2025-01678 Streets for People Active Transportation Final Plan - Part 2 — Sacramento City Council, December 2, 2025

Community
Engagement
3 Community Engagement
Input from community members, advocates, community-based organizations, local businesses, and City committees was crucial in developing the Streets for People Plan every step of the way.

Through the Streets for People Plan, we received input from a broad range of community members to help us identify and better understand transportation needs, challenges, and community priorities about our transportation network. We conducted a three-phased effort with a range of in-person and virtual activities to meet people where they are as well as provide a variety of convenient opportunities to be involved in the project. For a more detailed breakdown of engagement activities, events, dates, locations visited, and findings, please refer to Appendix 5 – Public Engagement Feedback.

Leading with Equity
We conducted engagement activities across
the city with special attention to activities in
the plan’s focus areas: North Sacramento,
South Sacramento, and Fruitridge/Broadway.

We also sought out priority audiences for
engagement including Black, Indigenous,
and People of Color (BIPOC) communities;
households with no/limited access to motor
vehicles; and people with disabilities. The
experiences of these individuals were
crucial in understanding existing issues and
concerns across a range of perspectives, and
their feedback informed recommendations
to create a transportation system that
works for everyone. To reach broader and
often underrepresented audiences, our
communication materials were made
available in English, Hmong, simplified
Chinese, Spanish, and Vietnamese with
targeted engagement activities conducted in
Spanish, Hmong, Mandarin, and Vietnamese.

We recognize that even while we visited
many neighborhoods and made efforts
to disseminate information widely, not all
communities had the time, capacity, or
internet access to go out of their way to
engage with us. While we made some organic
connections with the help of our community
leaders and trusted voices, we acknowledge
that just because certain voices were not
able to join the conversation, we should
not assume they have no lived experiences
or visions for the future of the city’s active
transportation network.
41 Streets for People: Sacramento's Active Transportation Plan We created a volunteer Community Planning
Team (CPT) composed of a diverse group
of community members primarily from the
focus areas but also representing different
city neighborhoods. CPT members were
compensated for their time and valuable
insights. CPT members advised us throughout
the process to make sure community voices
and priorities were centered. CPT members
attended meetings, suggested opportunities
for community engagement events like
farmers’ markets and school resource
fairs, provided feedback on recommended
improvements, and helped us spread the
word about project engagement activities for
the larger community.

A big thank you…
to each and every one of our
neighbors who gave their time,
energy, and commitment to
share their transportation
needs and priorities with us.

That input made the Streets
for People Plan a plan created
by the community and for
everyone in Sacramento.

Community Planning Team
Community Planning Team meeting
42 Community Engagement
To see both the neighborhood-scale and
citywide picture, we employed several
strategies designed to provide people options
for how they wished to share their input (see
Figure 17 on page 45).

Pop-up events and
neighborhood meetings
We held pop-up events and presented at
neighborhood meetings to engage with
communities in place and reduce travel
barriers to participation. These events
provided project information to communities
and requested their input on the local
context to inform the plan such as important
destinations within the neighborhood and
streets or intersections that pose a barrier to
accessing those destinations by walking or
biking.

Online interactive engagement
Our project website (streetsforpeople.org)
served as a space to share information
about the project and other related
initiatives. Our online interactive maps
enabled users to provide feedback about the
existing transportation network and current
deficiencies. These tools also allowed users
to share their thoughts about the proposed
network improvements.

Pop-up event at Rio Velo
Engagement Events
Walking workshops and related
case studies
We held in-person walking workshops in
various neighborhoods throughout the city
with an emphasis on neighborhoods within
the three focus areas. These were selected
based on feedback from our CPT to be
representative of the active transportation
challenges that exist in Sacramento today.

These events provided communities with the
opportunity to express their concerns about
their perceptions of safety, accessibility, and
comfort in real time and brainstorm their
vision for what the corridor could look like in
the future.
43 Streets for People: Sacramento's Active Transportation Plan

IN-PERSON ENGAGEMENT

ONLINE ENGAGEMENT
69 engagement events
6 Community Planning
Team meetings
1,438
participants
160
participants
640+
comments
9 virtual events
3 City Commission
presentations
Project website and
online interactive map
3,191
comments
2,415
contributors
3 focus groups
31 pop-up events
13 neighborhood
presentations
11 walking workshops
5 canvasing sessions
9 community workshops
Engagement by the Numbers
44 Figure 17 – Community Engagement Events
South
Sacramento
Fruitridge / Broadway
North
Sacramento
Ä99
Ä244
Ä275
Ä99
Ä51
Ä160
Ä16
Ä160
Ä84
¥80
¥80
¥5
¥5
£50
Bing
Maloney
Golf Course
Sacramento River
American River

EL CAMINO AVE

DEL PASO BLVD ARDEN WAY

GARDEN HWY
65TH ST
24TH ST

FRANKL NI BLVD
21ST ST

MACK RD

NORTHGATE BLVD

DEL PASO RD

FLORIN RD

POWER INN RD

ELDER CREEK RD

RICHARDS BLVD

BRUCEVILLE RD
14TH AVE

RIVERSIDE BLVD

SAN JUAN RD

RIO LINDA BLVD

STOCKTON BLVD

FREEPORT BLVD

TRUXEL RD

NORWOOD AVE

CENTER PKWY

FRUITRIDGE RD

FLORIN PERKINS RD

MAIN AVE

MEADOWVIEW RD

MARYSVILLE BLVD

BELL AVE

HOWE AVE

ROSEVILLE RD

POCKET RD

AUBURN BLVD

C OMME R CEWAY

ARENA BLVD

EXPOSITION BLVD

COSUMNES RIVER BLVD

NATOMAS BLVD
65TH STREET EXPY
10TH ST
9TH ST
16TH ST
15TH ST
I ST
N ST
L ST
12TH ST
19TH ST
5TH ST

BR O ADWAY

FOLSOM BLVD
3RD ST
P ST
J ST
W S
Q ST
T
X ST
7TH ST
Data source: City of Sacramento, County of Sacramento, County of Yolo, and Caltrans. Date saved: 2/6/2025.

PUBLIC

ENGAGEMENT
EVENTS
DESTINATIONS +

BOUNDARIES
Railroad
Park
City Boundary
Focus Area
EVENTS*
Canvasing (5)
Community
Workshop (9)
Neighborhood
Presentation (13)
Pop-up Event (31)
Walking
Workshop (11)
Ä99
Ä51
¥5
£50
9TH ST
10TH ST
16TH ST
15TH ST

CAPITOL MALL
I ST
N ST
L ST
12TH ST
19TH ST
5TH ST
3RD ST
P ST

BROADWAY
W ST
Q ST
X ST
J ST
21ST ST
29TH ST
7TH ST
0 1 2 MILES
* Virtual events are excluded from the
map, including the six CPT Meetings, five
Community Workshops, three Neighborhood
Presentations, and two Pop-up Events.

CENTRAL CITY

CENTRAL CITY
45 Streets for People: Sacramento's Active Transportation Plan What We Heard
The following four themes represent what we heard throughout the engagement process related to walking, biking, and rolling in Sacramento:

MAKE IT SAFER AND MORE CONNECTED
Address safety concerns related to
traffic conditions, user behavior, and
network gaps.

Safety was often identified as the most
important project goal. Our communities are
concerned about the way drivers seem to
travel at unsafe speeds at specific locations
and noted general problematic behavior such
as not looking during turns or veering into bike
lanes. They also noted feeling unsafe while
crossing because of traffic conditions and
because crossings are too infrequent.

Establish more comfortable east-west
connections.

Our communities noted feeling unsafe
walking, biking, and rolling on various eastwest streets because of the fast traffic and lack of separation from oncoming traffic.

They also see existing highways as barriers
to local destinations. They would like to
see more comfortable facilities for people
walking, biking, and rolling, particularly in the
Fruitridge/Broadway and North Sacramento
focus areas.

Create safer, more frequent
connections to transit, neighborhood
destinations, and jobs.

Our residents confirmed a need for a greater
network of high-frequency transit, and that it
is difficult to access the limited existing highfrequency transit because of the lack of low stress infrastructure outside the urban core.

They would like to see additional lower-stress
connections to transit and neighborhood
destinations including parks and schools.

Existing highways also limit our communities'
ability to go to different destinations within
their neighborhoods.
46 Community Engagement
Some of our communities don't have comfortable facilities to walk or bike on, leading to people biking on sidewalks which creates conflicts with people walking. 47 Streets for People: Sacramento's Active Transportation Plan

MAKE IT MORE

COMFORTABLE
Provide wider sidewalks and
bikeways along major streets.

Our communities feel the sidewalks
and bike facilities are too narrow to use
comfortably and sidewalks are sometimes
blocked by utility poles or boxes.

Community members also felt that some
walking facilities are too steep for mobility
device users. Additionally, residents
highlighted existing rolled curbs allow
drivers to park on the sidewalk, acting as
barriers for people walking.

Include more shade along
sidewalks, bike facilities, and at
bus stops.

Our communities said that shade was an
important aspect along sidewalks and
bike facilities and at bus stops to improve
comfort for walking, biking, and rolling.

Also, shaded rest stops or benches are
needed to make walking more accessible
and comfortable along shared-use paths
during heat and for those traveling longer
distances or with physical disabilities.

This need is supported by the results
from Appendix 2 – Existing Conditions,
particularly the heat vulnerability analysis.
48 Community Engagement

MAINTAIN WHAT

WE ALREADY HAVE
Focus on maintenance of existing infrastructure.

Increased maintenance on existing streets to delineate
space for all users often came up as an important project goal. Our communities highlighted a desire for better
maintenance of street elements including pavement
quality, lane striping, and using reflective delineators.

Sidewalks in Old North Sacramento with overgrown vegetation 49 Streets for People: Sacramento's Active Transportation Plan

PROVIDE SUPPORTIVE AMENITIES AND PROGRAMS
Supporting infrastructure should be
included.

Our communities requested additional
pedestrian scale lighting throughout
neighborhood streets and shared-use paths
to better see and be seen during evening
and darker hours of the day. Additional
bike parking was also highlighted for
various locations throughout the city. More
connections to regional shared-use paths
would support people walking, biking, and
rolling across neighborhoods.

Interdepartmental collaborations
are needed to support people
experiencing homelessness.

We often heard about conditions and
issues surrounding people experiencing
homelessness and the active transportation
network. In some places our communities
noted being hindered from walking or
biking by existing encampments of people
experiencing homelessness. While outside the
scope of this specific plan, this input helped
inform interdepartmental collaborations to
leverage available support and resources for
these individuals.
50 Figure 18 – Incorporation of Community Comments into Recommendations Community Engagement
Our Communities' Input Matters!
The feedback our communities provided through various engagement events was combined with our analyses to inform the development of infrastructure and programmatic/policy recommendations as shown below:

Walking
Workshops
Project Email Existing Conditions
Analysis
How did our communities’ comments
inform project recommendations?
Interactive Map
Community
Workshops
In-person & virtual
Community Needs
Synthesis
Project
Recommendations
Pop-Up Events
Community
Planning Team
51 Recommendations
4 Make it safer and
more connected
Make it more
comfortable
Maintain what
we already have
Provide supportive
amenities and programs
Recommendations
The Streets for People Plan focuses
on expanding the existing network
of sidewalks, bikeways, and general
infrastructure to enhance and promote
people walking, biking, and rolling in
Sacramento. This plan also includes
supportive policies and programs to
enhance the infrastructure improvements.

The recommendations included in this
chapter build on the findings from our
analysis and the key themes we heard
from our communities during our public
engagement events:

This chapter presents infrastructure, policy,
and programmatic recommendations, as well
as maintenance considerations. Infrastructure
recommendations have been divided to show
proposed network improvements for people
walking and rolling, improvements for biking,
and improvements at intersections. Policy and
programmatic recommendations have been
organized thematically into those focusing on
equity, education, engagement, engineering,
evaluation, and encouragement. Finally, the
maintenance considerations provide solutions
to challenges expressed by our communities.
53 What we heard What we propose
• Providing greater separation between people
driving and people walking, biking, and rolling.
• Closing gaps for people walking, biking, and
rolling to transit.
• Identifying key intersections for safety
improvements.
• Enhancing multiple east-west connections
on major streets that work together with the
Neighborhood Connections Plan.

What we heard What we propose
• Emphasizing increased separation between
people driving and people walking, biking,
and rolling.
• Identifying sidewalk widening and sidewalk
buffering opportunities.
• Providing tools to identify opportunities for
greater shade cover along street improvements.

Make it safer and
more connected
Make it more
comfortable
54 Streets for People: Sacramento's Active Transportation Plan What we heard What we propose
• Talking openly about the existing and ongoing
need for maintenance of our network.
• Focusing improvements in historically
underinvested areas of the city.
• Finding overlap between upgrades to
infrastructure for people walking, biking, and
rolling to more easily implement it.

What we heard What we propose
• Expanding City policies that support people
walking, biking, and rolling.
• Enhancing existing programs to increase education
around walking and biking and encourage people
to walk and bike more frequently.
• Identifying opportunities for more supportive
amenities like bike parking, shade trees, systemic
safety improvements, and citywide Safe Routes to
Schools programming.

Maintain what we
already have
Provide supportive
amenities and
programs
Recommendations 55
Network
Recommendations
The recommendations included in this section
are based on our communities' feedback. The
recommendations build off the existing walking
and biking networks, incorporate previous plans
(see Appendix 1 – Plan and Policy Review), and
complement the improvements identified in the
Neighborhood Connections Plan.

Recommendations
Toolbox
Different facilities are better suited for different streets, based on characteristics such as how fast and how
frequently vehicles use the street, the street width,
and other types of transportation using the space. The
following facilities and amenities are part of the city’s bikeway and pedestrian “toolbox.”
As part of this toolbox, this plan also includes traffic calming improvements from the Neighborhood
Connections Plan.

What is a toolbox?
A toolbox is a collection of resources and
infrastructure related improvements designed
to support the goals of this plan. This toolbox
complements the improvements included in the
Neighborhood Connections Plan.
56 Streets for People: Sacramento's Active Transportation Plan Recommendations 57
* Intersection or crossing improvement

SIDEWALKS
• Provide an area for people
walking to travel separated
from vehicle traffic.
• Typically constructed out
of concrete and raised
at least four inches
above the adjacent
roadway. Includes a curb,
gutter, and sometimes
a landscaped buffer.
• Wider sidewalks (>6ft) allow
for comfortable passing,
side-by-side walking, and
accommodate people
using wheelchairs and
strollers. Wide sidewalks
are particularly beneficial
in areas with high walking
traffic, near schools, at
transit stops, and near retail
and entertainment areas.

SHADE TREES
• Can increase comfort
for people walking
and biking by lowering
temperatures, filtering air
and water, and improving
the quality of both.
• The presence of trees
can make walking and
biking facilities feel
more comfortable and
appealing, contributing to
mode shift and reducing
greenhouse gas emissions.

PLANTING STRIPS
• Create expanded
space for roots so trees
can grow faster; share
nutrients; better resist
disease, pests, and
drought; and live longer.
• Reduce risk of pavement
damage by root systems.
• Can serve to capture
stormwater recharge,
and potential storage
opportunity.

Toolbox for People Walking
and Rolling
58 Streets for People: Sacramento's Active Transportation Plan * Intersection or crossing improvement
Toolbox for People Walking and Rolling (cont.)

MEDIAN REFUGE
ISLANDS*
• Help improve access
for people walking by
increasing visibility and
allowing pedestrians
to cross one direction
of traffic at a time.
• Minimize pedestrian
exposure at mid-block
crossings by shortening
the crossing distance and
increasing the number of
available gaps for crossing.

HIGH-VISIBILITY
CROSSWALKS*
• High-visibility crosswalks
are marked with thick
bars, drawing additional
attention and awareness
to the crossing.
• In school zones, these
crossings are yellow instead
of the standard white color.

CURB

EXTENSIONS
• Horizontal extensions of
the curb into the street at
intersections or mid-block
crossings to expand the
place where pedestrians
can stand, narrow crossing
distances for people
walking, provide additional
space for placemaking
and landscape features,
and reduce speeds
of turning vehicles.
• Shortens crossing distances
and improves visibility.
• Slows turning vehicles.

Recommendations 59

PEDESTRIAN
SIGNAL*
• Used at mid-block crossings
where there are three (3)
or more travel lanes, traffic
volumes greater than
9,000, and posted speed
limits 35 mph or greater.
• Used at shared-use
path crossings,
both at intersections
and mid-block.
• Flashing amber warning
beacons may be
utilized at unsignalized
intersection crossings.

WAYFINDING
• Directional signage for
people walking to orient
themselves within the
network and navigate to
typical destinations.
• Helps make the active
transportation network
more approachable to
people walking or rolling
in an unfamiliar area.
• Can help people discover
new destinations
and services.
60 Streets for People: Sacramento's Active Transportation Plan

SHARED-USE
PATHS
• Paths shared by
people walking and
biking completely
separated from
motor vehicle traffic.
• Comfortable for
people of all ages
and abilities.
• Typically located
within or along parks,
rail corridors, rivers, or
other bodies of water.

Toolbox for People Biking

BUFFERED

BIKE LANES
• Dedicated lane
for bike travel
adjacent to traffic.
• Separated from traffic
or parking by painted
lane line or buffer.
• Buffer provides
additional comfort
and space from
motor vehicles
and/or parking.

SEPARATED

BIKEWAYS
• On-street bike lane
separated from motor
vehicle traffic by curb,
median, planters,
parking, or other
physical barrier.
• One- or two-way
facility.
• More comfortable
for people of all
ages and abilities.

BIKE LANES
• Dedicated lane
for bike travel
adjacent to traffic.
• Enable people biking to
ride at their preferred
speed without
interference from cars
or traffic conditions.
• Separated from traffic
or parking by painted
lane line or buffer.

Recommendations 61

BIKE PARKING
• Includes curbside
racks, corrals,
bike lockers, or
bike stations.
• Racks provide shortterm dedicated
parking outdoors
or in garages.
• Lockers provide longterm secure parking
at specific locations.
• Stations provide
long-term indoor
parking typically near
transit and can be
staffed or self-serve.
• The City adopted the
Bike Rack Design and
Placement Standards
in 2017 that apply to
all newly installed
bike parking.

WAYFINDING
• Directional signage for
people biking to orient
themselves within the
network and navigate
to typical destinations.
• Helps make the
biking network more
approachable to
new riders and
people riding in an
unfamiliar area.
• Can help people
discover new
destinations
and services.

BIKE-FRIENDLY

INTERSECTIONS
• Intersections designed
to provide additional
separation, comfort,
and safety for people
biking and walking.
• May include bike
boxes, signal priority,
curb extensions, or fully
protected intersection.
• Ideal for locations
with conflicts between
people driving,
walking, and biking.

BIKE ROUTES*
• Signed and/or marked
streets where drivers
share the travel lane
with people biking.
• May include
additional traffic
calming elements to
improve user comfort
(sometimes referred to
as bike boulevards).
• Generally not
considered
comfortable for most
users on higher speed
and volume streets.
• Typically appropriate
with speeds under
25 mph and vehicle
volumes of 3,000
per day or less.
* As of January 1, 2025, cities and agencies are prohibited from installing sharrows on any street with a speed limit above 30 mph following the signing into law of SB 1216. Some exceptions are allowed when used at or near intersections for connecting to other bikeways. The bill also requires that any project funded through the CA Active Transportation Program (ATP) not install a Class III facility or sharrows on a street with a speed limit above 25 mph (into effect on January 1, 2026). Jurisdictions may still implement Class III facilities/sharrows on roadways with speeds over 25 mph if it can be demonstrated that the project will reduce the speed to 25 mph or lower, or if the Class III designation/ marking is appropriate and context sensitive. 62 Streets for People: Sacramento's Active Transportation Plan

MINI ROUNDABOUTS /

TRAFFIC CIRCLES
• Mini roundabouts are
unsignalized, circular
intersections where
incoming traffic yields to
traffic in the intersection.
• Designs may include
separated bike lanes
or shared lanes
to accommodate
people biking.
• Traffic circles require
less space and may
be stop controlled.
• Provides an opportunity
for landscaping or
placemaking.

TRAFFIC DIVERTER /

STREET CLOSURE
• Street modifications which
partially or fully close
the street to vehicular
traffic while still allowing
access for people
walking and biking.
• Diagonal diverters prevent
all through movement, and
forced turn diverters prevent
through traffic on one street.
• Reduces cut-through traffic.
• Can be accomplished
with temporary, quickbuild materials.

Toolbox for Neighborhood Connections

SPEED HUMPS /

LUMPS / TABLES
• Elevated mounds three to
four feet in height placed
in the roadway intended to
slow vehicles. The mounds
may include gaps to allow
emergency vehicles and
bicycles to travel through
without experiencing
vertical deflection.
• To achieve effective traffic
calming, features should
be spaced appropriately
250 to 500 feet apart.
• When placed near
pedestrian crossings, they
can significantly enhance
comfort for those crossing.

Recommendations 63

CHICANES
• Segments of curb,
landscaping, or other curb
extension and alternate
from one side of the road to
the other to create a curved
segment of roadway which
shortens a driver’s sight
lines, lowering speeds.
• Additional space
may be utilized for
parking, landscaping,
or other elements.
• Increase available public
space on a corridor.

Requires additional
roadway space; generally
feasible for streets with
on-street parking.

PINCH POINTS
• Horizontal extension of the
curb into the street that
narrow travel lanes by one
to two feet or narrow a
two-lane roadway into one
wide travel lane shared by
vehicles traveling in both
directions, requiring drivers
to yield to each other.
• Reduces vehicle speeds.
• May be paired with
mid-block crossings to
reduce crossing distances
for people walking.

RAISED CROSSWALKS /

INTERSECTIONS
• Crosswalks or intersections
which are elevated to
sidewalk level to slow
vehicles and increase
driver alertness.
• Raised crossings are a
variation which raises
only the pedestrian/
bicycle crossing, and they
can be used as shared
use path crossings.
• Detectable warnings
and drainage should
also be considered.
• Increases visibility and
slows down drivers.
64 Streets for People: Sacramento's Active Transportation Plan CURB

LANE

NARROWING
• Narrowing lanes to 11
feet and reducing the
total amount of space
for vehicles can provide
visual cues for drivers to
slow down. This effect
may be achieved via
striping, adding a bikeway,
adding vertical elements,
or moving curb.
• Slows down drivers.

Reduces crossing distances
for people walking.
• May provide space for
placemaking amenities.

Toolbox for Neighborhood Connections (cont.)

ON-STREET

PARKING
• On-street parking reduces
roadway width by allowing
parking along a roadway
curb, causing a driver
to experience increased
“friction” on the side of
the road resulting in
lower driver speeds.
• Slows drivers and
provides public service
for people who drive.

Recommendations 65

HARDENED

CENTERLINES
• Hardened centerlines are
typically a flexible delineator
post or raised speed hump
placed along the road
centerline at an intersection
to narrow the path
through the intersection.
• Encourages drivers to turn
left at lower speeds.
• Guides vehicles to a wider
turning angle for slower,
more predictable turns.
• Helps drivers better see
people crossing the street.

GEOMETRY CHANGES /

CURB RADII
• Changing roadway
geometry or narrowing
curb radii increases the
amount of curb space,
requiring vehicles to slow
down when turning. This
treatment can also be
used to realign skewed
intersections to right angles.
• Improves visibility
for everyone using
the intersection.
• Reduces crossing distances
and vehicle turning speeds.

May provide additional
space for landscaping.

Before
After

STREET TREES
• Trees planted along a
roadway ("Street Trees")
can change the perception
of drivers such that the
road appears narrower
• than it is.
• Street trees can be used to
increase comfort for people
walking by lining sidewalks
and for people biking by
providing shade in bike
lanes, helping to reduce
temperatures on hot days.
• This treatment helps
to reduces traffic noise
and address the City’s
tree canopy goals
Streets for People: Sacramento's Active Transportation Plan Students walking to school along Del Paso Road. Credit: North Natomas Jibe 66 Recommendations for
People Walking and Rolling
The Streets for People Plan identifies 567 miles of new or improved sidewalks throughout the city. Recommendations for people walking, including planned active transportation crossings over major barriers, are shown in Figure 19–Figure 25 on the following pages.

New Sidewalk
on Both Sides
New or Improved
Sidewalks**
New Sidewalk
on One Side
Improved Sidewalk*
276 miles
75 miles
216 miles
567
miles

WHAT WE PROPOSE
*Sidewalk widening and filling in missing sidewalks.
**Rounded to the nearest whole number.

Ä99
Ä244
Ä275
Ä99
Ä51
Ä160
Ä16
Ä160
Ä84
¥80
¥80
¥5
¥5
£50
Bing
Maloney
Golf Course
Sacramento River
Arcade
Creek
American
River

EL CAMINO AVE

FOLSOM BLVD

DEL PASO BLVD
H ST

ARDEN WAY

LAND PARK DR

RALEY BLVD
J ST

GARDEN HWY
65TH ST

BROADWAY
65TH STREET EXPY

ARENA BLVD
24TH ST

FRANKLIN BLVD

CLUBCENTER DR

SOUTH AVE

RIV ERS DI E BL VD

FRUITRIDGE RD
21ST ST

NORTHGATE BLVD

DEL PASO RD
43RDAVE

FLORIN RD

POWER INN RD

SAN JUAN RD

ELVAS AVE

RICHARDS BLVD

POCKET RD
58TH ST

BRUCEVILLE RD
14TH AVE

ELDER CREEK RD

RIO LINDA BLVD

CENTER PKWY

MACK RD

GR E ENHAVEN DR

NORWOOD AVE

RU SH RI VER D R

DRY CREEK RD

VALLEY HI DR

HAVENSIDE DR

B E N D DR

AZEVEDO DR

NORTH AVE

GRAND AVE ROSEVILLE RD

FREEPORT BLVD
21ST AVE

MARYSVILLE BLVD

TRUXEL RD

LA RIVIERA DR

CARLSON DR

CA LVINE RD

FLORIN PERKINS RD

AUBURN BLVD GLORIA DR
T ST

EXPOSITION BLVD

MAIN AVE

MEADOWVIEW RD

AMHERSTST

STOCKTON BLVD

EL CENTRO RD

BROOKFIELDDR

BELL AVE

LEMON HILL AVE

HOWEAVE
29TH ST

UN IVERSI T Y
AVE

GATEWAY PARK BLVD

DUCKHORN
DR

COMMERCE WAY

HOGA N DR

PARK DR

JACIN TO A VE

COSUMNES RIVER BLVD

NATOMAS BLVD

DELTA SHORES CIR
Data source: City of Sacramento, County of Sacramento, County of Yolo, Caltrans, ACS 2021 5-year. Date saved: 7/30/2025.

Ä51
¥5
£50
9TH ST
N ST
L ST
J ST
26TH ST
23RD ST
15TH ST
E ST
K ST
V ST
G ST
D ST
22ND ST
17TH ST
7TH ST
11TH ST
20TH ST

CENTRAL CITY

CENTRAL CITY
0 1 2 MILES
Figure 19 – Recommendations for People Walking and Rolling in Sacramento DESTINATIONS + BOUNDARIES
Railroad
Park
City Boundary
Focus Area
Shared-Use Path
New Sidewalk
on Both Sides
New Sidewalk
on One Side
Improved Sidewalk
County-Maintained
Shared-Use Path

RECOMMENDATIONS

FOR PEOPLE WALKING

AND ROLLING

PARK SITE

TANZANITE
PARK
SOUTH

NATOMAS
PARK
NORTH

NATOMAS
PARK
AmericanRiver
Sacramento River

GARDEN HWY

NORTHGATE BLVD

DEL PASO RD

RICHARDS BLVD

NATOMAS CENTRAL DR

ORCHARD LN

B R IDGEFORD DR

SAN JUAN RD
12TH ST

TRUXEL RD

EL CAMINO AVE

PEBBLEWOOD DR BEND DR

AZEVEDO DR

EL CENTRO RD

REGENCY PARKC
M
IR

ABRY DR

DUCKHORN DR

CLUB CENTER DR

NORTHBOROUGH DR

ARENA BLVD

GATEWAY PARK BLVD

COMMERCE WAY

MENDEL WAY

RIVER DR

BRIDGECROSS DR

PARK DR

SHORE VISTA WAY

FAIRWEATHER DR

GATEWAY OAKS DR

NA TO M AS PARK DR

NATOMAS BLVD

MACON DR

ROSE ARBOR DR

DANBROO K D R

MAIN AVE

BAYOU RD

NEWMARKET DR
0 0.5 1 MILES
Figure 20 – Recommendations for People Walking and Rolling in Northwest Sacramento

DESTINATIONS
+ BOUNDARIES
Railroad
Park
City Boundary
Focus Area
Shared-Use Path
New Sidewalk
on Both Sides
New Sidewalk
on One Side
Improved Sidewalk
County-Maintained
Shared-Use Path

HANSEN RANCH

PARK SITE
ROBLA
PARK

UEDA PARKWAY

DEL PASO

REGIONAL
PARK

SUTTER'S

LANDING PARK

JOHNSTON
PARK
DEL

PASO REGIONAL PARK
Arcade Creek
American River

GROVE AVE

LEISURELN

EL CAMINO AVE

DEL PASO BLVD

ARDEN WAY RALEY BLVD

SOUTH AVE

NORTHGATE BLVD

WINTERS ST

RIO LINDA BLVD

NORWOOD AVE

SAN JUAN RD

DRY CREEK RD
C ST

FORD RD

NORTH AVE

ROSEVILLE RD

MCKINLEY BLVD

GRAND AVE

ARCADE BLVD EVERGREEN ST

BELL AVE

EXPOSITION BLVD

MAIN AVE

MARYSVILLE BLVD

ELVAS AVE

CARLSON DR

HARVARD ST

ASTORIAST

AUBURN BLVD

ELEANOR AVE

SILVER EAGLE RD

HERITAGE LN
FEE DR
0 0.5 1 MILES
Figure 21 – Recommendations for People Walking and Rolling in Northeast Sacramento

DESTINATIONS
+ BOUNDARIES
Railroad
Park
City Boundary
Focus Area
Shared-Use Path
New Sidewalk
on Both Sides
New Sidewalk
on One Side
Improved Sidewalk
County-Maintained
Shared-Use Path

CAPITOL
MALL
N ST
L ST
12TH ST
J ST
12TH AVE
26THST
E ST
4TH AVE
23RD ST
K ST
15TH ST
4TH ST

FRONT ST
22ND AVE
V ST
F ST
G ST
H ST
D ST
C ST
9TH AVE
22ND ST
11TH AVE
17TH ST
7TH ST
19TH ST
20TH ST

CAPITOL AVE
23RD AVE
20TH AVE
7TH AVE
19TH AVE
15 THAVE

SUTTER'S

LANDING PARK
LAND
PARK
Sacramento River
AmericanRiver
Sacramento River
24TH ST

LEISURELN

FOLSOM BLVD

LAND PARK DR

MARTIN LUTHER KING JR BLVD

STOCKTON BLVD

FRANKLIN BLVD

FRUITRIDGE RD

NORTHGATE BLVD

DEL PASO BLVD
43RD AVE

BROADWAY

SUTTERVILLE RD

RIVERSIDE BLVD
47TH AVE
51ST ST

RICHARDS BLVD

GLORI A DR
58TH ST

SEAMAS AVE
35TH AVE
COLOMA
WAY
39TH ST

ELVAS AVE

VALLEJO WAY

FREEPORT BLVD
26TH AVE
14TH AVE
T ST

GREENHAVEN DR

LAWRENCE DR

KARBET WAY
21ST AVE

E XPOSITION BLVD

CROCKER DR

GARDEN HWY

IRVIN WAY

HOGAN DR

MCKINLEY BLVD
FEE DR
0 0.5 1 MILES

DESTINATIONS
+ BOUNDARIES
Railroad
Park
City Boundary
Focus Area
Shared-Use Path
New Sidewalk
on Both Sides
New Sidewalk
on One Side
Improved Sidewalk
County-Maintained
Shared-Use Path

SUTTER'S

LANDING
PARK
TAHOE
PARK
OKI
PARK
SIM
PARK
NUNN
PARK

GRANITE
PARK
ARMY
DEPOT
PARK
American River
H ST

FOLSOM BLVD
J ST
65TH ST

AMERICAN RIVER DR
65TH STREET EXPY

COLLEGE TOWN DR

FRUITRIDGE RD

POWER INN RD

ELDER CREEK RD

BROADWAY
51ST ST

ELVAS AVE
59TH ST
58TH ST
14TH AVE
C ST
21ST AVE

MCKINLEY BLVD

LA RIVIERA DR
COLOMA
WAY

CARLSON DR

STOCKTON BLVD

FLORIN PERKINS RD
T ST

NOTRE DA M E DR

LAWRENCE DR

HOWE AVE

UNIVERSITY AVE

OCCIDENTAL DR

LEMON HILL AVE

FAIR OAKS BLVD
S ST
56TH ST

BELVEDERE AVE
0 0.5 1 MILES

DESTINATIONS
+ BOUNDARIES
Railroad
Park
City Boundary
Focus Area
Shared-Use Path
New Sidewalk
on Both Sides
New Sidewalk
on One Side
Improved Sidewalk
County-Maintained
Shared-Use Path

BING MALONEY

GOLF COURSE

CHORLEY PARK

BARTLEY

CAVANAUGH

GOLF COURSE
Sacramento River

FRANKLIN BLVD
FRUITRIDGE RD 21ST ST

LAND PARK DR

GREENHAVEN DR

FLORIN RD
47TH AVE

FREEPORT BLVD

COSUMNES RIVER BLVD

POCKET RD

SEAMAS AVE
24TH ST

RIVERSIDE BLVD

WINDBRIDGE DR

RUSH RIVER DR

SUTTERVILLE RD
35TH AVE

HAVENSIDE DR

RIVERGATE WAY
12TH AVE

GLORIA DR

AMHERST ST
43RD AVE

IRVIN WAY
29TH ST

HOGAN DR

MEADOWVIEW RD

PARK R VI IERA WAY

KARBET WAY
26TH AVE
21ST AVE

CROCKER DR

DELTA SHORES CIR

JOHN STILL DR
0 0.5 1 MILES

DESTINATIONS
+ BOUNDARIES
Railroad
Park
City Boundary
Focus Area
Shared-Use Path
New Sidewalk
on Both Sides
New Sidewalk
on One Side
Improved Sidewalk
County-Maintained
Shared-Use Path

ELDER CREEK RD
65TH STREET EXPY
24TH ST

FRUITRIDGE RD FRUITRIDGE RD
21ST ST
58TH ST

POWER INN RD
47TH AVE

CENTER PKWY

FRANKLIN BLVD

CARLIN AVE

VALLEY HI DR

FRANKLIN BLVD
21ST AVE

TANGERINE AVE

CALVINE RD

STOCKTON BLVD

MACK RD

FLORIN RD

ARMADALE WAY

MEADOWVIEW RD

EHRHARDT AVE

JOHN STILL DR

STOCKTON BLVD

BROOKFIELD DR

LAWRENCE DR

JACINTO RD

IRVIN WAY
29TH ST

BRUCEVILLE RD

HOGAN DR

J A CINTO AVE

BAMFORD DR
26TH AVE

WYNDHAM DR

COSUMNES RIVER BLVD

LEMON HILL AVE

DELTA SHORES CIR
0 0.5 1 MILES

DESTINATIONS
+ BOUNDARIES
Railroad
Park
City Boundary
Focus Area
Shared-Use Path
New Sidewalk
on Both Sides
New Sidewalk
on One Side
Improved Sidewalk
County-Maintained
Shared-Use Path

INFRASTRUCTURE
Existing/Recommended
Existing Crossings
Active
Transportation
Crossing
Recommended Crossings
Active
Transportation
Crossing
All Modes Crossing
All Modes Crossing
Figure 25 – Recommendations for People Walking and Rolling in Southeast Sacramento 73 Streets for People: Sacramento's Active Transportation Plan Recommendations
for People Biking
The recommendations included here
are intended to create a more extensive
network of facilities for people biking
that provides easy and comfortable
connections to neighborhood and regional
destinations. Recommended improvements
for people biking, including planned active
transportation crossings over major barriers,
are shown in Figure 27–Figure 33.

The recommendations have also been
developed to build on the Neighborhood
Connections Plan which includes both
Primary (i.e., routes that provide access to
everyday destinations with traffic calming
features) and Secondary (i.e., signed
routes that serve as “feeder routes,” linking
additional users to their desired destinations)
routes. Primary Routes for Neighborhood
Connections are identified with an outline
on Figure 27–Figure 33. For the complete
Neighborhood Connections network, see
Figure 34.

Additional information on how we developed
the recommended improvements can be
found in Appendix 7 – Development of
Recommendations and Segmentation
(Methods).
74 Recommendations

HOW THE RECOMMENDED BIKE

FACILITIES WERE SELECTED
The number and speed of vehicles on a
roadway can affect whether people biking feel
comfortable taking that route or bicycling at
all. Identifying the appropriate bikeway facility
type can be a challenge.

The Caltrans Bikeway Facility Selection
Guidelines and Complete Streets Contextual
Design Guidance (DIB-94) provide a starting
point to help identify which bike facility
type (e.g., bike lane, buffered bike lane,
separated bikeway) is appropriate for
each street context.

The goal of these guidelines is to provide
staff a framework to implement low-stress
bikeways that are comfortable for all ages and
abilities by using the posted travel speed and
average daily traffic (ADT) volume (as shown
in Figure 26). Please note that this document
only provides general guidance. Corridor
specific factors including land use context
should be considered when determining the
appropriate bikeway facility to implement.

Feasibility determination, final design,
accessibility, funding, community-identified
needs, and implementation of any
recommended improvements will be
undertaken in future feasibility studies and
addressed at the individual project level.

Figure 26 – Recommended Bicycle Facilities for Urban Areas, Suburban Areas, and Rural Main Streets
Source: Figure 5-A. Design Information Bulletin 94 - Complete Streets IB 94 Complete Streets Contextual Design Guidance DIB-94 does not apply above 45 mph
Shared-Use Path or Separated Bikeway
Shared-Use Path or Separated Bikeway
or Buffered Bike Lane
Shared-Use Path or Separated Bikeway
or Buffered Bike Lane or Bike Lane
Shared-Use Path or Separated Bikeway or
Buffered Bike Lane or Bike Lane or Bike Route
75 76 Streets for People: Sacramento's Active Transportation Plan *Rounded to the nearest whole number. More information on facilities for people biking can be found in the Neighborhood Connections Plan.

WHAT WE PROPOSE
Existing Facilities
for People Biking*
91 mi.
113
mi.
204
mi.
12 mi.
72 mi.
84 mi.
7 mi.
39 mi.
46 mi.
257
mi.
49 mi.
306
mi.
82 mi.
144
mi.
226
mi.
449
miles
New + Upgraded Facilities
for People Biking*
417
miles
Complete Recommended
Network for People Biking*
866
miles
Shared-Use Paths
Bike Lanes
Buffered Bike Lanes
Bike Routes
Separated Bikeways
Shared-Use Paths
Bike Lanes
Buffered Bike Lanes
Bike Routes
Separated Bikeways
Shared-Use Paths
Bike Lanes
Buffered Bike Lanes
Bike Routes
Separated Bikeways
Ä99
Ä244
Ä275
Ä99
Ä51
Ä160
Ä16
Ä160
Ä84
¥80
¥80
¥5
¥5
£50
Sacramento River
Arcade
Creek
A mericanRiver
Bing
Maloney
Golf Course

EL CAMINO AVE

FOLSOM BLVD

DEL PASO BLVD
H ST

ARDEN WAY

L AND PARK DR

RALEY BLVD
J ST

GARDEN HWY
65TH ST

BROADWAY
65TH STREET EXPY
24TH ST

FRANKLIN BLVD

CLUBCENTER DR

SOUTH AVE

MACK RD

RIVERSIDE BLVD
FRUITRIDGE RD 21ST ST

NORTHGATE BLVD

DEL PASO RD
43RDAVE

FLORIN RD

POWER INN RD

ELDER CREEK RD

SAN JUAN RD

CENTER PKWY

E LVAS AVE

RICHARDS BLVD

POCKET RD
58TH ST

BRUCEVILLE RD
14TH AVE

RIO LI NDA BLVD

GREE NHAVEN DR

NORWOOD AVE

RUSH RIVER DR

DRY CREEK RD

VALLEY HI DR

HAVENSIDE DR

B END DR

NORTH AVE

GRAND AVE

ROSEVILLE RD

FREEPORT BLVD
21ST AVE

MARYSVILLE BLVD

TRUXEL RD

LA RIVIERA DR

CARLSON DR

CA LVINE RD

FLOR NI PERK NI S RD

AUBURN BLVD

GLORIA DR

BELL AVE
T ST

AZEVEDODR

EXPOSITION BLVD

MAIN AVE

MEADOWVIEW RD

AMHERSTST

STOCKTON BLVD

EL CENTRO RD

BROOKFIELDDR

HOWE AVE
29TH ST

UNIVERSIT Y AVE

ARENABLVD

GATEWAY PARK BLVD

DU CKHOR N
DR

COMMERCE WAY

HOGA N DR

PARK DR

JACI NTO AV E

LEMON HILL AVE

COSUMNES RIVER BLVD

NATOMAS BLVD

DELTA SHORES CIR
Data source: City of Sacramento, County of Sacramento, County of Yolo, and Caltrans. Date saved: 7/30/2025.

Ä51
¥5
£50
9TH ST
8TH ST
I ST
N ST
L ST
5TH ST
26TH ST
P ST 24TH ST
23RD ST
3RD ST

BROADWAY
15TH ST
E ST
S ST
W ST
28TH ST
K ST
22ND ST
U ST
D ST
17TH ST
7TH ST
11TH ST
V ST
G ST

CENTRAL CITY

CENTRAL CITY
0 1 2 MILES
Figure 27 – Recommendations for People Biking in Sacramento Separated Bikeway /
Buffered Bike Lane
Shared-Use Path
Bike Lane
Buffered Bike Lane
Bike Route
Neighborhood
Connections
– Primary Route
Separated Bikeway

GARDEN HWY

CLUB CENTER DR

NORTHGATE BLVD

DEL PASO RD

SAN JUAN RD SAN JUAN RD

RICHARDS BLVD

NATOMAS CENTRAL DR

ORCHARDLN

BRIDGEFORD DR

PEBBLEWOOD DR

MENDEL WAY
12TH ST

BEND DR

EL CAMINO AVE

TRUXEL RD

DANBROOK DR

AZEVEDO DR

EL CENTRO RD

MABRYDR

NORTHBOROUGH DR

ARENA BLVD

GATEWAY PARK BLVD

DUCKHORN DR
COM

MERCE WAY

COMMERCE WAY

PARK DR

RIVER DR

BRIDGECROSS DR

SHORE VISTA WAY

FAIRWEATHER DR

GATEWAYOAKS DR

NA TO M AS PARK DR

ROSE ARBOR DR NATOMAS BLVD

MAIN AVE

MACON DR

BAYOU RD

NEWMARKET DR

REGENCY
PARK
HANSEN
RANCH

PARK SITE

TANZANITE
PARK
SOUTH

NATOMAS
PARK
NORTH

NATOMAS
PARK
0 0.5 1 MILES
Separated Bikeway /
Buffered Bike Lane
Shared-Use Path
Bike Lane
Buffered Bike Lane
Bike Route
Neighborhood
Connections
– Primary Route
Separated Bikeway

INFRASTRUCTURE
Existing/Recommended
DESTINATIONS + BOUNDARIES
Railroad
Park
City Boundary
Focus Area
County-Maintained
Shared-Use Path
Existing Crossings
Active Transportation
Crossing
Recommended Crossings
Active Transportation
Crossing
All Modes Crossing
All Modes Crossing
Figure 28 – Recommendations for People Biking in Northwest Sacramento 78 Ä51
Ä160
¥80
Arcade Creek
American River GROVE AVE

LEISURE LN

EL CAMINO AVE

DEL PASO BLVD

ARDEN WAY

RALEY BLVD

SOUTH AVE

NORTHGATE BLVD

ELEANOR AVE

WINTERS ST

RIO LINDA BLVD

NORWOOD AVE

SAN JUAN RD

DRY CREEK RD
C ST

FORD RD

NORTH AVE

GRAND AVE

ROSEVILLE RD

MCKINLEY BLVD

ARCADE BLVD MARYSVILLE BLVD EVERGREEN ST

AUBURN BLVD

MARYSVILLE BLVD

BELL AVE

EXPOSITION BLVD

MAIN AVE

ELVAS AVE

CARLSON DR

HARV A RD ST

ASTORIAST

MAIN AVE

SILVER EAGLE RD

HERITAGE LN
FEE DR

HANSEN RANCH

PARK SITE
ROBLA
PARK

UEDA PARKWAY

DEL PASO

REGIONAL
PARK

SUTTER'S

LANDING PARK

JOHNSTON
PARK
DEL

PASO REGIONAL PARK
0 0.5 1 MILES
Separated Bikeway /
Buffered Bike Lane
Shared-Use Path
Bike Lane
Buffered Bike Lane
Bike Route
Neighborhood
Connections
– Primary Route
Separated Bikeway

INFRASTRUCTURE
Existing/Recommended
DESTINATIONS + BOUNDARIES
Railroad
Park
City Boundary
Focus Area
County-Maintained
Shared-Use Path
Existing Crossings
Active Transportation
Crossing
Recommended Crossings
Active Transportation
Crossing
All Modes Crossing
All Modes Crossing
Figure 29 – Recommendations for People Biking in Northeast Sacramento 79 Separated Bikeway /
Buffered Bike Lane
Shared-Use Path
Bike Lane
Buffered Bike Lane
Bike Route
Neighborhood
Connections
– Primary Route
Separated Bikeway

FACILITY
Figure 30 – Recommendations for People Biking in Central West Sacramento 80 Ä99
Ä51
Ä16
£50
American River
H ST

FOLSOM BLVD

FOLSOM BLVD
J ST
65TH ST

AMERICAN RIVER DR
65TH STREET EXPY

FRUITRIDGE RD

POWER INN RD

ELDER CREEK RD

BROADWAY
51ST ST

ELVAS AVE
59TH ST
58TH ST
14TH AVE
C ST

STOCKTON BLVD
21ST AVE

MCKINLEY BLVD

LA RIVIERA DR
COLOMA
WAY

CARLSON DR
58TH ST

STOCKTON BLVD
J ST

FLORIN PERKINS RD
T ST

NOTRE DA M E DR

OCCIDENTAL DR

LAWRENCE DR

COLLEGE TO W NDR HOWE AVE

UNIVERSITY AVE

LEMON HILL AVE

FAIR OAKS BLVD
S ST
56TH ST

BELVEDERE AVE

SUTTER'S

LANDING
PARK
TAHOE
PARK
OKI
PARK
SIM
PARK
NUNN
PARK

GRANITE
PARK
ARMY
DEPOT
PARK
0 0.5 1 MILES
Separated Bikeway /
Buffered Bike Lane
Shared-Use Path
Bike Lane
Buffered Bike Lane
Bike Route
Neighborhood
Connections
– Primary Route
Separated Bikeway

INFRASTRUCTURE
Existing/Recommended
DESTINATIONS + BOUNDARIES
Railroad
Park
City Boundary
Focus Area
County-Maintained
Shared-Use Path
Existing Crossings
Active Transportation
Crossing
Recommended Crossings
Active Transportation
Crossing
All Modes Crossing
All Modes Crossing
Figure 31 – Recommendations for People Biking in Central East Sacramento 81 Ä160
¥ Ä99
5 ¥5
Sacramento River

SUTTERVILLE RD
24TH ST
24TH ST 24TH ST

FRANKLIN BLVD

FRUITRIDGE RD
21ST ST

LAND PARK DR

LAND PARKDR
43RD AVE

FLORIN RD

RIVERSIDE BLVD

RIVERSIDE BLVD
47TH AVE

FREEPORT BLVD

FREEPORT BLVD FREEPORT BLVD

COSUMNES RIVER BLVD

POCKET RD

SEAMAS AVE

GREENHAVEN DR

WINDBRIDGE
R
DR
U SH

RIVER DR

HAVENSIDE DR
35TH AVE
12TH AVE

RIVERGATE WAY

GLORIA DR

JOHN STILL DR

AMHERST ST

IRVIN WAY
29TH ST

HOGAN DR

MEADOWVIEW RD

CROCKER DR

PARK R IVIERA WAY
KARBET
WAY
26TH AVE
21ST AVE

DELTA SHORES CIR
LAND
PARK

BING MALONEY

GOLF COURSE

CHORLEY PARK

BARTLEY

CAVANAUGH

GOLF COURSE
0 0.5 1 MILES
Separated Bikeway /
Buffered Bike Lane
Shared-Use Path
Bike Lane
Buffered Bike Lane
Bike Route
Neighborhood
Connections
– Primary Route
Separated Bikeway

INFRASTRUCTURE
Existing/Recommended
DESTINATIONS + BOUNDARIES
Railroad
Park
City Boundary
Focus Area
County-Maintained
Shared-Use Path
Existing Crossings
Active Transportation
Crossing
Recommended Crossings
Active Transportation
Crossing
All Modes Crossing
All Modes Crossing
Figure 32 – Recommendations for People Biking in Southwest Sacramento 82 Ä99
¥5

ELDER CREEK RD

FRUITRIDGE RD
65TH STREET EXPY
24TH ST
24TH ST

MACK RD

FRUITRIDGE RD
21ST ST
58TH ST
47TH AVE

CENTER PKWY CENTER PKWY

BRUCEVILLE RD

FRANKLIN BLVD

POWER INN RD

FRANKLIN BLVD

VALLEY HI DR
21ST AVE

BAMFORD DR

TANGERINE AVE

CALVINE RD

STOCKTON BLVD

FLORIN RD

ARMADALE WAY

MEADOWVIEW RD

EHRHARDT AVE

JOHN STILL DR

STOCKTON BLVD

CARLIN AVE

BROOKFIELD DR

LAWRENCE DR

IRVIN WAY
29TH ST
21ST AVE

HOGAN DR

JACINTO AVE
26TH AVE

LEMON HILL AVE

WYNDHAM DR

COSUMNES RIVER BLVD

JACINTO RD

DELTA SHORES CIR
SIM
PARK
NUNN
PARK
SHASTA
PARK
0 0.5 1 MILES
Separated Bikeway /
Buffered Bike Lane
Shared-Use Path
Bike Lane
Buffered Bike Lane
Bike Route
Neighborhood
Connections
– Primary Route
Separated Bikeway

INFRASTRUCTURE
Existing/Recommended
DESTINATIONS + BOUNDARIES
Railroad
Park
City Boundary
Focus Area
County-Maintained
Shared-Use Path
Existing Crossings
Active Transportation
Crossing
Recommended Crossings
Active Transportation
Crossing
All Modes Crossing
All Modes Crossing
Figure 33 – Recommendations for People Biking in Southeast Sacramento 83 Figure 34 – Neighborhood Connections Network
Shared-Use Path
Primary Route
Secondary Route

NEIGHBORHOOD CONNECTIONS

NETWORK
DESTINATIONS + BOUNDARIES
Railroad
Park
City Boundary
Focus Area
84 Recommendations
The absence of bicycle facilities is a barrier for our communities accessing transit along Del Paso Boulevard. 85 Streets for People: Sacramento's Active Transportation Plan Intersection Recommendations
In addition to the network recommendations,
we identified key intersections for improving
safety and connectivity across the city. We
identified 612 intersections where existing
and proposed biking routes intersect or where
safety concerns like motor vehicles turning
at high-speeds, lack of crossing facilities,
turning vehicles encroaching onto bike lanes,
and others were identified through public
engagement and data analysis. Specific
improvements at each intersection will require
future assessment of their conditions like
speeds, volumes, number of vehicle lanes,
existing facilities, and even context of the
street.

A decision matrix to help City staff identify the
most appropriate intersection improvements
is available in Appendix 7 – Development
of Recommendations and Segmentation
(Methods). Intersection recommendation
locations are shown in Figure 35–Figure 41.
86 The intersection of Stockton Blvd and Lemon Hill Ave experiences high numbers of people walking or biking to access Lemon Hill Plaza. !!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!! !!
!!
!!
!! !!
!!
!!
!!
!!
! !! !
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!! !!
!! !! !!
!!!!!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!!!
!!
!!
!!!!
!!!!
!!
!! !!
!! !!
!! !!
!!!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!! !!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!! !!
!! !!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!!! !!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!! !!
!!
!!
!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!! !!
!! !!
!!
!!
!! !!
!!
!!
!!
!! !!!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!! !!!!
!!!!
!!!!!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!! !!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!! !!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!!!
!!
!!
!!!!
!!
!!
!! !!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!! !!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!! !! !! !! !!
!!
!! !!
!!
!!
!!!!
!!
!!
!!!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!! !!
!!
!!
!!!!
!!
!!
!!
!!!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!! !!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!! !!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!! !!
!!
!! !! !!
!!
!!
!!
!! !!
!! !!
!!
!!
! !! !
!! !!
!!
!!
!!
!! !! !! !!
!!
!! !!
!!
!! !!
! !! !
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!! !!
!!
!! !!
!! !!
!!
!! !!
!!
!!
!!!! !!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!!!
!!!!
!!!!
!!
!!!!!!
!!
!!
!!
!!!!!!
!!
!!
!! !!!!
!!
!!!!
!!!!!!
!!!!
!!
!! !! !!
!!
!!
!! !! !!
!! !!
!! !!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
! !! !
!!
!!
!! !!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!! !!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!! !! !!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!! !!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!! !!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!! !!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
Ä99
Ä244
Ä275
Ä99
Ä51
Ä160
Ä16
Ä160
Ä84
¥80
¥5
¥5
£50
Bing
Maloney
Golf Course
Sacramento River
Arcade
Creek
American River

EL CAMINO AVE

FOLSOM BLVD

DEL PASO BLVD
H ST

ARDEN WAY

LAND PARK DR

RALEY BLVD
J ST

GARDEN HWY
65TH ST

BROADWAY
65TH STREET EXPY
24TH ST

FRANKLIN BLVD

CLUBCENTER DR

SOUTH AVE

MACK RD

RIVERSIDEBLVD
FRUITRIDGE RD 21ST ST

NORTHGATE BLVD

DEL PASO RD
43RD AVE

FLORIN RD

POWER INN RD

ELDER CREEK RD

SAN JUAN RD
CENTER
PKWY

ELVAS AVE

RICHARDS BLVD

POCKET RD
58TH ST

BRUCEVILLE RD
14TH AVE

RIO LI NDA BLVD

GREE NHAVEN DR

NORWOOD AVE

RUSH RIVER DR

DRY CREEK RD

VALLEY HI DR

H A VENS DI E DR

B END DR

NORTH AVE

GRAND AVE

ROSEVILLE RD

FREEPORT BLVD
21ST AVE

MARYSVILLE BLVD

TRUXEL RD

LA RIVIERA DR

CARLSON DR

CA LVINE RD

FLORIN PERKINS RD

AUBURN BLVD

GLORIA DR

BELL AVE
T ST

AZEVEDO DR

EXPOSITION BLVD

MAIN AVE

MEADOWVIEW RD

AMHERSTST

STOCKTON BLVD

EL CENTRO RD

BROOKFIELDDR

HOWE AVE
29TH ST

UNI VE RS ITY AVE

ARENABLVD

GATEWAY PARK BLVD

DU CKHOR N
DR

COMMERCE WAY

HOGA N DR

PARK DR

JACI NTO AV E

LEMON HILL AVE

COSUMNES RIVER BLVD

NATOMAS BLVD

DELTA SHORES CIR
!! !!
Data source: City of Sacramento, County of Sacramento, County of Yolo, Caltrans, ACS 2021 5-year. Date saved: 6/20/2025. !!
! !! !!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
! !! !!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!!!
!!
!!
!!!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!! !!
!!
!!
!!!!
!!!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
! !! !
!!
!!!!
!!!!
!!!!
!!
! !! !!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
! !! !
!!
!! !!
!!
!! !!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!! !!
!! !!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
Ä!! 275
Ä51
¥5
£50
9TH ST
N ST
L ST
J ST
26TH ST
15TH ST
E ST
K ST
22ND ST
17TH ST
7TH ST
11TH ST
D ST
V ST
G ST

CENTRAL CITY

CENTRAL CITY
0 1 2 MILES
Figure 35 – Intersection Recommendations in Sacramento
Recommended
Improvement

INTERSECTION

RECOMMENDATIONS
DESTINATIONS + BOUNDARIES
Railroad
Park
City Boundary
Focus Area
87 !!
!!
!!
!! !!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!! !!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!! !!
!!
!! !!
!! !!
!!
!!
!!
!! !!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
Ä160
Ä99
¥80
¥80
¥5
¥5
HANSEN
RANCH

PARK SITE

TANZANITE
PARK
SOUTH

NATOMAS
PARK
NORTH

NATOMAS
PARK
American River
Sacramento River

GARDEN HWY

CLUB CENTER DR

NORTHGATE BLVD

DEL PASO RD

SAN JUAN RD

RICHARDS BLVD

NATOMAS CENTRAL DR

ORCHARD LN

BRIDGEFORD DR

PEBBLEWOOD DR

MENDEL WAY
12TH ST

BEND DR

EL CAMINO AVE

TRUXEL RD

DANBROOK DR

AZEVEDO DR

EL CENTRO RD

REGENCY PARK CIR

MABRYDR

NORTHBOROUGH DR

ARENA BLVD

GATEWAY PARK BLVD

DUCKHORNDR

COMMERCE WAY

PARK DR

RIVER DR

BRIDGECROSS DR

SHORE VISTA WAY

FAIRWEATHER DR

GATEWAYOAKS DR

NA TO M AS PARK DR

ROSE ARBOR DR NATOMAS BLVD

MAIN AVE

MACON DR

BAYOU RD

NEW MARKET DR
0 0.5 1 MILES
Figure 36 – Intersection Recommendations in Northwest Sacramento Recommended
Improvement

INTERSECTION

RECOMMENDATIONS
DESTINATIONS + BOUNDARIES
Railroad
Park
City Boundary
Focus Area
88 !!
!! !!
!!
!!
!! !!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!!! !!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!! !!
!!
!!
!!
!! !! !! !!
!!
!! !!
!!
!! !!
!! !! !!
!!
!! !!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!! !!
!!
!! !!
!!
Ä51
Ä160
¥80
¥80

HANSEN RANCH

PARK SITE
ROBLA
PARK

UEDA PARKWAY

DEL PASO

REGIONAL
PARK

SUTTER'S

LANDING PARK

JOHNSTON
PARK
DEL

PASO REGIONAL PARK
Arcade Creek
American River GROVE AVE

LEISURELN

EL CAMINO AVE

DEL PASO BLVD

ARDEN WAY

RALEY BLVD

SOUTH AVE

NORTHGATE BLVD

ELEANOR AVE

WINTERS ST

RIO LINDA BLVD

NORWOOD AVE

SAN JUAN RD

DRY CREEK RD
C ST

FORD RD

NORTH AVE

GRAND AVE

ROSEVILLE RD

MCKINLEY BLVD

ARCADE BLVD MARYSVILLE BLVD

EVERGREEN ST

AUBURN BLVD

BELL AVE

EXPOSITION BLVD

MAIN AVE

ELVAS AVE

CARLSON DR

HA R VARD ST

ASTORIAST

SILVER EAGLE RD

HERITAGE LN
FEE DR
0 0.5 1 MILES
Figure 37 – Intersection Recommendations in Northeast Sacramento Recommended
Improvement

INTERSECTION

RECOMMENDATIONS
DESTINATIONS + BOUNDARIES
Railroad
Park
City Boundary
Focus Area
89 Ä99
Ä51
Ä275
Ä160
¥5
¥5
£50
9TH ST
11TH ST
15TH ST

CAPITOL
MALL
N ST
L ST
M ST
J ST
17TH ST

CAPITOL AVE
19TH ST
5TH ST
G ST
26TH ST
E ST
4TH AVE
24TH ST
K ST
Q ST
F ST
4TH ST

FRONT ST
22ND AVE
9TH AVE
22ND ST
11TH AVE
D ST
26TH AVE
7TH ST
5TH AVE 7TH AVE
V ST
19TH AVE
O ST
24TH AVE
15 THAVE

SUTTER'S

LANDING PARK
LAND
PARK
Sacramento River
American River
Sacramento River

LEISURELN

FOLSOM BLVD

LAND PARK DR

STOCKTON BLVD

BROADWAY

SUTTERVILLE RD

FRANKLIN BLVD

RIVERSIDE BLVD

FRUITRIDGE RD

NORTHGATE BLVD

DEL PASO BLVD
39TH ST
43RDAVE
H ST
47TH AVE

MARTIN LUTHER KING JR BLVD
5 1ST ST

RICHARDS BLVD

GLORIA DR
58TH ST

SEAMAS AVE
C ST
12TH ST
35TH AVE
COLOMA
WAY
12TH AVE

ELVAS AVE

MCKINLEY BLVD

VALLEJO WAY

FREEPORT BLVD

HOGAN DR
14TH AVE
T ST

GREENHAVEN DR

E XPOSITION BLVD

LAWRENCE DR

IRVIN WAY

KARBET WAY
21ST AVE

CROCKER DR

GARDEN HWY
FEE DR
0 0.5 1 MILES
Figure 38 – Intersection Recommendations in Central West Sacramento Recommended
Improvement

INTERSECTION

RECOMMENDATIONS
DESTINATIONS + BOUNDARIES
Railroad
Park
City Boundary
Focus Area
90 !!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!!!
!!
!!
!! !! !!
!! !!
!!!!
!!
!!
!!
!! !!
!! !!
!! !!!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!! !!
!!
!!
!! !!
!!
!! !! !!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!! !! !!
!!
!!
!!
Ä99
Ä51
Ä16
£50

SUTTER'S

LANDING
PARK
TAHOE
PARK
OKI
PARK
SIM
PARK
NUNN
PARK

GRANITE
PARK
ARMY
DEPOT
PARK
American River
H ST

FOLSOM BLVD
J ST
65TH ST

AMERICAN RIVER DR
65TH STREET EXPY

FRUITRIDGE RD

POWER INN RD

ELDER CREEK RD

BROADWAY
51ST ST

ELVAS AVE
59TH ST
58TH ST
14TH AVE
C ST
21ST AVE

MCKINLEY BLVD

LA RIVIERA DR
COLOMA
WAY

CARLSON DR

STOCKTON BLVD

FLORIN PERKINS RD
T ST

NOTRE DA M E DR

OCCIDENTAL DR

LAWRENCE DR

COLLEGE TO W NDR HOWE AVE

UNIVERSITY AVE

LEMON HILL AVE

FAIR OAKS BLVD
S ST
56TH ST

BELVEDERE AVE
0 0.5 1 MILES
Figure 39 – Intersection Recommendations in Central East Sacramento Recommended
Improvement

INTERSECTION

RECOMMENDATIONS
DESTINATIONS + BOUNDARIES
Railroad
Park
City Boundary
Focus Area
91 Ä160
Ä99
¥5
¥5
LAND
PARK

BING MALONEY

GOLF COURSE

CHORLEY PARK

BARTLEY

CAVANAUGH

GOLF COURSE
Sacramento River

SUTTERVILLE RD
24TH ST

FRANKLIN BLVD

FRUITRIDGE RD
21ST ST

LAND PARK DR
43RDAVE

FLORIN RD

RIVERSIDE BLVD
47TH AVE FREEPORT BLVD

COSUMNES RIVER BLVD

POCKET RD

SEAMAS AVE

GREENHAVEN DR WINDBRIDGE DR

RUSH RIVER DR

HAVENSIDE DR
35TH AVE
12TH AVE

RIVERGATE WAY

GLORIA DR

JOHN STILL DR

AMHERST ST

IRVIN WAY
29TH ST

HOGAN DR

MEADOWVIEW RD

CROCKER DR

PARK R IVIERA WAY

KARBET WAY
26TH AVE
21ST AVE

DELTA SHORES CIR
0 0.5 1 MILES
Figure 40 – Intersection Recommendations in Southwest Sacramento Recommended
Improvement

INTERSECTION

RECOMMENDATIONS
DESTINATIONS + BOUNDARIES
Railroad
Park
City Boundary
Focus Area
92 !!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!! !!
!!!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!! !!
!! !!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!!!
!!
!! !!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!! !! !!!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!! !! !! !!
!!!!
!!
!! !!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!! !!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!! !!
!!
Ä99
¥5
SIM
PARK
NUNN
PARK
SHASTA
PARK

ELDER CREEK RD

FRUITRIDGE RD
65TH STREET EXPY
24TH ST

MACK RD

FRUITRIDGE RD
21ST ST

POWER INN RD
58TH ST
47TH AVE

CENTER PKWY

BRUCEVILLE RD

FRANKLIN BLVD

VALLEY HI DR
21ST AVE

BAMFORD DR

TANGERINE AVE

CALVINE RD

STOCKTON BLVD

FLORIN RD

ARMADALE WAY

MEADOWVIEW RD

EHRHARDT AVE

JOHN STILL DR

STOCKTON BLVD

CARLIN AVE

BROOKFIELD DR

LAWRENCE DR

JACINTO RD

IRVIN WAY
29TH ST

HOGAN DR

JACINTO AVE
26TH AVE

LEMON HILL AVE

WYNDHAM DR

COSUMNES RIVER BLVD

DELTA SHORES CIR
0 0.5 1 MILES
Figure 41 – Intersection Recommendations in Southeast Sacramento Recommended
Improvement

INTERSECTION

RECOMMENDATIONS
DESTINATIONS + BOUNDARIES
Railroad
Park
City Boundary
Focus Area
93 Streets for People: Sacramento's Active Transportation Plan Making Sacramento more walkable and
bikeable requires not only new infrastructure
investments but also ongoing policies and
programs that support and encourage
those who rely on active travel and those
who choose it for convenience. This section
outlines the recommended policies and
programs designed to help achieve the goals
set forth in this plan. The recommendations
are organized under the following themes:

EQUITY
Equity is a major component throughout these
proposed policies and programs to prioritize
recommendations within Equity Priority
Communities that are heavily dependent on
public transit or active transportation.

EDUCATION
Bike and pedestrian education policies and
programs help those who are interested
in active transportation to feel safer, more
comfortable, and more confident navigating
streets and shared-use paths.

ENCOURAGEMENT
Encouragement policies and programs help to
create a lasting active transportation culture
and can encourage overall mode share shifts.

ENGAGEMENT
Engagement policies and programs can
institutionalize safer biking and walking
transportation systems. By prioritizing people
who walk, bike, and roll, these policies and
programs help create safer environments for
all users.

EVALUATION
Policies and programs to evaluate and track
progress toward reaching the plan’s goals are
important for long-term success.

Active Transportation
Commission Recommendations
In September 2024, the Active
Transportation Commission provided
the City Council with various
recommendations for policies
and programs to improve active
transportation in Sacramento through
the Sacramento Active Transportation
Commission Annual Report. These
recommendations are currently under
consideration by the City Council.

ENGINEERING
Support infrastructure and facilities that
provide increased comfort and ease for people
who walk, bike, and roll. These engineering
policies and programs are intended to work
with existing bike and pedestrian infrastructure
to improve the experience for people walking,
biking, and rolling.

Recommended Policies
and Programs
94 Recommendations

POLICIES
Equity

RECOMMENDED POLICY DESCRIPTION
Prioritize People Walking,
Biking, and Taking Transit
The City shall prioritize mobility, comfort, health, safety, and convenience for those walking, followed by those biking and riding transit, ahead of design and operations for those driving.

Sacramento 2040 General Plan (M-1.2)
Invest Equitably The City shall ensure that the transportation system is planned and implemented with an equitable process
to achieve equitable outcomes and investments so that
all neighborhoods one day will have similar levels of
transportation infrastructure such as sidewalks, marked lowstress crossings, and bikeways.

Sacramento 2040 General Plan (M-1.9)
Reduce or Eliminate
Barriers to Walking
The City shall remove barriers to walking, where feasible, and work with utility companies to remove barriers to allow people of all abilities to move with comfort and convenience throughout the city, including through the following:
• Provision of curb ramps, crosswalks, and overpasses;
• Relocation of infrastructure or street furniture that impedes travel pathways;
• Reducing or consolidating driveways and curb cuts;
• Providing long and short-term bike and scooter parking to minimize sidewalk obstructions; and
• Creation of additional walking entrances to important destinations like schools, parks, and commercial areas.

Sacramento 2040 General Plan (M-1.16)
Support Community Efforts
to Expand Access to Bikes
The City shall continue to support community efforts to offer, promote, and expand access to bikes, bike skills, and bike repair.

Sacramento 2040 General Plan (NS-M-2)
95 Streets for People: Sacramento's Active Transportation Plan

POLICIES
Education

RECOMMENDED POLICY DESCRIPTION
Promote Greater Use of TDM
Strategies by Employers
The City should promote the greater use of Transportation Demand Management strategies by employers and residents to reduce dependence on single-occupancy vehicles with
the target that 17 percent of all trips are made by transit and active transportation modes by 2030 and 23 percent of all trips are made by transit and active transportation modes by 2045.

Sacramento 2040 General Plan (M-2.1)
Engagement

RECOMMENDED POLICY DESCRIPTION
Continue Sidewalk Bike
Riding Ticket Diversion
Program
The City should continue to implement its Urban Biking and Scooting class. The class also serves as the City’s Sidewalk Bike Riding Ticket Diversion program to allow people to avoid paying a fine for illegally biking on the sidewalk if they take the course. This program helps to provide important education, encouragement, and information on the rules of the road.
96 Recommendations

POLICIES
Engineering

RECOMMENDED POLICY DESCRIPTION
Support Existing
Complete Streets
Policy
The City should continue to implement the existing City of Sacramento Complete Streets Policy by incorporating Complete Street elements and designs across all street projects.

Develop a Policy for
Leading Pedestrian
Intervals
The City should develop and implement a policy for leading pedestrian intervals at signalized intersections.

Implement Bikeway
Project Design Based
on DIB-94
The City should incorporate guidance from California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) Design Information Bulletin – 94 which encourages increased separation between people biking and people driving. Going forward, the City will incorporate this guidance on bikeway design projects to provide increased separation wherever possible.

Implement Streets For
People Projects
The City should implement projects recommended in this
plan based on the Transportation Priorities Plan process and in combination with any City projects as well as with private development projects.

Incorporate Tree
Canopy Strategies in
Active Transportation
Infrastructure Projects
The City should include street trees as a part of transportation projects infrastructure to support achievement of 50 percent shading over streets and sidewalks. Street trees have been proven to have traffic calming, urban heat, and air quality benefits and should be employed as part of strategies to create more bikeable and walkable streets and paths.

The Streets for People Plan has identified high-opportunity areas for tree planting, particularly in areas with substantial urban heat exposure and limited existing tree canopy coverage, which creates a barrier to accessing and using active transportation facilities, such as sidewalks and bikeways.

This policy recommends including street trees as a part of active transportation projects infrastructure to support achievement of 50 percent shading over streets and sidewalks. The additional canopy should prioritize shading of active transportation facilities, such as sidewalks, bikeways, and shared use paths.
97 Streets for People: Sacramento's Active Transportation Plan Encouragement

RECOMMENDED POLICY DESCRIPTION
Implement Forthcoming
TDM Policies
The City should implement the policies, programs, and
regulations included in the forthcoming Transportation
Demand Management Implementation Plan/Report to
increase support for travel by walking, biking, and transit. The General Plan and Climate Action & Adaptation Plan mode
share goals include increasing active transportation to 6% by 2030 and 12% by 2045; and transit to 11% by 2030.

Evaluation

RECOMMENDED POLICY DESCRIPTION
Evaluate Infrastructure and
Programs Regularly
As part of the regular update of this plan, conduct in-depth engagement with the community to gauge how the
community views the success of recent active transportation projects, programs, and policies.

POLICIES
Engineering

RECOMMENDED POLICY DESCRIPTION
Continue Bike Parking
Requirements and
Program
The City should continue to require new development to include long and short term bicycle parking. The City should also continue to install bike parking through its bike parking program.
98 Recommendations 99
Residents at the Sacramento Northern Bikeway
Streets for People: Sacramento's Active Transportation Plan

PROGRAMS
Education

RECOMMENDED PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
Continue the Urban Biking
and Scooting Class
The City should continue to implement the Urban Biking and Scooting 101 Course. This program educates people biking and scooting on how to anticipate and respond to drivers and walkers.

Engineering

RECOMMENDED PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
Create a Wayfinding
Program
The City should implement a citywide comprehensive
wayfinding program to highlight low-stress all ages and abilities routes for walking, rolling, and biking to community destinations and transit.
100
Recommendations

PROGRAMS
Encouragement

RECOMMENDED PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
Develop Bikeway Maps The City should continue to develop and provide bikeway maps for public navigation throughout Sacramento. Types of public bike maps include an interactive map, brochures, handouts, etc. Bike maps would serve as recommendations of which routes to take throughout the City as an encouraging mode to explore the City and/or commute to work.

Host Bicycling and
Walking Events
Continue to host public events to support walking and biking such as public bike rides or walking events.

Evaluation

RECOMMENDED PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
Monitor Crash Data Regularly review crash data for collisions involving people walking, biking, and rolling.

Active Transportation
Count Program
Conduct regular counts of people walking and biking
throughout the community to identify trends in usage and assess the benefits of completed projects.
101
Maintenance
Considerations
Maintenance of the existing and proposed network includes multi-level challenges that may reduce the ability of the City to keep up with proactive maintenance. To address these issues, we propose the following:

Shared-use path maintenance
ISSUE
As the City continues to expand its shareduse path network, the maintenance funding for paths has not increased. Path construction
comes from competitive grants, but grants do
not fund recurring maintenance.

SOLUTION
Identify additional funding source for ongoing
maintenance costs.

Streets for People: Sacramento's Active Transportation Plan Sacramento Northern Bike Trail entrance
102
Areas of historical underinvestment
ISSUE
Areas that have lacked historical investment
from the City such as our focus areas have
also typically received a lower level of
maintenance funding on the transportation
network.

SOLUTION
Prioritize maintenance in historically
underinvested areas.

Deferred maintenance
ISSUE
Like many cities, the City of Sacramento has
a significant level of deferred maintenance
across the transportation network, which has
only grown in the last decade. The current
total backlog of $1.4 billion means that new
maintenance issues may be deferred to
later years to address other needs that were
deferred previously.

SOLUTION
Identify additional funding source for ongoing
deferred maintenance needs.

Sidewalk maintenance
ISSUE
This is currently the responsibility of the
adjacent property owner and not the City.

While this reduces the overall maintenance
burden on the City, it can result in a patchwork
of sidewalk conditions including overgrown
vegetation blocking the sidewalk, piles of
leaves in the sidewalk path, and other issues.

SOLUTION
Identify a program that will determine ways
to address sidewalk maintenance, focusing
on equity.

Recommendations 103
Common
Questions
We received several similar questions about
the draft plan that we want to address. Please
see below for these common questions and
our responses.

Why doesn’t this
plan consider more
street reallocations
(lane reductions) to
accommodate more
active transportation
infrastructure?
The number of vehicle lanes on a street is dictated by the City’s General Plan. In the development of the 2040 General Plan, staff evaluated all streets for eligibility for lane reductions.

Considerations include existing and projected vehicle volume, land uses, transit headways, and more. The 2040 General Plan was the City’s first major attempt to look citywide at reallocation of street space to accommodate walking, bicycling and transit.

That plan, not this Streets for People Plan, dictates how many vehicle lanes are on a street.

Why doesn’t this plan
consider converting oneway streets to two-way?
Converting one-way streets to two-way is expensive and can cause challenges near rail. Converting streets to two-way requires new traffic signals and new signal operations. This currently (2025) costs over $1 million per intersection. If the proposed street is near rail, the City must receive approval from the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) and from the rail owners (often Union Pacific Railroad). These agencies are reluctant to approve two-way conversions.

Why hasn’t the City closed
some streets in William
Land Park to cars?
Most of the streets in William Land Park are managed by the Department of Youth, Parks, and Community Enrichment (YPCE).

The YPCE team has investigated the possibility but determined the cost to implement is beyond available funding at this time. 104 Streets for People: Sacramento's Active Transportation Plan Why can’t the City reduce
the default speed limit to
20 mph?
A reduction in the ‘prima facie’ or default speed limit will be brought to council for resolution in the 2025-2026 fiscal year. The application must follow State laws regarding speed limits. City staff anticipate that the proposal will establish a 20 mph prima facie speed limit for Business Activity Districts, based on specific roadway and land use criteria. A reduction in the prima facie speed limit to 20 mph is also anticipated for Local Roads and Senior Zones pending determination by an Engineering & Traffic Survey.

Why doesn’t this
plan include a
recommendation to
prohibit right turns on
red in the central city?
Prohibiting right turns on red would require a study to determine impacts and feasibility. A study for this is not in the Public Works' Transportation Division’s current work plan.

Why can’t the City have
more leading pedestrian
intervals?
An evaluation of best practice to establish guidelines for leading pedestrian intervals (LPIs) at signalized intersections is currently (2025) underway and will be included in the updated City of Sacramento Traffic Signal Operations Manual (TSOM). The TSOM and the guidelines for LPIs will be presented to the Active Transportation and Disability Advisory Commissions to allow for public discussion of the proposed standard practices.

Why doesn’t the City
institute an all-red phase
at traffic signals?
As direction from the California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices, the “all-red” time between signal phases is determined by equation using specific site conditions and geometric measurements of the intersection. Nearly all signalized intersections operated by the City of Sacramento have “all-red” time between phases. Typically, the amount of time is difficult for a driver waiting at one approach of the intersection to notice. It may be a period less than one second, but greater than zero.

A practice to establish a greater “all-red” time, with a minimum of one second added to the calculated value previously used at all signalized intersections, is currently under evaluation as the Transportation Division prepares a Traffic Signal Operations Manual (TSOM). The TSOM will be presented to the Active Transportation and Disability Advisory Commissions in the 2025- 2026 fiscal year to allow for public input into the adoption of standard practices.

Recommendations 105
Implementation
5 Table 1 – Generalized Costs for
People Walking and Rolling11
Table 2 – Generalized Costs for People Biking
Proposed Improvement Cost
Curb Extensions $$$$
Hardened Centerlines and Turn
Wedges $$$$
Median Refuge Islands $$$$
Pedestrian Hybrid Beacons $$$$
Planting Strips $$$$
Rectangular Rapid Flashing
Beacons $$$$
Shade Trees $$$$
Sidewalks* $$$$
Classification Cost (per mile)
Shared-Use Path $$$–$$$$
Bike Lane $–$$$
Bike Routes $
Separated Bikeway $$$-$$$$
$ – Up to $300,000
$$ – $300,000–$500,000
$$$ – $500,000–$1M
$$$$ – $1M–$5M
*Assumes up to $100,000 per 50 feet
$ – Up to $300,000
$$ – $300,000–$500,000
$$$ – $500,000–$1M
$$$$ – $1M–$5M
Implementation
Costs
The Streets for People Plan recommends over
$1.5 billion in projects for people walking and
rolling across the city and up to $893 million in
projects for people biking. Cost estimates are
provided in 2024 dollars.
11 Only sidewalks are included in the estimated total for people walking as specific intersection improvements will be identified on a case-by-case basis. Estimates for those improvements are included in Table 1 for reference.

The cost estimates identified in
this chapter include planning,
design, environmental clearances,
implementation, as well as staff time.
107
Streets for People: Sacramento's Active Transportation Plan Return on Investment: The Case
for Active Transportation
Through the Streets for People Plan, the
City has a unique opportunity to build a
comprehensive active transportation network
that supports comfortable, accessible, and
convenient travel for people of all ages and
abilities. By investing in well-designed walking
and biking infrastructure, the City can unlock
a wide range of benefits—from enhancing
public health and reducing traffic congestion
to supporting local businesses and improving
environmental sustainability:
• In Minneapolis-St. Paul, for every 400 meters
closer a median-priced home is to an offstreet bicycle facility, its value increases by $510.
12 • People biking in Philadelphia ride 260,000
miles daily, saving 47,450 tons of CO2 from
being emitted by cars each year.
13 • A study of the Great Allegheny Passage
estimated $40 million in shared-use pathattributed revenue and $7.5 million in wages distributed by shared-use path-facing
businesses. In 2014, an estimated 40% of
sales were related to shared-use path
traffic in towns along the Great Allegheny
Passage.
13 • In North Carolina, every $1.00 of trail
construction supported $1.72 annually
from local business revenue, sales tax
revenue, and benefits related to health and
transportation.
14 12 "Protected Bike Lanes Statistics," PeopleForBikes, accessed July 9, 2025, https://www.peopleforbikes.org/statistics/ economic-benefits.
13 Rails to Trails Conservancy, Active Transportation Transforms America: The Case for Increased Public Investment in Walking and Biking Connectivity, October 2019, https://www.railstotrails.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/12/ActiveTransportation-Transforms-America.pdf. 14 Institute for Transportation Research and Education (ITRE) and Alta Planning and Design, Evaluating the Economic Impact of Shared Use Paths in North Carolina, February 2018, https://itre.ncsu.edu/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/ NCDOT-2015-44_SUP-Project_Final-Report_optimized.pdf.
108
Funding
The City's Capital Improvement Plan is the primary method for allocating funding for street projects; however, the City does not have a dedicated funding source specifically for transportation improvements and often leverages grant funding for larger projects. A variety of funding opportunities are available to support project design and construction. The following represent a few of the potential grant funds the City may pursue for project implementation:

Federal
• Better Utilizing
Investments to Leverage
Development (BUILD)
• Safe Streets and Roads for
All (SS4A)
• Reconnecting
Communities Pilot
• Active Transportation
Infrastructure
Improvement Program
(ATIIP)
• Regional Infrastructure
Accelerator (RIA) Grant
State
• Caltrans Active
Transportation Program
(ATP)
• Caltrans Sustainable
Transportation Planning
Grant
• Caltrans Highway Safety
Improvement Program
(HSIP) Grant
• California Strategic
Growth Fund
Transformative Climate
Communities Grant
• Affordable Housing and
Sustainable Communities
(AHSC) Program
Regional / Local
• SACOG Active
Transportation Program
• Sacramento
Transportation Authority
- Tax Measure A
Implementation 109
Monitoring
and Review
It will be important for us to measure
how well-used these proposed
improvements are and how they benefit
the community's well-being once
they’re constructed. While we have not
historically tracked the total levels of
activity for people walking, biking, and
rolling, it may be possible to evaluate the
level of use through:
• Conducting surveys for people
walking, biking, and rolling throughout
the city with each plan update to
assess how people are using new
facilities.
• Leveraging data resources such as
StravaMetro or Replica Places to
estimate total levels of walking, biking,
and rolling over time.

These strategies will help to review which
projects have been most beneficial and
assess the benefits to different areas
of the city following projects. Reviewing
the success of projects once they are
completed is an important step to
guiding thoughtful implementation of
future projects.
110 Streets for People: Sacramento's Active Transportation Plan Next Steps
The Streets for People Plan envisions a significant level of improvement across the city guided by our communities' input and the needs they've helped identify.

Implementation of these improvements will rely on the TPP's process, available funding, and our communities' continued engagement.

Prioritizing Implementation
The TPP identified a clear process for
identifying which transportation projects are
the highest priority based on the following
community values:
• Improving air quality, climate, and health
• Providing equitable investment
• Providing access to destinations
• Improving transportation safety
• Fixing and maintaining the system15
The City of Sacramento will include the
projects in the Streets for People Plan
as part of the next TPP process. Once
completed, this process will identify
which projects are the highest priority
and which will receive funding first. More
information about this plan and the
prioritization process is available on the
City website.

STAY ENGAGED
The Streets for People Plan is a major step
forward toward creating a more walkable and
bikeable Sacramento with streets that work for
everyone, but it is one step in a long process
toward making real change. Our communities
can continue to help shape that process along
each step of the way by staying connected and
engaged with City staff and elected leaders on
transportation issues important to them.

We encourage our communities to reach
out and engage with us as we work through
this process together using any of the
resources below:

Contact the Mayor and Council
District Offices.

Attend a City Council meeting
or an Active Transportation
Commission meeting.

Implementation
15 City of Sacramento, Transportation
Priorities Plan, November 2022, page 42.
111
Streets for People: Sacramento's Active Transportation Plan Appendices
A
112
Appendices
Appendices
Appendix 1 – Plan and Policy Review
Appendix 2 – Existing Conditions (Citywide and Focus Areas) Appendix 3 – Gap Analysis
Appendix 4 – Tree Opportunity Analysis
Appendix 5 – Public Engagement Feedback and Summaries
Appendix 6 – Case Studies and Recommendations
Appendix 7 – Development of Recommendations and
Segmentation (Methods)
Appendix 8 – Project Costs
113

Sacramento City CouncilDecember 2, 2025

Sacramento City Council
December 2, 2025