager.

17. OPEN SESSION - REPORT FROM CLOSED SESSION
City Attorney Adam Lindgren reported that Council took up three cases, staff was given direction and no reportable action was taken. City Attorney Adam Lindgren reported that an item would be scheduled at a future Council meeting related to the City Manager Labor Negotiations.

18. ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Sander adjourned the meeting at 8:21 p.m.
_________________
Stacy Leitner, CMC
City Clerk

MEMORANDUM
City Council Staff Report - Page 1 of 2

ITEM 9.2.

DATE: January 16, 2024
TO: Honorable Mayor and Council Members
FROM: Albert Stricker, Public Works Director
Jesse Yabes, Assistant Civil Engineer
SUBJECT: A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE CONTRACT NO. 2023-263 WITH MARK THOMAS & COMPANY, INC.

IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $580,500 FOR PLANNING AND

PRELIMINARY DESIGN OF THE ROSSMOOR BAR TRAIL

ENHANCEMENTS PLANNING PROJECT

RECOMMENDATION
Adopt the Resolution.

RESULT OF RECOMMENDED ACTION
Adoption of the Resolution would authorize the City Manager to execute Contract No. 2023-263 with Mark Thomas & Company, Inc. in the amount of $580,500 to perform planning and engineering services for the Rossmoor Bar Trails Enhancement Project.

BACKGROUND
This project will improve public access to the American River Parkway by enhancing an existing network of informal pedestrian trails in the Rossmoor Bar area in Rancho Cordova (Attachment 2). These unimproved trails provide limited accessibility for users, especially those with disabilities, due to uneven surfaces and protruding cobbles. The formation of these “social trails” contributes to habitat fragmentation and impacts natural vegetation. This project will determine which trails to enhance for pedestrian use, and which ones to close for restoration.

Proposed trail enhancements include section leveling, smooth dirt and gravel surfaces, and uniform trail widths where allowable. Trailheads will be improved to allow access for users of all abilities. This project will provide environmental protection and improve pedestrian accessibility to the natural features of Rossmoor Bar for the benefit of all Parkway visitors.

In 2023, City staff pursued grant opportunities to partially fund the planning and design of the project. On June 19, 2023, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 89-2023 to approve the filing of an application for grant funding from the Wildlife Conservation Board (WCB). As a condition of WCB approval, the project was presented to the Lower American River Program Conservancy Advisory Committee and Sacramento County Parks and Recreation Commission for approval. Both of these bodies found the project to be consistent with the American River Parkway Plan and the American River Natural Resources Management Plan. During a Board meeting on November 15, 2023, the WCB approved the City’s grant application and request of

City Council Staff Report - Page 2 of 2

$597,000. On November 21, 2023, the WCB executed an Agreement (Attachment 3) with the city and issued a Notice to Proceed to begin work described in the work plan, in accordance with the terms and conditions of the Grant Agreement.

City staff propose entering into a contract with Mark Thomas (Attachment 4) to assist the City with performing the tasks outlined in the work plan of the WCB Grant Agreement. City staff recommend Mark Thomas from a list of pre-qualified consulting firms based on their experience performing environmental clearance and their experience in trail design.

Under this agreement, the project team will study the biological and cultural resources in the area to inform the decisions related to planning and design. Trail improvement concepts will be shared with the public via an online survey for comment and feedback. City staff will hold meetings with key stakeholders, such as Sacramento County Regional Parks, to gain input on the proposed plans. This project will design preliminary trail layout plans, landscape and restoration plans, and details for signposts and informational kiosks. Permit applications will be submitted to various agencies to authorize construction of the project in the floodway. The planning study is expected to be complete by the end of 2025. By completing this planning effort, the City will reach an important milestone in preparing the project for final design and future implementation.

FISCAL IMPACT AND FUNDING SOURCE
There is no impact to the City’s General Fund. The total cost of this project is approximately $675,000. Funding consists of WCB Grant Funds, Infrastructure Replacement Funds, and Community Enhancement Funds. This project is included in the City’s current approved Fiscal Year 2023-25 Capital Improvement Plan.

City staff will seek future grant opportunities to fund the implementation phase of the project.

ATTACHMENT(S)

1. Resolution

2. Project Map

3. WCB Grant Agreement WC-2396CA

4. Draft Contract 2023-263

ITEM 9.2. ATTACHMENT 1
Resolution No. XX-2024 Page 1 of 2

CITY OF RANCHO CORDOVA
RESOLUTION NO. XX-2024

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CORDOVA,

STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE CONTRACT NO. 2023-263 WITH MARK THOMAS & COMPANY, INC. IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $580,500 FOR PLANNING AND PRELIMINARY DESIGN OF THE ROSSMOOR BAR TRAIL

ENHANCEMENTS PLANNING PROJECT
WHEREAS, the City of Rancho Cordova desires to enter into Contract No. 2023-263 with Mark Thomas & Company, Inc. in an amount not to exceed $580,500 for planning and design services for the Rossmoor Bar Trail Enhancements Project; and WHEREAS, the Project will conduct environmental review, develop concepts and alternatives, conduct public outreach and stakeholder engagement, perform preliminary design of trail layouts and restoration plans, and submit permit applications; and WHEREAS, the Wildlife Conservation Board awarded the City of Rancho Cordova grant funds subject to the terms and conditions of Grant Agreement No. WC-2396CA; and WHEREAS, the Project complies with the American River Parkway Plan and the American River Natural Resources Management Plan; and
WHEREAS, the Project will prepare and file an Addendum to the American River Parkway Plan Environmental Impact Report (EIR) in compliance with state and federal law; and WHEREAS, services will exceed the maximum amount the City Manager has authorization to approve; and
WHEREAS, the Contract will be paid through State funds from the Wildlife Conservation Board, Infrastructure Replacement Fund, and Community Enhancement Fund. The contract does not impact the general fund.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CORDOVA authorizes the City Manager to execute Contract No. 2023-263 with Mark Thomas & Company, Inc. in an amount not to exceed $580,500 in a form approved by the City Attorney.

PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cordova on the 16th day of January 2024 by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

ITEM 9.2. ATTACHMENT 1
Resolution No. XX-2024 Page 2 of 2
ATTEST:

David Sander, Mayor
Stacy Leitner, CMC
City Clerk

ITEM 9.2. ATTACHMENT 2

ITEM 9.2. ATTACHMENT 3

ITEM 9.2. ATTACHMENT 3

ITEM 9.2. ATTACHMENT 3

ITEM 9.2. ATTACHMENT 3

ITEM 9.2. ATTACHMENT 3

ITEM 9.2. ATTACHMENT 3

ITEM 9.2. ATTACHMENT 3

ITEM 9.2. ATTACHMENT 3

ITEM 9.2. ATTACHMENT 3

ITEM 9.2. ATTACHMENT 3

ITEM 9.2. ATTACHMENT 3

ITEM 9.2. ATTACHMENT 3

ITEM 9.2. ATTACHMENT 3

ITEM 9.2. ATTACHMENT 3

ITEM 9.2. ATTACHMENT 3

ITEM 9.2. ATTACHMENT 3

ITEM 9.2. ATTACHMENT 3

ITEM 9.2. ATTACHMENT 3

ITEM 9.2. ATTACHMENT 3

PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT BETWEEN

THE CITY OF RANCHO CORDOVA AND
MARK THOMAS & COMPANCY, INC. FOR THE ROSSMOOR BAR TRAIL

ENHANCEMENTS PLANNING PROJECT
THIS AGREEMENT for professional services is made by and between the City of Rancho Cordova, a California municipal corporation (“City”), and Mark Thomas & Company, Inc., a California Corporation (“Professional”) as of _______, 2024.

Section 1. SERVICES. Subject to the terms and conditions set forth in this Agreement, Professional shall provide to City the services described in the Scope of Work attached as Exhibit A at the time and place and in the manner specified therein. In the event of a conflict or inconsistency between the terms of this Agreement and Exhibit A, the Agreement shall prevail.

1.1 Term of Services. The term of this Agreement shall begin on the date first noted above and shall end on December 31, 2025, the date of completion specified in Exhibit A.

Professional shall complete the work described in Exhibit A prior to that date, unless the term of the Agreement is otherwise terminated or extended, as provided for in Section 8.

The time provided to Professional to complete the services required by this Agreement shall not affect the City’s right to terminate the Agreement, as provided for in Section 8.

1.2 Standard of Performance. Professional shall perform all services required pursuant to this Agreement in the manner and according to the standards observed by a competent practitioner of the profession in which Professional is engaged in the geographical area in which Professional practices its profession. Professional shall prepare all work products required by this Agreement in a substantial, first-class manner and shall conform to the standards of quality normally observed by a person practicing in Professional's profession.

1.3 Assignment of Personnel. Professional shall assign only competent personnel to perform services pursuant to this Agreement. In the event that City, in its sole discretion, at any time during the term of this Agreement, desires the reassignment of any such persons, Professional shall, immediately upon receiving notice from City of such desire of City, reassign such person or persons.

1.4 Time. Professional shall devote such time to the performance of services pursuant to this Agreement as may be reasonably necessary to meet the standard of performance provided in Section 1.2 above and to satisfy Professional’s obligations hereunder.

Section 2. COMPENSATION. City hereby agrees to pay Professional a sum not to exceed Five Hundred Eighty Thousand, Five Hundred Dollars and Zero Cents ($580,500.00), notwithstanding any contrary indications that may be contained in Professional’s proposal, for services to be performed and reimbursable costs incurred under this Agreement. In the event of a conflict between this Agreement and Professional’s proposal, attached as Exhibit B, regarding the amount of compensation, the Agreement shall ITEM 9.2. ATTACHMENT 4

prevail. City shall pay Professional for services rendered pursuant to this Agreement at the time and in the manner set forth herein. The payments specified below shall be the only payments from City to Professional for services rendered pursuant to this Agreement. Professional shall submit all invoices to City in the manner specified herein. Except as specifically authorized by City, Professional shall not bill City for duplicate services performed by more than one person.

Professional and City acknowledge and agree that compensation paid by City to Professional under this Agreement is based upon Professional’s estimated costs of providing the services required hereunder, including salaries and benefits of employees and subcontractors of Professional. Consequently, the parties further agree that compensation hereunder is intended to include the costs of contributions to any pensions and/or annuities to which Professional and its employees, agents, and subcontractors may be eligible. City therefore has no responsibility for such contributions beyond compensation required under this Agreement.

2.1 Invoices. Professional shall submit invoices, not more often than once a month during the term of this Agreement, based on the cost for services performed and reimbursable costs incurred prior to the invoice date. Invoices shall contain the following information:
 Serial identifications of progress bills; i.e., Progress Bill No. 1 for the first invoice, etc.;
 The beginning and ending dates of the billing period;  A Task Summary containing the original contract amount, the amount of prior billings, the total due this period, the balance available under the Agreement, and the percentage of completion;
 At City’s option, for each work item in each task, a copy of the applicable time entries or time sheets shall be submitted showing the name of the person doing the work, the hours spent by each person, a brief description of the work, and each reimbursable expense;
 The total number of hours of work performed under the Agreement by Professional and each employee, agent, and subcontractor of Professional performing services hereunder, as well as a separate notice when the total number of hours of work by Professional and any individual employee, agent, or subcontractor of Professional reaches or exceeds 800 hours, which shall include an estimate of the time necessary to complete the work described in Exhibit A;
 The Professional’s signature.

2.2 Monthly Payment. City shall make monthly payments, based on invoices received, for services satisfactorily performed, and for authorized reimbursable costs incurred. City shall have thirty (30) days from the receipt of an invoice that complies with all of the requirements above to pay Professional.

2.3 Final Payment. City shall make the final payment within sixty (60) days after completion of the services and submittal to City of a final invoice, if all services required have been satisfactorily performed.

ITEM 9.2. ATTACHMENT 4

2.4 Total Payment. City shall pay for the services to be rendered by Professional pursuant to this Agreement. City shall not pay any additional sum for any expense or cost whatsoever incurred by Professional in rendering services pursuant to this Agreement. City shall make no payment for any extra, further, or additional service pursuant to this Agreement.

In no event shall Professional submit any invoice for an amount in excess of the maximum amount of compensation provided above either for a task or for the entire Agreement, unless the Agreement is modified prior to the submission of such an invoice by a properly executed change order or amendment.

2.5 Hourly Fees. Fees for work performed by Professional on an hourly basis shall not exceed the amounts shown on the fee schedule set forth in Exhibit B.

2.6 Reimbursable Expenses. Reimbursable expenses, if any, are set forth in Exhibit B, and shall not exceed Six Thousand Seven Hundred Fifty-Six Dollars and Zero Cents ($6,756).

Expenses not listed in Exhibit B are not chargeable to City. Reimbursable expenses are included in the total amount of compensation provided under this Agreement that shall not be exceeded.

2.7 Payment of Taxes. Professional is solely responsible for the payment of employment taxes incurred under this Agreement and any similar federal or state taxes.

2.8 Payment upon Termination. In the event that the City or Professional terminates this Agreement pursuant to Section 8, the City shall compensate the Professional for all outstanding costs and reimbursable expenses incurred for work satisfactorily completed as of the date of written notice of termination. Professional shall maintain adequate logs and timesheets in order to verify costs incurred to that date.

2.9 Authorization to Perform Services. The Professional is not authorized to perform any services or incur any costs whatsoever under the terms of this Agreement until receipt of authorization from the Contract Administrator.

Section 3. FACILITIES AND EQUIPMENT. Except as set forth herein, Professional shall, at its sole cost and expense, provide all facilities and equipment that may be necessary to perform the services required by this Agreement. City shall make available to Professional only the facilities and equipment listed in this section, and only under the terms and conditions set forth herein.

City shall furnish physical facilities such as desks, filing cabinets, and conference space, as may be reasonably necessary for Professional’s use while consulting with City employees and reviewing records and the information in possession of the City. The location, quantity, and time of furnishing those facilities shall be in the sole discretion of City. In no event shall City be obligated to furnish any facility that may ITEM 9.2. ATTACHMENT 4

involve incurring any direct expense, including but not limited to computer, long-distance telephone or other communication charges, vehicles, and reproduction facilities.

Section 4. INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS. Before beginning any work under this Agreement, Professional, at its own cost and expense, shall procure "occurrence coverage" insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damages to property that may arise from or in connection with the performance of the work hereunder by the Professional and its agents, representatives, employees, and subcontractors.

Professional shall provide proof satisfactory to City of such insurance that meets the requirements of this section and under forms of insurance satisfactory in all respects to the City. Professional shall maintain the insurance policies required by this section throughout the term of this Agreement. The cost of such insurance shall be included in the Professional's bid. Professional shall not allow any subcontractor to commence work on any subcontract until Professional has obtained all insurance required herein for the subcontractor(s) and provided evidence thereof to City. Verification of the required insurance shall be submitted and made part of this Agreement prior to execution. Professional shall maintain all required insurance listed herein for the duration of this Agreement.

4.1 Workers’ Compensation. Professional shall, at its sole cost and expense, maintain Statutory Workers’ Compensation Insurance and Employer’s Liability Insurance for any and all persons employed directly or indirectly by Professional. The Statutory Workers’ Compensation Insurance and Employer’s Liability Insurance shall be provided with limits of not less than ONE MILLION DOLLARS ($1,000,000.00) per accident. In the alternative, Professional may rely on a self-insurance program to meet those requirements, but only if the program of self-insurance complies fully with the provisions of the California Labor Code. Determination of whether a self-insurance program meets the standards of the Labor Code shall be solely in the discretion of the Contract Administrator. The insurer, if insurance is provided, or the Professional, if a program of self-insurance is provided, shall waive all rights of subrogation against the City and its officers, officials, employees, and volunteers for loss arising from work performed under this Agreement.

An endorsement shall state that coverage shall not be canceled except after thirty (30) days' prior written notice by certified mail, return receipt requested, has been given to the City. Professional shall notify City within fourteen (14) days of notification from Professional’s insurer if such coverage is suspended, voided or reduced in coverage or in limits.

The requirement to maintain Statutory Worker’s Compensation and Employer’s Liability Insurance may be waived by the City upon written verification that Professional does not have any employees.

4.2 Commercial General and Automobile Liability Insurance.

4.2.1 General requirements. Professional, at its own cost and expense, shall maintain commercial general liability insurance for the term of this Agreement in an amount not less than TWO MILLION DOLLARS ($2,000,000.00) and automobile liability ITEM 9.2. ATTACHMENT 4

insurance for the term of this Agreement in an amount not less than ONE MILLION DOLLARS ($1,000,000.00). The commercial general liability and automobile liability insurance shall be per occurrence, combined single limit coverage for risks associated with the work contemplated by this Agreement. If a commercial general liability insurance or an automobile liability form or other form with a general aggregate limit is used, either the general aggregate limit shall apply separately to the work to be performed under this Agreement or the general aggregate limit shall be at least twice the required occurrence limit. Such coverage shall include but shall not be limited to, protection against claims arising from bodily and personal injury, including death resulting therefrom, and damage to property resulting from activities contemplated under this Agreement, including the use of owned and nonowned automobiles.

4.2.2 Minimum scope of coverage. Commercial general liability coverage shall be at least as broad as Insurance Services Office Commercial General Liability occurrence form CG 0001 (most recent edition) covering comprehensive General Liability on an “occurrence” basis. Automobile coverage shall be at least as broad as Insurance Services Office Automobile Liability form CA 0001 (most recent edition), Code 1 (any auto). No endorsement shall be attached limiting the coverage.

4.2.3 Additional requirements. Each of the following shall be included in the insurance coverage or added as an endorsement to the policy:
a. City and its officers, employees, agents, and volunteers shall be covered as additional insureds with respect to each of the following: liability arising out of activities performed by or on behalf of Professional, including the insured’s general supervision of Professional; products and completed operations of Professional; premises owned, occupied, or used by Professional; and automobiles owned, leased, or used by the Professional. The coverage shall contain no special limitations on the scope of protection afforded to City or its officers, employees, agents, or volunteers.
b. The insurance shall cover on an occurrence or an accident basis, and not on a claims-made basis.
c. An endorsement must state that coverage is primary insurance with respect to the City and its officers, officials, employees and volunteers, and that no insurance or self-insurance maintained by the City shall be called upon to contribute to a loss under the coverage.

ITEM 9.2. ATTACHMENT 4

d. Any failure of Professional to comply with reporting provisions of the policy shall not affect coverage provided to City and its officers, employees, agents, and volunteers.
e. An endorsement shall state that coverage shall not be canceled except after thirty (30) days' prior written notice by certified mail, return receipt requested, has been given to the City. Professional shall notify City within fourteen (14) days of notification from Professional’s insurer if such coverage is suspended, voided or reduced in coverage or in limits.

4.3 Professional Liability Insurance. Professional, at its own cost and expense, shall maintain for the period covered by this Agreement professional liability insurance for licensed professionals performing work pursuant to this Agreement in an amount not less than TWO MILLION DOLLARS ($2,000,000) covering the licensed professionals’ errors and omissions.

4.3.1 Any deductible or self-insured retention shall not exceed $150,000 per claim.

4.3.2 An endorsement shall state that coverage shall not be suspended, voided, canceled by either party, or reduced in coverage or in limits, except after thirty (30) days' prior written notice by certified mail, return receipt requested, has been given to the City.

4.3.3 The following provisions shall apply if the professional liability coverages are written on a claims-made form:
a. The retroactive date of the policy must be shown and must be before the date of the Agreement.
b. Insurance must be maintained and evidence of insurance must be provided for at least five (5) years after completion of the Agreement or the work, so long as commercially available at reasonable rates. c. If coverage is canceled or not renewed and it is not replaced with another claims-made policy form with a retroactive date that precedes the date of this Agreement, Professional must provide extended reporting coverage for a minimum of five (5) years after completion of the Agreement or the work. The City shall have the right to exercise, at the Professional’s sole cost and expense, any extended reporting provisions of the policy, if the Professional cancels or does not renew the coverage.
d. A copy of the claim reporting requirements must be submitted to the City prior to the commencement of any work under this Agreement.

ITEM 9.2. ATTACHMENT 4

4.4 All Policies Requirements.

4.4.1 Acceptability of insurers. All insurance required by this section is to be placed with insurers with a Bests' rating of no less than A:VII.

4.4.2 Verification of coverage. Prior to beginning any work under this Agreement, Professional shall furnish City with certificates of insurance and with original endorsements effecting coverage required herein. The certificates and endorsements for each insurance policy are to be signed by a person authorized by that insurer to bind coverage on its behalf. The City reserves the right to require complete, certified copies of all required insurance policies, at any time.

4.4.3 Subcontractors. Professional shall include all subcontractors as insureds under its policies or shall furnish separate certificates and endorsements for each subcontractor. All coverages for subcontractors shall be subject to all of the requirements stated herein.

4.4.4 Deductibles and Self-Insured Retentions. Professional shall disclose to and obtain the approval of City for the self-insured retentions and deductibles before beginning any of the services or work called for by any term of this Agreement.

During the period covered by this Agreement, only upon the prior express written authorization of Contract Administrator, Professional may increase such deductibles or self-insured retentions with respect to City, its officers, employees, agents, and volunteers. The Contract Administrator may condition approval of an increase in deductible or self-insured retention levels with a requirement that Professional procure a bond, guaranteeing payment of losses and related investigations, claim administration, and defense expenses that is satisfactory in all respects to each of them.

4.4.5 Waiver of Subrogation. Professional hereby agrees to waive subrogation which any insurer or contractor may require from vendor by virtue of the payment of any loss. Consultant agrees to obtain any endorsements that may be necessary to effect this waiver of subrogation. The Workers’ Compensation policy shall be endorsed with a waiver of subrogation in favor of the entity for all work performed by the Professional, its employees, agents, and subcontractors.

4.4.6 Notice of Reduction in Coverage. In the event that any coverage required by this section is reduced, limited, or materially affected in any other manner, Professional shall provide written notice to City at Professional’s earliest possible opportunity and in no case later than five (5) days after Professional is notified of the change in coverage.

ITEM 9.2. ATTACHMENT 4

4.5 Remedies. In addition to any other remedies City may have if Professional fails to provide or maintain any insurance policies or policy endorsements to the extent and within the time herein required, City may, at its sole option exercise any of the following remedies, which are alternatives to other remedies City may have and are not the exclusive remedy for Professional’s breach:
 Obtain such insurance and deduct and retain the amount of the premiums for such insurance from any sums due under the Agreement;
 Order Professional to stop work under this Agreement or withhold any payment that becomes due to Professional hereunder, or both stop work and withhold any payment, until Professional demonstrates compliance with the requirements hereof; and/or  Terminate this Agreement.

Section 5. INDEMNIFICATION AND PROFESSIONAL’S RESPONSIBILITIES.

5.1 General Requirement. Professional shall indemnify, defend with counsel selected by the City, and hold harmless the City and its officials, officers, employees, agents, and volunteers from and against any and all losses, liability, claims, suits, actions, damages, and causes of action arising out of any personal injury, bodily injury, loss of life, or damage to property, or any violation of any federal, state, or municipal law or ordinance, to the extent caused, in whole or in part, by the willful misconduct or negligent acts or omissions of Professional or its employees, subcontractors, or agents, by acts for which they could be held strictly liable, or by the quality or character of their work. The foregoing obligation of Professional shall not apply when (1) the injury, loss of life, damage to property, or violation of law arises wholly from the negligence or willful misconduct of the City or its officers, employees, agents, or volunteers and (2) the actions of Professional or its employees, subcontractor, or agents have contributed in no part to the injury, loss of life, damage to property, or violation of law. It is understood that the duty of Professional to indemnify and hold harmless includes the duty to defend as set forth in Section 2778 of the California Civil Code. Acceptance by City of insurance certificates and endorsements required under this Agreement does not relieve Professional from liability under this indemnification and hold harmless clause. This indemnification and hold harmless clause shall apply to any damages or claims for damages whether or not such insurance policies shall have been determined to apply. By execution of this Agreement, Professional acknowledges and agrees to the provisions of this Section and that it is a material element of consideration.

5.2 PERS Indemnification. In the event that Professional or any employee, agent, or subcontractor of Professional providing services under this Agreement is determined by a court of competent jurisdiction or the California Public Employees Retirement System ITEM 9.2. ATTACHMENT 4

(“PERS”) to be eligible for enrollment in PERS as an employee of City, Professional shall indemnify, defend, and hold harmless City for the payment of any and all employee and/or employer contributions for PERS benefits on behalf of Professional or its employees, agents, or subcontractors, as well as for the payment of any penalties and interest on such contributions, which would otherwise be the responsibility of City, and any attorneys’ fees and costs incurred by the City to enforce this Section.

5.3 Design Professionals. To the extent that the services under this Agreement include design professional services subject to California Civil Code Section 2782.8, as may be amended from time to time, Professional’s duty to indemnify under Sections 5.1 and 5.2 shall only be to the maximum extent permitted by California Civil Code Section 2782.8.

Section 6. STATUS OF PROFESSIONAL.

6.1 Independent Contractor. At all times during the term of this Agreement, Professional shall be an independent contractor as defined in Labor Code Section 3353, and shall not be an employee of City. Nothing contained in this Agreement shall be construed to be inconsistent with the foregoing relationship or status. City shall have the right to control Professional only insofar as the results of Professional's services rendered pursuant to this Agreement and assignment of personnel pursuant to Subparagraph 1.3; however, otherwise City shall not have the right to control the means and methods by which Professional accomplishes services rendered pursuant to this Agreement. Professional shall have no power or authority by this Agreement to bind the City in any respect. All employees and agents hired or retained by Professional are employees and agents of Professional and not of the City. The City shall not be obligated in any way to pay any wage claims or other claims made against Professional by any such employees or agents, or any other person resulting from performance of this Agreement.

Notwithstanding any other City, state, or federal policy, rule, regulation, law, or ordinance to the contrary, Professional and any of its employees, agents, and subcontractors providing services under this Agreement shall not qualify for or become entitled to, and hereby agree to waive any and all claims to, any compensation, benefit, or any incident of employment by City, including but not limited to eligibility to enroll in PERS as an employee of City and entitlement to any contribution to be paid by City for employer contributions and/or employee contributions for PERS benefits. Professional shall not allow any employee, agent or subcontractor to become eligible for a claim for PERS benefits.

6.2 Professional Not an Agent. Except as City may specify in writing, Professional shall have no authority, express or implied, to act on behalf of City in any capacity whatsoever as an agent. Professional shall have no authority, express or implied, pursuant to this Agreement to bind City to any obligation whatsoever.

ITEM 9.2. ATTACHMENT 4

Section 7. LEGAL REQUIREMENTS.

7.1 Governing Law. The laws of the State of California shall govern this Agreement.

7.2 Compliance with Applicable Laws. Professional and any subcontractors shall comply with all laws and regulations applicable to the performance of the work hereunder, including but not limited to, the California Building Code, the Americans with Disabilities Act, and any copyright, patent or trademark law. Professional’s failure to comply with any law(s) or regulation(s) applicable to the performance of the work hereunder shall constitute a breach of contract.

7.3 Other Governmental Regulations. To the extent that this Agreement may be funded by fiscal assistance from another governmental entity, Professional and any subcontractors shall comply with all applicable rules and regulations to which City is bound by the terms of such fiscal assistance program. This Agreement utilizes grant funds from the California Wildlife Conservation Board. In accordance with the terms and conditions associated with such grant funds, Professional acknowledges and agrees that auditors for the State of California and the California Wildlife Conservation Board shall have the right to examine the records of the Professional relative to the goods, services, equipment, materials, supplies or other assistance provided to City under this Agreement.

7.4 Licenses and Permits. Professional represents and warrants to City that Professional and its employees, agents, and any subcontractors have all licenses, permits, qualifications, and approvals of whatsoever nature that are legally required to practice their respective professions. Professional represents and warrants to City that Professional and its employees, agents, any subcontractors shall, at their sole cost and expense, keep in effect at all times during the term of this Agreement any licenses, permits, and approvals that are legally required to practice their respective professions. In addition to the foregoing, Professional and any subcontractors shall obtain and maintain valid Business Licenses from City during the term of this Agreement.

7.5 Nondiscrimination and Equal Opportunity. Professional shall not discriminate, on the basis of a person’s race, religion, color, national origin, age, physical or mental handicap or disability, medical condition, marital status, sex, or sexual orientation, against any employee, applicant for employment, subcontractor, bidder for a subcontract, or participant in, recipient of, or applicant for any services or programs provided by Professional under this Agreement. Professional shall comply with all applicable federal, state, and local laws, policies, rules, and requirements related to equal opportunity and nondiscrimination in employment, contracting, and the provision of any services that are the subject of this Agreement, including but not limited to the satisfaction of any positive obligations required of Professional thereby.

ITEM 9.2. ATTACHMENT 4

Professional shall include the provisions of this Subsection in any subcontract approved by the Contract Administrator or this Agreement.

Section 8. TERMINATION AND MODIFICATION.

8.1 Termination. City may cancel this Agreement at any time and without cause upon written notification to Professional.

Professional may cancel this Agreement upon Thirty days’ written notice to City and shall include in such notice the reasons for cancellation.

In the event of termination, Professional shall be entitled to compensation for services performed to the effective date of termination; City, however, may condition payment of such compensation upon Professional delivering to City any or all documents, photographs, computer software, video and audio tapes, and other materials provided to Professional or prepared by or for Professional or the City in connection with this Agreement.

8.2 Extension. City may, in its sole and exclusive discretion, extend the end date of this Agreement beyond that provided for in Subsection 1.1. Any such extension shall require a written amendment to this Agreement, as provided for herein. Professional understands and agrees that, if City grants such an extension, City shall have no obligation to provide Professional with compensation beyond the maximum amount provided for in this Agreement. Similarly, unless authorized by the Contract Administrator, City shall have no obligation to reimburse Professional for any otherwise reimbursable expenses incurred during the extension period.

8.3 Amendments. The Parties may amend this Agreement only by a writing signed by all the Parties.

8.4 Assignment and Subcontracting. City and Professional recognize and agree that this Agreement contemplates personal performance by Professional and is based upon a determination of Professional’s unique personal competence, experience, and specialized personal knowledge. Moreover, a substantial inducement to City for entering into this Agreement was and is the professional reputation and competence of Professional.

Professional may not assign this Agreement or any interest therein without the prior written approval of the Contract Administrator. Professional shall not subcontract any portion of the performance contemplated and provided for herein, other than to the subcontractors noted in the proposal, without prior written approval of the Contract Administrator.

8.5 Survival. All obligations arising prior to the termination of this Agreement and all provisions of this Agreement allocating liability between City and Professional shall survive the termination of this Agreement.

ITEM 9.2. ATTACHMENT 4

8.6 Options upon Breach by Professional. If Professional materially breaches any of the terms of this Agreement, City’s remedies shall include, but not be limited to, the following:

8.6.1 Immediately terminate the Agreement;

8.6.2 Retain the plans, specifications, drawings, reports, design documents, and any other work product prepared by Professional pursuant to this Agreement;

8.6.3 Retain a different Professional to complete the work described in Exhibit A not finished by Professional; or

8.6.4 Charge Professional the difference between the cost to complete the work described in Exhibit A that is unfinished at the time of breach and the amount that City would have paid Professional pursuant to Section 2 if Professional had completed the work.

Section 9. KEEPING AND STATUS OF RECORDS.

9.1 Records Created as Part of Professional’s Performance. All reports, data, maps, models, charts, studies, surveys, photographs, memoranda, plans, studies, specifications, records, files, or any other documents or materials, in electronic or any other form, that Professional prepares or obtains pursuant to this Agreement and that relate to the matters covered hereunder shall be the property of the City. Professional hereby agrees to deliver those documents to the City upon termination of the Agreement. It is understood and agreed that the documents and other materials, including but not limited to those described above, prepared pursuant to this Agreement are prepared specifically for the City and are not necessarily suitable for any future or other use. City and Professional agree that, until final approval by City, all data, plans, specifications, reports and other documents are confidential and will not be released to third parties without prior written consent of both parties.

9.2 Professional’s Books and Records. Professional shall maintain any and all ledgers, books of account, invoices, vouchers, canceled checks, and other records or documents evidencing or relating to charges for services or expenditures and disbursements charged to the City under this Agreement for a minimum of three (3) years, or for any longer period required by law, from the date of final payment to the Professional pursuant to this Agreement.

9.3 Inspection and Audit of Records. Any records or documents that Section 9.2 of this Agreement requires Professional to maintain shall be made available for inspection, audit, and/or copying at any time during regular business hours, upon oral or written request of the City. Under California Government Code Section 8546.7, if the amount of public funds ITEM 9.2. ATTACHMENT 4

expended under this Agreement exceeds TEN THOUSAND DOLLARS ($10,000.00), the Agreement shall be subject to the examination and audit of the State Auditor, at the request of City or as part of any audit of the City, for a period of three (3) years after final payment under the Agreement.

Section 10 MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS.

10.1 Attorneys’ Fees. If a Party to this Agreement brings any action, including an action for declaratory relief, to enforce or interpret the provision of this Agreement, the prevailing Party shall be entitled to reasonable attorneys’ fees in addition to any other relief to which that Party may be entitled. The court may set such fees in the same action or in a separate action brought for that purpose.

10.2 Venue. In the event that either Party brings any action against the other under this Agreement, the Parties agree that trial of such action shall be vested exclusively in the state courts of California in the County of Sacramento or in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California.

10.3 Severability. If a court of competent jurisdiction finds or rules that any provision of this Agreement is invalid, void, or unenforceable, the provisions of this Agreement not so adjudged shall remain in full force and effect. The invalidity in whole or in part of any provision of this Agreement shall not void or affect the validity of any other provision of this Agreement.

10.4 No Implied Waiver of Breach. The waiver of any breach of a specific provision of this Agreement does not constitute a waiver of any other breach of that term or any other term of this Agreement.

10.5 Successors and Assigns. The provisions of this Agreement shall inure to the benefit of and shall apply to and bind the successors and assigns of the Parties.

10.6 Use of Recycled Products. Professional shall prepare and submit all reports, written studies and other printed material on recycled paper to the extent it is available at equal or less cost than virgin paper.

10.7 Conflict of Interest. Professional may serve other clients, but none whose activities within the corporate limits of City or whose business, regardless of location, would place Professional in a “conflict of interest,” as that term is defined in the Political Reform Act, codified at California Government Code Section 81000 et seq.

Professional shall not employ any City official in the work performed pursuant to this Agreement. No officer or employee of City shall have any financial interest in this Agreement that would violate California Government Code Sections 1090 et seq.

ITEM 9.2. ATTACHMENT 4

Professional hereby warrants that it is not now, nor has it been in the previous twelve (12) months, an employee, agent, appointee, or official of the City. If Professional was an employee, agent, appointee, or official of the City in the previous twelve months, Professional warrants that it did not participate in any manner in the forming of this Agreement. Professional understands that, if this Agreement is made in violation of Government Code §1090 et.seq., the entire Agreement is void and Professional will not be entitled to any compensation for services performed pursuant to this Agreement, including reimbursement of expenses, and Professional will be required to reimburse the City for any sums paid to the Professional. Professional understands that, in addition to the foregoing, it may be subject to criminal prosecution for a violation of Government Code § 1090 and, if applicable, will be disqualified from holding public office in the State of California.

10.8 Solicitation. Professional agrees not to solicit business at any meeting, focus group, or interview related to this Agreement, either orally or through any written materials.

10.9 Contract Administration. This Agreement shall be administered by Jesse Yabes, P.E. ("Contract Administrator"). All correspondence shall be directed to or through the Contract Administrator or his or her designee.

10.10 Notices. Any written notice to Professional shall be sent to:

Matt Brogan, P.E.
701 University Ave, Ste 200
Sacramento, CA 95825
Email Address (for Insurance Update Requests)
[email protected]
Any written notice to City shall be sent to:

Jesse Yabes, P.E.
2729 Prospect Park Drive
Rancho Cordova, CA 95670

10.11 Professional Seal. Where applicable in the determination of the Contract Administrator or when required by law, the first page of a technical report, first page of design specifications, and each page of construction drawings shall be stamped/sealed and signed by the licensed professional responsible for the report/design preparation. The stamp/seal shall be in a block entitled "Seal and Signature of Registered Professional with report/design responsibility," as in the following example. _________________________________________
ITEM 9.2. ATTACHMENT 4

Seal and Signature of Registered Professional with
report/design responsibility.

10.12 Integration. This Agreement, including the scope of work attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit A, and the compensation schedule attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit B, represents the entire and integrated agreement between City and Professional and supersedes all prior negotiations, representations, or agreements, either written or oral.

10.13 IRS Form W-9. Professional shall complete and submit Internal Revenue Service Form W-9 to the City before execution of this Agreement. The City’s Finance Director shall have authority to waive this requirement.

ITEM 9.2. ATTACHMENT 4

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have executed this Agreement as of the day and year first set forth above, which date shall be considered by the Parties to be the effective date of this Agreement.

CITY OF RANCHO CORDOVA PROFESSIONAL

______________________________ ______________________________ Micah Runner, City Manager Matt Brogan, P.E., Vice President Date: ____________________ Date: ____________________
Attest:

Stacy Leitner, CMC, City Clerk
Date: ____________________
Approved as to Form:
______________________________
Adam U. Lindgren, City Attorney
ITEM 9.2. ATTACHMENT 4

EXHIBIT A

SCOPE OF SERVICES
ITEM 9.2. ATTACHMENT 4

ROSSMOOR BAR TRAIL ENHANCEMENTS
City of Rancho Cordova

SCOPE OF WORK

PROJECT UNDERSTANDING
Rossmoor Bar is located along the American River Parkway, in Rancho Cordova, CA. The project will formalize and enhance the recreational hiking trail system to improve accessibility, navigability, and engagement with the natural environment. The project will include surface improvements of existing established dirt trails with decomposed granite and trail borders. The surface improvements will result in a more comfortable walking experience for all users.

Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) standards for accessible pathways will be incorporated where feasible. No biking will be allowed.

As a focus on trail user experience, the project will include enhancements to the existing trailhead locations and the addition of interpretive and wayfinding signage for established trail routes. Portions of existing “social trails” will be closed to promote use of the formalized trails and to reduce disturbance to the natural environment. To maximize recreational benefit and encourage ongoing use of the new formalized trails, their alignments will be of a natural form responding to vegetation, landform, and scenic view opportunities. The Project will be consistent with the County’s American River Parkway Plan and Natural Resource Management Plan.

This scope of work is consistent with the "planning" phase grant awarded by the Wildlife Conservation Board. This scope will include concept plans, topographic surveys, public outreach, design plans to 65% level, and resource agency permit applications. Final Design and Construction Documents are not included with this scope of work.

The date of completion of this agreement is December 31, 2025.

TASK 1. PROJECT MANAGEMENT
Mark Thomas will provide overall consultant team management and leadership for the scope of services described herein. The specific activities and sub-tasks associated with this task are detailed below:

Task 1.1. Project Administration / Project Coordination Mark Thomas will prepare and submit monthly progress reports identifying work performed on each task in the preceding month. The monthly summary will show total charges made to each task, the contract budget for each task, reallocated budget amounts, prior billing amount, current billing, total billed to date, and a total percentage billed to date. An engineering progress report will also accompany the monthly reports and will include subconsultant charges for each sub-task with an estimated percent completed of work.

Task 1.2. Project Management and Control
Mark Thomas will prepare a detailed critical path method (CPM) schedule to reflect plan and progress of Services and to serve as a master schedule for the Project. The schedule will be updated monthly to include key milestones and tasks completed. This task also includes preparation and maintenance of an action item log, project files, Submittals Log Registry, Risk Registry, Risk Management Plan and Project Management Plan. The Team assumes the total Project timeline to cover 12 months, from the kick-off meeting to the 65% submittal milestone.

ITEM 9.2. ATTACHMENT 4

ROSSMOOR BAR TRAIL ENHANCEMENTS
City of Rancho Cordova

Task 1.3. Meeting Preparation and Attendance
Mark Thomas will arrange and conduct project team coordination calls, PDT meetings, focus meetings, and field reviews for the project. Mark Thomas will prepare and submit all meeting agendas one (1) week prior to the relevant meeting date and distribute draft meeting minutes for review within ten (10) working days after each meeting. Final meeting minutes will be distributed to the PDT incorporating relevant comments received on draft meeting minutes.

PDT members are likely to include members of the consultant team and the City of Rancho Cordova. The anticipated meetings are outlined in further detail below:

Project Initiation and Kick-off Meeting (1) - Consultant team will attend one Project kick-off meeting via teleconference with the City. As an integral element of Project kick-off, the Team will begin preparation of the data needs list as part of this meeting.

Field Review Meetings (2) - Project manager and select members of the technical team will conduct up to two (2) field reviews of the Project corridor and potential alternative sites to capture additional details needed to support an understanding of any environmental constraints, challenges, and/or opportunities. The Team will also rely on site photos to supplement existing conditions information. The field review meetings will be documented with brief memoranda to file.

Project Development Team (PDT) Meetings (12) – Consultant team will up to twelve (12) Project team meetings via a virtual platform (e.g., MS Teams, Zoom) with City staff.

Environmental Focus Meetings (3) – So that the approval and implementation schedule objectives are satisfied, the Team assumes environmental focus meetings will include three (3) coordination meetings with the City. These meetings are expected to be targeted and focused environmental meetings that will provide move the environmental deliverables forward. The meetings will occur over a virtual platform with follow-up correspondence occurring electronically via email and phone calls.

WCB Grant Management Meetings (2) - Mark Thomas will support the City to coordinate and attend up to Two (2) coordination meetings with the WCB to resolve technical issues or discuss grant administration.

City Council Presentations (2): This task includes up to two (2) additional meetings for presenting the project to the County Council, or other stakeholder groups as required.

TASK 1 DELIVERABLES:
• CPM Schedule Updates (up to 12)
• PDT Meeting Agendas and Minutes (up to 12)
• Environmental Focus Meeting Agendas and Minutes (up to 3) • Monthly Invoices and Progress Reports (up to 12)
• Field Review Memoranda (2)
• Action Item Log Updates (Following each PDT)
• Data Request List
• All deliverables to be submitted in .pdf format unless specifically stated otherwise.

ITEM 9.2. ATTACHMENT 4

ROSSMOOR BAR TRAIL ENHANCEMENTS
City of Rancho Cordova

TASK 2. TRAIL CONCEPT DEVELOPMENT
Trail improvement concepts will be prepared to facilitate initial stakeholder and public engagement activities.

Task 2.1. Trail Alternative Development
Two (2) alternative concepts will be developed, mapping the proposed trail routes, sign locations, inspiration for interpretive signs and wayfinding signs (Task 2.2), and cross-sections showing surface trail improvements.

Task 2.2. Interpretive Signs and Trail Amenities
In support of the alternatives developed in Task 2.1, the project team will develop theming and concept design/inspiration for interpretive signs and wayfinding signs. Inspiration for the interpretive signs may be historic, cultural, or natural (flora and fauna). This task is limited to the development of subjects, inspiration, and concepts only.

Mark Thomas will collaborate with a qualified artist to prepare artwork for the signs. A wayfinding signage conceptual program will be developed for the project’s trail network. This program will highlight sign designs inspired by a theme developed with feedback from the public and project team and will be unique to Rossmoor Bar area. Trailhead improvements will be showcased with color rendered concept plans for two (2) trailheads. Trailheads will be sited adjacent to existing parking areas.

TASK 2 DELIVERABLES:
• Draft and Final Versions of Trail Concept Drawings - 2 Alternatives • Interpretive Sign Concepts
• Two Trailhead Concept Plans
• All deliverables to be submitted in .pdf format unless specifically stated otherwise.

TASK 3. PUBLIC AND STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT
Task 3.1. Stakeholder Meetings
Mark Thomas anticipates attending up to eight (8) key stakeholder meetings, as directed by the City. The potential stakeholders include but are not limited to the following:
• Sacramento Regional Parks
• Soil Born Farms
• Cordova Community Council
• Cordova Recreation and Park District
• American River Parkway Foundation
• Rotary Club of Rancho Cordova
• Folsom-Cordova School District
Mark Thomas will prepare meeting summaries and action item lists following each meeting. All input from the key stakeholders will be tabulated for use in developing the 65% plans.

ITEM 9.2. ATTACHMENT 4

ROSSMOOR BAR TRAIL ENHANCEMENTS
City of Rancho Cordova

Task 3.2. Community Meetings
Two (2) in-person community meetings will be held to gather feedback and support for the project. The meetings will be focused on the following neighborhood groups:
• Cordova Meadows
• Cordova Gardens
• Mills Ranch
• Sunriver
• Rossmoor
Task 3.3. On-Line Survey
Mark Thomas will support the city in the preparation of a Metroquest survey to gather public feedback for the project.

Mark Thomas will attend one (1) meeting to discuss the survey layout and content. Mark Thomas will also prepare up to six (6) graphics pieces to be included in the survey. The city will work with others to prepare the survey, administer the survey, and gather a summary report.

TASK 3 DELIVERABLES
• Stakeholder Meeting Attendance and Summaries (8)
• Community Meeting Attendance and Summaries (2)
• Graphic Pieces to Support On-Line Metroquest Survey (up to 6) • All deliverables to be submitted in .pdf and Word format unless specifically stated otherwise.

TASK 4. ENGINEERING, DESIGNS, AND ESTIMATES
The project team will prepare 65% drawings and will refine the design and project footprint in preparation for permitting.

Task 4.1. Civil Engineering Design and Base Mapping
Task 4.1.1. Topographic Base Mapping
Mark Thomas will establish control by GPS and conventional methods, based horizontally on the California Coordinate System North American Datum of 1983 (NAD83) in U.S. Survey feet and vertically based on the North American Vertical Datum of 1988 (NAVD88). Project control will be established based upon GPS ties to the California Spatial Reference Center (CSRC) network. Local project control will be set, as needed, based upon the project control network. This scope assumes no record of survey will be required.

Mark Thomas will perform field surveys to collect topographic data within the project limits intended to serve as the basis for design work for the project. The mapping will be at a scale of 1” =50’ and will have a one-foot contour intervals. The topographic survey will include, but not be limited to, flowlines, grade breaks, pavement limits, pathway limits, surface visible utilities, trees and driplines, fences, signs, and guard rails.

Mark Thomas will engage with the utility owners to verify mapping of existing facilities. Utility records will be added to the base map in ACAD. An amended scope of work will be required if potholing is required, as potholing is excluded from this scope of service.

ITEM 9.2. ATTACHMENT 4

ROSSMOOR BAR TRAIL ENHANCEMENTS
City of Rancho Cordova

Task 4.1.2. Civil Engineering Plans
The Mark Thomas team will prepare 65% Plans and Estimate for the Rossmoor Bar Trail Enhancements. Plans will be prepared consistent with City of Rancho Cordova Standard. It is anticipated that the following sheets will be prepared:

Description Scale Estimate Sheet Count
Title Sheet N/A 1
Typical Cross Sections N/A 2
Key Map 1” = 200’ 1
Project Control 1” = 200’ 1
Layouts 1” = 50’ 4
Profile 1” = 50’H(H); 1” = 5’(V) 4
Construction Details Varies 4
Water Pollution Control Plans 1” = 50’ 4
Total Estimated Plan Sheets 21
Task 4.2. Planting, Irrigation and Trail Amenity Plans
The Mark Thomas Landscape Architecture Team will prepare 65% level planting plans, irrigation plans, and trail amenity plans. Irrigation plans will identify points of connection to the water meters, mainlines, and other master overall system elements. Comments received on the conceptual planting palette and landscape guidelines will be considered and addressed in the 65% PS&E and responded to in the comment response matrix. Draft specifications will be provided for landscape and irrigation elements. Landscape and irrigation details and specifications will be provided. Mark Thomas will not provide structural, utility, or electrical design in relation to the landscape plans and specifications. Erosion control seed mix will be recommended for approval by the Sacramento County Parks Department.

Description Scale Estimate Sheet Count
Way Finding Sign Plan 1” =50’ 4
Irrigation Plan 1" = 20’ and varies 6
Planting Plan 1” =20’ and varies 6
Irrigation Details Varies 3
Planting Details Varies 1
Total Estimated Plan Sheets 20
TASK 4 DELIVERABLES:
• 65% Civil Plans (11x17 PDF)
• 65% Planting, Irrigation, and Trail Amenity Plans
• 65% Engineers Estimate (MS Excel, PDF)
• Topographic Base Mapping (1” =50’ Scale) (ACAD Civil 3D) • Utility Base Mapping (ACAD Civil 3D); Pothole Report (PDF, if required) ITEM 9.2. ATTACHMENT 4

ROSSMOOR BAR TRAIL ENHANCEMENTS
City of Rancho Cordova

TASK 5. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW AND PERMITTING
Task 5.1. CEQA EIR Addendum
LSA will prepare an Addendum to the American River Parkway Plan Environmental Impact Report (EIR) with supporting biological and cultural resources technical memorandums, as described in Tasks 5.2 and 5.3 below. In accordance with Section 15164 of the CEQA Guidelines, a lead agency shall prepare an addendum to a previously certified EIR if some changes or additions are necessary but none of the conditions described in Section 15162 calling for preparation of a subsequent EIR have occurred. Those conditions include substantial changes to the project or with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken, or new information of substantial importance, which result in new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects. Thus, the EIR Addendum will demonstrate that the Rossmoor Bar trail enhancements would involve no substantial changes or new significant impacts that were not considered in the previous EIR. This scope of work assumes that the proposed trail improvements would not result in new significant impacts or an increase in the severity of a previously identified impact, as identified in the American River Parkway Plan EIR.

Task 5.1.1. Administrative Draft EIR Addendum
LSA will prepare an Administrative Draft EIR Addendum for review by the City of Rancho Cordova. The EIR Addendum will be formatted as a memorandum and will include an introduction with a brief description of the American River Parkway Plan and the Rossmoor Bar trail improvements, as well as a description of the required contents and applicability of preparing an EIR Addendum. The Administrative Draft EIR Addendum will evaluate whether any new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects will occur. The results of the biological and cultural resources analyses, described below, will be reflected in the Administrative Draft EIR Addendum. The Administrative Draft EIR Addendum will be transmitted electronically for City review.

Task 5.1.2. Review Draft EIR Addendum
LSA will respond to City comments on the Administrative Draft EIR Addendum, complete necessary revisions, and resubmit the document for City approval. The Draft Final EIR Addendum will be transmitted electronically for City review. Consistent with requirements under CEQA, LSA does not anticipate that a public review meeting or public circulation will be required as part of this process.

Task 5.1.3. Final EIR Addendum
LSA will incorporate the final comments and responses into the Final EIR Addendum and will submit an electronic copy to the city.

Task 5.2. Aquatic Resources Delineation Report
LSA will conduct an aquatic resources delineation to identify wetlands or other waters potentially subject to regulation by the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) and/or the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). Any resources subject to California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) jurisdiction will also be identified. The results of the delineation field work will be documented in a letter report prepared in accordance with the USACE Minimum Standards for Acceptance of Aquatic Resources Delineation Reports, dated January 2016 and the USACE Regulatory Guidance Letter 16-01 (October 2016) regarding Preliminary Jurisdictional Delineations. The report will include a description of the setting, a discussion of the methods and results, the completed wetland data forms, location and vicinity maps, and a preliminary delineation map showing the limits of all potential jurisdictional waters of the United ITEM 9.2. ATTACHMENT 4

ROSSMOOR BAR TRAIL ENHANCEMENTS
City of Rancho Cordova

States (U.S.) and State on the site. If requested by the USACE, LSA will conduct a field verification with USACE staff and revise the delineation map based on the field verification visit.

Task 5.3. Biological Resources Technical Report
LSA will evaluate the biological resources present on the project site and determine project effects to those resources consistent with CEQA. A key objective of the evaluation will be to identify any special-status plant or wildlife species, or sensitive habitats, which may be affected by the project. Prior to a field survey, LSA will conduct a biological resources records search of the California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) and the United States Fish and Wildlife Services’ Information for Planning and Consultation online database. LSA will review the databases for known occurrences of special-status biological resources in the project area, as well as the American River Parkway Plan EIR and American River Natural Resource Management Plan EIR.

Following the background review, LSA will conduct a 2-day general field survey of the project site to map plant communities and assess habitat conditions, as well as to evaluate potential impacts to sensitive biological resources from the proposed project. The survey will be timed in early spring to help inform the design process. The survey will be conducted on foot, walking the perimeter and throughout the project site. Any observations of rare plant and/or wildlife species on the project site will be mapped. If the general field survey indicates that there is habitat for specialstatus plants within the project site, LSA will conduct one focused survey to determine if these species occur on the project site. The surveys will be scheduled to coincide with the normal blooming periods of the target species to ensure that they are readily identifiable during the survey. Elderberry shrubs, the host plant for the federally listed valley elderberry longhorn beetle (VELB), may also be mapped for avoidance during the focused survey.

The results of the background review and field surveys will be documented in a biological resources technical report addressing CEQA requirements. The report will include a discussion of the land cover/vegetation communities present on the site, as well as a discussion of plant and animal species occurring (or expected to occur) on the site based on the communities present. Any sensitive biological resources identified will be mapped on an aerial photo exhibit. The report will include a quantitative assessment of potential project impacts on sensitive biological resources, and recommended mitigation measures consistent with the American River Parkway Plan EIR will be provided.

While LSA anticipates that potential impacts to sensitive biological resources, including listed species, will be avoided or minimized to the extent feasible as part of the design process, based on a review of the American River Parkway Plan EIR and LSA’s knowledge of the project area, the trail improvements have the potential to impact VELB. If needed, LSA will prepare a succinct Biological Assessment to facilitate Section 7 consultation with the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) as part of this task.

Task 5.4. Cultural Resource Section 106 Report
LSA will coordinate with the project team to develop an Area of Potential Effects (APE) map for the project, conduct a record search and literature review, and contact the Native American Heritage Commission for a review of its Sacred Lands File. Once the results of the record search have been obtained, LSA will conduct a pedestrian field survey of the project site to identify resources within the project. The survey will be timed in early spring to help inform the design process. The results of the background review and field survey will be documented in a cultural resource report consistent with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) if a Section 404 permit from the USACE is anticipated. Mitigation measures will be prepared to avoid potential project impacts to resources, as needed, consistent with the American Parkway Plan EIR. LSA has also budgeted to assist with Native American consultation under Section 106 of the NHPA or as specified by Assembly Bill 52, if requested by the city. Based on the results of the record search, field survey, and cultural resources report, additional evaluation may be necessary consistent with Task 5.5 if cultural resources are identified within the APE.

ITEM 9.2. ATTACHMENT 4

ROSSMOOR BAR TRAIL ENHANCEMENTS
City of Rancho Cordova

Task 5.5. Cultural Resources Testing / Evaluation (Optional Task) Consistent with the existing mitigation measures in the EIR, any cultural resources found in the project during the record search or survey will need to be recorded/updated and a subsurface testing program developed and implemented to determine the significance of the resource, followed by preparation of a descriptive evaluation report describing such finds. Significant/important cultural resources will be avoided by the project and no data recovery will be required.

Task 5.6. CDFW 1602 Notification
Riparian vegetation removal along the American River will require a Streambed Alteration Agreement from CDFW. LSA will submit a notification of streambed alteration to CDFW. The notification will also include a revegetation plan for approval by CDFW. A processing fee will be included with the notification (to be provided by the city).

Task 5.7. USACE Section 404 Permit Application
For any impacts to waters of the U.S. regulated by the USACE, LSA will submit a Preconstruction Notification (PCN) to the USACE requesting verification that the project can be authorized under one or more Nationwide Permits consistent with Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA). The PCN will also include the aquatic resources delineation report, biological assessment (if needed), and Section 106 report.

Task 5.8. RWQCB Section 401 Permit Application
For any impacts to waters of the State regulated by the RWQCB, LSA will submit an application for water quality certification consistent with Section 401 of the CWA. The application will include a simple Alternatives Analysis, documenting how impacts to waters of the State have been avoided to the maximum extent feasible. LSA will coordinate with the project engineer, as needed, to obtain input on the previously reviewed alternatives. An application fee will be included with the application (to be provided by the city).

Task 5.9. USACE Section 408 Permit Application
The project will require a Section 408 permit from the USACE for construction work within a federally regulated floodplain. The project team will apply to the USACE to obtain the authorization for work within the floodplain. LSA will prepare a screening memo that will include the Checklist for Categorical Permission (CP) 22 Trails, Roads, and Ramps and exhibits of the project area. The memo will be used as the basis for engaging the USACE Section 408 Unit in discussion.

Task 5.10. CVFPB Encroachment Permit Application
Mark Thomas will prepare documentation to achieve Project Approval from Caltrans. This scope assumes that both a Draft Project Report (DPR) and Project Report will be prepared and submitted to Caltrans for approval. In the Caltrans project development system, a “Draft Project Report” is prepared as a standalone, approved document that identifies the project design alternatives engineering features which are being included in the circulated Draft Environmental Document. Approval of the DPR is required to circulate the environmental document. DPR will be prepared and approved by Caltrans ahead of Draft Environmental Document Circulation.

An encroachment permit is required from the Central Valley Flood Protection Board (CVFPB) for work within a designated floodway. The project team will submit an application to the CVFPB to obtain the authorization for work within the floodway. An application fee must be included with the application (to be provided by the city).

ITEM 9.2. ATTACHMENT 4

ROSSMOOR BAR TRAIL ENHANCEMENTS
City of Rancho Cordova

Task 5.11. Environmental Project Management
LSA’s project manager will manage the day-to-day activities associated with the project and monitor the scope, budget, and scheduling of the project. LSA staff will also participate in conference calls with the project team and regulatory agency staff, as needed, throughout the project duration. We have budgeted for up to six virtual project meetings, including a project kick-off meeting and other meetings with the project team as needed.

TASK 5 DELIVERABLES:
• Task 5.1 Administrative Draft EIR Addendum (MS Word)
• Task 5.1 Review Draft EIR Addendum (MS Word)
• Task 5.1 Final EIR Addendum (PDF)
• Task 5.2 Draft Aquatic Resources Delineation Report (PDF) • Task 5.2 Final Aquatic Resources Delineation Report (PDF) • Task 5.3 Draft Biological Resources Technical Report (PDF) • Task 5.3 Final Biological Resources Technical Report (PDF) • Task 5.4 Draft Cultural Resources Section 106 Report (PDF) • Task 5.4 Final Cultural Resources Section 106 Report (PDF) • Task 5.5 Draft Cultural Resources Evaluation Report (PDF) • Task 5.5 Final Cultural Resources Evaluation Report (PDF) • Task 5.6 CDFW 1602 Notification (PDF)
• Task 5.6 CDFW Habitat Restoration Plan (PDF)
• Task 5.7 USACE Section 404 Permit Application (PDF)
• Task 5.8 RWQCB Section 401 Permit Application (PDF)
• Task 5.9 CVFPB Permit Application / CP Request (PDF)

SCOPE ASSUMPTIONS / EXCLUSIONS
• General
o No traffic or pedestrian counts will be included with this scope. o Drainage design will be limited to trailhead areas only. It is assumed that no drainage systems will be required for trails.
o Scope assumes two (2) concept alternatives that will be presented to the public. A single alternative will be carried to the 65% design phase.
o 95%, 100%, and Final submittals are not included in this scope. o SWPPP is not included in this scope.
o No Potholing of existing utilities is included with this scope. o Detailed right of way surveys not included with this scope. We have assumed all improvements are within County lands.
o No preliminary title reports will be ordered.
o Geotechnical field work and analysis are not included in this scope of work. • Environmental Technical Reports Assumptions
o All permitting fees will be paid by the city.

ITEM 9.2. ATTACHMENT 4

EXHIBIT B

COMPENSATION SCHEDULE
ITEM 9.2. ATTACHMENT 4

Project Manager
Project Engineer
Design EngineerI
Survey Manager II
Project Surveyor III
Survey Technician II 2‐Person Crew
(OE3)*
LAUD Division
Manager
LAUD Project
Manager
Landscape Architect
Landscape DesignerI
Sr. Project
Accountant
Sr. Project
Coordinator
Graphic Designer
LSA

INTERPRETIVE SIGN
ARTIST
$272 $194 $135 $280 $225 $140 $335 $292 $243 $182 $116 $179 $173 $161

1.0 PROJECT MANAGEMENT1.1 Project Administration / Coordination 24 4 8 36 $8,628 ‐ $8,628

1.2 Project Management and Control 24 4 8 36 $8,628 ‐ $8,628

1.3 Meeting Preparation and Attendance 80 80 $21,760 ‐ $21,760 Subtotal Phase 1 128 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 16 0 152 $39,016 $0 $0 $39,016

2.0 CONCEPTS & ALTERNATIVES2.1 Trail Alternative Development 4 16 80 100 $14,992 ‐ ‐                 $14,9922.2 (LAUD) Interpretive Signs and Trail Amenities 2 8 40 50 $9,808 ‐ 5,000 $14,808 Subtotal Phase 2 4 16 80 0 0 0 0 2 8 40 0 0 0 0 150 $24,800 $0 $5,000 $29,800

3.0 PUBLIC & STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT3.1 Stakeholder Meetings 8 12 24 6 50 $8,710 ‐ ‐                 $8,710

3.2 Community Meetings 8 12 24 14 58 $9,998 ‐ ‐                 $9,998

3.3 On‐Line Survey 8 12 8 12 40 $7,516 ‐ ‐                 $7,516 Subtotal Phase 3 24 36 56 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 32 148 $26,224 $0 $0 $26,224

4.0 ENGINEERING DESIGNS & ESTIMATES

4.1 Civil Engineering Design and Base Mapping 0 $0 ‐ ‐                 $0

4.1.1 (SURVEY) Topographic Base Mapping 2 8 44 34 88 $19,910 ‐ ‐                 $19,910

4.1.2 Civil Engineering Plans 32 80 284 396 $62,564 ‐ ‐                 $62,5644.2 (LAUD) Planting, Irrigation, and Trail Amenity Plans 4 16 64 200 284 $39,904 ‐ ‐                 $39,904 Subtotal Phase 4 32 80 284 2 8 44 34 4 16 64 200 0 0 0 768 $122,378 $0 $0 $122,378

5.0 ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW & PERMITTING

5.1 CEQA EIR Addendum 68 6 20 $3,994 27,790 ‐                 $31,784

5.2 Aquatic Resources Delineation Report 22 4 8 $1,472 22,910 ‐                 $24,382

5.3 Biological Resources Technical Report 44 4 12 $2,404 22,910 ‐                 $25,314

5.4 Cultural Resources Section 106 Report 46 8 18 $3,332 28,561 ‐                 $31,893

5.5 Cultural Resources Testing / Evaluation (NOT AUTHORIZED) 22 4 8 $1,472 105,000 ‐                 $106,472

5.6 CDFW 1602 Notification 40 0 4 $1,088 16,043 ‐                 $17,131

5.7 USACE Section 404 Permit Application 24 6 12 $2,130 10,640 ‐                 $12,770

5.8 RWQCB Section 401 Permit Application 11 1 3 $601 12,917 ‐                 $13,5185.9 USACE Section 408 Permit Application 6 8 26 40 $6,694 4,099 ‐                 $10,793

5.10 CVFPB Encroachment Permit Application 6 8 26 40 $6,694 4,099 ‐                 $10,793

5.11 Environmental Project Management 0 $0 16,053 ‐                 $16,053 Subtotal Phase 5 37 43 85 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 165 $29,881 $271,019 $0 $300,900

6.0 CONTINGENCY6.1 Contingency $55,426 ‐ ‐                 $55,426 Subtotal Phase 6 0 0 0000000000000 $55,426 $0 $0 $55,426 TOTAL HOURS 225 175 505 2 8 44 34 6 24 104 200 8 16 32 1383ANTICIPATED SALARY INCREASE $0 $0 $0 $0OTHER DIRECT COSTS $2,494 $4,262 $0 $6,756TOTAL COST $61,200 $33,950 $68,175 $560 $1,800 $6,160 $11,390 $1,752 $5,832 $18,928 $23,200 $1,432 $2,768 $5,152 $300,219 $275,281 $5,000 $580,500 COST PROPOSAL FOR PROJECT SCOPE: Rancho Cordova ‐ Rossmoor Bar Trail Enhancements

TOTAL COST
Subconsultants
Total
Hours
Total MT
Cost
Please note that the rates shown are for estimating purposes only. See rate schedule for actual rates/ranges. 12/19/2023 ITEM 9.2. ATTACHMENT
4

MEMORANDUM
City Council Staff Report - Page 1 of 2

ITEM 9.3.

DATE: January 16, 2024
TO: Honorable Mayor and Council Members
FROM: Albert Stricker, Public Works Director
Quoc Nham, Senior Civil Engineer
SUBJECT: A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO APPROVE THE FINAL MAP OF THE RANCH VILLAGE 1, SUBDIVISION NO. FM2021-002-14 AND EXECUTE SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT CONTRACT NO. 2023-255 WITH K. HOVNANIAN AT

JAEGER RANCH, LLC

RECOMMENDATION
Adopt the Resolution.

RESULT OF RECOMMENDED ACTION
Adoption of the Resolution would result in the City entering into Subdivision Improvement Agreement Contract No. 2023-255 (Attachment 2) with K. Hovnanian at Jaeger Ranch, LLC., guaranteeing the construction of public roads and utilities and the recording of the final subdivision map of The Ranch Village 1 (Attachment 3) creating 86 residential lots, 1 protected drainage area, 1 open space buffer area, and 1 passive green area located north of Chrysanthy Boulevard and east of Rancho Cordova Parkway.

BACKGROUND
The map has been examined and checked for compliance with Title 22 of the City of Rancho Cordova Municipal Code and the California Subdivision Map Act. The City Council approved the Small Lot Tentative Map on January 6, 2020. A Development Agreement between the City and K. Hovnanian at Jaeger Ranch, LLC. was entered into on February 21, 2020, and recorded on May 1, 2020, in the Official Records of Sacramento County as Document No. 202005010617. A copy of the final map, Attachment 3, and copy of the vicinity map, Attachment 4, are included with this Staff Report.

Roads are offered for dedication with this subdivision. K. Hovnanian at Jaeger Ranch, LLC. has provided a performance and labor and material bond guaranteeing the construction of the public improvements. Wood Rodgers, Inc. has waived the requirement for a bond to guarantee payment for setting the survey monuments with the subdivision. The soil report requirement has been satisfied by Wallace-Kuhl and Associates dated September 26, 2019.

There are no delinquent taxes against the property and the Tax Collector has so certified. The 2022/2023 estimated taxes have been secured with the Sacramento County Tax Collector.

City Council Staff Report - Page 2 of 2

FISCAL IMPACT AND FUNDING SOURCE
There is no fiscal impact to the City.

ATTACHMENT(S)

1. Resolution

2. Contract 2023-255 The Ranch

3. Final Map for The Ranch

4. Vicinity Map The Ranch

ITEM 9.3. ATTACHMENT 1
Resolution No. XX-2024 Page 1 of 1

CITY OF RANCHO CORDOVA
RESOLUTION NO. XX-2024

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CORDOVA, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, APPROVING THE FINAL MAP OF THE RANCH VILLAGE 1, SUBDIVISION NO. FM-2021-002-14 AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT NO. 2023-255 WITH K.

HOVNANIAN AT JAEGER RANCH, LLC
WHEREAS, the City Council approved the Small Lot Tentative Map on January 6, 2020, per Resolution No. 5-2020; and
WHEREAS, the Final Map is in substantial compliance with the approved Tentative Map; and
WHEREAS, the conditions of approval have been complied with; and WHEREAS, the Final Map complies with Title 22 of the City of Rancho Cordova Municipal Code and the California Subdivision Map Act; and
WHEREAS, the approval of Final Map is exempt from review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to CEQA Regulation Section 15268(b)(3) as a ministerial approval; and
WHEREAS, the City desires to enter into a subdivision improvement agreement with the developer to ensure necessary public improvements are completed and secured with a bond.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CORDOVA does approve the Final Map of The Ranch Village 1 Subdivision No.

FM-2021-002-14 and does authorize the City Manager to execute Subdivision Improvement Agreement No. 2023-255 with K. Hovnanian at Jaeger Ranch, LLC., in a form approved by the City Attorney.

PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cordova on the 16th day of January 2024 by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

ATTEST:

David Sander, Mayor
Stacy Leitner, CMC
City Clerk

ITEM 9.3. ATTACHMENT 2

ITEM 9.3. ATTACHMENT 2

ITEM 9.3. ATTACHMENT 2

ITEM 9.3. ATTACHMENT 2

ITEM 9.3. ATTACHMENT 2

ITEM 9.3. ATTACHMENT 2

ITEM 9.3. ATTACHMENT 3

ITEM 9.3. ATTACHMENT 3

ITEM 9.3. ATTACHMENT 3

ITEM 9.3. ATTACHMENT 3

ITEM 9.3. ATTACHMENT 3

ITEM 9.3. ATTACHMENT 3

ITEM 9.3. ATTACHMENT 3

WHEAT RIDGE DR

PAWCATUCK WAY

PALEO WAY

ALAMOSA DR

COAL CREEK WAY

PASSERINE CT

RALLIDAE CT

WHEAT RIDGE DR

ALAMOSA DR

VICINITY MAP OF
THE RANCH VILLAGE 1
SUBDIVISION NO. FM-2021-002-14
¯
0 125 250
Feet
Aerial Photo Date: March 2022

DOUGLAS RD RANCHO CORDOVA PKWY

LOCATION MAP
Path: X:\GIS_Staff\PROJECTS\PUBLIC_WORKS\DEVELOPMENT\SUBDIVISIONS\THE_RANCH_VILLAGE_1\THE_RANCH_VILLAGE_1.mxd | Date: 12/18/2023 DETAIL
AREA
ITEM 9.3. ATTACHMENT 4

MEMORANDUM
City Council Staff Report - Page 1 of 2

ITEM 9.4.

DATE: January 16, 2024
TO: Honorable Mayor and Council Members
FROM: Albert Stricker, Public Works Director
Edgar Medina, Principal Engineer
SUBJECT: A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE CONTRACT AMENDMENT NO. 2021-299-03 TO INCREASE THE
CONTRACT AMOUNT BY $30,928.00 TO AN AMOUNT NOT TO
EXCEED $395,178.00 WITH WOOD RODGERS INC. FOR THE

ENGINEERING DESIGN AND RIGHT OF WAY ACQUISITION
SUPPORT SERVICES FOR THE WHITE ROCK ROAD PHASE 3 -

MACAL DRIVE TO CITY LIMITS PROJECT

RECOMMENDATION
Adopt the Resolution.

RESULT OF RECOMMENDED ACTION
Adoption of the Resolution would authorize the City Manager to execute an engineering services contract with Wood Rodgers, Inc. in the amount of $395,178.00 for engineering design and right of way support services for the final phase of the White Rock Road Phase 3 - Macal Drive to City Limits Project, CP22-2228.

BACKGROUND
White Rock Road from Macal Drive to the City limits is currently an undivided two-lane road with narrow shoulders, no bicycle facilities, and poor pavement condition with vertical and horizontal alignment challenges. At full build-out, White Rock Road will include six lanes with class II bicycle lanes, sidewalks, and landscaped median and frontage. In the interim, the road will be four lanes with bike lanes, a landscaped median, storm water facilities, and traffic signals.

This project will facilitate housing development along White Rock Road within the approved Rio del Oro Specific Plan and Westborough Specific Plan. The project will increase safety and beauty of the corridor, promote economic development by improving access between 70,000 existing jobs in Rancho Cordova and 24,000 new jobs from adjacent developments, and provide an alternate route to U.S. 50 that relieves regional congestion.

The road segment of White Rock from Fitzgerald Road to 0.5 mile east of Rancho Cordova Parkway was completed in 2022. This phase of White Rock Road will continue the four lane road section from Macal Drive to the City’s easterly limits (Attachment 2 - Project Limits).

City Council Staff Report - Page 2 of 2

To date, the City has received environmental approvals, successfully secured $9.5 million in state and federal grants, and is aggressively pursuing additional funding. Wood Rodgers, Inc. performed preliminary engineering on the project for the entire corridor and, therefore, has been selected to complete the final design which will maximize efficiency and minimize re-work.

The proposed amendment to design Contract No. 2021-299-03 will complete the full design of the four-lane road segment in preparation for securing additional state or federal funding for construction. This final segment of White Rock has an estimated project cost of $12.5 million, which is offset by the $9.5 million in grants that have been awarded to the project.

The preliminary schedule for completion of final design and acquisitions is the end of 2024 with an anticipated construction start in 2025.

FISCAL IMPACT AND FUNDING SOURCE
Funding for White Rock Road Phase 3 - Macal Drive to City Limits consists of $5,500,000 in SACOG Regional Grant, $4,000,000 Congressional Direct Spending Funds, and in Traffic Mitigation Impact Fees. There are no impacts to the City's General Fund.

This project is included in the City’s current approved Capital Improvement Plan and in the 2023/24 budget.

ATTACHMENT(S)

1. Resolution

2. Project Limits

3. Contract Amendment No. 2021-299-03

ITEM 9.4. ATTACHMENT 1
Resolution No. XX-2024 Page 1 of 2

CITY OF RANCHO CORDOVA
RESOLUTION NO. XX-2024

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CORDOVA, STATE

OF CALIFORNIA, AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE CONTRACT AMENDMENT NO. 2021-299-03 TO INCREASE THE CONTRACT AMOUNT AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $395.178 WITH WOOD RODGERS, INC. FOR THE ENGINEERING

DESIGN & RIGHT OF WAY ACQUISITIONS SUPPORT SERVICES FOR THE WHITE ROCK ROAD PHASE 3 - MACAL DRIVE TO CITY LIMITS
WHEREAS, on October 4, 2021, City Council approved Contract No. 2021-299 with Wood Rodgers, Inc. in the amount of $364,250.00 for engineering design and right of way acquisition support services for White Rock Road Phase 3 - Macal Drive to City Limits Project, CP22-2228; and
WHEREAS, on November 1, 2022, the City approved Administrative Amendment No. 2021-299-01 to reallocate available budget within the original contract amount to Task 5 - Grant Application Support; and
WHEREAS, on March 6, 2023, the City approved Administrative Amendment No. 2021- 299-02 to reallocate available budget within the original contract amount to Task 2 - Final Design; and
WHEREAS, the proposed Contract Amendment No. 2021-299-03 will increase the contract amount by $30,928.00 to an amount not to exceed $395,178.00 for final engineering design and right of way acquisition services; and
WHEREAS, this project was reviewed under the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act and National Environmental Policy Act and Initial Study with Mitigated Negative Declaration/Environmental Assessment with Finding of No Significant Impact and Section 4(f) Evaluation was approved in January 2016 and re-validated in September 2020; and WHEREAS, funding for the final phase of the White Rock Road Safety and Beautification Project currently consists of a $5,500,000 Sacramento Area Council of Governments (SACOG) Regional Grant, $4,000,000 Congressional Direct Spending Funds, Sacramento Water Agency Funds and Traffic Mitigation Impact Fees. The contract does not impact the general fund.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CORDOVA does authorize the City Manager to execute Contract No. 2021-299- 03 to Increase the Contract Amount by $30,928.00 to an amount not to exceed $395,178.00 with Wood Rodgers, Inc., in a form approved by the City Attorney.

PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cordova on the 16th day of January 2024 by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ITEM 9.4. ATTACHMENT 1
Resolution No. XX-2024 Page 2 of 2
ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

ATTEST:

David Sander, Mayor
Stacy Leitner, CMC
City Clerk

Attachment 2 – Project Limits
White Rock Road Project
Sunrise Blvd
Phase 1
WRR: Sunrise Blvd to
Fitzgerald Road
Construction Completed
December 2023
Phase 2
WRR: Fitzgerald Road to 0.5 Mile East of
Rancho Cordova Parkway
Construction Completed
December 2022
Phase 3
White Rock Road – Macal Drive to Easterly City
Limits
Design Completion - Fall 2024
ITEM 9.4. ATTACHMENT 2

CONTRACT NO. 2021-299-03
Third Amendment to Professional Services Agreement between Page 1 of 4 City of Rancho Cordova and Wood Rodgers, Inc.

THIRD AMENDMENT TO THE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT
BETWEEN THE CITY OF RANCHO CORDOVA AND WOOD RODGERS, INC. FOR

ENGINEERING DESIGN AND RIGHT OF WAY ACQUISITION SERVICES FOR THE WHITE ROCK ROAD PHASE 3 – MACAL DRIVE TO CITY LIMITS PROJECT, CP22-2228 This Third Amendment to the Agreement for Professional Services (“Amendment”) is made by and between the City of Rancho Cordova (“City”) and Wood Rodgers Inc. (“Professional”) as of January 16, 2024. City and Professional are hereinafter collectively referred to as the "Parties."

RECITALS
WHEREAS, the Parties entered into a Professional Services Agreement (“PSA”) dated October 4, 2021 for the purpose of providing engineering design and right of way acquisition services for Phase 2 of the White Rock Road Safety and Beautification Project; and WHEREAS, on November 1, 2022, the City approved administrative amendment 2021-299- 01 to reallocate available budget within the original contract amount to Task 5 - Grant Application Support; and
WHEREAS, on March 6, 2023, the City approved administrative amendment 2021-299-02 to reallocate available budget within the original contract amount to Task 2 - Final Design; and WHEREAS, contract amendment 2021-299-03 will increase the contract amount by $30,928.00 to an amount not to Exceed $395,178.00 for Design and Right of Way Services; and WHEREAS, the Parties agree that changes to the term and services provided for in the PSA are necessary in order for the City to continue receiving services by Professional.

NOW, THEREFORE, the Parties hereto agree as follows:

AGREEMENT

1. The Parties agree to modify the document entitled “Scope of Services,” attached hereto as Exhibit A, shall replace and supersede the PSA's Exhibit A.

2. The Parties agree to modify the document entitled “Fee Proposal,” attached hereto as Exhibit B, shall replace and supersede the PSA's Exhibit B.

3. All other terms and conditions in the PSA shall remain in full force and effect to the extent they are not in conflict with this Amendment.

4. The signatures of the Parties to this Amendment may be executed and acknowledged on separate pages or in counterparts which, when attached to this Amendment, shall constitute one complete Amendment.

5. Contract Administration. This Agreement shall be administered by Mr. Edgar Medina, P.E. ("Contract Administrator"). All correspondence shall be directed to or through the Contract Administrator or his or her designee.

ITEM 9.4. ATTACHMENT 3

CONTRACT NO. 2021-299-03
Third Amendment to Professional Services Agreement between Page 2 of 4 City of Rancho Cordova and Wood Rodgers, Inc.

Notices. Any written notice to Professional shall be sent to:

Wood Rodgers, Inc.

Attention: Mark Rayback, P.E. President, Project Manager Email Address (for Insurance Update Requests):
[email protected]
Any written notice to City shall be sent to:

City of Rancho Cordova, Dept. of Public Works
Attention: Edgar Medina, P.E.
2729 Prospect Park Drive
Rancho Cordova, Ca. 95670
[email protected]
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have executed this Amendment on the day and year first above written.

CITY OF RANCHO CORDOVA WOOD RODGERS, INC.

PROFESSIONAL
____________________________ ______________________________ Micah Runner, City Manager Mark Rayback, President
Date:__________________ Date:__________________
Attest:
____________________________
Stacy Leitner, CMC, City Clerk
Date:__________________
Approved as to Form:
____________________________
Adam U. Lindgren, City Attorney
Date:__________________
ITEM 9.4. ATTACHMENT 3

CONTRACT NO. 2021-299-03
Third Amendment to Professional Services Agreement between Page 3 of 4 City of Rancho Cordova and Wood Rodgers, Inc.

EXHIBIT A

SCOPE OF SERVICES
ITEM 9.4. ATTACHMENT 3

CONTRACT NO. 2021-299-03
Third Amendment to Professional Services Agreement between Page 4 of 4 City of Rancho Cordova and Wood Rodgers, Inc.

EXHIBIT B

FEE PROPOSAL
ITEM 9.4. ATTACHMENT 3

MEMORANDUM
City Council Staff Report - Page 1 of 2

ITEM 9.5.

DATE: January 16, 2024
TO: Honorable Mayor and Council Members
FROM: Albert Stricker, Public Works Director
Edgar Medina, Principal Engineer
SUBJECT: A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE CONTRACT AMENDMENT NO. 2021-336-02 TO INCREASE THE
CONTRACT AMOUNT BY $29,970.39 TO AN AMOUNT NOT TO
EXCEED $109,862.75 WITH DEWBERRY ENGINEERS INC. FOR

DESIGN SERVICES FOR THE MATHER FIELD ROAD

ENHANCEMENTS PROJECT

RECOMMENDATION
Adopt the Resolution.

RESULT OF RECOMMENDED ACTION
Adoption of the Resolution would authorize the City Manager to execute Contract Amendment No. 2021-336-02 to increase the Contract amount by $29,970.39 to an amount not to exceed $109,862.75 with Dewberry Engineers Inc. for Design Services for the Mather Field Road Enhancements Project.

BACKGROUND
The City has identified Mather Field Road as a key entry point and corridor for the City and over the past several years has invested heavily in upgrading the roadway infrastructure to current standards. The City is completing the current phase of construction that rehabilitated Mather Field Road from Folsom Boulevard to International Drive.

In 2022 and in alignment with the rehabilitation project, City Council approved Community Enhancement and Investment Funds and American Rescue Plan Act funds to design and construct the Mather Field Road Enhancement Project. This project is intended to improve the aesthetic on certain elements within the corridor that were not part of the rehabilitation project.

The enhancement project includes converting the California Department of Transportation's (Caltrans) fence to a concrete sound wall on the north side of U.S. 50, upgrade the landscaping and hardscaping near the westbound offramp lanes, upgrade the aesthetic wall treatment along the east side of Mather Field, and replace the pedestrian fencing along the overpass structure over U.S. 50.

The City utilized its professional services on-call list and selected Dewberrry Engineers, Inc. to

City Council Staff Report - Page 2 of 2

assist in developing the project design and associated coordination with Caltrans. The proposed contract amendment is a result of the extensive coordination with Caltrans regarding the bridge structure attachments. Contract Amendment No. 2021-336-02 will allow staff to complete the final design of the enhancements and finalize Caltrans approvals, in preparation for construction.

The preliminary schedule for completion of final design and approvals is Spring 2024 with an anticipated construction start in Summer/Fall 2024.

FISCAL IMPACT AND FUNDING SOURCE
Funding for Mather Field Road Enhancements Projects consists of Community Enhancement & Investment Funds, American Rescue Plan Act Funds and Infrastructure Replacement Funds.

There is no impact to the City's General Fund.

This project is included in the City’s current approved Capital Improvement Plan and in the 2023/24 budget.

ATTACHMENT(S)

1. Resolution

2. Contract Amendment No. 2021-336-02

ITEM 9.5. ATTACHMENT 1
Resolution No. XX-2024 Page 1 of 2

CITY OF RANCHO CORDOVA
RESOLUTION NO. XX-2024

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CORDOVA,

STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE CONTRACT AMENDMENT NO. 2021-336-02 TO INCREASE THE CONTRACT AMOUNT BY $29,970.39 TO AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $109,862.75 WITH DEWBERRY ENGINEERS, INC. FOR ENGINEERING DESIGN SERVICES FOR THE MATHER FIELD ROAD ENHANCEMENTS PROJECT, CP22-2233
WHEREAS, the Public Works Department employs the assistance of qualified consultants for engineering design services in order to provide flexibility to adapt to the variable Capital Improvement Program demands; and
WHEREAS, on December 2, 2021, the City approved Contract No. 2021-336 with Dewberry Engineers, Inc. in the amount of $79,892.36 for engineering design services for Mather Field Road Enhancements Project, CP22-2233; and
WHEREAS, on December 1, 2023, the City approved Contract Amendment No. 2021- 336-01 with Dewberry Engineers, Inc. to extend the contract term to June 30, 2025; and WHEREAS, the proposed contract amendment will increase the contract amount by $29,970.39 to an amount not to exceed $109,862.75 for engineering design services for the project; and
WHEREAS, funding for the Mather Field Road Enhancements Project consists of Community Enhancement & Investment Funds, American Rescue Plan Act Funds, and Infrastructure Replacement Funds. There is no impact to the City's General Fund.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CORDOVA does authorize the City Manager to execute Contract mendment No. 2021-336-02 to increase the contract amount by $29,970.39 to an amount not to exceed $109,862.75 with Dewberry Engineers, Inc. for engineering design services for the Mather Field Road Enhancements Project, CP22-2233, and in a form approved by the City Attorney.

PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cordova on the 16th day of January 2024 by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

ITEM 9.5. ATTACHMENT 1
Resolution No. XX-2024 Page 2 of 2
ATTEST:

David Sander, Mayor
Stacy Leitner, CMC
City Clerk

CONTRACT NO. 2021-336-02
Second Amendment to Professional Services Agreement between Page 1 of 4 City of Rancho Cordova and Wood Rodgers, Inc.

SECOND AMENDMENT TO THE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF RANCHO CORDOVA AND DEWBERRY ENGINEERS, INC. FOR ENGINEERING DESIGN FOR THE MATHER FIELD ROAD ENHANCEMENTS PROJECT, CP22-2233 This Second Amendment to the Agreement for Professional Services (“Amendment”) is made by and between the City of Rancho Cordova (“City” or “LOCAL AGENCY”) and Dewberry Engineers, Inc. a California Corporation (“Professional” or “CONSULTANT”) as of January 16, 2024. City and Professional are hereinafter collectively referred to as the "Parties."

RECITALS
WHEREAS, the Parties entered into a Professional Services Agreement (“PSA”) dated January 24, 2022, for the purpose of providing engineering design services; and WHEREAS, on December 01, 2023, City approved administrative amendment 2021-336-01 that amended Section 1.1 Performance Period, extending the term of this agreement from June 30, 2023, to June 30, 2025: and
WHEREAS, this Amendment 2021-336-02 will amend Section 2 “Compensation” to Increase the contract amount by $29,970.39 to an amount not to exceed $109,862.75: and WHEREAS, the Parties agree that changes to the term and services provided for in the PSA are necessary in order for the City to continue receiving services by Professional.

NOW, THEREFORE, the Parties hereto agree as follows:

AGREEMENT

1. The Parties agree to amend Section 2 “COMPENSATION” of the PSA to Increase the contract amount by $29,970.39. The first sentence of Section 2. COMPENSATION of the PSA is amended to read as follows:
“City hereby agrees to pay Professional a sum not to exceed One Hundred Nine Thousand Eight Hundred Sixty Two Dollars and Seventy Five Cents ($109,862.75), notwithstanding any contrary indications that may be contained in Professional’s cost proposal dated November 14, 2023, for services to be performed and reimbursable costs incurred under this Agreement.

2. All other terms and conditions in the PSA shall remain in full force and effect to the extent they are not in conflict with this Amendment.

3. The signatures of the Parties to this Amendment may be executed and acknowledged on separate pages or in counterparts which, when attached to this Amendment, shall constitute one complete Amendment.

4. Contract Administration. This Agreement shall be administered by Mr. Edgar Medina, P.E. ("Contract Administrator"). All correspondence shall be directed to or through the Contract Administrator or his or her designee.

Notices. Any written notice to Professional shall be sent to:

ITEM 9.5. ATTACHMENT 2

CONTRACT NO. 2021-336-02
Second Amendment to Professional Services Agreement between Page 2 of 4 City of Rancho Cordova and Wood Rodgers, Inc.

Dewberry Engineers, Inc.

Attention: Matt Satow, P.E. Vice President
11060 White Rock Road, Ste 200
Rancho Cordova, Ca. 95670
[email protected]
Any written notice to City shall be sent to:

Mr. Edgar Medina, P.E.

City of Rancho Cordova
2729 Prospect Park Drive
Rancho Cordova, CA 95670
[email protected]
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have executed this Amendment on the day and year first above written.

CITY OF RANCHO CORDOVA PROFESSIONAL
____________________________ ______________________________ Micah Runner, City Manager Dennis Haglan, President
Date:__________________ Date:__________________
Attest:
____________________________
Stacy Leitner, City Clerk
Date:__________________
Approved as to Form:
____________________________
Adam Lindgren, City Attorney
Date: __________________
ITEM 9.5. ATTACHMENT 2

CONTRACT NO. 2021-336-02
Second Amendment to Professional Services Agreement between Page 3 of 4 City of Rancho Cordova and Wood Rodgers, Inc.

EXHIBIT A

FEE PROPOSAL
ITEM 9.5. ATTACHMENT 2

CONTRACT NO. 2021-336-02
Second Amendment to Professional Services Agreement between Page 4 of 4 City of Rancho Cordova and Wood Rodgers, Inc.

ITEM 9.5. ATTACHMENT 2

City Council Staff Report – Page 1 of 1

MEMORANDUM
ITEM 11.1.

DATE: January 16, 2024
TO: Honorable Mayor and Council Members
FROM: Arlene Granadosin-Jones, AICP, Senior Planner
SUBJECT: MINE SHAFT DIGITAL BILLBOARD SIGNS - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT,

MINOR DESIGN REVIEW, AND OPERATING AGREEMENT (MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION PREPARED PURSUANT TO ARTICLE 6 OF THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT) - PROJECT PLND-0822- 0047 - 2300 MINE SHAFT LANE; APN: 072-0231-014-0000
____________________________________________________________________________ PROPERTY OWNER:

Cordova Community Council Foundation
2729 Prospect Park Drive, Suite 117
Rancho Cordova, CA 95670
APPLICANT:

RSC Engineering, Inc.
1420 Rocky Ridge Drive, Suite 150
Roseville, CA 95661
PROJECT: The Applicant, Cordova Community Council, is seeking approval of a Conditional Use Permit, Minor Design Review, and Operating Agreement for two digital billboard signs along US Highway 50. Each sign has two sign area displays, each measuring 1,200 square feet. The digital signs are approximately 2,708 feet from each other. The east sign height is 60 feet, and the west sign height is 70 feet. The Applicant will enter into an Operating Agreement with the City to govern the operation of the digital signs.

FILE: PLND-0822-0047
LOCATION: 2300 Mine Shaft Lane
APN: 072-0231-014-000
PLANNER: Arlene Granadosin-Jones, AICP, Senior Planner

RECOMMENDATION
Continue the proposed project to the February 5, 2024, City Council Meeting.

MEMORANDUM
City Council Staff Report - Page 1 of 2

ITEM 11.2.

DATE: January 16, 2024
TO: Honorable Mayor and Council Members
FROM: Albert Stricker, Public Works Director
Dalia Fadl, Principal Engineer
SUBJECT: A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE CITY OF RANCHO CORDOVA'S ADJUSTED STORM DRAINAGE IMPACT FEE SCHEDULE FOR 2024,

WHICH IS PAID BY DEVELOPERS TO MITIGATE FOR THEIR
PROJECT IMPACTS ON THE CITY’S DRAINAGE SYSTEM

RECOMMENDATION
Adopt the Resolution.

RESULT OF RECOMMENDED ACTION
Adoption of the Resolution would approve the 2024 Storm Drainage Impact Fee Schedule.

BACKGROUND
The City's Storm Drainage Impact Fee Program was established in 2020 through the City Council's adoption of Rancho Cordova Municipal Code (RCMC) Chapter 16.95. The City started collecting fees under this program in March 2021. The fees collected as part of the Storm Drainage Impact Fee Program facilitate new development through construction of major drainage infrastructure that provides regional benefits, while mitigating development impacts of the City’s drainage system. The fees are paid by developers and collected at the project approval phase.

On an annual basis, the impact fees are adjusted to account for inflation based on the Engineering News - Record (ENR) index. This year the adjustment is 2.31%. In addition, credits and reimbursements are adjusted annually pursuant to RCMC 16.95.110 and 16.95.120.

The 2024 Storm Drainage Impact Fee schedule (Attachment 2) includes a table showing the proposed fees that will take effect immediately upon approval of the Resolution.

FISCAL IMPACT AND FUNDING SOURCE
The proposed Resolution would have no impact on the City's General Fund. Funds collected pursuant to the Storm Drainage Impact Fee Program will be used for City storm drain improvements.

ATTACHMENT(S)

1. Resolution

City Council Staff Report - Page 2 of 2

2. Exhibit A to the Resolution - 2024 Drainage Impact Fees

3. Presentation

ITEM 11.2. ATTACHMENT 1
Resolution No. XX-2024 Page 1 of 1

CITY OF RANCHO CORDOVA
RESOLUTION NO. XX-2024

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CORDOVA, STATE

OF CALIFORNIA, APPROVING THE ADJUSTED STORM DRAINAGE IMPACT FEE SCHEDULE FOR 2024
WHEREAS, the City separated from Sacramento County's Zone 11 drainage fee program and created a Storm Drainage Impact Fee Program in 2020; and WHEREAS, City Council adopted Municipal Code Chapter 16.95 establishing the City's Storm Drainage Impact Fee Program in October 2020; and

WHEREAS, the City started implementing the new Storm Drainage Impact Fee Program in March 2021; and
WHEREAS, annually in January, the City will update the drainage impact fee schedule to account for inflation based on the Engineering News-Record Index, and this year the increase is

2.30%; and

WHEREAS, the adjusted 2024 Storm Drainage Impact Fee Schedule is included in Exhibit A.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CORDOVA adopts the 2024 Storm Drainage Impact Fee Schedule.

PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cordova on the 16th day of January 2024 by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

ATTEST:

David Sander, Mayor
Stacy Leitner, CMC
City Clerk

Land Use
Percent
Impervious
Construction
Cost/Acre
Administrative
Cost/Acre
Total
Fee/Acre
Commercial/Office/Retail1 70% $ 25,195.90 $ 1,008.40 $ 26,204 Industrial 70% $ 25,195.90 $ 1,008.40 $ 26,204
High Density Residential
RMH 75% $ 26,997.45 $ 1,080.50 $ 28,078
RD-302 70% $ 25,195.90 $ 1,008.40 $ 26,204
RD-25 70% $ 25,195.90 $ 1,008.40 $ 26,204
RD-20 70% $ 25,195.90 $ 1,008.40 $ 26,204
Medium Density Residential
RD-15 70% $ 25,195.90 $ 1,008.40 $ 26,204
RD-10 60% $ 21,597.10 $ 864.19 $ 22,461
RD-7 50% $ 17,997.23 $ 719.98 $ 18,717
RD-6 40% $ 14,398.43 $ 575.76 $ 14,974
Low Density Residential
RD-5 40% $ 14,398.43 $ 575.76 $ 14,974
RD-4 38% $ 13,678.45 $ 546.71 $ 14,225
RD-3 33% $ 11,699.33 $ 467.07 $ 12,166
RD-2 28% $ 9,898.85 $ 394.96 $ 10,294
RD-1 25% $ 8,999.15 $ 360.53 $ 9,360
AR-1 17% $ 6,119.25 $ 244.30 $ 6,364
AR-2 10% $ 3,598.80 $ 144.21 $ 3,743
AR-5 10% $ 3,598.80 $ 144.21 $ 3,743
AR-10 10% $ 3,598.80 $ 144.21 $ 3,743
Mowed grass with graded and piped to drain 20% $ 7,198.68 $ 288.42 $ 7,487 Mowed grass with no piped drainage 10% $ 3,598.80 $ 144.21 $ 3,743 Impervious Area Park2 75% $ 26,997.45 $ 1,080.50 $ 28,078 School Campus with detention 25% $ 8,999.15 $ 360.53 $ 9,360 School Campus 50% $ 17,997.23 $ 719.98 $ 18,717
1 2 A school or park that detains greater than 50% of peak flow value, at the discreation of the City, may reduce the fee by 50%.

NOTICE OF UPDATED FEE 1-1-2024
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Storm Drainage Impact Fees will automatically be adjusted in January by averaging the percentage change in the 20-City and San Francisco Construction Cost Index (CCI) as reported by Engineering New Record (ENR) for the twelve-month period ending in October of the prior year.

Storm Drainage Impact Fees
Impervious area for Commercial and Industrial reduced to reflect the use of Low Impact Development (LID) practices, meeting HMP requirements and increased landscaping standards. Actual fees may vary if LID not utilized P:\Finance\Fees\Development Impact Fees\Fees and Fee Updates\Annual Developer Fee Adjustments\January 1 Fee Increases\Drainage Impact Fee\2024 Draingage Impact Fees ITEM 11.2. ATTACHMENT 2 Exhibit A to the Resolution

DRAINAGE IMPACT FEES PAID BY DEVELOPMENT
2024 UPDATE
January 16, 2024
ITEM 11.2. ATTACHMENT 3

Background
■ The program transitioned from the
County to the City in 2020, City started
collecting fees in March 2021.
■ The Drainage Impact Fee Program
requires developers to pay a fee to
mitigate for their project impacts to the
City’s drainage system.
■ The program funds are used to fund
installation of new regional storm drain
facilities and the enhancement of
existing facilities to mitigate
development impacts and facilitate
future development.

ITEM 11.2. ATTACHMENT 3

Fee Implementation
■ The fees shall be paid at the issuance of a building permit or approval of the improvement plans by the City, whichever occurs first.
■ The fees shall be based on the fee schedule in effect at the time of payment. The fee is based on the proposed land
use and expected hardscape area.
■ In January of each calendar year, the fees are adjusted using the average of the percentage change in the 20-City and the San Francisco Construction Cost Index as reported by Engineering News Record.
■ Tonight's action will approve the fee table for 2024.

ITEM 11.2. ATTACHMENT 3

MEMORANDUM
City Council Staff Report - Page 1 of 2

ITEM 12.1.

DATE: January 16, 2024
TO: Honorable Mayor and Council Members
FROM: Albert Stricker, Public Works Director
Quoc Nham, Senior Civil Engineer
SUBJECT: PRESENTATION ON THE PROPOSED RENAMING OF POOPENAUT

COURT IN THE SUNRIDGE PARK COMMUNITY

RECOMMENDATION
Receive direction from City Council on the preferred street name.

RESULT OF RECOMMENDED ACTION
If so directed by City Council, staff will proceed with posting the Council-selected street name at the site for a minimum ten-day period, followed by a public hearing to formally change the name, and installation of a new street name sign.

BACKGROUND
Poopenaut Court was developed as part of the Sunridge Park Phase II Subdivision, recorded March 7th, 2006, in Book 348 of Maps, at Page 1. Many of the streets within this subdivision follow a nature inspired theme, influenced by various natural features, trails, and lakes.

Poopenaut is the name of a valley and trail head in Yosemite National Park. Poopenaut Court is a public and non-residential road currently providing access to a SMUD substation facility, an adjacent City stormwater detention basin, and a future Juniper Creek Battery Storage Facility.

City Council requested that staff evaluate options for a street name change for Poopenaut Court.

Street names must be unique within Sacramento County to avoid confusion for emergency services and the general public. Staff identified the following unique names in the Sierra Nevada theme:
• Mono Pass Court
• Towering Rock Court
• Preston Falls Court
• Artist Point Court
• Peoria Ridge Court
• Lava Bluff Court
The City polled the Sunridge Park community twice on their preferred names from the list. In November and December 2023 there were four responses to the poll with the top three

City Council Staff Report - Page 2 of 2

selected as:
• Towering Rock Court
• Artist Point Court
• Mono Pass Court
Staff is requesting direction from City Council on the preferred name. If so directed by City Council, next steps would include posting the proposed name at the site for a minimum of 10 days, holding a public hearing where Council would consider formally adopting a resolution to change the name, and the installation of the new street name sign.

FISCAL IMPACT AND FUNDING SOURCE
There is no fiscal impact to the City's General Fund.

ATTACHMENT(S)

1. Presentation

1 STREET NAME CHANGE
Poopenaut Court
CityOfRanchoCordova.org
ITEM 12.1. ATTACHMENT 1

2 • Background
• Select New Street Name
Presentation Goals
ITEM 12.1. ATTACHMENT 1

3 • Background
• Location of Poopenaut Court
• Street Name Change Process
• Sunridge Park Theme
• Review Street Name Options
• Community Outreach
• Recommendations
• Next Steps
Presentation Outline
ITEM 12.1. ATTACHMENT 1

4 • City Council directed staff to evaluate options to change the name of Poopenaut Court located east of Rancho Cordova
Parkway and South of Douglas Road within the Sunridge Park Community.
• “Poopenaut” is the name of a valley and trail head in Yosemite National Park.
• The street is public providing access to the SMUD Facility, an adjacent City drainage basin, and the approved future Juniper Creek Energy Storage Facility.

Background
ITEM 12.1. ATTACHMENT 1

5 Location Map
Douglas Road
Rancho Cordova Parkway
Sunridge Park
Community
Grant Line Road
City Stormwater Basin
SMUD
Future
Juniper
Creek
Energy
Storage
Americanos Blvd
ITEM 12.1. ATTACHMENT 1

6 • Guidelines include: City to ensure street names are not duplicates within the County and not more than 13 characters. • Provide County with a list of street names for review, approval, and hold for use.
• City to select street name and confirm agreement from service providers such as the County, Fire District, Police, SMUD, and the U.S. Post Office, and
• Provide notification to current occupants.

Street Name Change Process
ITEM 12.1. ATTACHMENT 1

7 • Notice of public hearing shall be posted along subject street 10 days prior to the hearing.
• City shall hold a public hearing for the new street name. • If accepted, City to notify in writing all affected property owners and service providers of the change.
• City to erect new street signs.

Street Name Change Process
ITEM 12.1. ATTACHMENT 1

8 • Poopenaut Court is part of the Sunridge Park community. • The street names for the community follow a nature inspired theme, influenced by various natural features, trails, lakes, etc. in California.
• To continue the same theme of the community, staff proposes alternative nature inspired street names approved by the County.

Sunridge Park Theme
ITEM 12.1. ATTACHMENT 1

9 • The new street names proposed and available for use as confirmed by the County are as follows:
• Mono Pass Court
• Towering Rock Court
• Preston Falls Court
• Artist Point Court
• Peoria Ridge Court
• Lava Bluff Court.

Street Name Options
ITEM 12.1. ATTACHMENT 1

10 • The Sunridge Park Community was notified twice of the proposed name change through neighborhood social media. o Notification included a poll with the list of proposed street names that was available for the month of November and
December 2023.
o 4 people responded to the poll
o With 2 respondents favoring Towering Rock Court, followed by Artist Point Court and Mono Pass Court for the other 2 respondents.

Community Outreach
ITEM 12.1. ATTACHMENT 1

11 • Public Notice for 10-days.
• Return to Council in early 2024 for a Consent Public Hearing. • If Approved, City Staff to install new street name signs Next Steps
Recommendation
• Provide direction to staff regarding Council preferred street name. o Names reserved with County are: Towering Rock Court, Artist Point Court, Mono Pass Court, Preston Falls Court, Peoria Ridge Court, Lava Bluff Court.
o Or other name preferred by Council
ITEM 12.1. ATTACHMENT 1

12 THANK YOU
CityOfRanchoCordova.org
ITEM 12.1. ATTACHMENT 1

MEMORANDUM
City Council Staff Report - Page 1 of 2

ITEM 12.2.

DATE: January 16, 2024
TO: Honorable Mayor and Council Members
FROM: Albert Stricker, Public Works Director
Kristine Courdy, Senior Civil Engineer
SUBJECT: PRESENTATION REGARDING THE CITYWIDE ROUNDABOUT

FEASIBILITY STUDY AND IMPLEMENTATION PLAN

RECOMMENDATION
Receive presentation and provide feedback on the Citywide Roundabout Feasibility Study and Implementation Plan.

RESULT OF RECOMMENDED ACTION
Staff would incorporate Council feedback and return with the final Citywide Roundabout Feasibility Study and Implementation Plan which would provide a roadmap for potential retrofitting of roundabouts at existing locations in the City and guidelines for including roundabouts in future developments.

BACKGROUND
The City of Rancho Cordova applied for and successfully received a Fiscal Year 2021-22 California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) Sustainable Transportation Planning Grant in the amount of $154,928.00 for the Citywide Roundabout Feasibility Study & Implementation Plan (Plan). The Plan explored options to include roundabouts to better serve the needs of the community and evaluated the feasibility of switching traffic signals and stop sign controlled intersections to roundabouts. The Plan created a prioritized roundabout implementation plan with conceptual designs of potential locations and created guidelines to evaluate roundabout locations in the future.

On June 6, 2022, the City Council awarded a professional services agreement to Kittelson & Associates, Inc. to prepare the Plan. To develop the Plan, Kittelson screened potential roundabout locations, studied the top location intersections, tested overlay design sketches, and gathered input from the community and stakeholders. The community feedback included three community meetings reaching 50 attendees and an online survey with 88 responses. One section of the Plan includes the Roundabout Guidelines (refer to Appendix E of the Plan) that will help guide the design of roundabouts in new developments throughout the City.

The next steps will be to finalize the Plan for Council approval and test the top five concepts against future traffic volumes, continue community engagement for top locations, seek grants

City Council Staff Report - Page 2 of 2

and funding to implement concepts, and use the Roundabout Guidelines to identify new roundabouts within future development.

FISCAL IMPACT AND FUNDING SOURCE
Funding for the Citywide Roundabout Feasibility Study and Implementation Plan consists of $154,928.00 from the Caltrans Sustainable Transportation Planning Grant Program and the required City match is funded from Gas Tax for the delivery of this project. The project has no impact on the City's General Fund.

This project is included in the City's current approved Capital Improvement Plan and is in the current budget.

ATTACHMENT(S)

1. Citywide Roundabout Feasibility Study & Implementation Plan

2. Presentation

DECEMBER 2023
RANCHO

CORDOVA

ROUNDABOUT

FEASIBILITY

STUDY REPORT

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT 1

CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION 6
About the Project  6
Why Roundabouts? 8
PLANNING CONTEXT 14
General Plan  14
Bicycle Master Plan  14
Local Road Safety Plan  14
Pedestrian Master Plan  15
Specific Plans  15
COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT 18
Project Website  18
Community Meetings  19
Technical Advisory Committee  21
LOCATION SCREENING 24
Priority Screening  25
Feasibility Screening 27
RESULTS 32
WHAT’S NEXT? 40
Next Steps for Existing Locations  40
Next Steps for Future Locations  40
Funding  41
Roundabout Guidelines  41
APPENDIX A: COMMUNITY & STAKEHOLDER
ENGAGEMENT MATERIALS 43
APPENDIX B: SCREENING MEMO 45
APPENDIX C: SCALED DESIGN DRAWINGS 47
APPENDIX D: FUNDING SOURCES 49
APPENDIX E: ROUNDABOUT GUIDELINES 55
Rancho Cordova Roundabout Feasibility Study Report 2

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT 1

FIGURES
TABLES
Figure 1. Planted Roundabout as Community Gateway (Citrus Heights, CA) 6 Figure 2. Roundabout Features 9
Figure 3. Comparing Conflict Points: Signalized or Stop-Controlled Intersection vs. Roundabout 10
Figure 4. Comparing Crash Types: Signalized or Stop-Controlled Intersection vs. Roundabout 11
Figure 5. Roundabout Project Website 18
Figure 6. Sample Survey Question 20
Figure 7. Priority Screening Weighted Factor Scoring 26 Figure 8. Sample Roundabout Footprint Sketch 27
Figure 9. Rancho Cordova Roundabout Priority Locations 28 Figure 10. Old Placerville Road and Rockingham Drive Concept Sketch 33 Figure 11. Old Placerville Road and Routier Drive Concept Sketch 34 Figure 12. Kilgore Road and Sun Center Drive Concept Sketch 35 Figure 13. Capital Center Drive and Data Drive Concept Sketch 36 Figure 14. Mather Field Road and Peter A McCuen Boulevard Concept Sketch 37 TABLE 1. Funding Source Summary, as of 2023 41
3 Rancho Cordova Roundabout Feasibility Study Report

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT 1

Rancho Cordova Roundabout Feasibility Study Report 4

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT 1

Introduction
5 Rancho Cordova Roundabout Feasibility Study Report

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT 1

Introduction
1 City of Rancho Cordova, “Growth by the Numbers,” https://www. cityofranchocordova.org/Home/Components/News/News/4586/19. 2 FHWA, “Roundabouts,” August 2023, https://highways.dot.gov/safety/ intersection-safety/intersection-types/roundabouts.

The City of Rancho Cordova got its start during the Gold Rush, when entrepreneurial spirits raced to extract wealth and opportunity from the landscape. Today, in its prime spot along the American River outside Sacramento, Rancho Cordova is once again a boom town. The city is one of the region’s largest employers and boasts a population that has grown by almost 50 percent in 20 years.1 The city’s recent growth in population has created the need to address local transportation safety, circulation, and congestion.

This report summarizes the results of the City of Rancho Cordova Roundabout Feasibility Study, a project funded through the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) Sustainable Transportation Planning Grant Program. The study considered roundabouts as a way to decrease city congestion, improve traffic safety, and reduce greenhouse gas emissions by identifying appropriate existing and future intersection locations for roundabouts. This document identifies the top existing locations for potential Rancho Cordova roundabout projects, offers concepts for those locations, and outlines guidance to help the City plan and implement roundabouts moving forward.

About the Project
Versatile in their size, shape, and design,
roundabouts offer numerous safety and operational
benefits. Their design forces low vehicle speeds,
reduces conflict points for all road users, and
promotes efficient traffic operations.2 Installing
roundabouts can reduce the number and severity of
crashes, reduce traffic congestion, and help create
a sense of place and function as a gateway into a
community (Figure 1). And, because they don’t
require electrical controllers or signal operations,
many roundabouts have reduced ongoing costs
compared to traffic signals. Roundabouts also
are resilient during natural disasters since the
intersections continue to function as designed when
the power goes out.

To take advantage of these safety and operational
benefits, the City of Rancho Cordova studied the
feasibility of building roundabouts at new and
existing intersections throughout the city. Using a
series of data points and community feedback, the
project team evaluated and prioritized potential
roundabout locations, created an implementation
plan—including conceptual designs at five potential
roundabout locations—and developed guidelines
to help the City plan for and prioritize future
roundabouts.

Figure 1. Planted Roundabout as Community
Gateway (Citrus Heights, CA)
Source: Google Earth, (38.684381, -121.296489)
Rancho Cordova Roundabout Feasibility Study Report 6

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT 1

4/ Prepare City roundabout guidelines.
3/ Gather input from the community and technical advisory committee and develop roundabout designs.
2/ Study top location intersections and
test overlay design sketches.

Project Goals
With this project, the City set out to achieve three goals:
/ Identify suitable existing locations for roundabouts. / Prepare planning and design guidelines for future roundabouts. / Develop a forward-looking roundabout priority plan for the City of Rancho Cordova.

Throughout this project, the City relied on public and stakeholder feedback to help shape and refine the study.

Project Process
1 2
3 1/ Screen potential roundabout locations
using existing city data.
7 Rancho Cordova Roundabout Feasibility Study Report

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT 1

/ Safer Intersections
Roundabouts can effectively decrease
the frequency and severity of crashes by
reducing the number of conflict points for
drivers, pedestrians, and bicyclists and by
reducing vehicle speeds (see Figure 3).
/ More Resilient Infrastructure
Because roundabouts typically don’t have
signals requiring power, they continue
to function even when the power goes
out, such as during an earthquake,
wildfire, or other emergency.
/ Lower Life Cycle Costs
Roundabouts don’t need electrical controllers,
signal maintenance, or retiming, and they have
a longer service life than traffic signals. As a
result, roundabouts can reduce municipality
maintenance costs compared to a signal.3
3 Niederhauser, M., B. Collins, and E. Myers. “The Use of Roundabouts: Comparison with Alternate Design Solution.” Presented at the 67th Annual Meeting of the Institute of Transportation Engineers, Washington, DC, 1997. 4 National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP), NCHRP Research Report 1043: Guide for Roundabouts (2023), Section 2.4.2, https://nap.nationalacademies.org/catalog/27069/guide-forroundabouts and Salamati, K., N. Rouphail, C. Frey, B. Schroeder, and L. Rodegerdts. Assessment of the Environmental Characteristics of Roundabouts. Vol. III of VII, Accelerating Roundabout Implementation in the United States, publication FHWA-SA-15-071, FHWA, US Department of Transportation, 2015. / More Attractive Streets
Roundabout central islands provide
natural locations for landscape and art,
which can enhance street aesthetics and
help visually indicate that roadway users
are entering a distinct community.
/ Access Management
Roundabouts can naturally provide U-turn
movements but without the delay of vehicles
waiting to make a tight U-turn. This allows
the installation of raised medians that
restrict left turn movements across traffic,
which can help make the street safer.
/ Less Congestion and
Reduced Emissions
When operating within their capacity,
roundabouts typically result in lower travel
time delays and reduced emissions compared
to other intersection control types.4 Drivers
yield to circulating traffic and take turns rather
than waiting for a programmed green signal.

This benefit is especially helpful when traffic
volume is low outside the peak periods.

Why Roundabouts?
Roundabouts are a type of circular intersection where vehicles move counterclockwise around a central island. Drivers entering the roundabout yield and wait for a gap to appear before merging into circulating traffic. This design feature means that no one movement has priority or more dedicated time over the other movements.

Roundabouts have proven safety and operational benefits:

Rancho Cordova Roundabout Feasibility Study Report 8

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT 1

3 4
2 9
7 8
6 5
1 Roundabout Features
Not all circular intersections are roundabouts: roundabouts require drivers to yield on entry. Figure 2 illustrates common features of roundabouts in the United States.

Figure 2. Roundabout Features
Source: Adapted from NCHRP Research Report 1043, Exhibit 2.1 3 2
4 9
7 8
6 5
1 Sidewalk/multiuse path
ADA accessible pedestrian crossings
Splitter island with accessible
pedestrian refuge
Central island
Circulatory roadway
Truck apron
Yield at entry
Buffer/landscape strip
Bicycle ramp
9 Rancho Cordova Roundabout Feasibility Study Report

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT 1

Speed Management
A roundabout’s circular design creates deflection, which naturally reduces vehicle speeds.

Vehicle speed is a critical component of intersection safety because the speed at which a crash occurs greatly influences the survivability of that crash—particularly for vulnerable road users like bicyclists and pedestrians. Roundabouts save lives by keeping speeds low. In a roundabout, every movement is controlled by forcing drivers to turn along curved paths rather than merely going straight. This deflection naturally slows drivers down (Figure 4).

For more on the impact and influence of speed, check out City Limits: Setting Safe Speed Limits on City Streets from the National Association of City Transportation Officials and NCHRP Research Report 1043: Guide for Roundabouts.

Well-designed roundabouts keep speeds low at entrances, conflict points, and pedestrian crossings.

Roundabouts Reduce Conflict Points
Because they reduce the number of conflict points and their potential severity, roundabouts design away potentially severe head-on and left-turn conflicts (Figure 3).

For more on the proven safety outcomes of roundabouts, check out https://highways.dot.gov/safety/ proven-safety-countermeasures/roundabouts.

Source: Adapted from NCHRP Research Report 1043, Exhibits 7.2 and 7.3.

Typical Orthagonal
Intersection Roundabout
32 Conflict Points 8 Conflict Points
Figure 3. Comparing Conflict Points: Signalized or Stop-Controlled Intersection vs. Roundabout Rancho Cordova Roundabout Feasibility Study Report 10

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT 1

Solutions to SiteSpecific Challenges
Particular locations where roundabouts could
provide more benefits than another intersection
type share some common features. Intersections or
corridors with one or more of the following features
could be good candidates for a roundabout:
/ Documented crash history—especially severe
angle, turning, or speed-related crashes
/ Drivers routinely exceed the
posted or target speed
/ Desired traffic calming
/ Particularly low traffic volumes during nonpeak hours compared to the peak hours / Two-way stop-control with long
delays on side streets
/ Five or more legs of the intersection
/ A high percentage of turning movements,
especially left turns or U-turns
/ Change in context and speed (such as
at the entrance into a business district
or residential neighborhood)
/ A campus, neighborhood, commercial
development, or urban area gateway or entrance
Reduced Head-On and
Right-Angle Crashes
As they reduce conflict points, roundabouts also
design away two types of crashes: right-angle (also
called T-bone) and left-turn crashes (Figure 4).

These two crash types are typically some of the
most severe due to the angles of the collision and
the resulting high levels of energy transfer involved.

Collisions that occur in a roundabout—typically
sideswipe, shallow-angle, or low-speed rear-end
crashes—are less severe because the collision angles
reduce the impact force and because vehicles are
traveling at slower speeds.

Additional Resources
/ Federal Highway Association, “Roundabouts,”
https://highways.dot.gov/safety/provensafety-countermeasures/roundabouts. / NCHRP Research Report 1043: Guide for
Roundabouts, 2023, https://www.trb.
org/Publications/Blurbs/182939.aspx.

Figure 4. Comparing Crash Types: Signalized or
Stop-Controlled Intersection vs. Roundabout
Source: Adapted from Kansas Roundabout
Guide, Second Edition
Right-Angle
Left Turn
Sideswipe
Shallow-Angle
Stop-Controlled Intersections
Roundabout
11 Rancho Cordova Roundabout Feasibility Study Report

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT 1

Rancho Cordova Roundabout Feasibility Study Report 12

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT 1

Planning
Context
13 Rancho Cordova Roundabout Feasibility Study Report

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT 1

Planning Context
The City of Rancho Cordova works hard to develop plans and policies that provide safe and efficient transportation options for everyone who lives in and visits the city. This project was developed within the City’s larger planning and policy ecosystem.

General Plan
The 2006 Rancho Cordova General Plan and its subsequent updates provide a long-term vision for land use in the city. The City uses this plan as a reference for anticipated future land use and travel demand.

The travel demand needs from the General Plan influence roundabout viability and help determine whether a single-lane or multilane roundabout will be most appropriate in a given location. This roundabout feasibility study and accompanying guidelines offers the next general plan a means to incorporate and evaluate roundabouts as part of future development.

Bicycle Master Plan
The City’s 2016 Bicycle Master Plan puts the General Plan’s bicycling policies and goals into action. The Bicycle Master Plan recommends infrastructure like bike lanes and paths and charts a course for implementation.

This roundabout study used the Bicycle Master Plan to design prospective roundabouts in the context of planned bicycle networks.

For example, where the bicycle plan recommends separated bike lanes, this project includes those facilities in the concept design.

Local Road Safety Plan
The City’s Local Road Safety Plan identifies emphasis areas, priority locations, and project recommendations for the City to implement to improve traffic safety. The City may reconsider these locations in light of the results of this feasibility report to determine whether roundabouts are appropriate at previously identified locations.

Rancho Cordova Roundabout Feasibility Study Report 14

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT 1

Specific Plans
A specific plan sets planning policies and standardizes how a particular geographic area should develop,
including where development can occur, how dense
that development can be, and what structures
might look like. For the City’s specific plans, check
out the Planning Division’s document library.

When developing specific plans, the City
can use information in this roundabout study
to identify roundabout locations before
setting development constraints.

Pedestrian Master Plan
The City’s 2011 Pedestrian Master Plan offers a policy framework to increase walking and improve walking conditions in the city. In addition to development patterns that support walking, the plan identifies pedestrian-supportive infrastructure improvements, such opportunities to fill sidewalk gaps, intersection and crossing improvements, street lights, and neighborhood traffic calming efforts. The Pedestrian Master Plan is a supplement to the General Plan’s Circulation Element.
15 Rancho Cordova Roundabout Feasibility Study Report

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT 1

Rancho Cordova Roundabout Feasibility Study Report 16

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT 1

Community
Engagement
17 Rancho Cordova Roundabout Feasibility Study Report

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT 1

Community
Engagement
Throughout this project, the project team
collaborated with Rancho Cordova community
members. Their questions, concerns, and ideas
informed project priorities and the viability of future roundabout locations.

For more on community engagement for this
project, see Appendix A.

Project Website
To help connect community members with study
information, the project team developed a website
(Figure 5). The site explained the study’s purpose
and timeline and provided links to public meetings
and presentation materials. To visit the site,
check out https://www.cityofranchocordova.org/
residents/new-businesses-and-projects/publicworks-plans-and-projects/.

Figure 5. Roundabout Project Website
Engagement by the Numbers
3 Public Meetings
50 Attendees
88 Survey Responses
138
Total Connections
Rancho Cordova Roundabout Feasibility Study Report 18

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT 1

Community Meetings
The project team hosted three community meetings during this project.

Key Findings
/ Safety is this community’s top priority.
/ Residents are excited to see landscape
features in roundabout center islands.
/ Rancho Cordova residents have
concerns about driver behavior.
/ Meeting attendees had questions
about the roundabouts in future
City development plans.

October 2022, First Community Meeting:

The team introduced the project and implementation plan. The team also explained why the City is considering roundabouts and answered questions about the plan and roundabouts. This meeting was recorded, and the video remained available on the website throughout the project.

January 2023, Second Community Meeting:

The team shared their location screening process to
identify the top 50 potential locations, presented nine potential roundabout locations deemed most feasible,
and gathered for public input on locations.

June 2023, Third Community Meeting:

The project team shared project updates
and asked for feedback on the five remaining
highest ranked roundabout locations and
concept designs.

For complete meeting summaries, see Appendix A.
19 Rancho Cordova Roundabout Feasibility Study Report

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT 1

Online Survey
To hear from more community members about the
project and different design concepts, the project
team hosted an online survey, which was open
during June and July in 2023 (Figure 6). The survey
received 88 responses and asked participants about
the five potential intersection locations and about
different roundabout features, including landscape,
public art, and bicycle and pedestrian treatments.

The survey also asked Rancho Cordova community
members about their priorities when it comes to
roundabout implementation.

Survey respondents had positive reactions to
pedestrian crossing safety elements, and ranked the
following priorities for siting future roundabouts:
1/ Safety improvements
2/ Reduced traffic delay
3/ Bicycle comfort
4/ Prioritizing social equity
5/ Walking comfort
6/ Aesthetic improvements
For complete survey results, see Appendix A.

Figure 6. Sample Survey Question
Source: Metroquest
Community Survey Voices
Life is a short trip. People need
to slow down and stay safe.

Roundabouts are an innovative
way to increase safety for all.

I like the look and feel of
roundabouts; they add
value to cities’ aesthetics.

Safety is the number
one priority.

More than half of survey
respondents indicated that
safety was their top priority.

Rancho Cordova Roundabout Feasibility Study Report 20

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT 1

Technical Advisory Committee
Throughout the project, feedback and questions from the Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) helped guide design priorities, emergency vehicle and access needs, and existing and planned transit needs. The team began collaborating with the TAC in September 2022 and provided subsequent updates throughout the project. The TAC reviewed and gave valuable feedback on this report.

Sacramento Regional
Transit District (SacRT)
TAC Members
Folsom Cordova Unified
School District
Sacramento Area
Bicycle Advocates
Civic Thread
Sacramento Metropolitan
Fire District
Multimodal Advocacy Groups
21 Rancho Cordova Roundabout Feasibility Study Report

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT 1

Rancho Cordova Roundabout Feasibility Study Report 22

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT 1

Location
Screening
23 Rancho Cordova Roundabout Feasibility Study Report

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT 1

Location
Screening
To identify existing intersections in Rancho Cordova
that would be good candidates for roundabouts,
the project team developed a screening process
that evaluated locations first by priority and then
by feasibility. The screening process used data on
traffic counts and travel demand forecasts, land
use, roadway characteristics, demographics, and
environmental characteristics. Below is a summary
of the screening process.

What Data Did We Use?
Transportation Data
/ Roadway functional classification
/ Posted speed limits
/ Number of lanes
/ Existing intersection control type
/ Existing and proposed
bikeway classification
/ Transit lines and stops
/ Existing and projected traffic volumes
/ Crash history
Land Use Data
/ Planning areas
/ Zoning opportunities and constraints
Demographic,
Socioeconomic, and
Environmental Data
/ Social equity indicators
/ Hazard risk
Feasibility Screening
Community Feedback
Priority Screening
All Intersections in the City
Top 50 Intersections
9 Potential Locations
5 Proposed Locations
For a complete discussion of both the priority
screening and feasibility screening process, see
Appendix B.

Rancho Cordova Roundabout Feasibility Study Report 24

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT 1

Priority Screening
To understand what locations would most benefit
from a roundabout, the project team began a
priority screening process of all city intersections.

The first step was to remove intersections that met
one or more of the follow criteria:
/ Had vehicle travel volumes higher than the
estimated capacity for a two-lane roundabout.
/ On a state highway or exclusively
on neighborhood streets.
/ Had six or more total lanes.5
The project team then screened the remaining
intersections according to locations that were
appropriate for roundabouts and locations that
reflected City priorities.

To identify locations that aligned with City
priorities, the project team examined:
/ Safety—The frequency and
severity of crashes at intersections
over a five-year period.
/ Social equity—How disadvantaged,
underserved or burdened the area
is according to two indicators:
the CalEnviroScreen and Healthy
Places Index (see Appendix B).
/ Modal priority—Whether a location was
along an existing or planned bike lane or bike
route (increased priority); whether it was
within 250 feet of a transit stop (increased
priority); and whether it was on a designated
STAA truck route (decreased priority).
/ Land use opportunities and constraints—
Whether the intersection area may have
fewer property conflicts (due to being
on undeveloped land or City-owned
parcels, for example) and whether it
avoids potentially sensitive land uses
(such as a creek or other waterway).
/ Natural hazard risk—The likelihood of
impacts from wildfire, flood, or earthquake
according to the Federal Emergency
Management Agency’s National Risk Index.
5 The team removed six-lane roadways from consideration because properly accommodating three lanes of circulating vehicle traffic requires a very large roundabout. Designs for roundabouts of this size are challenging to implement. Roundabouts with three circulating lanes offer fewer benefits and did not align with study goals. Smaller, one- and two-lane roundabouts are a better fit for City needs because they offer the greatest safety and operational benefits.

These factors alerted the project team to potential
design challenges, how the intersection might
grow and change over time, and whether a
roundabout might slow traffic or need further speed
management treatments.

The list of screened locations was then prioritized
using a system that placed a heavier emphasis
on intersections with identified safety concerns
(Figure 7). Safety is the City’s—and community’s—
top priority, and this weighting scheme prioritizes
roundabouts in locations that could benefit most.

From this list of prioritized projects, the team
identified the top 50 locations, which represented
the intersections with the greatest potential to reap
the many benefits of a roundabout.

Roundabouts and Resilience
Roundabouts are a more resilient type
of intersection because they do not rely
on electrically-powered traffic signals to
operate. This means that during times of
power outages, such as in the aftermath
of an earthquake, flood, or wildfire, the
intersection can continue to move people
and goods through the community.

To help Rancho Cordova prepare to meet
the increasing uncertainty from a changing
climate, the screening criteria for this project
prioritized areas that would be most at-risk
for natural hazards.
25 Rancho Cordova Roundabout Feasibility Study Report

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT 1

Decreased
Priority
Increased
Priority

12.5%
Natural
Hazard
Risk

12.5%
Modal
Priorities
Bike Lanes
and Paths
Transit
Stops
Truck
Routes 12.5%
Land Use
Opportunities
Constraints

12.5%
Social Equity
Disadvantaged
Neighborhoods
50%
Safety
High Crash
Intersections
Weighted
Factor
Scoring
Figure 7. Priority Screening Weighted Factor Scoring
Locations were evaluated
to put safety first.

Rancho Cordova Roundabout Feasibility Study Report 26

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT 1

Feasibility Screening
To develop the list of the top 50 intersections, the project team placed planning-level roundabout footprints on top of aerial imagery according to national best-practice standards outlined NCHRP Research Report 1043: Guide for Roundabouts (Figure 8). Footprint sizes corresponded to the number of travel lanes and the types and sizes of vehicles expected to use that intersection. For more on these sketches and standard sizing, see Appendix B and the Rancho Cordova Roundabout Guidelines.

Figure 8. Sample Roundabout Footprint Sketch
Source: Google Earth and Kittelson and Associates, Inc.

Sketches of potential roundabouts and the space they would occupy (called footprints) were used to identify nine intersections that could accommodate a new roundabout with limited right-of-way and property impacts:
/ Rockingham Drive and Routier Road
/ Vehicle Drive and Zinfandel Drive
/ Old Placerville and Rockingham Drive
/ Old Placerville Road and Routier Road
/ Kilgore Road and Sun Center Drive
/ Capital Center Drive and Disk Drive
/ Femoyer Street and Peter A McCuen Boulevard
/ DeBellevue Street and Peter
A McCuen Boulevard
/ Mather Field Road and Peter
A McCuen Boulevard
To assess feasibility, context, and support for these nine intersections; the project team sought public input and coordinated with other City planning and engineering teams to assess planning and engineering feasibility and land use impacts.

This additional assessment narrowed down the list of feasible locations from nine to five (see Figure 9):
/ Old Placerville Road and Rockingham Drive
/ Old Placerville Road and Routier Drive
/ Kilgore Road and Sun Center Drive
/ Capital Center Drive and Disk Drive
/ Mather Field Road and Peter
A McCuen Boulevard
27 Rancho Cordova Roundabout Feasibility Study Report

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT 1

Figure 9. Rancho Cordova Roundabout Priority Locations
Rancho Cordova Roundabout Feasibility Study Report 28

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT 1

29 Rancho Cordova Roundabout Feasibility Study Report

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT 1

Rancho Cordova Roundabout Feasibility Study Report 30

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT 1

Results
31 Rancho Cordova Roundabout Feasibility Study Report

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT 1

Results
To better understand how a roundabout would fit at each of the five intersections, the project team developed sketch design concepts for each site (see Figure 10–Figure 14). Drawn over scaled aerial photo base maps, these initial concepts helped the project team and community members envision the potential roundabout at the site and helped the City prepare for project development and future funding opportunities.

The project team also prepared scorecards to summarize each location’s screening results according to safety, social equity, hazard risk, modal priority, opportunities and constraints, intersection volume and capacity, and crash history.

The following pages present an overview of each priority location and include the concept sketch and score results. For each site’s scaled design drawings, see Appendix C.

Rancho Cordova Roundabout Feasibility Study Report 32

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT 1

Old Placerville Road
and Rockingham Drive
Figure 10. Old Placerville Road and Rockingham Drive Concept Sketch Scorecard
Safety
Social Equity
Hazard Risk
Modal Priority
Opportunities/Constraints
CalEnviroScreen
Healthy Places Index
X
Volume
to Capacity
Ratio
Number
of Crashes
(2017–2021)
Historically
Disadvantaged
Community
SACOG
Disadvantaged
Communities
24%
below capacity
with roundabout
15 3 injury +
12 property damage
Low
Income
Low High
Priority
LEGEND
Parcel Boundary
33 Rancho Cordova Roundabout Feasibility Study Report

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT 1

Old Placerville Road
and Routier Drive
Figure 11. Old Placerville Road and Routier Drive Concept Sketch Scorecard
Safety
Social Equity
Hazard Risk
Modal Priority
Opportunities/Constraints
CalEnviroScreen
Healthy Places Index
X
X
Volume
to Capacity
Ratio
Number
of Crashes
(2017–2021)
Historically
Disadvantaged
Community
Areas of
Persistent
Poverty
SACOG
Disadvantaged
Communities
37%
below capacity
with roundabout
10 3 injury +
7 property damage
Low
Income
Low High
Priority
LEGEND
Parcel Boundary
Rancho Cordova Roundabout Feasibility Study Report 34

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT 1

Kilgore Road and
Sun Center Drive
Figure 12. Kilgore Road and Sun Center Drive Concept Sketch Scorecard
Safety
Social Equity
Hazard Risk
Modal Priority
Opportunities/Constraints
CalEnviroScreen
Healthy Places Index
Volume
to Capacity
Ratio
Number
of Crashes
(2017–2021)
Historically
Disadvantaged
Community
SACOG
Disadvantaged
Communities
67%
below capacity
with roundabout
5 4 injury +
1 property damage
NA
Low High
Priority
LEGEND
Parcel Boundary
35 Rancho Cordova Roundabout Feasibility Study Report

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT 1

Capital Center Drive
and Data Drive
Figure 13. Capital Center Drive and Data Drive Concept Sketch Scorecard
Safety
Social Equity
Hazard Risk
Modal Priority
Opportunities/Constraints
CalEnviroScreen
Healthy Places Index
Volume
to Capacity
Ratio
Number
of Crashes
(2017–2021)
Historically
Disadvantaged
Community
SACOG
Disadvantaged
Communities
85%
below capacity
with roundabout
2 1 injury +
1 property damage
NA
Low High
Priority
LEGEND
Parcel Boundary
Rancho Cordova Roundabout Feasibility Study Report 36

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT 1

Mather Field Road and
Peter A McCuen Boulevard
Figure 14. Mather Field Road and Peter A McCuen Boulevard Concept Sketch Scorecard
Safety
Social Equity
Hazard Risk
Modal Priority
Opportunities/Constraints
CalEnviroScreen
Healthy Places Index
X
Volume
to Capacity
Ratio
Number
of Crashes
(2017–2021)
Historically
Disadvantaged
Community
SACOG
Disadvantaged
Communities
38%
below capacity
with roundabout
1 1 injury +
0 property damage
Low
Income
Low High
Priority
LEGEND
Parcel Boundary
37 Rancho Cordova Roundabout Feasibility Study Report

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT 1

Rancho Cordova Roundabout Feasibility Study Report 38

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT 1

What’s Next?
39 Rancho Cordova Roundabout Feasibility Study Report

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT 1

What’s Next?
Next Steps for Existing Locations
Over the course of this project, the project team identified the five most viable roundabout locations according to existing traffic volumes, land use constraints, and screening criteria. To help make the final five roundabouts a reality, the City can:
1/ Use the City’s updated travel demand model to determine if the proposed concepts can adequately serve projected traffic growth using Appendix E: Roundabout Guidelines. 2/ Continue to gather input to understand and address community concerns. 3/ Discuss projects with landowners to determine implementation feasibility in areas with property impacts. 4/ Identify appropriate funding sources to make viable roundabouts a reality (see the funding section on the next page).
5/ Use the Rancho Cordova Roundabout Guidelines and principles from NCHRP Research Report 1043 to develop context-appropriate designs.

Next Steps for Future Locations
To support more roundabouts in Rancho Cordova, the City can also:
/ Identify locations for desired roundabouts in future developments. / Use traffic volume forecasts to inform feasibility and design. / Pursue grants to fund roundabout implementation.
/ Integrate potential priority locations into upcoming specific plans.

Rancho Cordova Roundabout Feasibility Study Report 40

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT 1

Roundabout Guidelines
Funding
There are several funding sources that can help the City pay for roundabout projects (Table 1). The listed funding sources have requirements and scoring systems that will determine whether the five concepts or any other potential locations could be competitive. For more information on funding sources, see Appendix D.

TABLE 1. Funding Source Summary, as of 2023
Funding Source Frequency Application Period
Safe Streets for All (SS4A) Annual until
Fiscal Year 2026
March–July
Award Notification: October
Surface Transportation Block Grant Program Annual Application Due Date Varies Apportionment: October
Rebuilding American Infrastructure with
Sustainability and Equity (RAISE), formerly

BUILD & TIGER
Annual Dec–Feb
Award Notification: June
Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ)
Improvement Program
Annual Apportionment: October
Active Transportation Program (ATP) Every 2–3 years March–June Award Notification: October
Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) Every 1–2 Years May–November Award Notification: March
Affordable Housing and Sustainable
Communities Program
Every 1–2 years January–April
Award Notification: August
Transformative Climate Communities (TCC) Annual March–August Pre-Proposals due in May
Award Notification: December
Sacramento Area Council of Governments
(SACOG) regional funding rounds
Annual Varies
As part of this project, the project team developed a
guide for planning and designing future roundabouts
(Appendix E). Based on national best practices, this
guide will help support City staff, consultants, and other practitioners involved in City projects during the roundabout planning and design process. These guidelines will also help the City and partners site, plan, and move roundabouts
through the project development process.
41 Rancho Cordova Roundabout Feasibility Study Report

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT 1

Rancho Cordova Roundabout Feasibility Study Report 42

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT 1

Appendix A:

Community &
Stakeholder
Engagement
Materials
43 Rancho Cordova Roundabout Feasibility Study Report

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT 1

1/3/2024
1 City of Rancho Cordova Roundabout
Feasibility Study
Stakeholder Meeting
September 14, 2022
CityOfRanchoCordova.org
2 • Introductions• Provide Project Overview• Provide Information on Roundabouts• Solicit Stakeholder Feedback Meeting Goals
12

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT
1

1/3/2024
3 Project Team
City of Rancho Cordova (Grant Recipient)
Kittelson & Associates, Inc. (Project Consultant)
Project Manager = Kristine CourdyPrincipal Engineer = Edgar Medina Senior Transportation Planner = Drew Hart
Project Manager = Mike Alston
Principal In-Charge = Wade Scarbrough
Project Planner = Matt Braughton
FY21/22 Caltrans Sustainable Transportation Planning Grant Project: Citywide Feasibility Study & Implementation Plan 4 • Develop the Roundabout Priority Plan for the City• Prepare Guidelines for Future Decisions about Roundabouts• Utilize Public & Stakeholder Feedback to Develop Project Deliverables
Project Objectives
34

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT
1

1/3/2024
5 What is a Roundabout?
6 What is a Roundabout?
SacramentoWest River Dr / Orchard Ln
RosevilleOak St / Washington Blvd
Source: Google Earth Source: Google Earth
56

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT
1

1/3/2024
7 • Roundabouts are being considered as viable or
even preferred alternatives due to potential benefits:
• Safety performance• Lower delay• Environmental benefits (emissions, fuel savings)• Access management• Operations and maintenance costs• Aesthetics Why Build Roundabouts?
8 • 90-100% reduction in fatalities• 75% reduction in injuries• 35% reduction in total crashes• Very little reported pedestrian and bicycle crash experience Safety Performance
MergingDivergingCrossing
Source: NCHRP Report 572, NCHRP Report 672
78

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT
1

1/3/2024
9 • Geometry controls entry
and circulating speeds roundabouts
• Entry speeds at or less than:
• 25 mph for single-lane• 30 mph for two-lane
• Circulating speeds: 10 to 12mph
• Slow intersection speeds =
• Increased time for driver reaction• Decreased chance for injury or fatality
Vehicle Speeds: Reduced
10 Aesthetic & Green Infrastructure Opportunities
Bend, OregonSource: Lee Rodegerdts
Portland, OregonSource: Lee Rodegerdts
910

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT
1

1/3/2024
11 Where to Consider Roundabouts?
Advantageous Potentially Challenging
• Physical or geometric constraints • Frequent large vehicles: Routes or land uses generating oversized loads
• Nearby Preemption needs (e.g.
nearby rail crossing)
• Location along a
coordinated signal network
• Identified opportunity to
improve safety
• Long delays (Two-way or allway stop capacity exceeded) • Closely spaced intersections • Aesthetic/gateway treatment desired
• Near Schools • Unusual geometry
12 • Benefits:
• Slow vehicle speeds• Two-stage crossing
• Considerations:
• Crosswalk alignment• Width of splitter island• Space for exiting vehicles to yield to pedestrians
• Yield-controlled crossings
Roundabouts & Pedestrians
Storage space for exiting vehicles
Median refuge and two-stage crossing
Sources: Google Earth; Kittelson
1112

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT
1

1/3/2024
13 Considerations for Visually Impaired:1. Well defined walkway edges2. Separated walkways3. Aligned detectable warnings4. Perpendicular crossings5. Contrasting crosswalk markingsPerformance assessment detailed in NCHRP Report 834 Roundabouts & Pedestrians
3 2
1 4
5 Note presence of push-button for multilane roundabout crossing.Source: Lee Rodegerdts 14 • Roundabouts slow vehicles to speeds
compatible with bicycles
• Bicyclists have option of traveling as
vehicle or pedestrian
• Serve different users based on
their level of comfort
• No bicycle lanes within circulatory
roadway
• Guidance for off-street paths
is emerging
Roundabouts & Bicycles
1314

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT
1

1/3/2024
15 Separate Bike/Ped Options
San Luis Obispo, CaliforniaSource: Brian Ray
Source: Massachusetts DOT Separated Bike Lane Planning and Design Guide 16 • Buses will be a design vehicle;
use turn analysis to verify line/route movements
• Bus stops may be on entry or exit:
• Locate near crosswalk• Avoid conflict with circulatory roadway• May end up further from corner compared to other intersection types
Roundabouts & Buses
Verifying bus movements at a roundabout concept.
1516

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT
1

1/3/2024
17 • "Design" versus "accommodate"
larger vehicles
• Accommodations include:
• Truck aprons• Placement of landscaping• Reinforced curbs Roundabouts & Larger Vehicles
18 • We want to hear from you:
• Overall feedback on
Roundabouts
• Concerns• Input on how to prioritize
locations
• Additional engagement• How to make
future projects successful
Stakeholder Feedback
1718

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT
1

1/3/2024
19 • Community Meeting• Launch Project Website• Develop Prioritization Plan• Develop Concept Locations• Future Stakeholder Working Meetings? Next Steps
20 THANK YOUTHANK YOU
Check Web Portal for Project Updates:
www.cityofranchocordova.org/CurrentProjects
If you have additional questions about the project, please reach out to the City’s Project Manager:

Kristine Courdy
(916) 851-8842
[email protected]
CityOfRanchoCordova.org
1920

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT
1

City of Rancho Cordova Roundabout Feasibility Study
Community Workshop #1
October 12, 2022 5:30 – 6:30 p.m.

City of Rancho Cordova Roundabout Feasibility Study
Community Workshop #1
Meeting Summary
Introduction
On Wednesday, October 12, 2022, from 5:30 – 6:30 p.m., the City of Rancho Cordova held its first virtual community workshop about the Roundabout Feasibility Study, wherein participants had a chance to learn about roundabouts and provide feedback on potential locations and implementation. A total of 41 community members registered, and 19 community members attended the meeting, which was hosted virtually through Zoom to create the most flexibility and accommodation for participants. The project team also hosted six community members in person at City Hall.

About the Project
The City of Rancho Cordova received a grant to begin the Roundabout Feasibility Study, which explores the possibility of constructing roundabouts in new and existing intersections throughout the city. There are many benefits of installing roundabouts including fewer and less severe crashes, reduction of traffic congestion, less vehicle pollution, creating a sense of place and a “gateway” into the community, and lower maintenance costs compared to traffic signals.

The study will evaluate and prioritize potential locations, create an implementation plan including conceptual designs, and develop guidelines for additional roundabout locations in the future.

Community Workshop Purpose & Format
As the first community outreach effort of the
Roundabout Feasibility Study, the purpose of this
community meeting was more to inform and
begin the conversation with the public.

Specifically, the virtual community workshop
educated participants the benefits of
roundabouts and why the city is considering
them as well as created a space for community
feedback on roundabouts themselves and where
they should be considered for installation.

Following a presentation, Katie DeMaio of AIM Consulting led the project team in facilitating a large group discussion where participants asked questions and provided input through the virtual “chat box” or by verbally asking questions. The project team concluded the community workshop by reviewing project’s next steps and plans for future outreach events.

Introducing the project team from the City & from Kittelson.

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT 1

City of Rancho Cordova Roundabout Feasibility Study
Community Workshop #1
October 12, 2022 5:30 – 6:30 p.m.

Presentation
City of Rancho Cordova’s Project Manager Kristine Courdy began the meeting by welcoming everyone, introducing the team, and introducing the project in a high-level way.

First Poll
Katie then facilitated two polls to gauge participants’ connection to the project and background with roundabouts:
1) How people are connected to Rancho Cordova (resident, work, recreation, visit with friends/leisure, other); and
2) What are your general thoughts/attitude about roundabouts (Likert scale ranging from “very negative” to “very positive”).

Most people are indeed residents and/or work in Rancho Cordova, and there were mostly positive feelings about roundabouts. In addition to the digital poll results below, three inperson submissions all noted they are residents. Two are “very positive” about roundabouts and one is “neutral.”
Mike Alston, Project Manager from Kittelson & Associates, Inc., began the formal presentation, which provided an overview of the benefits of roundabouts, addressed common questions, and shared the four-phase process for the study. A link to the presentation is included on the Project website.

Detailed results from the first two live poll questions in Zoom.

The presentation started by stating objectives, then defining what a roundabout is so as to discuss benefits.

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT 1

City of Rancho Cordova Roundabout Feasibility Study
Community Workshop #1
October 12, 2022 5:30 – 6:30 p.m.

Second Poll
Following Mike’s presentation, Katie facilitated a live poll asking people “Do you feel you have a better
understanding of roundabouts?” A lot of participants have a better understanding of roundabouts because of the
presentation. This was also reflected in the three in-person poll answers: two understand them better while one
remains “already an expert” (written in). Following the live poll, Mike Alston continued the presentation, now
focusing on the Rancho Cordova Roundabout Feasibility
Study.

Project Overview
A high-level project schedule was shared, demonstrating the four phases of the project: screen locations using existing data such as traffic volumes and bus routes, test top
locations by looking at the specifics at desirable
intersections and overlaying design sketches, gather input and develop designs, and prepare city roundabout
guidelines as a formal report. The entire project is
anticipated to conclude by the end of winter 2023-2024.

Third Poll
As a transition into the Question & Answer session, Katie asked two questions for the third poll:
1) What is the top priority you would like the City to emphasize for roundabout project opportunities? Answer options: maximum safety benefit, social equity location emphasis, bike route locations, others (participants were encouraged to utilize the Zoom chat box to share additional priorities).
o 88% of participants selected safety.
o Two of the three people in person also selected safety (one of whom added “air quality”), and the third noted bike route locations.

Detailed results from the live poll question.

Project overview, demonstrating the four phases.

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT 1

City of Rancho Cordova Roundabout Feasibility Study
Community Workshop #1
October 12, 2022 5:30 – 6:30 p.m.
2) Has the information presented today changed your thoughts on roundabouts at all? Answer options as a Likert scale ranging from “significantly less favorable opinion” to “significantly more favorable opinion”
o A lot of opinions were unchanged, but there were a lot of favorable opinions coming in already.
o Again, this was reflected in the in-person results: one remained unchanged (“no change in expertise”), while two noted “significantly more favorable opinion.” Question and Answer Discussion
The meeting was then opened up for questions
and answers. What follows is a summary of each
question and the project team’s response:

Participant 1 asked if the team has considered adding in Rancho Cordova Police ticketing information, specifically around failure to yield.
• The project team noted that they are including crash history, so it gets added in an indirect way. They don’t have anything as granular as ticket citations, failure to yield in particular – but it is a great idea, and it can be discussed as the project moves forward.

Participant 2 gets around town on a bike or foot. For roundabouts where bikes take a lane, how does the cultural element get tackled so that everyone can use it without issue? How do we help people know what the actual traffic laws are?
• If it’s a location where it is appropriate to have a bike lane on the approach roadways, then it may be the case for it to be appropriate to provide a bike lane outside of the roundabout to keep bicyclists off the roadway. If it’s a location where speeds are managed pretty well, then people on bikes can use the travel lanes. • The City does have a Bike Master Plan which will also inform this project and the development of the guidelines. Once roundabouts are actually getting implemented, there will be a corresponding educational campaign in the community.

Zoom Chat: Participants started sharing possible intersection ideas in the chat box, including Coloma Road & Zinfandel Road, Olsen Drive & Calle Del Sol Way, Routier & Rockingham, Sunrise near the new developments, Aramon Drive & Chassella Way, and Rancho Cordova Parkway.

The screen projected during the Q&A Session.

Detailed results from the live poll question.

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT 1

City of Rancho Cordova Roundabout Feasibility Study
Community Workshop #1
October 12, 2022 5:30 – 6:30 p.m.

Participant 3 asked for a right-of-way clarification: if a test plot on the desired location goes over into private property, the city has to make an offer to buy that property, correct? • The project team noted that right of way constraints are a consideration for each location and if required will follow the right of way acquisition procedures.

Participant 4 asked if the crash data will be provided to the public because there are a lot of hot spots/areas that need improvement but it’s hard to suggest locations without access to true data.
• The project team noted that their intent is to share their work with the public as the Project moves along. The city also has a Local Road Safety Plan adopted by City Council earlier this year which captures crash history data from the past five years. That will be available on the City’s website.

Participant 5 asked if intersections without streetlights can be prioritized. • The project team noted they include traffic signals in the analysis. They have not used street lighting data, but that can be assessed as locations are tested.

Next Steps
Kristine Courdy concluded the meeting by sharing the next steps of the project, which reviewed the four phases shared earlier in the presentation. The next community workshop is planned for early 2023.

Two final comments/questions were made at the end of the meeting:

Participant 6 asked about road design, noting that the trend in traffic engineering is now toward traffic calming. That being the case, why are new roads in the newer parts of the city still being designed like highways?
• The project team shared that part of this project is creating guidelines to be taken into the development of future projects – so it is not just for how they implement roundabouts in existing parts of the city, but also as an integral planning element in the development of newer communities.
• The historic trend for a long time used to prioritize how to get the most cars through the fastest, but now the industry is seeing a shift toward traffic calming especially in neighborhoods – so people will start to see the newer developments incorporate roundabouts. But the project team doesn’t want to just focus on the newer parts of the city – they want to look at where roundabouts would be appropriate treatments and design elements in all parts of the city.

Participant 7 commented that he believes only single-lane roundabouts should be used; multilane streets should be reduced prior to the crosswalks. Please design streets physically (narrowing lane widths, etc.) to reduce speeds approaching roundabouts to 15 mph or less, without relying on ineffective "speed limit" signs. Separate bicycle lanes would be great.

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT 1

1/3/2024
1 City of Rancho Cordova Roundabout
Feasibility Study
Community Workshop
October 12, 2022
CityOfRanchoCordova.org
2 Zoom Instructions
12

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT
1

1/3/2024
3 • Introductions• Provide Information on Roundabouts• Provide Project Overview• Solicit Community Feedback Meeting Goals
4 Project Team
City of Rancho Cordova (Grant Recipient)
Kittelson & Associates, Inc. (Project Consultant)
Project Manager = Kristine CourdyPrincipal Engineer = Edgar Medina Senior Transportation Planner = Drew Hart
Project Manager = Mike Alston
Principal In-Charge = Wade Scarbrough
Project Planner = Matt Braughton
FY21/22 Caltrans Sustainable Transportation Planning Grant Project: Citywide Feasibility Study & Implementation Plan 34

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT
1

1/3/2024
5 Live Poll #1
Question 1: Identify Purpose In Rancho CordovaA. ResidentB. WorkC. RecreationD. Visit with Friends/LeisureE. Other (put in chat)Question 2: What are your general thoughts/attitude about roundabouts?1 - Very negative2 – Slightly negative3 - Neutral4 – Slightly positive5 – Very positive 6 • Develop the Roundabout Priority Plan for the City• Utilize Public & Stakeholder Feedback to Develop Project Deliverables
• Prepare Guidelines for Future Guidance about Roundabouts Project Objectives
56

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT
1

1/3/2024
7 What is a Roundabout?
8 What is a Roundabout?
SacramentoWest River Dr / Orchard Ln
RosevilleOak St / Washington Blvd
Source: Google Earth Source: Google Earth
78

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT
1

1/3/2024
9 • Roundabouts are being considered for potential benefits:
• Safety improvements• Lower delay• Environmental benefits (emissions, fuel savings)• Access management• Operations and maintenance costs• Aesthetics Why Build Roundabouts?
10 • 90-100% reduction in fatalities• 75% reduction in injuries• 35% reduction in total crashes• Very little reported pedestrian and bicycle crash experience Safety Performance
MergingDivergingCrossing
Source: NCHRP Report 572, NCHRP Report 672
910

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT
1

1/3/2024
11 • Roundabouts controls vehicle speeds
• Entry speeds at or less than:
• 25 mph for single-lane• 30 mph for two-lane
• Circulating speeds: 10 to 12mph
• Slow speeds
• Increased time for driver reaction• Decreased chance for injury or fatality Vehicle Speeds Reduced
12 Aesthetic & Green Infrastructure Opportunities
Bend, OregonSource: Lee Rodegerdts
Portland, OregonSource: Lee Rodegerdts
1112

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT
1

1/3/2024
13 • Benefits:
• Slow vehicle speeds• Two-stage crossing
• Considerations:
• Crosswalk location• Space for exiting vehicles to yield to pedestrians
• Yield-controlled crossings
Roundabouts & Pedestrians
Storage space for exiting vehicles
Median refuge and two-stage crossing
Sources: Google Earth; Kittelson
14 Considerations for Visually Impaired:1. Well defined walkway edges2. Separated walkways3. Aligned detectable warnings4. Perpendicular crossings5. Contrasting crosswalk markingsPerformance assessment detailed in NCHRP Report 834 Roundabouts & Pedestrians
3 2
1 4
5 Note presence of push-button for multilane roundabout crossing.Source: Lee Rodegerdts 1314

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT
1

1/3/2024
15 • Roundabouts slow vehicles to speeds
compatible with bicycles
• Bicyclists have option of traveling as
vehicle or pedestrian
• Serve different users based on
their level of comfort
• No bicycle lanes within circulatory
roadway
• Guidance for off-street paths
is emerging
Roundabouts & Bicycles
16 Separate Bike/Ped Options
San Luis Obispo, CaliforniaSource: Brian Ray
Source: Massachusetts DOT Separated Bike Lane Planning and Design Guide 1516

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT
1

1/3/2024
17 • Roundabouts can accommodate
large vehicles through design:
• Truck aprons• Placement of landscaping• Reinforced curbs Roundabouts & Larger Vehicles
18 Live Poll #2
Question 1: Do you feel you have a better understanding of roundabouts?A. Yes – I understand them betterB. UnchangedC. No – I have more confusion 1718

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT
1

1/3/2024
19 Project Overview
1Screen Locations
2Test Top Locations
3Gather Input + Develop Designs
4Prepare CityRoundabout Guidelines
2022 2023
Fall Winter Spring Summer Fall Winter
We are here
20 • Part 1: Screen Locations
• Filter locations with data• Use prioritization scores Project Overview
1920

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT
1

1/3/2024
21 Part 2: Test Top Locations
Project Overview
Example feasibility Testing, starting with assumed size and advancing to sketch level concept. 22 Part 3: Gather Input + Develop Designs
Project Overview
Example rendering of roundabout design concept
2122

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT
1

1/3/2024
23 • Part 4: Prepare City Roundabout Guidelines
Project Overview
24 Project Overview
1Screen Locations
2Test Top Locations
3Gather Input + Develop Designs
4Prepare City Roundabout Guidelines
2022 2023
Fall Winter Spring Summer Fall Winter
We are here
2324

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT
1

1/3/2024
25 Live Poll #3
Question 1: What is the top priority you would like the City to emphasize for roundabout project opportunities?A. Maximum safety benefitB. Social equity location emphasisC. Bike route locationsD. Other (tell us your comment in the chat!)Question 2: Has the information presented today changed your thoughts on roundabouts at all?1 - Significantly less favorable opinion2 – Slightly less favorable opinion3 – Opinion has not changed4 – Slightly more favorable opinion5 – I now have a significantly more favorable opinion 26 • We want to hear from you:
• Overall feedback on
roundabouts
• Input on how to prioritize
locations
• Other questions
Questions & Answers
2526

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT
1

1/3/2024
27 • Identify top locations• Develop Concept Locations• Document feedback and best practices for City Guidelines• Next Community Workshop in early 2023 Next Steps dh0
28 THANK YOUTHANK YOU
Check Web Portal for Project Updates:
www.cityofranchocordova.org/CurrentProjects
If you have additional questions about the project, please reach out to the City’s Project Manager:

Kristine Courdy
(916) 851-8842
[email protected]
CityOfRanchoCordova.org
2728

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT
1

Slide 27
dh0 Consider:

Add new first bullet, "Document Feedback"
[email protected], 2022-10-11T23:50:58.782

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT 1

Rockingham Dr.

Single-lane
Routier Rd.

Data Dr.

Disk Dr.

Roundabout Type
Yellow: Multilane roundabout
Green: Single-lane roundabout
(not on a truck route)
Multilane

DATA DRIVE &

DISK DRIVE

ROCKINGHAM DRIVE &

ROUTIER ROAD
Do you think this is a good
location for a roundabout?
Do you think this is a good
location for a roundabout?
Comments/Concerns Comments/Concerns

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT 1

White Rock Rd.

Quality Dr.

Vehicle Dr.

Zinfandel Dr.

Roundabout Type
Green: Single-lane roundabout
(not on a truck route)
Single-lane
Single-lane

VEHICLE DRIVE &

ZINFANDEL DRIVE

QUALITY DRIVE & WHITE

ROCK ROAD
Do you think this is a good
location for a roundabout?
Do you think this is a good
location for a roundabout?
Comments/Concerns Comments/Concerns

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT 1

OLD PLACERVILLE ROAD &

ROUTIER ROAD

OLD PLACERVILLE ROAD
& ROCKINGHAM ROAD
Do you think this is a good
location for a roundabout?
Do you think this is a good
location for a roundabout?
Comments/Concerns Comments/Concerns
Rockingham Dr.

Old Placerville Rd.

Old Placerville Rd.

Routier Rd.

Roundabout Type
Yellow: Multilane roundabout
Blue: Single-lane roundabout
(on a truck route) Single-lane Multilane

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT 1

EXPLORER DRIVE & LINCOLN

VILLAGE DRIVE

KILGORE ROAD & SUN

CENTER DRIVE
Do you think this is a good
location for a roundabout?
Do you think this is a good
location for a roundabout?
Comments/Concerns Comments/Concerns
Sun Center Dr.

Kilgore Rd.

Lincoln Village Dr.

Explorer Dr.

Roundabout Type
Green: Single-lane roundabout
(not on a truck route)
Single-lane
Single-lane

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT 1

FEMOYER STREET & PETER A

MCCUEN BLVD

CAPITAL CENTER DRIVE
& DATA DRIVE
Do you think this is a good
location for a roundabout?
Do you think this is a good
location for a roundabout?
Comments/Concerns Comments/Concerns
Capital Center Dr.

Data Dr.

Peter A McCuen Blvd.

Femoyer St.

Roundabout Type
Green: Single-lane roundabout
(not on a truck route)
Single-lane
Single-lane

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT 1

MATHER FIELD ROAD & PETER

A MCCUEN BLVD

DEBELLEVUE STREET

PETER MCCUEN BLVD
Do you think this is a good
location for a roundabout?
Do you think this is a good
location for a roundabout?
Comments/Concerns Comments/Concerns
Peter A McCuen Blvd.

DeBellevue St.

Peter A McCuen Blvd.

Mather Field Rd.

Roundabout Type
Yellow: Multilane roundabout
Green: Single-lane roundabout
(not on a truck route)
Single-lane
Multilane

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT 1

1/3/2024
1 City of Rancho Cordova Roundabout
Feasibility Study
Stakeholder Meeting
May 16, 2023
CityOfRanchoCordova.org
2 • Provide Project Update• Get Feedback on Prioritization for Future Intersections• Solicit Stakeholder Feedback Meeting Goals
12

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT
1

1/3/2024
3 • Develop the Roundabout Priority Plan for the City• Prepare Guidelines for Future Decisions about Roundabouts• Utilize Public & Stakeholder Feedback to Develop Project Deliverables
Project Objectives
4 Screening and Prioritization
34

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT
1

1/3/2024
5 Screening and Prioritization
6 Screening and Prioritization
56

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT
1

1/3/2024
7 Screening and Prioritization
• Vetted top 50 for feasibility
• Traffic volumes accounting for future
growth
• Size of intersection based on design
vehicles
• Narrowed list to 12 intersections
8 Advancing Five Locations for Concept Designs
• Narrowed to five based on:
• Prioritization rank• Land uses (avoiding property takes)• Public input• Public Works and Planning feedback• Traffic Data • 5 Locations are:
• Old Placerville Rd / Rockingham Dr• Old Placerville Rd / Routier Dr• Kilgore Rd / Sun Center Dr• Capital Center Dr / Data Dr• Mather Field Rd / Peter A McCuen Blvd 78

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT
1

1/3/2024
9 Draft Concepts
#18 Old Placerville Rd / Rockingham Dr
10 Draft Concepts
#19 Old Placerville Rd / Routier Dr
910

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT
1

1/3/2024
11 Draft Concepts
#35 Capital Center Dr / Data Dr
12 • Document work to date• Identify funding and implementation plan• Developing greenfield intersection/roundabout approach• We welcome your input now on what to prioritize/consider
Draft and Final Plan
1112

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT
1

1/3/2024
13 • 6/7 Community Meeting and survey• Refine concept locations• Develop prioritization plan Next Steps
We are here
14 THANK YOUTHANK YOU
Check Web Portal for Project Updates:
www.cityofranchocordova.org/CurrentProjects
If you have additional questions about the project, please reach out to the City’s Project Manager:

Kristine Courdy
(916) 851-8842
[email protected]
CityOfRanchoCordova.org
1314

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT
1

1/3/2024
1 City of Rancho Cordova Roundabout
Feasibility Study
Community Workshop
June 7th, 2023
CityOfRanchoCordova.org
2 • Introductions• Meet the Team• Prior Engagement• Project Objectives• Information on Roundabouts• Feasible Locations• Next Steps Meeting Agenda
12

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT
1

1/3/2024
3 Project Team
City of Rancho Cordova (Grant Recipient)
Kittelson & Associates, Inc. (Project Consultant)
Project Manager = Kristine CourdyPrincipal Engineer = Edgar Medina Senior Transportation Planner = Drew Hart
Project Manager = Mike Alston
Principal In-Charge = Wade Scarbrough
Project Planner = Matt Braughton
FY21/22 Caltrans Sustainable Transportation Planning Grant Project: Citywide Feasibility Study & Implementation Plan 4 Prior Engagement
Virtual Workshop October 2022 Open House January 2023
34

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT
1

1/3/2024
5 Project Objectives
6 Develop the Roundabout Priority Plan for the CityUtilize Public & Stakeholder Feedback to Develop Project DeliverablesPrepare Guidelines for Future Guidance about Roundabouts Project Objectives
56

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT
1

1/3/2024
7 Roundabout Education
8 What is a Roundabout?
78

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT
1

1/3/2024
9 Safety improvements:
• 90-100% reduction in fatalities• 75% reduction in injuries• 35% reduction in total crashes Roundabouts controls vehicle speeds:
• 25 mph for single-lane• 30 mph for two-lane• Increased time for drive reaction• Decreased chance for injury or fatality Why Build Roundabouts?
10 Aesthetic & Green Infrastructure Opportunities
Bend, OregonSource: Lee Rodegerdts
Portland, OregonSource: Lee Rodegerdts
910

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT
1

1/3/2024
11 Considerations for Visually Impaired:1. Well defined walkway edges2. Separated walkways3. Aligned detectable warnings4. Perpendicular crossings5. Contrasting crosswalk markings Roundabouts & Pedestrians
3 2
1 4
5 Note presence of push-button for multilane roundabout crossing.Source: Lee Rodegerdts Performance assessment detailed in NCHRP Report 834
12 Roundabouts slow vehicles to speeds compatible with bicyclesBicyclists have option of traveling asvehicle or pedestrian • Serve different users based on
their level of comfort
No bicycle lanes within circulatory roadwayGuidance for off-street paths is emerging Roundabouts & Bicycles
1112

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT
1

1/3/2024
13 Separate Bike/Ped Options
San Luis Obispo, CaliforniaSource: Brian Ray
Source: Massachusetts DOT Separated Bike Lane Planning and Design Guide 14 Roundabouts can accommodate large vehicles through design:
• Truck aprons• Placement of landscaping• Reinforced curbs Roundabouts & Larger Vehicles
1314

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT
1

1/3/2024
15 Project Overview
16 Project Overview
1Screen Locations
2Test Top Locations
3Gather Input + Develop Designs
4Prepare City Roundabout Guidelines
2022 2023
Fall Winter Spring Summer Fall Winter
We are here
1516

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT
1

1/3/2024
17 Project Overview
Part 1: Screen Locations
18 Project Overview
Part 1: Screen Locations
1718

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT
1

1/3/2024
19 Project Overview
Part 1: Screen Locations
20 Part 2: Test Top Locations
Example rendering of roundabout design concept
Project Overview
• Vetted top 50 for feasibility
• Traffic volumes accounting for future growth• Size of intersection based on design vehicles• Narrowed list to 12 intersections Example feasibility testing
1920

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT
1

1/3/2024
21 Part 3: Gather Input + Develop Designs
Example rendering of roundabout design concept
Project Overview
22 Part 4: Prepare City Roundabout Guidelines
Project Overview
2122

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT
1

1/3/2024
23 Feasible Locations
24 Advancing Five Locations for Concept Designs
• Narrowed to five based on:
• Prioritization rank• Land uses (avoiding property takes)• Public input• Public Works and Planning feedback• Traffic Data • 5 Locations are:
• Old Placerville Rd / Rockingham Dr• Old Placerville Rd / Routier Dr• Kilgore Rd / Sun Center Dr• Capital Center Dr / Data Dr• Mather Field Rd / Peter A McCuen Blvd 2324

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT
1

1/3/2024
25 Draft Concepts
#18 Old Placerville Rd / Rockingham Dr
26 Draft Concepts
#19 Old Placerville Rd / Routier Dr
2526

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT
1

1/3/2024
27 Draft Concepts
#22 Kilgore Rd / Sun Center Dr
28 Draft Concepts
#35 Capital Center Dr / Data Dr
2728

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT
1

1/3/2024
29 Draft Concepts
#46 Mather Field Rd / Peter A McCuen Blvd
30 • Refine concept locations• Develop prioritization plan Next Steps
We are here
2930

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT
1

1/3/2024
31 We want to hear from you!
https://metroquestsurvey.com/dv2v2i
Or bit.ly/RanchoRoundabout
Next Steps
32 THANK YOUTHANK YOU
Check Web Portal for Project Updates:
www.cityofranchocordova.org/CurrentProjects
If you have additional questions about the project,
please reach out to the City’s Project Manager:

Kristine Courdy
(916) 851-8842
[email protected]
CityOfRanchoCordova.org
3132

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT
1

1 Roundabout Feasibility Study
Survey Screens
August 1, 2023

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT 1

2 Welcome Screen

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT 1

3 Welcome Screen

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT 1

4 Welcome Screen

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT 1

5 Preferences Screen

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT 1

6 Preferences Screen

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT 1

7 Preferences Screen

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT 1

8 Preferences Screen

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT 1

9 Preferences Screen

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT 1

10 Preferences Screen

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT 1

11 Image Rating Screen

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT 1

12 Image Rating Screen

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT 1

13 Image Rating Screen

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT 1

14 Image Rating Screen

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT 1

15 Image Rating Screen

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT 1

16 Image Rating Screen

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT 1

17 Image Rating Screen

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT 1

18 Image Rating Screen

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT 1

19 Image Rating Screen

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT 1

20 Image Rating Screen

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT 1

21 Image Rating Screen

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT 1

22 Image Rating Screen

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT 1

23 Image Rating Screen

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT 1

24 Priorities Screen

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT 1

25 Priorities Screen

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT 1

26 Priorities Screen

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT 1

27 Priorities Screen

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT 1

28 Priorities Screen

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT 1

29 Priorities Screen

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT 1

30 Priorities Screen

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT 1

31 Wrap-Up Screen

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT 1

32 Wrap-Up Screen

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT 1

33 Wrap-Up Screen

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT 1

Rancho Cordova Roundabout Feasibility Study Report 44

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT 1

Appendix B:

Screening
Memo
45 Rancho Cordova Roundabout Feasibility Study Report

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT 1

Kittelson & Associates, Inc.

Technical Memorandum

INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE
Kittelson & Associates, Inc. (Kittelson) is helping the City of Rancho Cordova (City) develop a Citywide Roundabout Feasibility Study and Implementation Plan. The plan will identify top locations for roundabout projects, including concepts for those locations and guidance for roundabout planning and implementation moving forward.

Top locations will be identified with a priority and feasibility screening. The screening will use data that describe existing conditions and planning priorities for the City.

This memo documents the data and planning information assembled to describe existing transportation, land use, and demographic information in the City. Each data source is desribed and visually presented in a map. Following the description of existing conditions data, this memo proposes a priority and feasibility screening methodology that will allow the City to transparently describe a roundabout prioritization process. As a next step, Kittelson and the City will test the proposed screening scenarios to identify top locations for roundabouts.

The memo is organized as follows:
◼ Existing Conditions Data
◼ Proposed Screening Methodology
◼ Next Steps
155 Grand Avenue, Suite 505
Oakland, CA 94612
P 510.839.1742
January 17, 2023 Project# 27668
To: Kristine Courdy, PE
City of Rancho Cordova
2729 Prospect Park Drive
Rancho Cordova, CA 95670
From: Kittelson & Associates, Inc.

CC: Edgar Medina, PE; Drew Hart
RE: Roundabout Study – Final Existing Conditions and Screening Process Memo

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT 1

January 17, 2023 Page 2
Roundabout Study – Final Existing Conditions and Screening Process Memo Existing Conditions Data Kittelson & Associates, Inc.

EXISTING CONDITIONS DATA
This section documents the data available for potential use in a citywide roundabout priority and feasibility screening process. The available data include:
◼ Transportation data
– Roadway functional classification
– Posted speed limits
– Lane numbers
– Intersection control type
– Existing and proposed bikeway classification
– Truck routes
– Transit lines and stops
– Existing and projected traffic volumes
– Crash history
◼ Land use data
– Planning areas
– Land use opportunities and constraints
◼ Demographic, Socioeconomic, and Environmental Data
– Social equity indicators
– Hazard risk

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT 1

January 17, 2023 Page 3
Roundabout Study – Final Existing Conditions and Screening Process Memo Existing Conditions Data Kittelson & Associates, Inc.

Transportation data
This section documents assembled data that describe existing and proposed transportation conditions in the City. The transportation data are displayed in a series of maps starting on page 7.

Roadway Functional Classification
City-provided data include the following roadway functional classification designations: state highway, arterial, collector, and local. The City data also included the location of proposed future roads, shown in the figure.

Because the screening will analyze and identify intersections, Kittelson has classified intersections by their intersecting roadway functional classes, including the highest order classification each intersection serves (e.g., if an intersection connects a local and arterial roadway, the arterial roadway would be identified as the highest-order functional classification). The following roadways were changed from local to collector classification (so that they could be included in the screening) at the direction of the City. • Georgetown Drive
• Anatolia Drive
• Cobble Brook Drive
• Dawes Street
• Country Garden Drive
• Laurelhurst Drive
• Rockingham Drive
• Peter A McCuen Boulevard
Posted Speed Limits
City-provided data include posted speed limits.

Roundabouts are a proven safety treatment that force slow driving speeds (typically entry speeds no higher than 30 miles per hour and circulating/exiting speeds ranging from 15 to 25 miles per hour).

Roundabouts built on higher-speed roadways (45 miles per hour or higher) may require some additional traffic calming measures in advance of the intersection or design features to promote slow speeds on approach. The desirable maximum entry design speed for a roundabout is dependent upon the roadway operational context, which may impact the roundabout design. At a high level, NCHRP Report 672 Exhibit 1-9 recommends desirable entry speeds for different roundabout types. ◼ Mini Roundabout (1 lane): 15 - 20 mph
◼ Single-Lane Roundabout (1 lane): 20 – 25 mph
◼ Multilane roundabout (2+ lanes): 25 – 30 mph
Roundabouts have successfully been built in higher speed environments with additional speed-reduction elements (e.g., extending splitter islands on the approaching roadway).

Lane Numbers
City-provided data include information on the total number of through lanes for each roadway (which does not include turn lanes at intersections).

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT 1

January 17, 2023 Page 4
Roundabout Study – Final Existing Conditions and Screening Process Memo Existing Conditions Data Kittelson & Associates, Inc.

Existing roadway lane numbers do not necessarily indicate how many lanes a roundabout would require but do provide an indication of existing curb-to-curb and right-of-way space and the relative amount of traffic a road may carry (streets with more lanes typically carry more traffic)1. In the absence of traffic volume data at any location, the number of lanes on a roadway is a starting point for an assumption about whether a single- or multilane roundabout would provide adequate capacity. The City and Kittelson have agreed that a feasibility screening will screen out six-lane roadways (total through lane number) from further consideration. Ultimately, traffic volumes are necessary to plan roundabout lane number and sizing.

Intersection Control Type
City-provided data include intersection locations and control type. The control type data include the following values: 1 way stop, 2 way stop, 3 way stop, 4 way stop, traffic signal, or uncontrolled. Existing traffic control data provide helpful context.

Existing and Proposed Bikeways by Classification
Kittelson obtained existing and proposed citywide bikeway network data as identified in the Bicycle Master Plan.
2 These data indicate the City’s priorities for people biking; existing and proposed bikeways will determine how people biking are to be served at the intersection for any roundabout project (e.g., shared or separated dedicated lane on approach or exit). A separated, dedicated lane will typically require more space at the intersection, so the desired bikeway type helps to determine planning-level size estimates.

Truck Routes
The City provided data on the federal and local truck routes, as well as other roadways along which trucks frequently travel to serve commercial businesses. More detailed information will become available with the City’s ongoing freight study.

Truck volume and size is a key design input for roundabouts. Large trucks and buses typically dictate a roundabout’s dimensions: if either vehicle frequently uses the intersection, the roundabout will need to be larger than it otherwise would be. At any location, the largest vehicle frequently using the intersection, or the design vehicle, should be able to make all movements in-lane without striking curbs or crossing outside its travel lane. Less frequent larger vehicles can be accommodated through the design (e.g., with use of a truck apron for the rear wheels of a larger truck (see Exhibit 1). 1 Many City roadways are built to accommodate anticipated future (2040) volumes, further reinforcing that lane numbers are a rough proxy for traffic volume data.
2 Available at https://www.cityofranchocordova.org/home/showpublisheddocument/11416/635996042085130000 (as of July 27,2022)

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT 1

January 17, 2023 Page 5
Roundabout Study – Final Existing Conditions and Screening Process Memo Existing Conditions Data Kittelson & Associates, Inc.

Exhibit 1: Basic Geometric Elements of a Roundabout
Source: Reproduced from NCHRP Report 672
Transit Lines and Stops
Kittelson obtained transit routes and stop locations within the City from the Sacramento Regional Transit (SacRT) website. Transit stop location is helpful in the design of a roundabout but would typically not affect its feasibility.

Existing and Projected Traffic Volumes
Existing approach roadway traffic volumes will help identify at a planning level whether a single-lane roundabout would suffice or whether some portions of a roundabout would need multiple lanes. Future projected traffic volumes will allow the project team to test the resilience of roundabout sizing decisions against projected future growth.

Two sources of traffic volume data were available to the project team:
◼ Existing and future model volumes from SACSIM. SACSIM is the Sacramento Area Council of Governments (SACOG) activity based model that represents the Sacramento County area and provides existing and future calibrated hourly and daily volumes. ◼ City Fee Study projected future (2055) volumes. The City has prepared future volumes for its recent traffic impact fee study.

For this screening Kittelson recommends used existing (2016) SacSIM volumes to screen locations that could not feasibly be served by single or multilane roundabouts. Because future volumes in Rancho Cordova show anticipated growth, a feasibility assessment would only rule out locations that would be over capacity with existing volumes and would therefore continue to exceed capacity into the future.

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT 1

January 17, 2023 Page 6
Roundabout Study – Final Existing Conditions and Screening Process Memo Existing Conditions Data Kittelson & Associates, Inc.

Crash History
Reported crash history for the City for 2017-2021 was obtained from the online Statewide Integrated Traffic Reporting System (SWITRS) database maintained by California Highway Patrol and the Transportation Injury Mapping System (TIMS) maintained by SafeTREC at the University of California, Berkeley. The crash datasets were combined into a single geocoded dataset. The dataset was then filtered to include intersectionrelated crashes on local roadways (i.e., not state highways).3 The crash dataset was then used to develop crash severity scores. Severity scores are calculated based on Caltrans estimated costs of crash outcomes and are normalized to be expressed in terms of equivalent property damage only collisions (PDOs).4 The relative severity values are as follows:
◼ Fatal/severe injury collisions are 119.9 equivalent PDOs at signalized intersections and 190.8 at unsignalized intersections.
◼ Moderate injuries are 10.7.
◼ Minor injuries are 6.1.

For example, a signalized intersection with an annualized crash severity score of 48, for example, would represent the equivalent of 48 PDO collisions per year, two fatal/severe injury collisions over 5 years (119.9*2/5 = 48), or some combination of severity levels resulting in the same score.

Figure 9 on page 15 shows the crash severity scores at each intersection.

Because roundabouts are a proven safety treatment and have been demonstrated to drastically reduce fatal and injury crashes, the screening can prioritize locations with a high severity score that would see a substantial safety benefit from a roundabout project.
.
3 Intersection-related crashes are those recorded as occurring within 250 feet of an intersection. This distance is a typical value used to consider the influence area of the intersection and is the definition used by Caltrans. 4 Caltrans Local Road Safety Manual (April 2022).

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT 1

January 17, 2023 Page 7
Roundabout Study – Final Existing Conditions and Screening Process Memo Existing Conditions Data Kittelson & Associates, Inc.

Figure 1: Roadway Functional Classification

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT 1

January 17, 2023 Page 8
Roundabout Study – Final Existing Conditions and Screening Process Memo Existing Conditions Data Kittelson & Associates, Inc.

Figure 2. Posted Speed Limits

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT 1

January 17, 2023 Page 9
Roundabout Study – Final Existing Conditions and Screening Process Memo Existing Conditions Data Kittelson & Associates, Inc.

Figure 3. Number of Lanes

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT 1

January 17, 2023 Page 10
Roundabout Study – Final Existing Conditions and Screening Process Memo Existing Conditions Data Kittelson & Associates, Inc.

Figure 4. Intersection Control Type

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT 1

January 17, 2023 Page 11
Roundabout Study – Final Existing Conditions and Screening Process Memo Existing Conditions Data Kittelson & Associates, Inc.

Figure 5. Existing and Proposed Bikeways

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT 1

January 17, 2023 Page 12
Roundabout Study – Final Existing Conditions and Screening Process Memo Existing Conditions Data Kittelson & Associates, Inc.

Figure 6. Truck Routes

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT 1

January 17, 2023 Page 13
Roundabout Study – Final Existing Conditions and Screening Process Memo Existing Conditions Data Kittelson & Associates, Inc.

Figure 7. Transit Lines & Stops

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT 1

January 17, 2023 Page 14
Roundabout Study – Final Existing Conditions and Screening Process Memo Existing Conditions Data Kittelson & Associates, Inc.

Figure 8 Intersection Volumes

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT 1

January 17, 2023 Page 15
Roundabout Study – Final Existing Conditions and Screening Process Memo Existing Conditions Data Kittelson & Associates, Inc.

Figure 9. Crash Frequency and Severity (2017-2021)

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT 1

January 17, 2023 Page 16
Roundabout Study – Final Existing Conditions and Screening Process Memo Existing Conditions Data Kittelson & Associates, Inc.

Land Use Data
This section includes the data that describe existing and proposed land use in the City.

Planning Areas
The City’s website provides the spatial boundaries of Special Planning areas, which allow for creative implementation of the City’s General Plan. Special Planning Areas may have unique standards to achieve certain planning outcomes. However, planning Areas would not be a part of the screening. Their location and relation to potential roundabout sites will be retained for future City decision making.

Land Use Opportunities and Constraints
Kittelson obtained parcel-level data identifying existing land use categories. These data indicate potential opportunities (e.g., vacant parcels or city-owned parcels where right-of-way impacts may be accommodated) and “fatal flaw” right-of-way impacts (e.g., sensitive land uses on the corner of an intersection). Figure 11 on page 18 shows the following land uses as opportunities:
◼ Vacant parcels, where a project with a right-of-way impact may be feasible). ◼ Parcels identified as flood plains, where a roundabout project may provide an increase in pervious area or may include rain garden features to help guard against flooding.

Conversely, the figure shows the following as constraints, where a project with right-of-way impacts would likely be infeasible:
◼ Cemeteries
◼ Utilities
◼ Drainage ditches
◼ Levees
◼ Adjacent rail tracks

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT 1

January 17, 2023 Page 17
Roundabout Study – Final Existing Conditions and Screening Process Memo Existing Conditions Data Kittelson & Associates, Inc.

Figure 10: Planning Areas

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT 1

January 17, 2023 Page 18
Roundabout Study – Final Existing Conditions and Screening Process Memo Existing Conditions Data Kittelson & Associates, Inc.

Figure 11. Land Use Opportunities & Constraints

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT 1

January 17, 2023 Page 19
Roundabout Study – Final Existing Conditions and Screening Process Memo Existing Conditions Data Kittelson & Associates, Inc.

Demographic, Socioeconomic, and Environmental
Data
Social Equity Indicators
A number of social equity indicators are available at the national, state, and regional level to characterize population characteristics and environmental conditions. The following social equity indicators compiled were obtained or compiled:
◼ USDOT Historically Disadvantaged Communities (Figure 12) ◼ USDOT Areas of Persistent Poverty (Figure 13)
◼ CalEnviroScreen 4.0 (Figure 14)
◼ Healthy Places Index (Figure 15)
◼ SACOG Disadvantaged Communities and Communities of Concern (Figure 16) ◼ TDP index, calculated from US Census ACS data (Figure 17) In addition to several national, federal, and regional social equity focused indicators which provide data at the Census tract level, Kittelson has supplemented with ACS data to incorporate a number of demographic and socioeconomic factors at the more granular Census block group level to identify populations with overlapping determinants of economic disadvantage.

Table 1 summarizes the social equity datasets Kittelson has compiled. Several of these indicators have historically been included as social equity critiera in grant programs such as the federal Rebuilding American Infrastructure with Sustainability and Equity (RAISE) and the state Sustainable Communities Planning Grant programs.

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT 1

January 17, 2023 Page 20
Roundabout Study – Final Existing Conditions and Screening Process Memo Existing Conditions Data Kittelson & Associates, Inc.

Table 1. Social Equity Indicators
Social Equity
Indicator
Associated
Governmental
Level
Granularity Inputs Application
Areas of Persistent
Poverty Federal (USDOT) Census tract (2010) ◼ Poverty ◼ Y/N Historically
Disadvantaged
Communities
Federal (USDOT) Census tract
(2010)
◼ Transportation Access
◼ Health
◼ Environmental
◼ Economic
◼ Resilience
◼ Social
◼
◼ Y/N
CalEnviroScreen

4.0 State Census tract (2010)
◼ Pollution burden
◼ Environmental quality,
◼ Socioeconomic
◼ Public health conditions
◼ Percentile
scores
Healthy Places
Index 3.02
State Census tract
(2010)
◼ Economic
◼ Education
◼ Social
◼ Transportation
◼ Healthcare Access
◼ Housing
◼ Clean Environment
◼ Percentile
scores
SACOG
Disadvantaged
Communities
Regional
Census
block
groups
(2010)
◼ Minority
◼ Low-income
◼ “other” vulnerable
communities -- measures
such as individuals over
age 75, linguistically
isolated households, and
concentrations of
households with at least
one person with a
disability.
◼ Y/N
Transportation
Disadvantaged
Populations Index
Custom
(Kittelson &
Associates)
Census
block (2020)
◼ Demographic factors
(race/ethnicity, poverty
status, English
proficiency, vehicle
access, age, disability,
single-parent families)
◼ Percentile
scores
1 A census tract is considered historically disadvantaged by USDOT if it meetings 4 or more of the social equity indicators. More information on this dataset can be found at https://www.transportation.gov/equity-Justice40 2 More information on the HPI methodology can be found at: https://www.healthyplacesindex.org/learningcenter#first-time The City can use this data to be intentional in the prioritization of legacy and disadvantaged communities for improvement. Kittelson has associated the socialequity scores with each intersection so that any of them may be used in the screening or recalled in the future for reference or reprioritization (for example, when grant opportunities arise and reference a certain indicator).

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT 1

January 17, 2023 Page 21
Roundabout Study – Final Existing Conditions and Screening Process Memo Existing Conditions Data Kittelson & Associates, Inc.

Figure 12 Historically Disadvantaged Communities

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT 1

January 17, 2023 Page 22
Roundabout Study – Final Existing Conditions and Screening Process Memo Existing Conditions Data Kittelson & Associates, Inc.

Figure 13. Areas of Persistent Poverty

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT 1

January 17, 2023 Page 23
Roundabout Study – Final Existing Conditions and Screening Process Memo Existing Conditions Data Kittelson & Associates, Inc.

Figure 14. CalEnviroScreen 4.0

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT 1

January 17, 2023 Page 24
Roundabout Study – Final Existing Conditions and Screening Process Memo Existing Conditions Data Kittelson & Associates, Inc.

Figure 15. Healthy Places Index

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT 1

January 17, 2023 Page 25
Roundabout Study – Final Existing Conditions and Screening Process Memo Existing Conditions Data Kittelson & Associates, Inc.

Figure 16. SACOG Disadvantaged Communities

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT 1

January 17, 2023 Page 26
Roundabout Study – Final Existing Conditions and Screening Process Memo Existing Conditions Data Kittelson & Associates, Inc.

Figure 17. Transportation Disadvantaged Populations

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT 1

January 17, 2023 Page 27
Roundabout Study – Final Existing Conditions and Screening Process Memo Existing Conditions Data Kittelson & Associates, Inc.

Hazard Risk
Roundabouts are a more resilient infrastructure option than traffic signals because they do not require power supply to operate. Therefore, in the event of a power outage, they can continue to operate without the presence of traffic control officers. Hence, the proposed screening includes prioritization of locations sensitive to hazard risks.

The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) developed the National Risk Index (NRI) to create a framework for assessing the likelihood and consequences of natural hazards combined with social factors and resilience capabilities. The NRI includes eighteen hazard types. The three most relevant hazard types to the City of Rancho Cordova geographic context and its roadway operations are:
◼ Wildfire
◼ Flooding
◼ Earthquake
Figure 18 through Figure 20 show a map of the NRI scores in the City by Census tract for each of the three isolated hazard types. The hazard type risk score is relative to all other Census tracts nationally. Scores are not absolute measurements and should be expected to change over time either by their own changing measurements or changes in other communities.

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT 1

January 17, 2023 Page 28
Roundabout Study – Final Existing Conditions and Screening Process Memo Existing Conditions Data Kittelson & Associates, Inc.

Figure 18. Earthquake Hazard Risk

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT 1

January 17, 2023 Page 29
Roundabout Study – Final Existing Conditions and Screening Process Memo Existing Conditions Data Kittelson & Associates, Inc.

Figure 19. Flooding Hazard Risk

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT 1

January 17, 2023 Page 30
Roundabout Study – Final Existing Conditions and Screening Process Memo Existing Conditions Data Kittelson & Associates, Inc.

Figure 20. Wildfire Hazard Risk

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT 1

January 17, 2023 Page 31
Roundabout Study – Final Existing Conditions and Screening Process Memo Proposed Screening Methodology Kittelson & Associates, Inc.

PROPOSED SCREENING METHODOLOGY
This section identifies a proposed screening method to identify priority locations for the City to pursue roundabout projects. The screening as proposed will not by itself determine project feasibility but will rank locations based on City priorities and will include relevant data to help assess feasibility at a planning level.

The proposed screening will use factors to describe the City’s priorities and criteria to evaluate them. The following definitions apply to the screening:
◼ Factors: Categories used to express community or agency values, or general categories that define technical feasibility. An example factor is safety.
◼ Criteria: Characteristics used to measure or evaluate each factor. An example criterion for the safety factor would be intersection crash severity score, where each intersection is given a score to evaluate the relative crash frequency and severity.
◼ Scaling: The process of making two variables comparable. An example scaling would be normalizing the intersection crash severity score (dividing all scores by the maximum score) to create values that range from 0 to 1.
◼ Weights: Number used to indicate the relative importance of different factors. Weighting allows a screening to emphasize certain factors.

Kittelson proposes to conduct the screening in three steps:
◼ Step 1 – Roadway Class, Lane, and Volume Selection. This step acts as a filter and reduces the analysis to include only portions of the roadway network where the City would consider a project. Therefore, this step would exclude:
– Local/local intersections (volumes would not likely justify a roundabout) – Roadways with more than four approaching through lanes, – State-owned facilities (outside of City jurisdiction) – Intersections for which all approaches are private roadways (as indicated by City provided GIS layer).
◼ Step 2 – Prioritization. This step applies a score for each proposed factor and weights the factor scores to calculate a single score for each intersection. The single score would be used to sort the top locations.
◼ Step 3 – Planning and Design Values. This step will add relevant information that can be carried forward to inform roundabout design needs and assess feasibility of the top scoring sites. This step does not modify scores or further filter intersections but provides relevant context information for the City to refine its list of priority locations from the scores created in Step 2.

The steps and relevant data are listed in Table 2.

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT 1

January 17, 2023 Page 32
Roundabout Study – Final Existing Conditions and Screening Process Memo Proposed Screening Methodology Kittelson & Associates, Inc.

Table 2. Proposed Screening Methodology
Factor Criterion/Criteria
Step 1: Roadway Class, Lane, and Volume Selection
Roadway functional
classification
Identify intersections that serve collector or arterial roadways. Exclude all others.

Lane Number Identify intersections that serve roadways with fewer than 6 total through lanes.

Exclude all others.

Volume Exclude intersections where a multilane would be over capacity with existing traffic volumes (see discussion below table).

Step 2: Prioritization
Safety Calculate a crash severity score based on five-year intersection crash frequency and severity. All intersections at the 97.5 percentile score and above receive a maximum score, and intersections below that level are assigned a proportionally scaled score.

Social equity Calculate a composite social equity score for the intersection’s location based on HPI and CES4.0 scores (weighing each of the two equally).

Natural hazard risk Calculate a composite score for the intersection based on natural hazard risk (weighing all three inputs equally).

Modal priorities An aggregate modal priority score is calculated with one point each for the following:
◼ Existing or proposed Class I or Class IV bikeway
◼ NOT along a truck route (0 points for an intersection along a truck route) ◼ Along a transit line
Land Use
Opportunities and
Constraints
Identify existing and expected access need(s), traffic characteristics, and growth potential at potential site locations. Identifies potential “fatal flaw” right-of-way impacts. Scores range from -0.5 to +1 for a combination of the following factors:
◼ Point deductions for an intersection located directly adjacent to a rail line or other constraint land use types
◼ Point additions for an intersection located directly adjacent to an opportunity land use type

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT 1

January 17, 2023 Page 33
Roundabout Study – Final Existing Conditions and Screening Process Memo Proposed Screening Methodology Kittelson & Associates, Inc.

Capacity Feasibility
Exhibit 3-12 from NCHRP Report 672 (recreated as Exhibit 2 below) provides a planning-level assessment of roundabout intersection capacity based on daily volumes. To apply the chart to this feasibility screening, the following daily capacities may be applied:
◼ Single Lane Volumes: Less than or equal to 25,000 daily entering vehicles ◼ Multilane Volumes: Greater than 25,000 and less than or equal to 45,000 ◼ Infeasible: Greater than 45,000
For intersections where model volumes can readily be postprocessed, the modeled daily entering existing conditions volumes can be applied against these values. Kittelson was able to estimate daily entering volumes for 84 intersections and apply this feasibility screening as a proposed element of Step 1.

Exhibit 2 Planning-Level Daily Intersection Volumes
Source: NCHRP Report 672, Exhibit 3-12
Factor/Criteria Notes
The approach presented in Table 2 represents a screening agreed upon between Kittelson and the City.

More details about some of the factors and criteria are listed below. ◼ Social equity factor. create a composite score from the CES4.0 and HPI datasets. These two indicators offer most of the input information that each of the other datasets independently offer, so combining these two avoids unnecessary redundancy. A composite score avoids double counting with other indicators but would incorporate pollution burden, environmental quality, socioeconomic characteristics, public health conditions, economic conditions, education levels, transportation access, and healthcare access.
◼ Modal priority. Deprioritize locations along truck routes because they require larger roundabouts (costlier and harder to fit within site constraints). Prioritize locations along transit lines to capture

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT 1

January 17, 2023 Page 34
Roundabout Study – Final Existing Conditions and Screening Process Memo Proposed Screening Methodology Kittelson & Associates, Inc.
potential benefit provided to transit riders. All else equal, intersections that serve buses would require a larger roundabout, but roundabouts can improve safety and operations for buses. Prioritize locations along bike routes/trails because roundabout’s safety and traffic calming benefits would help improve conditions for people biking.

Table 3 provides the data Kittelson proposes to associate with intersections as part of step 3. As previously indicated, these data would not affect prioritization scores but would help inform an initial assessment of project feasibility for locations identified in Steps 1 and 2. The table explains the influence of each input on roundabout feasibility.

Table 3: Proposed Screening Step 3: Planning and Design Values Data Purpose
Intersection
Control Type
Contextual information.

Transit stop at
intersection
Identifies if relocating a bus stop may present a design challenge.

Traffic volumes Determine single- versus multilane feasibility and test the resilience of roundabout sizing decisions against future growth.

Lane numbers Provides an indication of relative volumes served (if traffic volumes are not available) and the existing curb-to-curb size.

Speed limits Indicate whether roundabouts would slow traffic, integrate well with existing traffic speeds, or (if high-speed approaches) require approach speed management techniques.

Roundabout Corridors
Research documented in NCHRP Report 772: Evaluating the Performance of Corridors with Roundabouts indicates that roundabouts may provide increased benefits if present as a consistent intersection control throughout a corridor in certain scenarios.5 However, the document emphasizes a corridor-specific approach which acknowledges the unique operating, political, and community context of an area. The screening processes proposed in this memo will help identify areas with a high viability for roundabout implementation based on desired operational and community characteristics. The City may choose to evaluate the final list of prioritized and feasible roundabout locations by elevating sites that begin to create a roundabout “series”.
5 NCHRP 722 defined a “series of roundabouts” as a minimum of three roundabouts that function independently on an arterial roadway.

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT 1

January 17, 2023 Page 35
Roundabout Study – Final Existing Conditions and Screening Process Memo Proposed Screening Methodology Kittelson & Associates, Inc.

Factor Weighting
Factor weighting provides the City the opportunity to express priorities by assigning larger weights to some factors than to others. Table 4 provides example weighting scenarios for step 2 of the screening which reflect various potential goals such as equally weighing inputs or emphasizing safety over modal priorities and social equity. The outcome of this is a score that can be used to prioritize locations. Kittelson will set up the screening process so that the City can iterate and conducted sensitivity testing of various scenarios.

The City and Kittelson will collaboratively determine the desired weighting scenario to use for the plan.

Table 4: Example Initial Spatial Prioritization for Screening Step 2 Factor Weights
Factor Option 1: Equal Weights Option 2: Safety First Option 3: Social Equity and Opportunities
Safety 20% 50% 30%
Equity Indicators 20% 12.5% 30%
Hazard Risk 20% 12.5% 7.5%
Modal Priorities 20% 12.5% 7.5%
Land Use Opportunities
and Constraints
20% 12.5% 25%

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT 1

January 17, 2023 Page 36
Roundabout Study – Final Existing Conditions and Screening Process Memo Next Steps Kittelson & Associates, Inc.

NEXT STEPS
Kittelson and the City have discussed appropriate inputs for the screening, and decisions are reflected in the preceding discussion. Kittelson and the City have compared the results of the scenarios presented in Table 4 and have decided to proceed with “Option 2: Safety First.” The screening process will be used to identify an initial top 50 locations to assess design feasibility as part of Task 2.2. Kittelson will test roundabout footprint sizes on the top 50 locations as a first-pass feasibility check.

Following that test, Kittelson and the City will meet to determine locations for further project development and determine the right time for a community meeting to gather input.

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT 1

Rancho Cordova Roundabout Feasibility Study Report 46

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT 1

Appendix C:

Scaled Design
Drawings
47 Rancho Cordova Roundabout Feasibility Study Report

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT 1

© 2023 Microsoft Corporation © 2023 Maxar ©CNES (2023) Distribution Airbus DS

ROCKINGHAM DR OLD PLACERVILLE RD
50 25 0 50
Scale: 1" = 50'
H:\27\27668 - Rancho Cordova Roundabout Study\2_Analysis\2.3_Priority List and Concept Design\concept design files\CAD base files\27668_CORC_Intersection sketch aerials.dwg Jun 06, 2023 - 8:49am - malston Layout Tab: Old Placerville x Rockingham 11x17 Old Placerville Rd & Rockingham Dr
Rancho Cordova, CA
Roundabout Concept 2
N
ROW
Parcel Boundary

LEGEND DRAFT

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT 1

© 2023 Microsoft Corporation © 2023 Maxar ©CNES (2023) Distribution Airbus DS

OLD PLACERVILLE RD ROUTIER RD
2550 0 50
Scale: 1" = 50' \\kittelson.com\fs\H_Projects\27\27668 - Rancho Cordova Roundabout Study\2_Analysis\2.3_Priority List and Concept Design\concept design files\CAD base files\27668_CORC_Intersection sketch aerials.dwg May 05, 2023 - 4:18pm - bdemonbreun Layout Tab: Old Placerville x Routier 11x17 Old Placerville Rd & Routier Rd Rancho Cordova, CA
DRAFT Roundabout Concept May 2023
N
130'
10'
Right of Way
Parcel Boundary

LEGEND DRAFT

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT 1

© 2023 Microsoft Corporation © 2023 Maxar ©CNES (2023) Distribution Airbus DS

SUN CENTER DR CAPITAL CENTER DRIVE
2550 0 50
Scale: 1" = 50' H:\27\27668 - Rancho Cordova Roundabout Study\2_Analysis\2.3_Priority List and Concept Design\concept design files\CAD base files\27668_CORC_Intersection sketch aerials.dwg May 23, 2023 - 3:34pm - malston Layout Tab: Kilgore Road x Sun Center 11x17 Kilgore Rd & Sun Center Dr Rancho Cordova, CA
DRAFT Roundabout Concept May 2023
N
110'
10'
Right of Way
Parcel Boundary

LEGEND DRAFT

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT 1

© 2023 Microsoft Corporation © 2023 Maxar ©CNES (2023) Distribution Airbus DS

DATA DRIVE

CAPITAL CENTER DRIVE
2550 0 50
Scale: 1" = 50' \\kittelson.com\fs\H_Projects\27\27668 - Rancho Cordova Roundabout Study\2_Analysis\2.3_Priority List and Concept Design\concept design files\CAD base files\27668_CORC_Intersection sketch aerials.dwg May 05, 2023 - 4:21pm - bdemonbreun Layout Tab: Capital Center x Data 11x17 Capital Center Dr & Data Dr Rancho Cordova, CA
DRAFT Roundabout Concept May 2023
N
125'
10'
Right of Way
Parcel Boundary
LEGEND
Existing Bus Stop DRAFT

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT 1

© 2023 Microsoft Corporation © 2023 Maxar ©CNES (2023) Distribution Airbus DS © 2023 Microsoft Corporation © 2023 Maxar ©CNES (2023) Distribution Airbus DS PETER A MCCUEN BLVD

MATHER FIELD RD
50100 0 100
Scale: 1" = 100' H:\27\27668 - Rancho Cordova Roundabout Study\2_Analysis\2.3_Priority List and Concept Design\concept design files\CAD base files\27668_CORC_Intersection sketch aerials.dwg May 23, 2023 - 8:36am - malston Layout Tab: Mather Field x Peter McCuen 11x17 Mather Field Rd & Peter A McCuen Blvd Rancho Cordova, CA
DRAFT Roundabout Concept May 2023
N
140'
Right of Way
Parcel Boundary

LEGEND DRAFT

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT 1

Rancho Cordova Roundabout Feasibility Study Report 48

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT 1

Appendix D:

Funding
Sources
49 Rancho Cordova Roundabout Feasibility Study Report

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT 1

Appendix D: Funding Sources
This appendix summarizes potential federal, state,
regional, and local funding sources for roundabout
design and implementation as of 2023. This list
also includes funding sources for projects that
would install bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure
via roundabouts and educational programs.

Federal
Surface Transportation Block
Grant (STBG) Program
Managing Agency:

Federal Highway Administration
The 2015 Fixing America’s Surface Transportation
(FAST) Act converted the long-standing Surface
Transportation Program (STP) into the STBG
Program. Funding is allocated to the state
and may be used for projects to preserve and
improve the conditions and performance on any
federal-aid highway; highway and transit safety
infrastructure improvement projects; bridge
and tunnel projects on qualifying public roads;
pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure; and transit
capital projects, including intercity bus terminals.

Website:

STBG - Federal-aid Programs - Federalaid Programs and Special Funding - Federal Highway Administration (dot.gov)
Safe Streets and Roads for
All (SS4A) Grant Program
Managing Agency:

United States Department of Transportation
The 2021 Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (BIL)
established the SS4A discretionary program with
$5 billion in appropriated funds over five years.

The SS4A Program funds regional, local, and Tribal
initiatives through grants to support planning,
infrastructure, behavioral, and operational initiatives to prevent death and serious injury on roads and
streets involving all roadway users, including
pedestrians; bicyclists; public transportation,
personal conveyance, and micromobility users;
motorists; and commercial vehicle operators.

Individual roundabouts are not eligible. But because
roundabouts are proven safety countermeasures,
roundabout projects can be eligible if they are
submitted as part of multi-location, citywide, or
corridor safety improvement project or action plan.

Website:

Safe Streets and Roads for All (SS4A) Grant
Program | US Department of Transportation
Rebuilding American
Infrastructure with
Sustainability and
Equity (RAISE) Grant
Managing Agency:

United States Department of Transportation
Through the RAISE Grant Program, Congress
has dedicated nearly $5.6 billion for nine rounds
of National Infrastructure Investments to fund
projects that have a significant local or regional
impact. (These grants were previously known
as BUILD or TIGER discretionary grants.)
RAISE also aims to award additional funding
to projects in areas of persistent poverty or
historically disadvantaged communities.

The RAISE Program’s eligibility requirements allow
state and local project sponsors to obtain funding
for multimodal, multi-jurisdictional projects that
are traditionally more difficult to fund through
department of transportation programs.

A RAISE application requires the
following components:
1/ SF-424 form
2/ Project Information Form
3/ Project Description
4/ Project Location File
5/ Project Budget
6/ Funding Commitment Documentation
7/ Merit Criteria
8/ Project Readiness
9/ Benefit-Cost Narrative and Calculations
10/ Optional Letters of Support
Website:

RAISE Discretionary Grants | US Department of
Transportation; How to Apply for RAISE Grants
Rancho Cordova Roundabout Feasibility Study Report 50

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT 1

Congestion Mitigation
and Air Quality (CMAQ)
Improvement Program
Managing Agency:

United States Department of Transportation
The CMAQ Program funds state transportation
projects designed to reduce traffic congestion
and improve air quality—particularly in areas that
do not attain national air quality standards. The
program helps support investments that encourage
alternatives to driving alone, improve traffic flow,
and help urban areas meet air quality goals. The
CMAQ Program aims to reduce regulated emissions
associated with carbon monoxide, ozone and
particulate matter pollution in nonattainment and
maintenance areas, often through congestion
mitigation techniques. Managing congestion
can help reduce regulated emissions, reduce
travel delays, decrease engine idle time, and
prevent unproductive fuel consumption.

Website:

Federal Programs Directory: Congestion
Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) Improvement
Program | US Department of Transportation
State
Active Transportation
Program (ATP) Grants
Managing Agency:

California Transportation Commission (CTC)
The Active Transportation Program (ATP)
consolidates existing federal and state
transportation programs—including the
Transportation Alternatives Program (TAP),
Bicycle Transportation Account (BTA), and state
Safe Routes to School (SR2S)—into a single
discretionary grant program. The ATP emphasizes:
/ Increasing use of active modes by increasing
the proportion of walking and bicycling trips.
/ Increasing safety of non-motorized users.
/ Reducing greenhouse gases.
/ Improving public health.
/ Having disadvantaged communities
fully share in program benefits.

The program includes a state-administered and
a regionally-administered component. The latter
is listed and described in the next section.

Roundabout projects submitted for ATP
grants must be a part of broader active
transportation improvement projects
focused on the items listed above.

Website:

Active Transportation Program (ATP) | Caltrans
Highway Safety
Improvement Program
(HSIP) Grants
Managing Agency:

Caltrans
The HSIP is a core federal-aid program in the
FAST Act and the Infrastructure Investment and
Jobs Act (IIJA). The HSIP aims to reduce traffic
fatalities and serious injuries on all public roads,
including non-State-owned public roads and
roads on Tribal land. Safety projects can include
improvements like crosswalk markings, rapid
flashing beacons, curb extensions, speed feedback
signs, guard rails, pedestrian refuge islands,
and high friction surface treatments. Local HSIP
projects must be identified based on crash data.

HSIP projects must demonstrate a
competitive benefit-cost ratio based on
historical crash data. The lowest awarded
benefit-cost ratio from Cycle 11 was 19.

Website:

Local Highway Safety Improvement
Program (HSIP) | Caltrans
Affordable Housing and
Sustainable Communities
(AHSC) Program
Managing Agency:

California Strategic Growth Council
The AHSC Program aims to reduce greenhouse
gas emissions through projects that implement
land-use, housing, transportation, and agricultural
land preservation practices to support infill and
compact development and that support related and
coordinated public policy objectives, Objectives
include efforts to reduce air pollution, improve
conditions in disadvantaged communities, support
or improve public health, improve connectivity
and accessibility to jobs, increase options for
mobility, and increase transit ridership.
51 Rancho Cordova Roundabout Feasibility Study Report

ITEM 12.2. ATTACHMENT 1

Roundabout projects submitted for the AHSC
Program must be a part of broader active
transportation improvement projects that are
alongside affordable housing developments.

Website:

Affordable Housing and Sustainable Communities
(AHSC) - Strategic Growth Council (ca.gov)
Transformative Climate
Communities (TCC) Program
Managing Agency:

California Strategic Growth Council
Established by Assembly Bill 2722, the TCC Program
funds the development and implementation
of neighborhood-level transformative climate
community plans. To be eligible for funding,
projects must reduce greenhouse gas emissions
significantly over time, and they must leverage
additional funding sources and provide health,
environmental and economic benefits to the
community. The TCC Program funds both
implementation and planning grants.

Transportation-related projects can include:
/ Developing active transportation
and public transit projects.
/ Supporting transit ridership programs and
transit passes for low-income riders.
/ Expanding first-and-last mile connections
/ Building safe and accessible
biking and walking routes.
/ Encouraging education and planning
activities to promote increased use
of active transportation modes.

Website:

Transformative Climate Communities (TCC)
- Strategic Growth Council (ca.gov)
Local
Revolving Match Program
Managing Agency:

Sacramento Area Council of Governments
The Revolving Match Program offers project
sponsors additional funding to help pursue major
federal or state grants and deliver maintenance and
capital projects. Projects must fall within the fourcounty (Sacramento, Sutter, Yolo, Yuba) region and be listed in the 2020 Metropolitan Transportation
Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (MTP/SCS)
or fit within a lump-sum project category. Lump
sum project categories include road maintenance
and reconstruction, transit vehicle replacements,
operational improvements, intelligent transportation
systems, and bicycle and pedestrian investments.

Projects must be federal-aid eligible for CMAQ,
Regional Surface Transportation Program or State
Transportation Improvement Program funding.

Federal-aid eligible projects are those that contain
significant transportation infrastructure in the
public right-of-way. The project sponsor must
identify a specific state or federal grant program
in their application, and the project must meet
the eligibility requirements of that grant program.

Projects must also have a funding or financial plan
and be listed in an adopted planning document.

A draft planning document may be acceptable,
depending on the phase of the document.

Website:

Revolving Match Program - Sacramento Area
Council of Governments (sacog.org)
SACOG Regional
Funding Program
Managing Agency:

Sacramento Area Council of Governments
This regional funding program
funds three subprograms:
/ Community Design grants local government
agencies and their partners funds to
implement the SACOG Blueprint smart
growth principles. This program aims to use
regional transportation funding to promote
the construction of land use developments
(or land use and related projects) to reduce
congestion, decrease vehicle miles traveled and
support more walking, biking, and transit use.
/ Transformative is for projects seeking $5
million or more to address regional outcomes
or add new transit service. Outcomes may
include reducing regional vehicle miles
traveled or greenhouse gas emissions per
capita; reducing congestion; increasing
multimodal travel options; providing longterm economic benefits; improving goods movement; and improving safety and security.
/ Maintenance & Modernization funds projects
requesting less than $5 million to target
intelligent transportation systems or operations;
road rehabilitation or reconstruction; transit
Rancho Cordova Roundabout Feasibility Study Report 52