PEOPLE PROCESSES PROTECTION PERFORMANCE
SAFER STREETS
SAN BERNARDINO
BASELINE STREET STUDY
SAFE STREETS FOR ALL
STRONGER COMMUNITY
BETTER SAN BERNARDINO
SPRING 2026
San Bernardino Safe Streets for All Baseline Street Safety Study 2 Safe Streets for All
Baseline Street Study
Prepared by Prepared for
HW Lochner | An Egis Company
225 W Washington St 12th floor,
Chicago, IL 60606
Vanir Tower
290 North D Street
San Bernardino, CA 92401
San Bernardino Safe Streets for All Baseline Street Safety Study 3 Table of Contents
Chapter One - Introduction 5
Welcome to Baseline Street 6
What is the Baseline Street Safety Study? 7
How Does the Baseline Street Safety Study Make Travel Safer? 9 The Principles of the Safe System Approach 10
What Do We Hope to Accomplish? 11
Chapter Two - State of the System and Safety Analysis 12 Plans and Policies Overview 13
Safety Analysis Overview 20
Emphasis Areas 27
Chapter Three - Stakeholder & Community Engagement 32
Stakeholder and Community Engagement Overview 33
Engagement Methods and Tools 33
Engagement Feedback Analysis 39
Key Findings 44
San Bernardino Safe Streets for All Baseline Street Safety Study 4 Chapter Four - Countermeasures Toolbox & Priority Projects 46 Toolbox and Priority Projects Overview 47
Countermeasure Description 47
Prioritization Methodology 62
Top 10 Intersection Breakdown 63
Chapter Five - Implementation 87
Overview 88
Funding Opportunities 88
Funding Strategy Summary 93
Benchmark and Evaluation Metrics 93
San Bernardino Local Roadway Safety Plan Amendment 94
Developing an SS4A-Compliant LRSP 98
Chapter One -
Introduction
San Bernardino Safe Streets for All Baseline Street Safety Study 6 Welcome to Baseline Street
Home to six schools, 1,600 jobs, and 35,000 people,
Baseline Street is the soul of a thriving City of San
Bernardino Community. Baseline Street is served
by Omnitrans Route 3 and 4 and the City of San
Bernardino has the highest average weekday boardings
out of all cities served by Omnitrans. There are six
schools along the five-mile Baseline Street corridor that includes four elementary schools, one middle school,
and one high school. The annual average daily traffic
(AADT) weekday average along the Baseline Street
corridor is 9,600 - 29,100 vehicles.
For more than 150 years, Baseline Street has played a
significant role in shaping San Bernardino and Southern California. Originally established as a survey line that helped define land boundaries across the region, it
has since evolved into a major corridor serving the
heart of the San Bernardino Valley. Today, Baseline
Street connects three bus lines and serves tens of
thousands of travelers, providing access to destinations throughout San Bernardino and beyond.
As seen in Figure 1.1, Baseline Street (highlighted in
Blue) is a major thoroughfare serving commercial
land uses (parcels in Red and Purple) almost along its
entire extent, major destination attractors for residents around the area. Although residential uses (parcels
in Yellow and Orange) are not located directly along
Baseline Street, the corridor continues to serve a
significant portion of central San Bernardino residents by functioning as one of the City’s primary east-west
corridors.
Figure 1.1: Project Area Map
7 San Bernardino Safe Streets for All Baseline Street Safet Study The Baseline Street Safety Study represents the City of San Bernardino’s commitment to making this corridor
safer for everyone. In partnership with community
members, the City has developed a comprehensive
plan that identifies key safety concerns and outlines
targeted improvements. Once implemented, these
enhancements will help reduce and ultimately eliminate
serious injury and fatal crashes, while preserving and
protecting the people, neighborhoods, and destinations
that make Baseline Street unique.
What is the Baseline Street Safety
Study?
The Baseline Street Safety Study is a federallyfunded initiative to create safer communities across the United States.
In 2021, the United States government established
the Safe Streets and Roads for All (SS4A) program to
support communities of all sizes in improving roadway
safety and reducing traffic-related fatalities and serious injuries. Recognizing the need to enhance safety along
Baseline Street, the City of San Bernardino successfully secured a 2023 SS4A grant to fund the Baseline Street
Safety Study. With the study now complete, the City
is well positioned to pursue additional funding to
implement the improvements identified in Chapters 4
and 5.
San Bernardino Safe Streets for All Baseline Street Safety Study 8 Figure 1.2: Study Funding Flowchart
The USDOT Adminsters the
SS4A Program and offers
funding for SS4A Plans to
eligible entites
The City of San Bernardino
created the City of San
Bernardino Local Roadway
Safety Plan (LRSP)
The California Transportation
Commission, USDOT, and the
Southern California
Association of Governments
distribute funding for
implementing the LRSP
recommendations.
The City of San Bernardino is
awarded funding from the SS4A
program to develop The
Baseline Street Safety Study
The United States Congress created
and provided funding for
transportation projects
Requests SS4A Funding From:
Delegates Funding Distribution
To:
Granted funding to:
Applies for funding from:
Awards funding to:
The President and U.S.
Department of Transportation
(USDOT) set the transportation
budget priorities for the next five
years
The Baseline Street Safety Study originated from
the City of San Bernardino’s Local Roadway Safety
Plan (LRSP), which was adopted in late 2022. The
LRSP identified Baseline Street as the highest-priority corridor for safety improvments due to its high
concentration of roadway and traffic-related collisions.
Building upon the findings of the LRSP, the City
further evaluated existing safety concerns and
opportunities along the corridor to develop targeted
recommendations and strategies through this Study. To
advance these efforts, the City submitted an appliction to the United States Department of Transportration’s
Safe Streets and Roads for All (SS4A) program to
demonstrate the need for a comprehensive corridor
safety analysis. The application was successfully
awarded funding, allowing the City to undertake the
development of the Baseline Street Safety Study.
Figure 1.2 illustrates the overall funding and planning process associated with the Study.
San Bernardino Safe Streets for All Baseline Street Safety Study 9 Figure 1.3: Safe Systems Approach Overview1 2
THE
SAFE SYSTEM
APPROACH
It is our responsibility to
travel as safely as we
can, both on Baseline
Street and anywhere
else we travel.
Safe road users
When possible,
vehicles and vehicle
regulations should
minimize the risk of
crashes.
Safe vehicles
Roads are safer when they are
designed to protect everyone
and discourage situations
where crashes occur.
Safe roads
If a crash does happen, first
responders, media, and public officials
work together to ensure safety,
messaging, and future policy changes.
Post-Crash Care
Slower travel speeds
greatly reduce the
risk of crashes with
injury or death.
Safe speeds
The Safe
System
Approach
The Baseline
Street Safety
Study’s
approach to
roadway
safety.
How Does the Baseline Street Safety
Study Make Travel Safer?
Crashes may not always be preventable;
however, the frequency and severity of crashes
can be significantly reduced through thoughtful
planning, safer street design, effective policies,
and community-focused transportation
strategies. By reimagining how streets are
designed and operated, communities can beter
protect all roadway users and minimize the risk
of serious injuries and fatalities when creases
do occur.
The Baseline Street Safety Study (the Plan) is founded
on the Safe System Approach, a roadway safety
framework developed by the United States Department
of Transportation (USDOT) to reduce traffic-related
fatalities and seriour injuries. The Safe System
Approach emphasizes proactive safety strategies that
recognize human error while designing transportation
systems to minimize likelihood and severity of crashes.
Through safer roadway design, policies, speeds, and
operations, each component of the transportation
network works together to better protect all users and
reduce the potential for severe outcomes when crashes
occur.
1 Safe System Brochure | Federal Highway Administration 2 Vision Zero Toolkit | Federal Highway Adminstration
San Bernardino Safe Streets for All Baseline Street Safety Study 10 One component may fail to protect someone, but
another component could prevent a crash anyway.
Crashes only occur when every component of the
system fails to prevent a crash.
The safe system approach offers multiple
layers of protection.
Safe road
users
Safe road
users
Safe
vehicles
Safe
vehicles
Safe
speeds
Safe
speeds
Safe
roads
Safe
roads
Postcrash
care
Postcrash
care
The Principles of the Safe System Approach
Death/Serious Injury is Unacceptable. The City
is committed to improving safety along Baseline
Street so all users can travel safely regardless of
their mode of transportation.
Humans Make Mistakes. Humans are vulnerable to
serious injury during roaday collisions, particularly
pedestrians, bicyclists, and other unprotected
users. It is therefore essential for the City and
this Study to recognize and address the physical
forces generated during crashes by implementing
transportation improvements that reduce crash
severity and enhance overall roadway safety for
all users.
Humans Are Vulnerable. It is important for the
City and the Study to account for the crash forces
that pose a threat to human wellbeing.
Responsibility is Shared. It is the responsibility
of everyone who interacts with Baseline Street
(travelers, vehicles pedestrians, bicyclists, etc.) to
ensure that crashes do not lead to injury or death.
Safety is Proactive. The Baseline Street Safety
Study proactively identifies and creates mitigation
strategies for factors that could cause lifethreatening crashes.
Redundancy is Crucial. To reduce the risk of fatal
and severe injury crashes, the transportation
system must provide multiple layers of protection.
San Bernardino Safe Streets for All Baseline Street Safety Study 11 What Do We Hope to Accomplish?
The Baseline Street Safety Study will serve as the
primary plan for roadway safety along Baseline Street.
This chapter introduces the Study and its purpose.
Future chapters will discuss Baseline Street’s past,
examine the conditions that affect its present, and
propose designs and strategies for the future.
Chapter 2
Existing Conditions
This chapter examines
Baseline Street’s current
situation. It includes a “State
of the System” review, a
review of relevant plans,
policies, and projects, and
a collision analysis of the
crashes that have occurred
along Baseline Street over
the past five years.
Chapter 3
Stakeholder
and Community
Engagement
This chapter discusses the
community’s role in shaping
the Baseline Street Safety
Study. It highlights the City’s
efforts to reach current
community members and
their concerns about travel
safety on Baseline Street.
Chapter 4
Countermeasures
Toolbox & Priority
Projects
This chapter provides
a toolbox of potential
countermeasures that
are suitable for Baseline
Street. Following the
toolbox, the chapter
highlights key sections of
Baseline Street that have a
notable potential for traffic
safety improvements. It
showcases these potential
improvements in the form of
factsheets and conceptual
plans to summarize these
safety improvements.
Chapter 5
Implementation
This section outlines
how to implement the
Baseline Street Safety
Study, including potential
funding strategies for
improvements and ways to
track the effectiveness of
implemented projects.
12 Chapter Two -
State of the System and
Safety Analysis
San Bernardino Safe Streets for All Baseline Street Safety Study 13 Plans and Policies Overview
The following section summarizes transportationrelated planning documents found at the federal, state, and regional/county level. Upon review of these
documents, the City and project team identified
existing challenges and potential improvement
strategies concerning roadway safety along both the
Baseline Street corridor and in the surrounding area.
These items played a key role in informing the
development of this study. Figure 2.1 illustrates the
sections of Baseline Street that are discussed in each
planning document discussed in the following sections
in terms of safety issues, community concerns, and
recommended improvements.
Figure 2.1: Relevant Plans and Plan Extents
San Bernardino Safe Streets for All Baseline Street Safety Study 14 Federal
FHWA Highway Safety Programs
The San Bernardino Baseline Street Safety Action Plan
reflects United States Department of Transportation
(USDOT) strategies and priorities, including:
° The Safe System Approach, as discussed in
Chapter 1, creates a framework for reaching a goal
of zero deaths on roadways in the United States.
The Safe System Approach is intended to shape
approaches to roadway safety at every level of
government and is the basis for the Plan’s analysis
and recommendations.
° FHWA’s Proven Safety Countermeasures initiative
(PSCi), a collection of 28 roadway design and
policy and strategies effective in reducing
roadway fatalities and serious injury crashes.
Many of the recommendations in the Plan include
countermeasures taken from FHWA’s Proven
Safety Countermeasures list.
State
2025 – 2029 Strategic Highway Safety Plan
As a comprehensive safety document, the Strategic
Highway Safety Plan (SHSP) guides roadway safety
policies for every level of jurisdiction in California. The Plan will rely on the SHSP as a source for potential
program- and policy-based recommendations as well
as completely aligning with SHSP’s goals of safe and
accessible travel for all modes of transportation and
zero fatalities and severe injury on all of California’s roads.
2050 California Transportation Plan (2021)
The 2050 California Transportation Plan (CTP)
is California’s roadmap to improving the state’s
transportation system over the next 25 years. Like
the SHSP, it does not outline specific projects but
creates a set of program-centered recommendations
that California can implement to encourage better
transportation policy across the state. This plan will
align with CTP’s goals of:
° [Expanding] access to safe and convenient active
transportation options,
° [Expanding] access to jobs, goods, services, and
education,
° Enhancing transportation safety and security
Regional/County
Connect SoCal (2024)
Connect SoCal is the Southern California Association
of Government’s (SCAG’s) Regional Transportation
Plan and Sustainable Communities Strategy. Many
of the goals outlined in Connect SoCal align with
improvements proposed for Baseline Street in regional
and City plans, such as:
° Complete Streets, or roads that are designed to
enable safe access for all road users,
° Transit and multimodal integration into the makeup
of the City’s streets,
° Integrating emerging transportation technology
into street design and traffic control devices,
° And chiefly, eliminating transportation-related
fatalities and serious injuries.
San Bernardino Safe Streets for All Baseline Street Safety Study 15 As a major transportation corridor within the City of San Bernardino, Baseline Street is identified in several Connect SoCal plans and regional transportation
discussions as a corridor of regional significance,
uncluding the following:
° SCAG’s High-Injury Network (HIN) a collection of
Southern California streets that host 65% of the
region’s fatal and severe injury collisions. The areas
of the Plan area within an HIN are:
° Meridian Avenue to California Street and G
Street to Del Rosa Avenue (All Modes and
Automobiles)
° G Street to Del Rosa Drive (Pedestrians)
° SCAG’s High-Quality Transit Corridors, which
outlines transit corridors expected to have core
service frequencies of 15 minutes or better by
2050.
SCAG’s Priority Development Areas (PDA), which are
parts of Southern California where future development
can be concentrated to meet Connect SoCal’s
transportation and sustainability goals. Much of
Baseline Street is within a PDA zone. SCAG is a major
partner of the City, and the Baseline Street Safety
Action Plan is designed to advance the area and City
towards Connect SoCal’s regional planning goals. While
this plan does not include land use recommendations,
the City recognizes the interconnectivity between
current and future development alongside the
implementation of the Safe System Approach in
reducing fatal and severe injury crashes.
San Bernardino County Countywide Plan
Transportation and Mobility Element (2020)
The Transportation and Mobility Element of the San
Bernardino County Countywide Plan sets the policies
and goals for the County’s transportation network.
Within the Transportation and Mobility element,
Baseline Street is classified as a “Major Highway.” The element also recommends that Baseline Street receive
Class II bike lanes along the road’s entire route within San Bernardino County.
San Bernardino Associated Governments
Complete Streets Strategy (2015)
The San Bernardino Associated Governments
Complete Streets Strategy (Complete Streets Strategy)
encourages the adoption of complete streets policies
by its constituent municipalities. Complete streets
policies dictate how and when new and upgraded
roads must incorporate infrastructure for all users into their designs. The Complete Streets Strategy published
examples of practices implemented elsewhere and
created guidelines cities could follow to implement
their own policies.
Many of the elements suggested, such as bicycle lanes
and transit stop improvements, are eventually included
in the City of San Bernardino Active Transportation
Plan.
San Bernardino Safe Streets for All Baseline Street Safety Study 16 San Bernardino County Local Roadway Safety Plan
(2022)
The San Bernardino County Local Roadway Safety Plan
(County LRSP) focuses on evaluating why roadway
crashes occur in unincorporated San Bernardino County
and proposes solutions in reducing crashes. Many of the general solutions proposed in the County LRSP, such as
Advanced Dilemma Zone Technology, signal upgrades,
and bike lanes, are proposed in other city plans.
Customer-Focused, Technology-Enabled MultiModalism Action Plan (2018) The Customer-Focused, Technology-Enabled MultiModalism Action Plan (Multimodal Action Plan) was a joint effort by the San Bernardino County
Transportation Authority (SBCTA), SCAG, and
Omnitrans to leverage emerging transportation
technologies and strategies to encourage public and
active transportation throughout the San Bernardino
Valley. The Multimodal Action Plan’s only specific
suggestion for Baseline Street is the incorporation
of lighting and emergency call boxes into bus stops
Omnitrans found to have “Low Safety Ratings.” The
Multimodal Action Plan highlights several bus stops
recommended for improvements along Baseline Street
near its intersection with Waterman Avenue. The
Multimodal Action Plan also generally suggests creating comfortable and safe bike infrastructure.
San Bernardino County Non-Motorized
Transportation Plan (2018)
The San Bernardino County Non-Motorized
Transportation Plan (2018 NMTP) created a countywide plan for new bicycle infrastructure, including along Baseline Street. The 2018 NMTP proposed Class II bike
lanes along all of Baseline Street within City limits.
These Class II bike lanes would continue into Rialto in the west and Highland to the east.
San Bernardino County Transportation Authority
Regional Safe Routes to School, Volume 2 (2017)
The SBCTA Regional Safe Routes to School project
aims to create safety recommendations for select
schools in San Bernardino County. One of the three
schools selected to study for the plan was what is now
referred to as Riley College Preparatory Academy (Riley Prep). The SBCTA SRTS Plan recommends that the City
paint high-visibility crosswalks, Class II bicycle lanes, and school zone markings along Baseline Street. It also recommends accessibility upgrades and additional
school signage. All high visibility crosswalks should
also be painted in school zone yellow, instead of the
standard white color paint.
Omnitrans Short Range Transit Plan FY 2023-2030
The Omnitrans Short Range Transit Plan outlines
upcoming changes and modifications to the Omnitrans
bus network. While the routes that serve Baseline
Street (3,4, and 10) are mentioned, none of them are
slated to receive any changes in the Project area.
San Bernardino Safe Streets for All Baseline Street Safety Study 17 City of San Bernardino
San Bernardino City Active Transportation Plan
(2022)
The San Bernardino City Active Transportation Plan
(ATP) created a recommended network of bicycle,
pedestrian, and accessibility improvements throughout
the City. Within San Bernardino’s new active
transportation framework, Baseline Street was classified as a multi-modal corridor, meaning that the street
provides regional connectivity to destinations both
inside and outside of the city for several different types of road users. The 2022 plan proposed that Baseline
Street receive sidewalks, curb ramps, and a Class IV
bicycle lane along its entire length. It recommended
other improvements as well, including:
° Transit Stop Improvements
° High Visibility Crosswalks
° Leading Pedestrian Intervals
° Speed Feedback Signs
° Pedestrian HAWK Signals
° Advance Stop Bars
° Advance Yield Lines
° Street Trees
° Sidewalk Obstruction Removal
The ATP also found Baseline Street to be the highest
priority corridor for improvements in San Bernardino
and recommends that the City focus on improving the
street between Meridian Avenue and Del Rosa street.
San Bernardino City Local Roadway Safety Plan
(2022)
The San Bernardino City Local Roadway Safety Plan
(City LRSP) created recommendations for improving
travel safety on streets owned and maintained by
the City. Much like this Plan, the 2022 LRSP focused
on roadway collisions, focusing particularly on five
categories:
° Pedestrian safety
° Unsafe speeds
° Intersection safety
° Driving or Bicycling Under the Influence
° Collisions near schools
° Collision density
The City LRSP found a collection of collisions in each
category above to have been present along Baseline
Street. Additionally, Baseline Street between Meridian
and Tippecanoe Avenues had 742 collisions between
2016 and 2020, making it, by far, the corridor with the most crashes in San Bernardino. It also had more than
double the number of fatal and severe injury crashes
than the 2nd-ranked corridor in the City, Waterman
Avenue.
San Bernardino City Final Systemic Safety Analysis
Report/Inventory Report (2018)
The San Bernardino City Final Systemic Safety Analysis
Report/Inventory Report (SSARP) is another document
that identifies possible strategies for improving safety on San Bernardino’s roadway network. It includes a
specific focus on traffic control devices and, as a part of its recommendations, advises that the City replace
San Bernardino Safe Streets for All Baseline Street Safety Study 18 several signs and traffic lights along Baseline Street.
It also recommends that the City pursue traffic signal
upgrades at several intersections along the street.
One of the upgrades prescribed by the plan is the
installation of Advanced Dilemma Zone Detection
Systems, a type of Intelligent Transportation System
(ITS) technology that adjusts the yellow phase of a
traffic light to reduce the number of drivers who need
to decide where to continue through or stop before an
intersection.
The SSARP ultimately named Baseline Road as the
corridor most recommended for improvements. From
2013 to 2017, Baseline Street from Medical Center
Drive to Del Rosa Drive had more collisions than any
other city corridor. However, it also found that these
improvements would make travel along Baseline Street
substantially safer. The improvements, if implemented,
would generate more than 29 times the benefits for
their cost.
San Bernardino City Dilemma Zone Upgrades
(2025)
In Spring 2024, the City of San Bernardino upgraded
signals at 49 intersections across the City (including 19 on Baseline Street) to include Dilemma Zone detection
technology. The Dilemma Zone is the area before the
stop bar of an intersection where a driver needs to
decide whether to stop at a traffic light or continue
through the intersection. Dilemma Zone technology is
designed to extend the red light duration for all sides of the intersection to ensure that drivers who do decide
to proceed through the light in the Dilemma Zone have
adequate time to clear the intersection before traffic
from other directions enter.
The preliminary results of a study conducted by
SCAG and its partners show positive safety results.
San Bernardino City’s “Red Protect” Dilemma Zone
technology, which was implemented in conjunction
with other improvements like reflective backplates,
new electrical equipment, and pedestrian and ADA
improvements, resulted in a 53% decrease in average
crashes per year and a 72% decrease in average serious
and fatal injury crashes per year for participating
signalized intersections along Baseline Road.
Additionally, three of the five intersections with the
largest crash reductions (Waterman Avenue, Arrowhead
Avenue, and H Stret) were along Baseline Street.
Waterman/Baseline Neighborhood Specific Plan
(2016)
The 2016 Waterman/Baseline Neighborhood Specific
Plan creates a vision for future development and
improvements to the public realm in the vicinity of
Waterman Avenue and Baseline Street. The Plan details
several aspects of planning and development for the
area including a mobility plan that envisions a walkable, connected, mixed-use neighborhood.
The mobility plan proposes reconfiguring the
intersection of Baseline Street and Waterman Avenue
to add more turn lanes on Baseline Road while
also suggesting several safety components such as
streetscape and pedestrian improvements, including
adding lighting, accessibility features, medians, street trees, and bus stop improvements.
San Bernardino Safe Streets for All Baseline Street Safety Study 19 It also called for all crosswalks to be upgraded to highvisibility crosswalks, flashing beacons to be installed where necessary, and for a full set of crosswalks to
be installed at the intersection of Baseline Street and Windsor/Myrtle Drives. The mobility plan recommends
Class II bike lanes along Baseline Street within the
entirety of the plan area. These facilities would intersect with Class II bike lanes at Wall Avenue and a Class I
shared-use path that follows a drainage canal between
Canyon Road and Barton Street. Local residents and
community stakeholders had opportunities to discuss
the issues they have experienced in their neighborhood
and to identify potential solutions.
Neighboring Jurisdictions
Highland Circulation Element (2012)
The City of Highland’s Circulation Element of its 2012
Master Plan outlines the City’s priorities in maintaining and enhancing their transportation network. Baseline
Street, known as Base Line Street within Highland’s
boundaries, is classified as a truck route and a “Major Highway”, which at their ultimate design, includes four travel lanes, a raised median, and shoulder space that
can either be used for parking or Class II bike lanes.
This reflects Base Line Street’s current conditions in
the City of Highland, where a Class II buffered bike lane begins at Highland’s border with San Bernardino and
continues to just east of Boulder Avenue.
Rialto General Plan Circulation Element (2023)
Baseline Street, which is Base Line Street within the
City of Rialto, is classified as a “Major Arterial” in the Circulation Element of Rialto’s General Plan. Major
Arterial streets have an ultimate configuration of three travel lanes in each direction separated by a raised
median. However, Base Line Street currently maintains
four travel lanes and curbside parking throughout most
of its length in Rialto. It currently also has Class II bike lanes between Lilac and Maple Avenues.
Rialto Safe Routes to School Plan
The Rialto Safe Routes to School Plan recommends
several safety improvements within the vicinity of
Rialto schools, including several close to Baseline Street (known as Base Line Street within Rialto). The most
notable recommendation is Class II bike lanes that
would begin at Rialto’s border with San Bernardino and
continue throughout Rialto to Fontana.
San Bernardino Safe Streets for All Baseline Street Safety Study 20 Safety Analysis Overview
As is evident through its history and physical context, Baseline Street is an integral corridor that serves
the City of San Bernardino. Aside from carrying high
volumes of traffic through the entire east-west extent
of the city, it also accommodates major destinations
such as multiple schools and shopping centers.
However, due to high volumes and high demands
of travel, Baseline Street was also identified as one
of the highest crash rate corridors according to San
Bernardino’s LRSP, adopted in 2022.
Consequently, this safety anaysis will focus on
Baseline Street as the study area, specifically the
portion between Meridian Avenue and Tippecanoe
Avenue. Safety recommendations will be provided
based on the most recent five-year crash history,
2019-2023, as provided by the Statewide
Integrated Traffic Records System (SWITRS). This is
supplemented by a review of the 2024-2025 crash
data from the Dilemma Zone study. A brief overview
of crash trends will be explored, alongside more
detailed investigations into the top crash locations
along Baseline Street.
Crash Trends by Year
A total of 722 crashes occurred between 2019 and
2023. As seen in Figure 2.2, Baseline Street saw
relatively consistent crash numbers between the
years of 2019 to 2021. However, crash totals saw a
significant drop in 2022 and even more in 2023.
Potential reasons may be related to the City’s
implementation of safety countermeasures on
Baseline Street between the years 2022 and
2023, specifically the installation of retroreflective
backplates for signalized intersections. Since then,
several more attempts have been made to address
safety on Baseline Street. For example, a recent study
was conducted between 2024 and 2025 for Dilemma
Zone implementation at signalized intersections along
Baseline Street.
Preliminary results show that total crashes along
Baseline have decreased by about 50% in these two
years. While not directly comparable to this plan’s
crash data as 2019 to 2023 is a five-year period, the
study is expected to have significant impact for the
years between 2026 to 2028 if the same crash trends
continue.
In addition to the Dilemma Zone study, the City
completed a speed-limit study in 2024 that resulted
in reduced speed limits along several segments of
Baseline Street. However, becuase these improvements
were implemented after 2023 and did not cover the
entier corridor, the crash data associated with these
Figure 2.2: Crash Trends by Year
San Bernardino Safe Streets for All Baseline Street Safety Study 21 studies was not included in this analysis.
Although total crash numbers have declined between
2019 to 2023, it is important to note that Killed and
Severe Injury (KSI) crashes still remained relatively
consistent, hovering between 4% to 6%. The year 2022
saw a spike in KSI crashes, constituting about 10% of all crashes. So, while it is commendable for total crashes
to have declined throughout the corridor, specific
countermeasures may need to be considered to target
further reductions in KSI crashes.
Crash Mode and Fatal/Serious Injury (KSI)
Proportions
Figure 2.3 and Figure 2.4 categorizes crashes by mode
of transportation. Automobile-only crashes were the
most common, comprising 86% of all crashes. Pedestrian
crashes were the second most common followed by
motorcycle and bicycle crashes roughly sharing the
same proportions.
While it is unsurprising to see automobile-only crashes comprising the greatest number of KSI crashes, the
expected KSI proportions are substantially lower in
comparison, at 53%. In contrast, while pedestrian crashes were only 8% of total crashes, they comprised 26% of
all KSI crashes. The same pattern of overrepresentation is observed for motorcycle crashes, at 14%, and bicycle crashes, at 7%.
Exploring each mode’s crash severity proportions paints a similar scenario. As per Figure 2.5, about 20% of all pedestrian crashes resulted in a KSI. KSI proportions
are even higher for motorcycle crashes at almost 25%.
Bicycle crashes also had high KSI rates at around 15%.
Automobile KSI rates were only at about 4%, showing
Figure 2.3: Total Crashes by Mode of
Transportation
Figure 2.4: Further investigated crash modes by
KSI proportions.
San Bernardino Safe Streets for All Baseline Street Safety Study 22 Figure 2.5: Crash Severity by Mode of Transportation that Vulnerable Road Users (VRU) KSI rates are several
magnitudes higher compared to automobile KSI rates.
Ultimately, these results indicate that while VRU crashes occur at lower numbers, they have a much higher risk
of resulting in severe or fatal conditions when they do occur. With almost half of all KSI crashes on Baseline
Street being attributed to VRUs, recommendations
should be specifically tailored to these types of crashes, especially regarding pedestrian crashes, which make up
more than a quarter of all KSI crashes.
Crash Location Facilities
Aside from analyzing the crash data by travel mode,
it is imperative to also analyze general crash location types on Baseline Street. The project extent of Baseline Street covers a long stretch within the city with
different traffic volumes, land uses, and densities, so an analysis on location types helps direct attention to areas with the most need.
Table 2.1 breaks down the 722 crashes by their
corresponding location type, categorized into
Signalized Intersections, Unsignalized Intersections, and Segments. Crashes are assigned to segments if they
occur beyond 250 ft of a signalized intersection, or 150 ft of an unsignalized intersection.
The project extent of Baseline Street has a relatively
San Bernardino Safe Streets for All Baseline Street Safety Study 23 lower number of signalized intersections to
unsignalized intersections, 22 and 35 respectively.
Despite having more unsignalized intersections, about
71% of all crashes occurred at signalized intersections, likely due to the high volumes of traffic and activity
along signalized intersections as denser developments
and land uses are generally located near signalized
intersections.
Signalized Unsignalized Roadway Segment
Property Damage Only 203 62 11
% of Total 39.6% 35.8% 30.6%
Complaint of Pain 198 62 10
% of Total 38.6% 35.8% 27.8%
Visible Injury 88 36 9
% of Total 17.2% 20.8% 25.0%
Severe Injury 18 5 3
% of Total 3.5% 2.89% 8.33%
Fatal 6 8 3
% KSI 1.2% 4.6% 8.3%
TOTAL 513 173 36
GRAND TOTAL 722
Table 2.1: Crashes by Location Type
About 24% of crashes occurred at unsignalized
intersections, while only about 5% occurred along
segments. Segment crashes are relatively few since
Baseline Street is largely built out with intersections often being only a few hundred feet apart. However,
some longer portions do run uninterrupted across the
City where some segment crashes occur.
San Bernardino Safe Streets for All Baseline Street Safety Study 24 Crash Location and Crash Type
Table 2.2 and Table 2.3 details the crash type associated with each location facility type. The most common
types of collisions that occur at signalized intersections are broadside, rear end, and sideswipe crashes. These
three types of collisions also often occur at unsignalized intersections, though crash types are relatively evenly spread out for unsignalized intersections.
Generally, broadside and sideswipe crashes are related to turning movements which often occur at intersections.
Rear ends are most often associated with speeding
but may also include other factors such as distracted
driving. Again, note that vehicle/pedestrian crash types are less common but have the highest rates of KSIs for
both intersection types.
Segment crashes have slightly different proportions of
crash types with hit object being the most common,
followed by rear end and sideswipe. Hit object crashes
are also often attributed to speeding or unsafe turning movements.
Intersection
Crash Type
Signalized Total Signalized
KSI
%
Resulting in KSI
UnsignalizedTotal
Unsignalized KSI
%
Resulting in KSI
Broadside 194 14 7.22% 45 4 8.89%
Rear End 119 1 0.84% 27 0 0.00%
Sideswipe 60 1 1.67% 29 0 0.00%
Hit Object 43 1 2.33% 29 1 3.45%
Head-On 47 2 4.26% 20 3 15.00%
Vehicle/
Pedestrian
34 5 14.71% 20 3 15.00%
Overturned 6 0 0.00% 2 0 0.00%
Segment Collision Type Number of Crashes Total KSI % Resulting in KSI Hit Object 12 1 8.33%
Rear End 6 0 0.00%
Sideswipe 4 0 0.00%
Head-On 3 1 33.33%
Overturned 3 1 33.33%
Broadside 3 0 0.00%
Vehicle/Pedestrian 4 3 75.00%
Table 2.2: Baseline Street Intersection Crash Types
Table 2.3: Baseline Street Segment Crash Types
San Bernardino Safe Streets for All Baseline Street Safety Study 25 Crash Location and Primary Collision Factor
Aside from the types of crashes, it is also beneficial to investigate the Primary Collision Factors (PCF) that
are often attributed to location types. PCFs identify
common causes that may lead to crashes and help
direct countermeasures to address the cause factors at
similar location types.
As represented in Table 2.4, Traffic Signals and Signs
are the most common PCF for signalized intersections,
inferring that systemic improvements for traffic signal hardware or sign placements may be an important
focus.
Note that the City has implemented traffic signal
improvements along many of the major signalized
intersections along Baseline Street since 2022, which
may explain the decrease of total crash numbers
observed earlier in the analysis. However, KSI rates
for this PCF are also quite high especially considering its total crash amount, at close to 8%; compared to
the 2nd and 3rd most common PCFs, which both
have KSI rates at only about 1%, this is a much higher
comparative KSI rate. Recalling that though total
collisions were reduced in 2022 and 2023, KSI rates
remained the same and rose in 2022, so further
improvements at specific locations may need to be
considered.
Intersection Crash PCFs Signalized Total Signalized KSI% Resulting in KSI
Unsignalized Total
Unsignalized
KSI
% Resulting
in KSI
Traffic Signals and Signs 134 11 8.21% 2 0 0.00%
Unsafe Speed 118 2 1.69% 31 1 3.23%
Improper Turning 95 1 1.05% 55 4 7.27%
Automobile Right of Way 62 2 3.23% 36 0 0.00%
Unknown 25 1 4.00% 7 0 0.00%
Pedestrian Violation 15 2 13.33% 13 2 15.38%
Driving or Bicycling Under the
Influence of Alcohol or Drug
15 3 20.00% 8 4 50.00%
Pedestrian Right of Way 10 1 10.00% 1 0 0.00%
Table 2.4: PCFs for Signalized and Unsignalized Intersections San Bernardino Safe Streets for All Baseline Street Safety Study 26 Table 2.5: PCFs for Roadway Segments
Unsafe Speeds ranked as the 2nd PCF for signalized
intersections followed by improper turning, inferring
that speeding and unsafe or illegal turning movements
often occur at signalized intersections.
For unsignalized intersections, the most common PCF
was improper turning followed by automobile right
of way and unsafe speeds. Mitigations that restrict
dangerous turning movements and reducing speeds of
incoming vehicles may address many crashes that often
occur at unsignalized intersections. Crashes related to Automobile Right of Way relate to drivers disregarding
standard traffic right of way and failing to yield to
incoming traffic. Mitigations may include increased
enforcement and education for reducing aggressive or
unsafe driving behaviors.
Crash Type Segment Total
Signalized KSI
Unsafe Speed 10 2
Improper Turning 10 0
Automobile Right of Way 3 0
Pedestrian Violation 3 3
Unsafe Starting or Backing 2 0
Unsafe Lane Change 2 0
Other Hazardous Violation 2 0
Driving or Bicycling Under the Influence of Alcohol or Drug 1 1 Other Improper Driving 1 0
Other Other Then Driver (or Pedestrian) 1 0
Hazardous Parking 1 0
Table 2.5 similarly depicts PCFs that occur on
segments. Segment Crashes constituted 36 crashes
out of the 722 crashes on Baseline Street. While only a small portion of crashes occurred on segments, 6 KSI
crashes were recorded on these segments and should
also be considered for mitigation. The most common
PCFs related to segment crashes were unsafe speeds
and improper turning, with 2 KSI’s attributed to unsafe speeds. Mitigations to address issues of speeding may
include speed feedback signs, wider edge lines, and
road diets.
San Bernardino Safe Streets for All Baseline Street Safety Study 27 Emphasis Areas
Apart from analyzing crash trends by location,
facility types, and PCFs, California Department of
Transportation (Caltrans) also recommends jurisdictions to analyze crashes through the lens of Emphasis
Areas (EAs). EAs (also known as Challenge Areas) are
designated as factors that have historically created
the greatest challenges to roadway safety and/or
provide the greatest opportunity to achieve the goal
of zero fatal and severe injury crashes on all California public roads. In more simplified terms, EAs are the
most common crash types and cause factors found
amongst all crashes identified by Caltrans. Each crash
is then grouped into corresponding categories to
summarize common factors leading to certain crashes,
so that targeted approaches may be directed toward
addressing the highest number of crashes. These
EAs have been identified through careful analysis of
historical crash data, such as SWITRS, and through the
feedback of traffic safety stakeholders. Below is the
complete list of the 14 EAs as defined by Caltrans:
° Speed Management/Aggressive Driving
° Lane Departures
° Intersections
° Impaired Driving
° Pedestrians
° Motorcyclists
° Occupant Protection
° Young Drivers
° Commercial Vehicles
° Aging Drivers
° Distracted Driving
° Bicyclists
° Work Zones
City-wide Emphasis Areas vs Baseline
Street Emphasis Areas
Caltrans’ Strategic Highway Safety Plan (SHSP) was
used to gather statistics on the most prevalent EAs
for the City of San Bernardino. Table 2.6 compares the
top five EAs specifically for Baseline Street against
the City-wide EAs percentages. It ranks the top five
EAs found for Baseline Street, compared to the City
of San Bernardino, sorted by highest to lowest based
on City-wide percentages. Because Baseline Street
is only one corridor out of the entire city network,
some noticeable differences are apparent as noted
in the EA percentages for both Lane Departures
and Intersections. Due to its low percentages, Lane
Departures was not analyzed in this study.
Emphasis Area
Name
Baseline St EA
%
City-wide EA %
Speed Management/
Aggressive Driving
37.21% 40.26%
Lane Departures 4.65% 32.99%
Intersections 86.05% 29.65%
Impaired Driving 20.93% 26.16%
Pedestrians 18.60% 25.73%
Table 2.6: Emphasis Areas for Baseline St vs. City Wide San Bernardino Safe Streets for All Baseline Street Safety Study 28 The percentage of each EA notes the proportion of KSI victims that are attributed to that specific EA. EAs are not mutually exclusive and a singular KSI crash may
contribute to multiple KSI percentages of several EAs
at the same time if they fulfill those qualifications. For example, a KSI collision that occurred at an intersection and involved both a pedestrian and an impaired driver
can be counted in the three EAs of Intersections,
Impaired Driving, and Pedestrians. The following
section is a brief description of the top five EA’s and some potential countermeasure strategies that may
help mitigate these EA crashes.
Intersections
General EA trends across Federal, State, and Municipal
statistics often cite Intersections as one of the most
common EAs associated with KSIs due to the increased
volumes and conflict zones that occur at intersections.
However, while the City-wide Intersection EA accounts
for almost 30% of KSI victims, Baseline’s Intersection
EA accounts for 86% of KSI victims, a significantly
higher portion in comparison. Potential reasons may be
due to the physical characteristics of Baseline Street
itself. Baseline Street is a relatively built out corridor and a multitude of North-South streets cross Baseline
throughout its extent. Only a few stretches towards
the west of the street run uninterrupted; the rest of
the corridor have either signalized or unsignalized
intersections every few hundred feet. So, while high,
this statistic falls in line with the overall crash statistics, where 686 out of 722 crashes occurred at intersections.
In light of these findings, the Intersection EA focuses on identifying issues that lead to fatal or serious
injury crashes at or near intersection facilities.
Countermeasures often include infrastructure
improvements such as improved signals or signs,
dilemma zone management, pedestrian-bicycle
enhancements, etc. Education on appropriate driving
behavior such as yielding or signage comprehension
can also help drivers better navigate intersection rightof-way movements.
Speed Management/Aggressive Driving
Speed Management/Aggressive Driving is another
common EA that is often identified as a priority to
address. The statistics for Baseline Street are similar to those found in the City-wide percentages, off only
by three percent. Baseline Street, being an extremely
straight four-lane arterial road with relatively wide
shoulders, presents the corridor as a fast-speed road,
enticing drivers to often go above the posted speed
limit. With more than a third of KSI victims attributed to unsafe speeds or aggressive driving, it is important factor to mitigate on Baseline Street.
As a result, this EA focuses on identifying strategies
and mitigation measures that reduce issues of driving
too fast, tailgating, and other reckless driving behaviors.
Countermeasures may include lowering the speed limit,
improving signal or sign visibility, road diets, etc.
San Bernardino Safe Streets for All Baseline Street Safety Study 29 Impaired Driving
Impaired driving is the 3rd highest EA noted on
Baseline Street and the 4th highest City-wide. Impaired driving occurs when a person is operating a vehicle
under the influence of substances or under conditions
that diminish the driver’s ability to properly operate
the vehicle. This includes alcohol, both legal and illegal drugs, and even extreme fatigue. Driving under the
influence of alcohol (DUI) is the most common and
dangerous form of impaired driving, affecting a driver’s motor skills, reaction times, judgement, and overall
cognitive functions. Drugs also have a similar effect
but may vary significantly depending on the substance.
Driving while fatigued can also impair reaction times,
judgement, and vigilance similar to the previous
substances.
Countermeasures primarily focus on enforcement, and
education/awareness campaigns specifically targeting
impaired driving. Policies that encourage designated
drivers and ridesharing, ignition interlock devices that require a person to blow into a breathalyzer before
starting the vehicle, drowsiness detection systems, and addiction support and fatigue management are useful
tools to mitigate impaired driving.
Pedestrians
Pedestrians is the 4th highest EA noted on Baseline
Street and 5th highest for City-wide, with about 20% of KSI victims on Baseline being attributed as pedestrianrelated. The Pedestrians EA focuses on improving pedestrian safety and reducing fatal or serious injury
crashes that involve vehicles and pedestrians. This
EA not only includes those who walk but also those
who utilize wheelchairs, scooters, and non-motorized
transportation modes such as bikes or e-bikes. As
mentioned in the collision analysis, 11% of Baseline
Street crashes were attributed to pedestrians and
bicyclists. Yet pedestrians and bicyclists constituted
close to 33% of all KSI crashes, disproportionate to its expected share based on total crash distributions.
Due to their vulnerability and lack of protection
relative to a vehicle, countermeasures for this EA aims to separate the space these modes utilize for travel,
provide as much buffering as possible when space
is limited, or reduce the amount of time pedestrians
and bicyclists are on vehicle lanes during crossings.
Countermeasures include high-visibility crosswalks,
curb extensions, leading pedestrian intervals (LPIs),
sidewalk installations, pedestrian hybrid beacons, etc.
San Bernardino Safe Streets for All Baseline Street Safety Study 30 Disadvantaged Community Analysis
Another important factor to consider is Baseline
Street’s relationship with underserved areas as defined by state or federal standards. Funding opportunities
from federal grant programs use Areas of Persistent
Poverty (APP) as their most common indicator when
prioritizing projects in disadvantaged communities. For the state of California, agencies such as Caltrans often utilize CalEnviroScreen 4.0 (CES 4.0) or Healthy Places Index (HPI) 3.0 as their disadvantaged communities
indicator. Figure 2.6 on the following page analyzes
census tracts adjacent to Baseline Street based on the
three indicators of APP, CES 4.0 and HPI.
As represented in Figure 2.6, Baseline Street is
entirely located within the census tracts that qualify as disadvantaged under the APP, CES 4.0, and HPI.
Census tracts are counted as an APP if at least 20% of
its population have lived in poverty for consistently at least three data points: the 1990 and 2000 decennial
census and the most recent Small Area Income &
Poverty Estimates. Census tracts with a poverty rate
of at least 20% according to the American Community
Survey (ACS) are also counted as an APP. Generally,
for CES 4.0, any census tract that scores in the top 25th percentile are counted as disadvantaged according to
state guidelines. HPI scores disadvantaged tracts in the opposite manner, with tracts scoring on the bottom
25th percentile being qualified as disadvnataged.
Note that the characterstics measured between CES
4.0, APP, and HPI are different in nature. CES 4.0
measures the level of pollution while HPI measures
community conditions that may effect life expectancy.
Both of these indicators take into account a
multitude of environmental and socioeconomic data
to estimate which census tracts are overburdened
by above average pollution levels or below average
life expectancy. APP primarily focuses on median
household income and poverty levels as the two main
data sources, unlike CES 4.0 and HPI.
Ultimately, while these three indicators measure
different disadvantaged characterstics, many of these
data points are highly correlated with one another and
reveal that Baseline Street is bearing above average
burdens in all three measurements.
San Bernardino Safe Streets for All Baseline Street Safety Study 31 Figure 2.6: Disadvantaged Indicators for Baseline Street Chapter Three -
Stakeholder &
Community Engagement
San Bernardino Safe Streets for All Baseline Street Safety Study 33 Stakeholder and Community
Engagement Overview
This chapter summarizes the stakeholder and
community engagement conducted to support the
Baseline Street Safety Study. Between August 2025
and April 2026, the City of San Bernardino conducted a
range of outreach activities to identify location-specific safety concerns, understand corridor-level priorities,
and gather feedback on potential safety improvements
along Baseline Street. Input collected through these
efforts helped identify corridor needs and informed the recommendations and prioritization presented in later
chapters.
Consistent with the Safe System Approach, the
engagement process focused on understanding how
people use Baseline Street, where they experience
safety and accessibility concerns, and what types
of changes they believe would improve corridor
conditions. The study utilized in-person and online
participation formats to ensure multiple opportunities
for people to participate and share feedback in ways
that were accessible and responsive to different levels of interest and availability.
The following sections describe the communication
and outreach materials developed to support public
awareness and summarize the in-person events and
stakeholder meetings conducted during the study.
Key themes and location-specific feedback collected
through survey-based engagement tools provided a
broader understanding of existing conditions along the
corridor and helped inform the study’s recommended
safety improvements.
Engagement Methods and Tools
To support community participation throughout the
Baseline Street Safety Study, a range of informational
materials and engagement tools were developed to
introduce the study, communicate its purpose, and
provide accessible ways for community members
and stakeholders to share feedback. These resources
supported both awareness-building and input collection
across in-person and online formats.
Communication and Outreach
Communication and outreach materials were used to
support public awareness of the study and connect
community members to opportunities for participation.
These included public-facing digital tools, bilingual
printed materials, promotional outreach through
social media and email, and survey-based tools used
throughout the study process. Table 3.1 summarizes
the informational materials and engagement tools used
during the engagement process.
San Bernardino Safe Streets for All Baseline Street Safety Study 34 Tool Purpose Input
Project Website
(StoryMap)
A public-facing tool that served as the main online hub for engagement and provided study background and outreach
updates. Directed users to the interactive feedback map, a link to a standalone webmap page, and included a project email for general questions and specific comments.
Location-based comments submitted through the interactive feedback map, along with direct questions or comments
submitted through the project email.
Mapping feedback was open from August to December
2025; with a total of 49 comments received.
Project Flyer Produced in English and Spanish and used in both print and digital formats to promote awareness of the study and direct community members to participate in the survey, community workshop, and project website. Adapted versions were used as social media-style promotional graphics linking users to the survey, workshop, website, or other engagement opportunities.
No input was collected; it served as a promotional and
directional tool.
Fact Sheet A more detailed printed project handout used primarily at outreach events to summarize the study, communicate key project information, and direct participants to the project website and online feedback tools through QR codes.
No input was collected, as it served as an informational handout.
Social Media Shared project information and promoted the survey, project website, and community workshop on Instagram, Facebook, and Nextdoor. Posts provided direct links to participation opportunities and supported broader public awareness.
No input was collected; used as a directional tool to mobilize traffic to the survey and project website.
E-blasts/Stakeholder
Email Database
Used to distribute flyers and project updates to stakeholder and community contacts throughout the outreach process and to promote participation.
No input was collected; it promoted participation in
upcoming engagement events.
Table 3.1: Outreach Materials and Engagement Tools
Project Branding
Project branding was developed to promote
recognition of the Baseline Street Safety Study and to
distinguish it as a focused safety initiative within the City of San Bernardino. Using a stylized traffic-signal logo featuring icons for driving, bicycling, and walking, the project branding established a distinct visual
identity for the Baseline Street Safety Study and used
a color palette that complemented the City’s broader
visual identity, creating a consistent look across publicfacing materials and presentations.
Surveys
Surveys were used to collect structured feedback from
community members in both digital and paper formats.
These tools supported the broader outreach process
by providing opportunities for participants to identify safety concerns, describe travel experiences, and
respond to proposed improvements along the corridor.
San Bernardino Safe Streets for All Baseline Street Safety Study 35 Interactive Survey Webmap
This tool was developed to collect geographically
specific feedback along the Baseline Street corridor.
The web-based tool allowed users to add point or line
comments directly on the map, select from predefined
categories, and provide written comments describing
safety concerns, barriers, or improvement needs. The
webmap was embedded within the project website and
made available through a standalone link. QR codes
included on project flyers also directed users to the
standalone map.
Draft Recommendation Comment Card
A paper comment card was used during the community
workshop to collect feedback on the study’s draft
recommendations. Participants were asked to review
the project boards and indicate whether each of the
ten proposed roadway safety projects was important
to them and whether the proposed improvements
would make them feel more comfortable using those
roadways. Participants also had the opportunity to
identify any additional concerns they believed should
be addressed through an open-ended question
included on the comment card.
Intercept Survey
Intercept surveys were conducted in-person at selected
locations along the Baseline Street corridor. These
surveys were administered through brief conversations
that allowed participants to describe current conditions, identify immediate safety concerns, and respond to
potential improvement needs based on their experience
at or near specific intersections and transit-access
locations. This survey was able to capture corridor
feedback from people who were actively traveling and
included individuals who may not have participated
through online or workshop-based engagement.
Public Engagement and Stakeholder
Meetings
This section summarizes the in-person events,
workshops, and meetings conducted as part of
the outreach process. These activities provided
opportunities for community members, local
stakeholders, and agency representatives to learn
about the study and share feedback on safety
issues and potential improvements along Baseline
Street. Engagement formats varied by activity and
included pop-up outreach, workshop-style review of
recommendations, and meeting-based discussions with
committees and school representatives.
Community Outreach Events
The project team participated in three pop-up outreach
events that collectively reached approximately 435
community members. The first two events focused
on location-specific feedback and improvement
preferences, while the third focused primarily on
awareness-building and promotion of the March 3,
2026 community workshop. Refer to Table 3.2 on the
following page for a summary of completed community
outreach events.
San Bernardino Safe Streets for All Baseline Street Safety Study 36 # Event Date Location and Time Activities Engagement and Outputs 1 Mt. Vernon
Bridge
Reopening
Celebration
August
23, 2025
Mt. Vernon Bridge
San Bernardino, CA
9:30 AM–1:00 PM
Pop-up booth; oneon-one conversations;
printed Baseline
Street project area
map for locationbased comments;
project email sign-up;
flyer distribution.
140 booth visitors including families, seniors, and teens. 20 Spanish-speaking participants
19 email sign-ups.
75 flyers distributed with additional flyers provided to library staff.
Verbal comments and place-based map comments collected through map activity.
Emphasis placed on poor pavement conditions and the need for repaving; requests for safer and more visible crossings near schools; interest in bicycle infrastructure, and concern about sidewalk and streetscape conditions.
Participants also noted that cleanliness and conditions in the pedestrian environment affect comfort and perceived safety along the corridor. 2 12th Annual
Rendezvous
Back to
Route 66
October
11, 2025
Court Street
Square, San
Bernardino, CA
10:00 AM-4:00 PM
Project booth;
project map activity;
voting on potential
improvements.
135 booth visitors including families, seniors, teens, and Spanish-speaking participants.
Verbal comments and place-based map comments collected through map activity.
Participants identified high-visibility crosswalks as the most preferred improvement, followed by RRFBs and road diets.
3 San
Bernardino
Lunar New
Year Festival
February
21, 2026
Court Street
Square, San
Bernardino, CA
10:00 AM-6:00 PM
Project booth;
workshop promotion
and project
information sharing.
125 booth visitors, including families, seniors, teens, and Spanish-speaking participants.
Primary goal was awareness-building and promotion of the March 3, 2026 community workshop.
Attendees were also encouraged to participate through the City’s website and social media channels and to add their information to the project email contact list. Flyers were distributed at the library, senior center, and schools along the Baseline Street corridor.
4 Community
Workshop
at Feldheym
Library
March
3, 2026
Feldheym Library
555 W 6th Street
San Bernardino
5:30 PM–7:00 PM
Review of
recommendation
boards for 10 key
intersections; review
of countermeasure
toolbox; questions
and discussion;
written comment
cards; family-friendly
activity area.
10 attendees.
Comment themes included improved crosswalks, bike lanes, RRFBs, diagonal crossings at key intersections, and sidewalk cleaning.
Table 3.2: Outreach Materials and Engagement Tools
San Bernardino Safe Streets for All Baseline Street Safety Study 37 # Meeting Date Location and Time Activities Participation and Key Topics 1 Northwest
Project Area
Committee
(NWPAC)
Meeting
September 8,
2025
New Hop Family
Life Center, San
Bernardino, CA
6:00 PM-8:00 PM
15-minute
presentation; project
flyer distribution;
facilitated discussion
and Q&A; information
provided on how to
submit comments
through the project
mapping tool.
Approximately 40 attendees, including Councilmember Mario Flores, Planning Commissioners, City of San Bernardino police officers, and City code enforcement staff.
Nine project email sign-ups received
Key topics included speeding, red-light running, flashing beacons, bicycle lane feasibility, sun glare/shade, online survey availability, and a sidewalk gap near the wash/Arroyo Valley High School area toward Meridian Avenue.
2 Martin
Luther King
Jr. Middle
School
Meeting with
Principal
March 18,
2026
Virtual (Zoom)
2:30-3:00 PM
Review of
recommendations for
Baseline Street and
Medical Center Drive
with Principal Ernesto
Calles.
Principal Calles supported the proposed curb extension and identified student safety issues near El Super, including heavy after-school crossings, jaywalking, limited waiting space, and conflicts affecting students who walk, bike, or use scooters.
Approximately 250 students gather at the corner after school, with approximately 30 students commuting by bike or scooter.
Feedback highlighted concentrated school-area safety challenges involving dismissal-period crowding, heavy vehicle activity, limited pedestrian waiting space, and multimodal conflicts near the intersection.
Table 3.3: Stakeholder Outreach Events
Stakeholder Meetings
Stakeholder meetings provided a more focused
setting for discussion with committee members,
local leadership, and school representatives familiar
with corridor conditions and community travel
patterns. These meetings generally included a project
presentation or review of recommendations, followed
by facilitated discussion and questions. Input collected through these meetings helped supplement public
feedback by identifying location-specific concerns,
operational issues, and implementation considerations
relevant to Baseline Street. Refer below to Table 3.3 for a summary of stakeholder meetings conducted as part
of the outreach process.
San Bernardino Safe Streets for All Baseline Street Safety Study 38 # Meeting Date Location and Time Activities Participation and Key Topics 3 Arroyo Valley
High School
Coffee with a
Principal
April 15, 2026 Arroyo Valley High
School Library, San
Bernardino, CA
9:30-11:30 AM
10-minute
presentation followed
by 10-minute
facilitated discussion
and Q&A in English
and Spanish;
included review of
recommendations for
Baseline Street and
Medical Center Drive.
Principal Manuel Gonzalez hosted the two-hour meeting, of which the project team had 20 minutes for a discussion on the Baseline Street Safety Study. Approximately 20 attendees, including Councilmember Mario Flores, City of San Bernardino police officers, and local parents.
Meeting attendees were appreciative to learn about the project. Many shared concerns about the safety at the intersection of Medical Center Drive and Baseline Street, and concerns about potential for conflicts between students and vehicles near the school areas. Attenddees especially apprecieated the idea of curb extensions and asked for additional solutions to keep students safe. They also shared concerns about commercial truck usage of Baseline Street and overall street quality (potholes).
4 Gomez
Elementary
School
Coffee with a
Principal
April 29,
2026
Gomez Elementary
School, San
Bernardino, CA
2:30-3:30 PM
10-minute
presentation
followeed by
10-minute facilitated
discussion and
Q&A in Spanish;
included review of
recommendations for
Baseline Street and
Medical Center Drive
Principal Maria Martinez hosted a Coffee With a Principal event attended by approximately six parent attendees and four Gomez Elementary administrators.
Meeting attendees expressed appreciation for the proposed improvements and requested additional measures, including electronic speed feedback signs along Baseline Street near schools, safety rails at corners adjacent to school sites, and additional crosswalks where feasible to reduce student jawalking. Participants also requested that trees be trimmed where they obstruct visibility of speed limit signs. 5 Martin
Luther King
Jr. Middle
School Meet
and Greet
April 30,
2026
Martin Luther King Jr.
Middle School, San
Bernardino, CA
10:00-11:00 AM
10-minute
presentation followed
by 10-minute
facilitated discussion
and Q&A in English
and Spanish;
included review of
recommendations for
Baseline Street and
Medical Center Drive.
Principal Ernesto Calles hosted a Meet and Greet attended by four parents and eight school administrators.
Attendees expressed concerns about collisions at Medical Center Drive and Baseline Street, including an incident within the past year in which an MLK Middle School student was struck by a vehicle.
Participants requested additional crosswalks where feasible to reduce student jaywalking, as well as a pedestrian scramble. Attendees noted that these improvements could help encourage students to use the crosswalk at Medical Center Drive and Baseline rather than jaywalk farther north along Medical Center Drive.
San Bernardino Safe Streets for All Baseline Street Safety Study 39 Engagement Feedback Analysis
This section summarizes feedback collected through
survey-based outreach activities conducted as part of
the Baseline Street Safety Study. These tools captured
both existing conditions feedback and responses to
proposed safety improvements, allowing the project
team to compare corridor concerns with reactions to
draft recommendations.
Interactive Survey Webmap
Feedback collected through the Interactive Survey
Webmap provided insight into how participants
experience Baseline Street. Comments submitted
were most associated with walking, followed by key
destinations and bicycling, suggesting participants
primarily used the tool to identify pedestrian
accessibility issues, destination-based travel needs, and multimodal safety concerns. Feedback collected also
identified recurring issues at specific intersections and corridor segments of concern that informed the study’s
understanding of existing conditions.
Participants often identified physical barriers rather
than general perceptions of discomfort. Many of
the comments were tied to individual intersections
where users noted missing or incomplete pedestrian
infrastructure, particularly ADA curb ramps, crossing
treatments, and sidewalk connections. Refer to Table
3.4 for the distribution of comments per travel mode
category and Table 3.5 for additional details on
identified locations.
Category Count
Walking 15
Key Destination 11
Biking 9
Getting to Transit 6
Driving 5
Add your own comment 3
Table 3.4: Distribution of Comments per Travel Mode Categories San Bernardino Safe Streets for All Baseline Street Safety Study 40 Location Nearby Destination Comment Summary Survey Category Garner Avenue Between Mt. Vernon Avenue and
I-215
Need westbound Route 10 bus bench and shelter Getting to Transit Meridian Avenue Arroyo Valley High School /
school access
Install Class IV bikeway from Meridian Avenue to the
high school, including grade separation
Biking
Arrowhead Avenue Abraham Lincoln Elementary
School
Request for an ADA curb ramp on the northwest corner
of the intersection
Walking
N Berkeley Avenue Salsa Taco House Restaurant and
Riley College Prep Academy
Request for an ADA curb ramp on the westbound side Walking Valencia Avenue Bradley Elementary School /
school access
Request for ADA curb ramps on both sides of the
intersection
Walking
Windsor Drive Residential area Request for an ADA curb ramp on the northeast corner of the intersection
Walking
Cedar Street Hopeful Things Thrift Shop Request for ADA curb ramps on both corners of the intersection
Walking
Creek trail crossing Warm Springs Creek / trail
connection
Add mid-block crossing with wide curb ramps and
rectangular rapid flashing beacons
Walking
Perris Hill to
Tippecanoe Avenue
South side of Baseline Street
corridor
Construct the sidewalk on the south side of the corridor Walking H Street Riley College Prep Academy /
school access
Need to narrow the curb radii on the northwest corner
to reduce turning speeds
Walking
Davidson Avenue Santa Fe Market / Family Dollar /
residential access
Provide a center median and refuge island for pedestrian crossing on Baseline Street
Walking
E Street & F Street Adult Education Center (Inland
Career) / freeway access area
Signal and queueing issues causing congestion and
blocked intersections
Driving
Mountain View /
Alfredo’s area
Alfredo’s Restaurant Turning difficulty at night because of limited left-turn options and the lack of a left-turn arrow
Add your own comment
Madison Street
to Medical Center
Drive
Corridor segment Request for additional tree coverage, including sycamore trees
Add your own comment
Table 3.5: Location Specific Feedback
San Bernardino Safe Streets for All Baseline Street Safety Study 41 Draft Recommendations Comment Card
The Draft Recommendations Comment Card was used
during the March 3, 2026 community workshop, held
at the Norman F. Feldheym Public Library, to collect
structured feedback on the study’s proposed safety
improvements at ten project locations along the
Baseline Street corridor. A total of seven completed
comment cards were submitted and form the basis
of the results summarized in this section. Participants were asked to identify which of the ten proposed
projects were most important to them, indicate
whether the improvements would make them feel
more comfortable using those roadways, and share any
additional roadway safety concerns.
Table 3.6 lists the proposed project locations evaluated through the survey. These locations correspond to
the site-specific recommendations presented in the
Draft Recommendations Comment Card and served as
the basis for the yes/no responses summarized in the
following discussion.
Table 3.7 summarizes the three questions on the
comment card and the response format used for each.
No. Project Location
1 East Baseline Street & North Waterman Avenue
2 West Baseline Street & North Medical Center Drive
3 West Baseline Street & North Mt Vernon Avenue
4 Baseline Street & Sierra Way Avenue
5 West Baseline Street & North H Street
6 West Baseline Street & North E Street
7 West Baseline Street & North G Street
8 West Baseline Street & North D Street
9 West Baseline Street & North Arrowhead Avenue
10 East Baseline Street & North Lugo Avenue
Table 3.6: Proposed Project Locations
San Bernardino Safe Streets for All Baseline Street Safety Study 42 # Question Response Format
1 Which of the specific proposed
roadway safety projects on the
boards are most important to you?
Yes/No by project
location
2 If these safety improvements
were made, would you feel more
comfortable using these roadways?
Yes/No by project
location
3 Do you have any additional roadway
safety concerns regarding Baseline
Street that you would like the project
team to address in the Baseline
Street Safety Study?
Open-ended
written response
Project Location Yes No
E Baseline St & N Waterman Ave 7 0
W Baseline & N Medical Center Dr 6 0
W Baseline & N Mt Vernon Ave 6 1
Baseline St & Sierra Way Ave 6 1
W Baseline St & N H St 5 1
W Baseline St & N E St 5 1
W Baseline St & N G St 4 2
W Baseline St & N D St 3 2
W Baseline St & N Arrowhead Ave 3 2
E Baseline St & N Lugo Ave 3 2
Table 3.7: Draft Recommendations Comment Card Questions Table 3.8: Recommendations Question 1 Results Responses to Question 1 suggest participants were
selective when identifying the locations they viewed
as highest priority. The strongest responses were
concentrated among a smaller group of locations,
with East Baseline Street and North Waterman Avenue
receiving the highest number of “Yes” responses.
This pattern suggests that participants distinguished
between projects they generally supported and those
they viewed as most important for implementation.
San Bernardino Safe Streets for All Baseline Street Safety Study 43 Table 3.9 summarizes responses to Question 2, asking participants whether the proposed improvements
would make them feel more comfortable using the
roadway at each location. Unlike Question 1, which
required participants to identify relative priorities,
responses to Question 2 were uniformly positive across
all project locations.
Project Location Yes No
W Baseline & N Mt Vernon Ave 7 0
Baseline St & Sierra Way Ave 7 0
E Baseline St & N Waterman Ave 7 0
W Baseline & N Medical Center Dr 6 0
W Baseline St & N H St 6 0
W Baseline St & N G St 6 0
W Baseline St & N E St 6 0
W Baseline St & N D St 6 0
W Baseline St & N Arrowhead Ave 6 0
E Baseline St & N Lugo Ave 6 0
Table 3.9: Draft Recommendations Question 2 Results
Table 3.10 summarizes responses to the open-ended
Questions 3, asking participants if they had any
additional roadway safety concerns regarding Baseline
Street.
Additional Comments
Baseline and California Ave and going towards Rialto
(safety concerns)
Love the bike lanes, maybe add some protection? Poles, street parking?
Budget to keep sidewalks clean
Again, need clean sidewalks
Safety
More crosswalks for school safety
More neighborhood watch
New laws for speeding
The comment card results suggest a difference
between priority and general support. Participants were more selective when identifying which locations were
most important but were broadly positive when asked
whether the proposed improvements would make them
feel more comfortable using the roadway. This pattern
indicates that, while certain locations emerged as
clearer priorities, the workshop participants generally supported the recommended improvement approach
across the corridor.
Table 3.10: Additional Roadway Safety Concerns Question 3 Results
San Bernardino Safe Streets for All Baseline Street Safety Study 44 Intercept Surveys
Intercept surveys conducted on April 6 and April 7,
2026 provided additional location-specific insight at
several key corridor locations identified during the
Community Workshop. Comments collected at Baseline
Street and Waterman Avenue, Baseline Street and
Mt. Vernon Avenue, and Baseline Street and E Street
identified recurring concerns related to speeding,
limited lighting and nighttime visibility, uneven
pavement and crosswalk surfaces, stop sign visibility,
and overall maintenance conditions.
Participants also described challenges for people
walking, including the need for safer crossings,
smoother walking surfaces, and cleaner streets. At
Baseline Street and E Street, bicyclists and transit users raised concerns about driver behavior around cyclists,
the need for bike lanes or more visible bicycle facilities, and personal security concerns affecting comfort near
the bus stop.
Key Findings
The outreach activities conducted for the Baseline
Street Safety Study revealed a set of recurring themes
related to corridor safety conditions, user experience, and improvement priorities. Although feedback varied
by location and engagement format, several consistent
issues emerged across the study process. The key
findings presented below summarize those broader
patterns and highlight the issues that informed the
study’s understanding of existing conditions and
recommend safety improvements.
Pedestrian Safety, Driver Behavior, and
Corridor Visibility
Comments related to unsafe crossings, speeding, redlight running, limited visibility, and other conditions that make travel along Baseline Street feel unsafe were the most common amongst all the outreach events
and feedback channels. Webmap comments pointed
to missing ADA curb ramps, crossing treatments,
and sidewalk connections. Similar concerns were
raised through stakeholder discussions and intercept
surveys, where participants described fast driving,
poor nighttime visibility, uneven crosswalk surfaces,
and turning movements that create conflicts for people
walking and bicycling. These comments indicate that
safety concerns along the corridor are closely tied to
both physical crossing conditions and the way vehicles
operate at key locations.
San Bernardino Safe Streets for All Baseline Street Safety Study 45 Targeted Intersection and Crossing
Improvements
Public feedback reflected broad support for treatments
intended to improve visibility, clarify movements,
and increase user comfort. At the Route 66 pop-up
event and the Community Workshop, high-visibility
crosswalks and rectangular rapid flashing beacons were
among the most supported improvements. Interest in
treatments such as curb extensions, diagonal crossings, and median-related improvements were also expressed
to help improve pedestrian access and better organize
movements at intersections. Participants responded
positively to targeted improvements at key Baseline
Street locations where crossing needs and broader
safety concerns had already been identified through
earlier outreach, including East Baseline Street at North Waterman Avenue, West Baseline Street at North
Medical Center Drive, and West Baseline Street at North Mt. Vernon Avenue.
Multimodal Travel Needs and School Access
Feedback collected indicates Baseline Street functions
as an important access route for school-aged children.
Comments related to school access included safety
issues where high pedestrian activity, limited space,
and turning vehicle movements overlap, particularly
during arrival and dismissal periods. Related feedback
from other outreach activities reinforced the need for
safer bicycle connections, improved transit access, and roadway conditions that better accommodate people
using the corridor in different ways. This suggests
that improvements along Baseline Street should not
be evaluated only in terms of vehicle operations, but
also in how well they support safe and predictable
multimodal access to schools.
Corridor Conditions, Maintenance, and User
Comfort
Participants identified potholes, cracked pavement,
uneven walking surfaces, dim lighting, sidewalk
cleanliness, and other maintenance-related concerns as
issues that affect how safe and comfortable Baseline
Street feels to use. These concerns appeared alongside
requests for crossing improvements and traffic
safety measures, suggesting that day-to-day corridor
conditions influence comfort and accessibility in ways
that shape overall perceptions of safety along Baseline Street.
Chapter Four -
Countermeasures
Toolbox & Priority
Projects
San Bernardino Safe Streets for All Baseline Street Safety Study 47 Toolbox and Priority Projects Overview
Due to the scale of the corridor, this plan does
not include detailed conceptual analyses for all 57
intersections. Instead, conceptual diagrams will
be prepared for ten priority locations to provide
the City with clear, location-specific illustrations of proposed recommendations. In addition to these
ten concept plans, a countermeasure toolbox will be
developed for the remaining 47 intersections and
select roadway segments along Baseline Street. The
toolbox will identify each intersection and outline
the recommended improvements for that location.
The toolbox is intended as a planning-level reference
and is neither exhaustive nor a final determination for construction. All locations will be subject to further
evaluation, including detailed design, feasibility analysis, and applicable review and approval processes, prior to
implementation.
Countermeasure Description
Figure 5.1 presents a list of countermeasures applicable to the Baseline Street corridor. Each countermeasure
is accompanied by an illustrative image and a brief
description. The improvements in this list are common
infrastructure improvements often utilized to target
crashes occurring on both intersection and segment
facilities. Some additional countermeasures not present on the toolbox (bolded in Green) were also included
in the descriptions as potential supplemental systemic
improvements for future safety concerns on Baseline
Street.
San Bernardino Safe Streets for All Baseline Street Safety Study 48 “Rest in red” is a traffic safety technology where signals default to a red light in all directions, turning green only when sensors detect approaching vehicles (often traveling within speed limits). This is often implemented at night after the PM rush period, and before the AM rush period begins.
A four-headed signal that features a yellow flashing arrow in addition to the standard red, yellow, and green arrows. It allows vehicles to make a left-turn after yielding to incoming traffic and pedestrians, after the protected green arrow’s cycle.
Countermeasure Descriptions
Flashing Yellow Arrow Rest in Red
Yellow retroreflective strip with a minimum width of 1 inch and a maximum width of 3 inches placed on the perimeter of the face on the signal backplate. Retroreflective backplates added to a traffic signals improve the visibility of the signal by increasing contrast.
This can reduce crashes by increasing visibility of the traffic signal heads, particularly at night and for drivers with vision limitations.
Retroreflective Backplates
Traffic signal that provides left-turning drivers with their own protected phase, allowing them to turn without conflicting with oncoming traffic or pedestrian crossings. Dedicated left-turn phasing reduces the chance of angle and head-on collisions by creating predictable movements. This can be especially helpful for high volume intersections with a variety of users.
Dedicated Left-turn Phasing
Figure 5.1: Countermeasure Descriptions
San Bernardino Safe Streets for All Baseline Street Safety Study 49 Dedicated, separated spaces next to the street where active transportation users can safely travel. New walkways in areas previously without one dramatically increase safety by separating vulnerable road users from vehicle traffic.
An advanced stop bar is a standard stop bar is placed further away from the crosswalk, creating more distance between vehicles and pedestrians. The space between the stop bar and the crosswalk is also considered in California to be a bike box - a place where cyclists are visible to drivers and can safely wait for a green traffic signal.
Walkways (Sidewalks, Multi-use Paths)
Advance Stop Bars
Dedicated road spaces where pedestrians can safely cross from one side of the street to another. Installing crosswalks where there currently are none can alert drivers to the presence of pedestrians.
Crosswalks also improve safety in school zones and where pedestrians need to cross multiple lanes of turning traffic. Upgrading existing crosswalks to High-Visibility Crosswalks and/or installing enhanced safety and visibility features can increase pedestrian safety.
High-Visibility Crosswalks
Countermeasure Descriptions
San Bernardino Safe Streets for All Baseline Street Safety Study 50 A specialized traffic signal that pedestrians can activate to stop traffic and create an opportunity to cross the street. Pedestrian Hybrid Beacons (PHBs, also called HAWKs) have a yellow “Slow Down” phase, a solid red “Do Not Proceed” phase, and a flashing “Stop” phase. PHBs greatly increase pedestrian safety when compared to unsignalized crosswalks by separating pedestrians from vehicles and completely stopping traffic.
A signal designed to give pedestrians the opportunity to enter an intersection 3-7 seconds before vehicles. Leading Pedestrian Intervals (LPIs) increase the visibility of pedestrians at intersections, encourage motorists to yield to pedestrians, and greatly reduce conflicts between motorists and pedestrians.
Pedestrian-activated flashing lights that enhance the visibility of pedestrians using a crosswalk. Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons (RRFBs) enhance driver awareness and decrease conflicts between vehicles and pedestrians.
Pedestrian Hybrid Beacons (PHB/HAWK)
Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacon (RRFB) Leading Pedestrian Interval (LPI) Countermeasure Descriptions
San Bernardino Safe Streets for All Baseline Street Safety Study 51 Dedicated turn lanes are auxiliary lanes at intersections that separate vehicles intending to turn left or right from those going straight. By giving turning vehicles a dedicated lane to decelerate or wait, they reduce conflicts with through traffic lowering the likelihood of rearend or turning collisions and improving overall flow. These lanes are especially beneficial at intersections with heavy turning volumes or a history of turn-related crashes.
Flashing lights placed in advance of a traffic signal to warn drivers they are approaching a signalized intersection. Advanced Warning Flashing Beacons activate before the signal changes, giving motorists additional time to slow down and prepare to stop. By improving driver awareness and reducing abrupt braking, these beacons enhance safety at intersections with higher speeds, limited visibility, or complex conditions.
A signal treatment that adjusts the length and coordination of signal phases to better manage traffic flow through an intersection or corridor. Improved timing smooths vehicle movement, reduces delays, and adjusts yellow intervals to discourage late left turns. By creating more predictable traffic patterns and reducing stop-andgo conditions, optimized timing improves safety for all users and provides clearer crossing opportunities for pedestrians and cyclists.
Dedicated Turn Lanes
Signal Timing Improvements Advance Warning Flashing Beacons The re-organization of a roadway’s geometry to create more space for turning movements and other road users. Road diets decrease vehicle speeds, improve the safety of on-street parking, and reduce serious head-on factors. The new geometry may also make way for dedicated travel lanes for bikes, sidewalks, or even multi-modal paths.
Road Diet/Road Reconfiguration
Countermeasure Descriptions
San Bernardino Safe Streets for All Baseline Street Safety Study 52 At grade with bollards or raised sidewalk or curb sections that extend into the roadway at intersections or mid-block crossings.
They shorten the crossing distance for pedestrians, improve visibility between drivers and people walking, and naturally slow turning vehicles by narrowing the travel lane.
A roadway safety treatment that uses specialized surface materials or concrete design to increase tire-to-road grip, especially in areas prone to skidding or wet conditions. High friction pavement is often applied on curves, steep grades, or intersections to help drivers maintain control, reduce stopping distances, and prevent run-offroad or rear-end crashes.
Pavement markings that increase a driver’s perception of the edge of the travel lane by enhancing the visibility of travel lane boundaries compared to traditional edge lines. Wider edge lines should be a width of 6 inches, as opposed to the traditional 4 inches. These markings are particularly effective on roadways with presence of curves, high traffic volumes, and a history of nighttime crashes.
High Friction Pavement Curb Extensions
Wider Edge Lines
Milled or raised elements on the pavement that alert drivers through vibration and sound that their vehicle has left the travel lane. They can help reduce head on collisions by alerting distracted, drowsy, or otherwise inattentive drivers who drift from their lane.
Rumble Strips
Countermeasure Descriptions
San Bernardino Safe Streets for All Baseline Street Safety Study 53 Similar to separated walkways and paths, separated bike lanes provide significant safety improvements for bicycle users sharing the road with automobiles. Bicycle lanes may be separated by edgelines (Class II Bike Lanes) or more physical measures such as bollards or even raised pavement (Class IV Bike Lanes).
Separated Bike Lanes
An area within a raised median that provides a protected space for pedestrians to wait while crossing the road. The raised, separated space creates separation between pedestrians and vehicles.
Pedestrian Refuge Islands also give pedestrians a chance to cross a street wait for break in traffic before continuing to cross the street.
Pedestrian Refuge Islands
A raised divider installed along the center of a roadway to separate opposing lanes of traffic. The physical barrier prevents head-on collisions, reduces unsafe passing in the opposite lane, and organizes turning movements. They can also create space for pedestrian refuges making it easier and safer for people to cross wide or busy streets.
Concrete Medians
Countermeasure Descriptions
San Bernardino Safe Streets for All Baseline Street Safety Study 54 Name Control East/
West
Traffic
Signal Pedestal Mount
Upgrade to
Pole
Nearside
Signals
Mast
Arm Upgrades /
Additional Heads
Signal
Timing
for Consistency
with LPI
Intersections
Retroreflective
Backplates
Protected-Left
Turns or
Flashing
Yellow
Arrow
Leading
Pedestrian
Interval
(LPI)
Stop Line
Striping
at cross
street
Repaint
Pavement
Markings
Intersection
Lighting
Curb
Extensions
HighVisibility
Crosswalks
ADA
Curb
Ramps
Sidewalk Advance
Stop
Bars
Class
II Bike
Lanes
Stop
Sign
Flashing
Beacon
Additional
Signage
Red Curb
approaching
Baseline St
Pedestrian
Hybrid
Beacon/
RRFB
Road
Diet w/
Class
IV Bike
Lanes
Restin-Red
Signal
E Baseline Rd
& N Meridian
Ave
Signal W X X X X X X X X X
W Baseline St
& N Martin Rd
Unsignalized W X W2-2 X
W Baseline St
& N Lassen St
Unsignalized W X X
W Baseline St
& N University
Pkwy
Signal W Interconnect
signal with
the one at
California St
X X X X (signal
ahead PM
and signs)
X X X X
W Baseline St
& N California
St &
Signal W Interconnect
signal with
the one at
University
X X X X X X X X X X
W Baseline
St & N
Pennsylvania
Ave
Unsignalized W X W1-7,
OM1-1 ,
W2-2
X (install
only when
the curb
lane is >18’)
X
W Baseline St
& N Madison
St
Unsignalized W X W 1-7 &
OM 1-1,
W2-2
X X
W Baseline St
& N Wilson St
Unsignalized W X W 1-7 &
OM 1-1,
W2-2
X X
W Baseline St
& N Hancock
St
Unsignalized W X X W 1-7 &
OM 1-1,
W2-2
X X
W Baseline St
& N Medical
Center Dr
Signal W X X X X X X (signal
ahead PM
and signs)
X X W3-3 X X
W Baseline St
& N Tiajuana
St
Unsignalized W X X W1-7,
OM-1-1,
W2-2
X X
W Baseline St
& N Ramona
Ave
Unsignalized W W1-7,
OM-1-1,
W2-2
X X
W Baseline St
& N Western
Ave
Unsignalized W W1-7,
OM-1-1,
W2-2
X X
W Baseline
St & N
Blackstone
Ave
Unsignalized W W1-7,
OM1-1,
W2-2
X
W Baseline St
& N Pico Ave
Unsignalized W W1-7,
OM1-1,
W2-2
X
Table 5.1 below outlines each intersection along with the proposed improvements for each location.
San Bernardino Safe Streets for All Baseline Street Safety Study 55 Name Control East/
West
Traffic
Signal Pedestal Mount
Upgrade to
Pole
Nearside
Signals
Mast
Arm Upgrades /
Additional Heads
Signal
Timing
for Consistency
with LPI
Intersections
Retroreflective
Backplates
Protected-Left
Turns or
Flashing
Yellow
Arrow
Leading
Pedestrian
Interval
(LPI)
Stop Line
Striping
at cross
street
Repaint
Pavement
Markings
Intersection
Lighting
Curb
Extensions
HighVisibility
Crosswalks
ADA
Curb
Ramps
Sidewalk Advance
Stop
Bars
Class
II Bike
Lanes
Stop
Sign
Flashing
Beacon
Additional
Signage
Red Curb
approaching
Baseline St
Pedestrian
Hybrid
Beacon/
RRFB
Road
Diet w/
Class
IV Bike
Lanes
Restin-Red
Signal
W Baseline
St & N
Herrington
Ave
Unsignalized W W1-7,
OM1-1,
W2-2
X
W Baseline St
& N Mt Vernon
Ave
Signal W X X X X X X X
plus
Pedestrian
Scramble
Crosswalk
X X W3-3 X X
W Baseline
St & N Garner
Ave
Unsignalized W X X W1-7,
OM1-1,
W2-2
W Baseline St
& N Davidson
Ave
Unsignalized W X X X X W1-7,
OM1-1,
W2-2
PHB
W Baseline St
& N L St
Unsignalized W X W1-7,
OM1-1,
W2-2
W Baseline
St & N
Massachusetts
Ave
Signal W X X X X X X X X X X X
W Baseline St
& N K St
Unsignalized W X X W1-7,
OM1-1,
W2-2
W Baseline St
& N Perris St
Signal W X X X X X X X X X X X W1-7,
OM1-1,
W2-2
W Baseline St
& N H St
Signal E X X X X X
plus extend
the EB
left turn
pocket and
WB “FWY
ONLY”
lanes*
X X X X
W Baseline St
& N G St
Signal E X X X X X X X X X X X X
W Baseline St
& N Berkeley
Ave
Unsignalized W X W1-7,
OM1-1,
W2-2
W Baseline St
& N F St
Signal E X X X X X X X X X X X
W Baseline
St & N Acacia
Ave
Unsignalized E X X X X X X PHB
W Baseline St
& N E St
Signal E X X X X X X X X X X X
W Baseline St
& N Stoddard
Ave
Unsignalized E X X X X
W Baseline St
& N D St
Signal E X X X X X X X X
* City coordination with Caltrans is required for these improvements.
San Bernardino Safe Streets for All Baseline Street Safety Study 56 Name Control East/
West
Traffic
Signal Pedestal Mount
Upgrade to
Pole
Nearside
Signals
Mast
Arm Upgrades /
Additional Heads
Signal
Timing
for Consistency
with LPI
Intersections
Retroreflective
Backplates
Protected-Left
Turns or
Flashing
Yellow
Arrow
Leading
Pedestrian
Interval
(LPI)
Stop Line
Striping
at cross
street
Repaint
Pavement
Markings
Intersection
Lighting
Curb
Extensions
HighVisibility
Crosswalks
ADA
Curb
Ramps
Sidewalk Advance
Stop
Bars
Class
II Bike
Lanes
Stop
Sign
Flashing
Beacon
Additional
Signage
Red Curb
approaching
Baseline St
Pedestrian
Hybrid
Beacon/
RRFB
Road
Diet w/
Class
IV Bike
Lanes
Restin-Red
Signal
W Baseline St
& N Mayfield
Ave
Unsignalized E X X X W1-7,
OM1-1,
W2-2
W Baseline
St & N
Arrowhead
Ave
Signal E X X X X X X X X X X X
W Baseline St
& N Mountain
View Ave
Signal E X X X X X X X X X X X X
W Baseline St
& N Genevieve
St
Unsignalized E X X
Baseline Ave
& Sierra Way
Signal E X X X X X X X X X X X X
E Baseline St
& N Lugo Ave
Unsignalized E X X X X X X X PHB
E Baseline St
& N Sepulveda
Ave
Unsignalized E X X X X X X W2-2
E Baseline St
& N Wall Ave
Unsignalized E X X X X X X W2-2
E Baseline St
& N Belle St
Unsignalized E X X X X W2-2
E Baseline St
& N Waterman
Ave
Signal E X X X X X X X X W3-3 X
E Baseline St
& N Pepper
Tree Ln
Unsignalized E X W2-2
E Baseline St
& N Crestview
Ave
Signal E X X X X X X X X
E Baseline St
& N La Junta
St
Unsignalized E X X W2-2
E Baseline St
& N Valencia
Ave
Unsignalized E X X X X X X X W2-2
E Baseline St
& N Windsor
Dr
Signal same
signal as
Myrtle
E X X X X X X X X X X X
E Baseline St
& N Myrtle St
Signal same
Signal as
Windsor
E X X X X X X X
E Baseline St
& N Bobbett
Dr
Unsignalized E X X X X X X W2-2
E Baseline St
& N Cedar Ave
Unsignalized E X X X X X X W2-2 X
San Bernardino Safe Streets for All Baseline Street Safety Study 57 Name Control East/
West
Traffic
Signal Pedestal Mount
Upgrade to
Pole
Nearside
Signals
Mast
Arm Upgrades /
Additional Heads
Signal
Timing
for Consistency
with LPI
Intersections
Retroreflective
Backplates
Protected-Left
Turns or
Flashing
Yellow
Arrow
Leading
Pedestrian
Interval
(LPI)
Stop Line
Striping
at cross
street
Repaint
Pavement
Markings
Intersection
Lighting
Curb
Extensions
HighVisibility
Crosswalks
ADA
Curb
Ramps
Sidewalk Advance
Stop
Bars
Class
II Bike
Lanes
Stop
Sign
Flashing
Beacon
Additional
Signage
Red Curb
approaching
Baseline St
Pedestrian
Hybrid
Beacon/
RRFB
Road
Diet w/
Class
IV Bike
Lanes
Restin-Red
Signal
E Baseline St
& N Belvan
Ave
Unsignalized E X X X X X X X
E Baseline St
& N Canyon
Rd
Unsignalized E X X X X X X W2-2 X PHB
E Baseline St
& N Barton St
Unsignalized E X W2-2
E Baseline
St & N Perris
Hill Rd
Unsignalized E X X X X X X X X X PHB
E Baseline
St & N
Tippecanoe
Ave
Unsignalized E X W2-4 X
E Baseline St
& Tippecanoe
Signalized E X X X X X X X X
Following the table, select countermeasures are described in greater detail, including discussion of their potential application along Baseline Street and example locations or extents where they may be appropriate. This toolbox is intended as a planning-level resource and does not represent a final capital improvements program, nor does it obligate the City to implement the recommendations as presented.
Rather, the toolbox provides suggested strategies for the City’s consideration, and any potential implementation would be subject to further evaluation, including detailed design and feasibility analysis on a location-by-location basis.
Note that a visual reprentation of many of these toolbox countermeasures can be found in Appendix D, where a corridor-wide graphic is presented along with the general location of proposed improvements.
San Bernardino Safe Streets for All Baseline Street Safety Study 58 Road Diet/Roadway Reconfigurations
As mentioned in the toolbox description, road diets/
roadway reconfigurations are often considered in areas
where high speeds coexist with pedestrian and bicyclist traffic. However, road diets must also take into account capacity and flow of the corridor, meaning that road
diets may not be feasible depending on the number of
reduced lanes and current traffic volumes. As such, an
analysis to explore the feasibility of Baseline Street was conducted to identify portions of Baseline appropriate
for a road diet.
The analysis found that the western portion of Baseline Street, west of the I-215 ramps, experienced a lower
Annual Average Daily Trips (AADT) in comparison to
Baseline Street east of the I-215 ramps. AADT volumes
logged between 9,600 vehicles and 15,000 vehicles (all
day) between Meridian Avenue and Vernon Avenue.
The existing lane configuration on Baseline Street
includes two through lanes (in both directions)
alongside a center left-turn lane. See Figure 5.2
below for a cross section of the existing roadway
configurations and dimensions of the roadway. Note that these existing dimensions are mostly consistent in both west and east Baseline Street.
In its current configuration, the western portion of
Baseline Street experiences about half of the traffic
volume experienced on the east side of Baseline
Street. To compare, AADTs ranged from about 18,000
vehicles to 29,000 vehicles (all day) on Baseline east
of the I-215, a substantially higher range than west of I-215, specifically between H Street and Sierra Way.
The reasoning may be that western Baseline Street is
predominantly characterized by residential communities
and local schools, land uses that generally do not
generate as many vehicular trips compared to the more
commercially heavy areas of eastern Baseline Street. Figure 5.2: Existing Cross-section of Baseline Street San Bernardino Safe Streets for All Baseline Street Safety Study 59 Figure 5.3: Proposed Road Diet Lane Configuration (West of Massachusetts Avenue) These residential and school land uses also prefer
lower speeds to ensure safer travel for students and
parents that may prefer walking or biking to school.
Considering the low volumes and the higher desire
for slower speeds, a road diet may be a feasible
recommendation for the majority of the western
portion of Baseline Street, specifically between
Meridian Avenue and Mount Vernon Avenue. Figure 5.3
above illustrates the proposed road diet configuration, reconfiguring the two through lane corridor in
each direction into a one through lane corridor,
supplemented by separated bike lanes.
Signal Timing/Protected Left Turns/Leading
Pedestrian Intervals (LPI)/Flashing Yellow
Arrow (FYA)
Another important recommendation that should be
considered on Baseline Street is to improve signal
timing, specifically to accommodate for LPIs.
Baseline Street has multiple signalized intersections
that experienced both pedestrian and bicycle crashes;
while some were due to pedestrian violations, the
majority were due to vehicles not yielding the rightof-way for active transportation users. LPIs mitigate this potential by allowing pedestrians and bicyclists to begin crossing first for a few seconds, then followed
by a green signal for the through traffic. Refer to the above Toolbox Description figure or a visualization.
San Bernardino Safe Streets for All Baseline Street Safety Study 60 Baseline Street as a corridor experienced relatively high numbers of pedestrian crashes, therefore,
implementation of LPIs may be a priority for the City to consider.
The implementation of LPIs, however, necessitates
retiming not just that particular intersection
recommended for an LPI, but also the signals before
and after that LPI intersection. This ensures a smooth
flow across that section of the corridor. It is highly
recommended that all signalized intersections be
eventually retimed to include LPIs as a high number of
signalized intersections throughout Baseline Street are recommended for these improvements.
Aside from accommodating LPIs, signal timing
improvements may also be used to target vehicleto-vehicle crashes, especially those often related to turn-phases in the signal timing cycle. Left turnphasing adjustments are context-specific and heavily depend on volumes and queueing considerations,
so in-depth analysis will be required for individual
implementation. For the purposes of the plan, signal
timing improvements were also recommended for
intersections that experienced many broadside or
sideswipe collisions.
For example, one particular intersection, Baseline
Street at Arrowhead Avenue, is a potential candidate
for adjusting its left-turn phases to only include a
protected phase; it is currently a protected-permissive left turn, likely to accommodate the high volumes of
traffic at this location. However, this intersection ranks number three in total crash rank with more than 50% of
its crashes being broadside or sideswipe crashes. The
left-turn movement volumes are 153 vehicles during
the PM periods while the rest of the day averages
between 50 to 80 left-turn. With these considerations,
adjusting to a protected-only phasing, or adjusting the cycle length of the left-turn phasing, may be a feasible improvement for this intersection.
An alternative to a protected left is an FYA. An FYA
displays a yellow arrow that flashes, indicating that left turns are permitted after yielding to oncoming traffic
and pedestrians. Unlike a steady green ball, the arrow
shape clearly communicates that the indication applies
only to left-turning vehicles, reducing driver confusion.
FYAs are recommended at locations where there are
no Protected Left turns, but which may experience high
levels of turning-related crashes.
The final signal timing adjustment recommendation is
the rest-on-red timing, where all approaches remain
red until a vehicle approaches. This recommendation
is effective during off-peak hours, helping slow
down traffic from all directions. This improvement is
recommended for the Top 10 signalized intersections
as these locations had high proportions of crashes
occurring between 7:00 PM and 7:00 AM.
Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacon
(RRFB)/Pedestrian Hybrid Beacon (PHB/
HAWK)
As a special mention, RRFBs and PHB signals are
also essential to implement, especially on roadway
segments or unsignalized intersections. Smaller
and more affordable than a full set of traffic signals, they perform similar functions in notifying drivers
that pedestrians or bicyclists are about to cross. A
consistent number of pedestrian crashes are already
San Bernardino Safe Streets for All Baseline Street Safety Study 61 occurring on Baseline Street, so implementing RRFBs
or PHBs will substantially reduce the likelihood of these crashes.
Additionally, with the recommendation of implementing
either a road diet or Class II separated bike lanes along the project extent of Baseline Street, bicycle volumes
may also increase in the future, necessitating additional safety measures at popular crossings.
A few unsignalized intersections were included as
potential candidates for a RRFB or PHB. For example,
Baseline Street at Davidson Avenue is a T-intersection
with a high visibility crosswalk and “shark teeth” stop bars to alert vehicles of potential crossings. Despite
these measures, this intersection experienced another
pedestrian crash while also being an intersection prone to multiple vehicular crashes, including one severe
injury, due to unsafe speeds. A PHB may prove to be
a much more visible countermeasure to mitigate the
potential of future Killed and Serious Injury pedestrian crashes as a commercial building is immediately
adjacent to the intersection.
Another intersection, Baseline Street at Lugo
Avenue, experienced three pedestrian crashes,
with one resulting in a fatal crash. An PHB is highly
recommended for this intersection as it immediately
follows a high-volume signalized intersection.
To reiterate, the above intersections are examples
on reasonings of installing potential RRFBs or PHBs
for other unsignalized intersections along Baseline
Street. Implementation of these countermeasures will
still depend on each intersection’s physical context
and other important factors such as cost and traffic
volumes to determine their feasibility.
Aside from these additional sign types, systemic
lighting improvements are also considered throughout
Baseline Street, upgrading the current bulbs to 10,000
lumens for brighter and more extensive lighting along
the corridor.
San Bernardino Safe Streets for All Baseline Street Safety Study 62 Prioritization Methodology
As the project extent of Baseline Street stretches
almost the entirety of the City of San Bernardino,
a prioritization process was utilized to identify the
areas of Baseline Street with the most urgent need for
improvements. Each intersection was scored based
on two variables: Total Crash Score and Equivalent
Property Damage Only (EPDO) Score, as recommended
by Caltrans’ Local Roadway Safety Manual. These two
variables take into account both the amount of crashes
and also the severity of crashes, as EPDO scores weight crashes that result in an injury higher than property
damage only crashes.
Intersections ranking in the top 5 for these categories will receive five points respectively; similarly, those scoring below the top 20 will only receive one point.
A supplemental column for community engagement
mentions was also included to account for public
requests or concerns for certain intersections. If a
particular intersection was named at least once through surveys or during any events, that intersection will
receive one point to its prioritization score. Table
5.2 ranks the top 10 prioritized intersections along
Baseline Street based on these score metrics. Table 5.3 follows the top 10 intersections with the rest of the 47 intersections, using the same metrics discussed above.
Intersection Total
Collisions
Control EPDO/
Crash Cost
Score
Total
Collision
Score
Community
Engagement
Mentions
Total
Prioritization
score
Baseline St & Sierra Way Ave 48 Signal 5 5 10
W Baseline St & N Arrowhead Ave 41 Signal 5 5 1 11
E Baseline St & N Waterman Ave 66 Signal 4 5 9
W Baseline St & N G St 36 Signal 4 5 9
W Baseline St & N H St 34 Signal 4 4 1 9
W Baseline St & N D St 29 Signal 5 4 9
W Baseline St & N Medical Center Dr 30 Signal 3 4 7
W Baseline St & N Mt Vernon Ave 24 Signal 3 4 7
E Baseline St & N Lugo Ave 11 Unsignalized 5 2 7
W Baseline St & N E St 38 Signal 1 5 1 7
Table 5.2: Top 10 Intersection Prioritization Scores
San Bernardino Safe Streets for All Baseline Street Safety Study 63 Top 10 Intersection Breakdown
1. W Baseline St & N Arrowhead Ave (Score:
11)
» Highest overall priority
» High crash frequency and high severity
» Received community concern input
» Represents both a data-driven and public-driven
priority
» Strong candidate for near-term safety
improvements
2. Baseline St & Sierra Way Ave (Score: 10)
» High collision volume and severity
» No community mentions, but crash data alone
places it near the top
» Indicates a systemic safety issue independent of
public perception
3. (Tie). E Baseline St & N Waterman Ave
(Score: 9)
» Highest total crashes (66)
» Slightly lower EPDO weighting than top-ranked
locations
» Data suggests frequent crashes, potentially with
mixed severity
4. (Tie). W Baseline St & N G St (Score: 9)
» High collision frequency and severity
» No community input, but strong quantitative
justification
» Likely benefits from signal operations or
geometric improvements
5. (Tie). W Baseline St & N H St (Score: 9)
» Moderate-to-high crashes and severity
» Community engagement elevates its ranking
» Demonstrates alignment between crash data and
public concern
6 (Tie). W Baseline St & N D St (Score: 9)
» High severity score (EPDO = 5)
» Slightly lower crash frequency
» Suggests fewer crashes, but more severe
outcomes
7. (Tie). W Baseline St & N Medical Center
Dr (Score: 7)
» Moderate crash frequency and severity
» Lower urgency relative to top-tier intersections
» Still warrants inclusion due to consistent crash
history
San Bernardino Safe Streets for All Baseline Street Safety Study 64 8. (Tie). W Baseline St & N Mt Vernon Ave
(Score: 7)
» Moderate scores across all categories
» Represents a secondary priority within the
corridor
9. (Tie). E Baseline St & N Lugo Ave (Score:
7)
» Unsignalized intersection with high severity
weighting
» Lower crash frequency but elevated EPDO score
» Indicates potential benefit from control or visibility improvements
10. (Tie). W Baseline St & N E St (Score: 7)
» High crash frequency
» Low severity score offset by community
engagement
» Suggests perceived safety concerns despite less
severe outcomes
The final portion of this chapter showcases the top
10 priority locations with their corresponding vicinity maps, some basic crash statistics, high-level project
cost estimate, and a concept plan for the City’s
reference and use during eventual implementation.
San Bernardino Safe Streets for All Baseline Street Safety Study 65 Intersection Total
Collisions
Control EPDO/Crash
Cost Score
Total
Collision
Score
Community
Engagement
Mentions
Total
Prioritization
Score
W Baseline St & N F St 23 Signal 3 3 1 7
E Baseline St & N Cedar Ave 4 Unsignalized 5 1 1 7
N California St & W Baseline St 9 Signal 4 2 6
W Baseline St & N Mountain View Ave 29 Signal 1 4 5
E Baseline St & N Tippecanoe Ave 23 Signal 2 3 5
E Baseline St & N Crestview Ave 7 Signal 4 1 5
W Baseline St & I-215 S 18 Signal 1 3 4
W Baseline St & I-215 N 17 Signal 1 3 4
E Baseline St & N Wall Ave 17 Unsignalized 1 3 4
E Baseline St & N Bobbett Dr 8 Unsignalized 3 1 4
E Baseline St & N Sepulveda Ave 7 Unsignalized 3 1 4
E Baseline St & N Windsor Dr 13 Signal 1 2 1 4
W Baseline St & N Davidson Ave 8 Unsignalized 2 1 1 4
W Baseline St & N Western Ave 10 Unsignalized 1 2 3
E Baseline St & N Belle St 9 Unsignalized 1 2 3
W Baseline St & N Herrington Ave 5 Unsignalized 2 1 3
N Perris Hill Rd & E Baseline St 5 Unsignalized 2 1 3
W Baseline St & N Mayfield Ave 8 Unsignalized 2 1 3
W Baseline St & N University Pkwy 6 Signal 1 1 1 3
W Baseline St & N Garner Ave 2 Unsignalized 1 1 1 3
E Baseline Rd & N Meridian Ave 1 Signal 1 1 1 3
W Baseline St & N Tiajuana St 4 Unsignalized 1 1 2
W Baseline St & N Massachusetts Ave 8 Signal 1 1 2
W Baseline St & N Perris St 8 Signal 1 1 2
W Baseline St & N Acacia Ave 8 Unsignalized 1 1 2
W Baseline St & N Stoddard Ave 8 Unsignalized 1 1 2
E Baseline St & N Canyon Rd 7 Unsignalized 1 1 2
E Baseline St & N Valencia Ave 6 Unsignalized 1 1 2
W Baseline St & N Hancock St 5 Unsignalized 1 1 2
Table 5.3 : Prioritization of the 47 Other Intersections San Bernardino Safe Streets for All Baseline Street Safety Study 66 Intersection Total
Collisions
Control EPDO/Crash
Cost Score
Total
Collision
Score
Community
Engagement
Mentions
Total
Prioritization
Score
W Baseline St & N Berkeley Ave 5 Unsignalized 1 1 2
E Baseline St & N Myrtle St 5 Signal 1 1 2
E Baseline St & Tippecanoe Ave 5 Unsignalized 1 1 2
W Baseline St & N Wilson St 4 Unsignalized 1 1 2
W Baseline St & N Pennsylvania Ave 3 Unsignalized 1 1 2 W Baseline St & N Ramona Ave 3 Unsignalized 1 1 2
W Baseline St & N L St 3 Unsignalized 1 1 2
W Baseline St & N Genevieve St 3 Unsignalized 1 1 2
E Baseline St & N Barton St 3 Unsignalized 1 1 2
W Baseline St & N Lassen St 2 Unsignalized 1 1 2
W Baseline St & N Blackstone Ave 2 Unsignalized 1 1 2
E Baseline St & N Pepper Tree Ln 2 Unsignalized 1 1 2
N La Junta St & E Baseline St 2 Unsignalized 1 1 2
E Baseline St & N Belvan Ave 2 Unsignalized 1 1 2
W Baseline St & N Madison St 1 Unsignalized 1 1 2
W Baseline St & N Pico Ave 1 Unsignalized 1 1 2
W Baseline St & N Martin Rd 0 Unsignalized 1 1 2
W Baseline St & N K St 0 Unsignalized 1 1 2
At a Glance
Cost Estimate
Countermeasures
San Bernardino Safe Streets for All Baseline Street Study Project Factsheet 67 $192,000
EXHIBIT A-2
Madison St
Wilson StHancock St
Baseline Street
Medical Center Dr
0 1/8 1/4 Mi N
Total
CyclistInvolved
Crashes
1 Total
PedestrianInvolved
Crashes
3 Total Fatal &
Serious Injury
Crashes
1 Total
Crashes
30 Medical Center Drive
Recommended Countermeasure
Curb Extensions: Extensions of sidewalk or curb sections into the roadway; also known as bulb-outs. Shorten crossing distance for VRUs and slows down roadway speeds by visually narrowing lane width and forcing slower turns
Retroflective Backplates: Yellow retroreflective strip placed on the perimeter of a signal plate. Improves visibility of the signal by increasing contrast, especially during dusk or dark hours Near-Side Signal: Installation of a traffic signal on the near-side of the intersection, increasing visibility of the traffic signal cycle for incoming traffic
Road Diet: Re-organization of a roadway’s geometry to
accommodate for turning movements and other road users. Decreases vehicle speeds and allows for dedicated lanes for VRUs
Other Systemic Signal Upgrades: Includes systemic hardware upgrades such as additional signal heads, advance warning signs, and signal timing upgrades
San Bernardino Safe Streets for All Baseline Street Study Project Factsheet 68 Conceptual Plan Medical Center Drive
At a Glance
Cost Estimate
San Bernardino Safe Streets for All Baseline Street Study Project Factsheet 69 Countermeasures
$441,000
Baseline St
K StPerris St
Harrington Ave
Baseline Street
Mt Vernon Ave
0 1/8 1/4 Mi N
Total
CyclistInvolved
Crashes
0 Total
PedestrianInvolved
Crashes
1 Total Fatal &
Serious Injury
Crashes
1 Total
Crashes
24 Mt Vernon Avenue
Recommended Countermeasure
Advance Stop Bars: A stop bar that is placed further away from the crosswalk to create more distance between a stopping vehicle and the crosswalk
High Visibility Crosswalk: Enhanced crosswalks with
improved striping and more noticeable patterns, increasing safety and visibility of those crossing
Pedestrian Scramble Crosswalk: A “WALK” phase at the
signalized intersection where all vehicle traffic is required to stop, allowing pedestrians to cross throguh the intersection in any direction, including diagonally.
Near-Side Signal: Installation of a traffic signal on the nearside of the intersection, increasing visibility of the traffic signal cycle for incoming traffic
Road Diet: Re-organization of a roadway’s geometry to
accommodate for turning movements and other road users.
Decreases vehicle speeds and allows for dedicated lanes for VRUs
Other Systemic Signal Upgrades: Includes systemic
hardware upgrades such as additional signal heads,
retroreflective backplates, leading pedestrian interval (LPI), signal timing upgrades, and advance warning signs
San Bernardino Safe Streets for All Baseline Street Study Project Factsheet 70 Conceptual Plan Mt Vernon Avenue
At a Glance
Cost Estimate
Countermeasures
San Bernardino Safe Streets for All Baseline Street Study Project Factsheet 71 $83,000
Continued in the map below - E
NB Off-Ramp NB On-R
INTERSTATE
210
INTERSTATE
210
Baseline Street
H Street
0 1/8 1/4 Mi
N
Recommended Countermeasure
Advance Stop Bars: A stop bar that is placed further away from the crosswalk to create more distance between a stopping vehicle and the crosswalk
Curb Extensions: Extensions of sidewalk or curb sections into the roadway; also known as bulb-outs. Shorten crossing distance for VRUs and slows down roadway speeds by visually narrowing lane width and forcing slower turns
Leading Pedestrian Interval: Signal timing improvement that allows VRUs the opportunity to enter the intersection before vehicles are allowed the green light. Encourages vehicles to yield to those in the crosswalk
Class II Bike Lanes: Bike-only lanes separated by striping with no-parking signs
Other Systemic Signal Upgrades: Includes systemic hardware upgrades such as additional retroreflective backplates, and signal timing upgrades
Other Considerations: Coordination with Caltrans to extend the WB “FWY ONLY” lanes along with the EB left-turn lane to increase capacity and minimize intersection blocking at H Street Total
CyclistInvolved
Crashes
0 Total
PedestrianInvolved
Crashes
2 Total Fatal &
Serious Injury
Crashes
2 Total
Crashes
34 H Street
San Bernardino Safe Streets for All Baseline Street Study 72 Conceptual Plan H Street
Project Factsheet
At a Glance
Cost Estimate
Countermeasures
San Bernardino Safe Streets for All Baseline Street Study Project Factsheet 73 $217,000
Recommended Countermeasure
Advance Stop Bars: A stop bar that is placed further away from the crosswalk to create more distance between a stopping vehicle and the crosswalk
Curb Extensions: Extensions of sidewalk or curb sections into the roadway; also known as bulb-outs. Shorten crossing distance for VRUs and slows down roadway speeds by visually narrowing lane width and forcing slower turns
Leading Pedestrian Interval: Signal timing improvement that allows VRUs the opportunity to enter the intersection before vehicles are allowed the green light. Encourages vehicles to yield to those in the crosswalk
Retroflective Backplates: Yellow retroreflective strip placed on the perimeter of a signal plate. Improves visibility of the signal by increasing contrast, especially during dusk or dark hours Class II Bike Lanes: Bike-only lanes separated by striping with noparking signs Other Signal Upgrades: Includes mast arm upgrades, intersection lighting, luminaire upgrades, additional signal heads, and signal timing upgrades
CONCEPT PLAN C
NB Off-Ramp NB On-Ra
H St
Baseline St
INTERSTATE
210
INTERSTATE
210
Baseline Street
G Street
0 1/8 1/4 Mi N
Total
CyclistInvolved
Crashes
0 Total
PedestrianInvolved
Crashes
1 Total Fatal &
Serious Injury
Crashes
2 Total
Crashes
36 G Street
San Bernardino Safe Streets for All Baseline Street Study Project Factsheet 74 Conceptual Plan G Street
At a Glance
Cost Estimate
Countermeasures
San Bernardino Safe Streets for All Baseline Street Study Project Factsheet 75 $211,000
F St
Acacia Ave
Acacia Ave
Berkeley Ave
Baseline Street
E Street
0 1/8 1/4 Mi
N
Recommended Countermeasure
Advance Stop Bars: A stop bar that is placed further away from the crosswalk to create more distance between a stopping vehicle and the crosswalk
Curb Extensions: Extensions of sidewalk or curb sections into the roadway; also known as bulb-outs. Shorten crossing distance for VRUs and slows down roadway speeds by visually narrowing lane width and forcing slower turns
Leading Pedestrian Interval: Signal timing improvement that allows VRUs the opportunity to enter the intersection before vehicles are allowed the green light. Encourages vehicles to yield to those in the crosswalk
Retroflective Backplates: Yellow retroreflective strip placed on the perimeter of a signal plate. Improves visibility of the signal by increasing contrast, especially during dusk or dark hours Class II Bike Lanes: Bike-only lanes separated by striping with no-parking signs
Other Signal Upgrades: Includes mast arm upgrades, protected only left-turn signal heads, advance warning signs, and signal timing upgrades
Total
CyclistInvolved
Crashes
2 Total
PedestrianInvolved
Crashes
0 Total Fatal &
Serious Injury
Crashes
0 Total
Crashes
38 E Street
San Bernardino Safe Streets for All Baseline Street Study Project Factsheet 76 Conceptual Plan E Street
At a Glance
Cost Estimate
Countermeasures
San Bernardino Safe Streets for All Baseline Street Study Project Factsheet 77 $126,000
ow - G
Continued in the map below - F
Baseline Street
D Street
0 1/8 1/4 Mi
N
Recommended Countermeasure
Advance Stop Bars: A stop bar that is placed further away from the crosswalk to create more distance between a stopping vehicle and the crosswalk High Visibility Crosswalk: Enhanced crosswalks with improved striping and more noticeable patterns, increasing safety and visibility of those crossing Curb Extensions: Extensions of sidewalk or curb sections into the roadway; also known as bulb-outs. Shorten crossing distance for VRUs and slows down roadway speeds by visually narrowing lane width and forcing slower turns Leading Pedestrian Interval: Signal timing improvement that allows VRUs the opportunity to enter the intersection before vehicles are allowed the green light.
Encourages vehicles to yield to those in the crosswalk
Retroflective Backplates: Yellow retroreflective strip placed on the perimeter of a signal plate. Improves visibility of the signal by increasing contrast, especially during dusk or dark hours
Class II Bike Lanes: Bike-only lanes separated by striping with no-parking signs Other Systemic Signal Upgrades: Signal timing upgrades
Total
CyclistInvolved
Crashes
1 Total
PedestrianInvolved
Crashes
5 Total Fatal &
Serious Injury
Crashes
3 Total
Crashes
29 D Street
San Bernardino Safe Streets for All Baseline Street Study Project Factsheet 78 Conceptual Plan D Street
At a Glance
Cost Estimate
Countermeasures
San Bernardino Safe Streets for All Baseline Street Study Project Factsheet 79 $230,000
below - G
Continued in the map below - F
CONC
E
P
T
P
LAN
F
Baseline St
D
Mayfield Ave
Sepulveda AveWall Ave
Baseline Street
Arrowhead Ave
0 1/8 1/4 Mi
N
Recommended Countermeasure
Advance Stop Bars: A stop bar that is placed further away from the crosswalk to create more distance between a stopping vehicle and the crosswalk
High Visibility Crosswalk: Enhanced crosswalks with improved striping and more noticeable patterns, increasing safety and visibility of those crossing Curb Extensions: Extensions of sidewalk or curb sections into the roadway; also known as bulb-outs. Shorten crossing distance for VRUs and slows down roadway speeds by visually narrowing lane width and forcing slower turns Leading Pedestrian Interval: Signal timing improvement that allows VRUs the opportunity to enter the intersection before vehicles are allowed the green light. Encourages vehicles to yield to those in the crosswalk Retroflective Backplates: Yellow retroreflective strip placed on the perimeter of a signal plate. Improves visibility of the signal by increasing contrast, especially during dusk or dark hours
Class II Bike Lanes: Bike-only lanes separated by striping with no-parking signs
Other Systemic Signal Upgrades: Includes additional signal heads and signal timing upgrades
Total
CyclistInvolved
Crashes
1 Total
PedestrianInvolved
Crashes
6 Total Fatal &
Serious Injury
Crashes
3 Total
Crashes
41 Arrowhead Avenue
San Bernardino Safe Streets for All Baseline Street Study Project Factsheet 80 Conceptual Plan Arrowhead Avenue
At a Glance
Cost Estimate
Countermeasures
San Bernardino Safe Streets for All Baseline Street Study Project Factsheet 81 $132,000
CONC
E
P
T
P
LAN
J
Mountain View Ave
Genevieve St
Baseline Street
Sierra Way
0 1/8 1/4 Mi
N
Recommended Countermeasure
Advance Stop Bars: A stop bar that is placed further away from the crosswalk to create more distance between a stopping vehicle and the crosswalk
Curb Extensions: Extensions of sidewalk or curb sections into the roadway; also known as bulb-outs. Shorten crossing distance for VRUs and slows down roadway speeds by visually narrowing lane width and forcing slower turns Leading Pedestrian Interval: Signal timing improvement that allows VRUs the opportunity to enter the intersection before vehicles are allowed the green light. Encourages vehicles to yield to those in the crosswalk Retroflective Backplates: Yellow retroreflective strip placed on the perimeter of a signal plate. Improves visibility of the signal by increasing contrast, especially during dusk or dark hours
Near-Side Signal: Installation of a traffic signal on the near-side of the intersection, increasing visibility of the traffic signal cycle for incoming traffic Class II Bike Lanes: Bike-only lanes separated by striping with no-parking signs
Other Systemic Signal Upgrades: Includes additional signal heads and signal timing upgrades
Total
CyclistInvolved
Crashes
1 Total
PedestrianInvolved
Crashes
1 Total Fatal &
Serious Injury
Crashes
2 Total
Crashes
48 Sierra Way
San Bernardino Safe Streets for All Baseline Street Study Project Factsheet 82 Conceptual Plan Sierra Way
At a Glance
Cost Estimate
Countermeasures
San Bernardino Safe Streets for All Baseline Street Study Project Factsheet 83 $568,000
Recommended Countermeasure
Advance Stop Bars: A stop bar that is placed further away from the crosswalk to create more distance between a stopping vehicle and the crosswalk
High Visibility Crosswalk: Enhanced crosswalks with improved striping and more noticeable patterns, increasing safety and visibility of those crossing
Curb Extensions: Extensions of sidewalk or curb sections into the roadway; also known as bulb-outs. Shorten crossing distance for VRUs and slows down roadway speeds by visually narrowing lane width and forcing slower turns
Pedestrian Hybrid Signal: Specialized traffic signals activated by VRUs to create a crossing opportunity. They have a yellow “Slow Down” phase, a solid red “Do Not Proceed” phase, and a flashing “Stop” phase. Vehicles are obligated to stop at the red light to wait for the VRUs to complete the crossing
Class II Bike Lanes: Bike-only lanes separated by striping with noparking signs Lugo Avenue
SEE EXHIBIT C-1
Mountain View Av
Sierra W
Genevieve St
Baseline Street
Lugo Ave
0 1/8 1/4 Mi N
Total
CyclistInvolved
Crashes
1 Total
PedestrianInvolved
Crashes
3 Total Fatal &
Serious Injury
Crashes
2 Total
Crashes
11 San Bernardino Safe Streets for All Baseline Street Study Project Factsheet 84 Conceptual Plan Lugo Avenue
At a Glance
Cost Estimate
Countermeasures
San Bernardino Safe Streets for All Baseline Street Study Project Factsheet 85 $125,000
Recommended Countermeasure
Advance Stop Bars: A stop bar that is placed further away from the crosswalk to create more distance between a stopping vehicle and the crosswalk
Curb Extensions: Extensions of sidewalk or curb sections into the roadway; also known as bulb-outs. Shorten crossing distance for VRUs and slows down roadway speeds by visually narrowing lane width and forcing slower turns
Leading Pedestrian Interval: Signal timing improvement that allows VRUs the opportunity to enter the intersection before vehicles are allowed the green light. Encourages vehicles to yield to those in the crosswalk
Retroflective Backplates: Yellow retroreflective strip placed on the perimeter of a signal plate. Improves visibility of the signal by increasing contrast, especially during dusk or dark hours
Class II Bike Lanes: Bike-only lanes separated by striping with noparking signs Other Systemic Signal Upgrades: Includes signal timing upgrades and advance warning signs
Total
CyclistInvolved
Crashes
0 Total
PedestrianInvolved
Crashes
7 Total Fatal &
Serious Injury
Crashes
1 Total
Crashes
66 Waterman Avenue
Wall AveBelle St
Valencia Ave
Baseline Street
Waterman Ave
0 1/8 1/4 Mi
N
San Bernardino Safe Streets for All Baseline Street Study Project Factsheet 86 Conceptual Plan Waterman Avenue
Chapter Five -
Implementation
San Bernardino Safe Streets for All Baseline Street Safety Study 88 Overview
This chapter provides the framework for implementing
the recommendations of the Baseline Street Safety
Study. It outlines a phased approach for organizing
improvements, identifying funding opportunities, and
preparing priority projects for design and construction.
As conditions change and project needs evolve, the
implementation strategy can be updated to reflect
refined scopes, resource availability, and other
considerations related to advancing priority projects.
Following the funding section will be a section
identifying some benchmark and evaluation metrics
the City can use to monitor safety trends on Baseline
Street.
Funding Opportunities
Federal Funding Opportunities
Safe Streets for All (SS4A)
The United States Department of Transportation
(USDOT) Safe Streets for All (SS4A) program provides
competitive federal funding to help jurisdictions plan
for and implement strategies that reduce fatal and
serious injury crashes. Applicants must maintain a
Comprehensive Safety Action Plan that meets all
federal Action Plan requirements, allowing the City
to pursue SS4A Implementation Grants for eligible
projects identified in this Study.
For Baseline Street, SS4A can support improvements
enhancing pedestrian access and support multimodal
travel consistent with the Safe System Approach, such
as road diets, bike lanes, and signal improvements. The program typically provides up to 80 percent of eligible project costs, with a minimum 20 percent non-federal
match, offering the City a dependable funding pathway
to advance future Baseline Street safety projects.
Better Utilizing Investments to Leverage
Development (BUILD)
United States Department of Transportation (USDOT)
Better Utilizing Investments to Leverage Development
(BUILD) program provides competitive federal
funding for surface transportation projects. Eligible
projects include advancing safety, mobility, community
connectivity, economic competitiveness, and stateof-good-repair outcomes. Applications are required to submit a detailed benefit-cost analysis for multiple merit criteria (BCA).
BUILD may fund both planning and capital construction
activities, enabling the City to advance corridor-wide
improvements through a scalable federal funding
pathway. Capital requests may be up to $25 million,
with a minimum of $5 million required for urban
projects. The federal share may cover up to 80 percent
of eligible project costs, while projects located fully within an Area of Persistent Poverty or Historically
Disadvantaged Community may be eligible for up to
100 percent federal funding. Together, these provisions position BUILD as a viable option for implementing
larger-scale Baseline Street improvements.
San Bernardino Safe Streets for All Baseline Street Safety Study 89 Active Transportation Infrastructure Investment
Program (ATIIP)
Federal Highway Administration (FHWA)
The Active Transportation Infrastructure Investment
Program (ATIIP) provides competitive federal
funding to develop connected pedestrian and bicycle
networks that improve safety, access, and mobility for
people walking and biking. Eligible projects include
multi-modal investments supporting the creation of
continuous, connected active transportation corridors
that close gaps and strengthen multimodal connections
within and between communities.
For Baseline Street, ATIIP can support improvements
that address gaps in walking and biking infrastructure, enhance access to schools and transit stops, and
improve connectivity to nearby neighborhoods and
community destinations. The program may fund
planning, design, and construction activities for
bike lanes and road diets/roadway reconfigurations
consistent with the Study’s Safe System–oriented
recommendations. Federal funding may cover up to
80 percent of eligible project costs, with opportunities for full federal participation where eligibility criteria are met, offering the City a potential pathway to advance
active transportation enhancements along the corridor.
Highway Safety Improvement Program
Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and California
Department of Transportation (Caltrans)
The Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) is
a core Federal-aid program, administered by Caltrans
as part of the California’s State HSIP component. Its
purpose is to achieve a significant reduction in traffic fatalities and serious injuries. It requires detailed crash data in order to perform a benefit-cost ratio (BCR)
analysis. Applicants with the highest BCR are awarded
funding up to a certain BCR cut-off. The BCR score
cut-off differs on a yearly basis, depending on average applicant scores and availability of funding.
HSIP funds a multitude of improvements, including
those recommended on Baseline Street. Note that
only a total of three infrastructure improvements
can be recommended for a single application, so it
is recommended for the City to utilize other grant
opportunities for the rest of the improvements. Note
that the local match/reimbursement rate of the project
costs will depend on the countermeasures chosen.
Generally speaking, most countermeasures have a local
match requirement of 10%.
San Bernardino Safe Streets for All Baseline Street Safety Study 90 Regional and State Funding Opportunities
Active Transportation Program
California Transportation Commission (CTC)
Active Transportation Program (ATP) encourages
increased use of active modes of transportation, such
as biking and walking. Main goals of the program
include increasing the proportion of trips accomplished by walking and biking, increasing the safety and
mobility of non-motorized users, advancing efforts of
regional agencies to achieve greenhouse gas reduction
goals, enhancing public health, and providing a broad
spectrum of projects to benefit many types of users
including disadvantaged communities. Local matches
are not required, but applications are awarded extra
points during the application process if provided.
For Baseline Street, the ATP can be an important
source of funding for the pedestrian and bicycle
improvements recommended in the previous
chapters, especially regarding the road diets, bike lane implementation, curb extension upgrades, pedestrian
signals, and others.
Sustainable Transportation Equity Program
California Air Resources Board (CARB)
The Sustainable Transportation Equity Program
(STEP) is a funding initiative focusing on communityled projects that enhance transportation access and reduce vehicle emissions, especially in low-income
and disadvantaged communities. Its eligible projects
include a combination of strategies such as public
transit, electric/micro mobility, and infrastructure
improvements. Applying for STEP funding is a two-step
process; applicants must apply for the Concept Phases
to be eligible for the Full Phase. The application also requires a 11.47% local match for funded projects.
Note that as of April 2026, no future dates have been
provided for the next round of applications.
Table 6.1 briefly summarizes the above funding
opportunities. Additionally, Table 6.2 presents the
top 10 priority projects alongside potential grant
opportunities suitable to fund the respective projects.
Since this plan is a corridor study, the individual top priority projects may share similar physical contexts
and crash trends, making them suitable for similar
funding opportunities.
San Bernardino Safe Streets for All Baseline Street Safety Study 91 Oversight Agency Source Program Objectives Areas Addressed Federal Highway
Administration (FHWA)
Highway Safety
Improvement Program
(HSIP)
Any work on public roads, bikeways and pedestrian paths/ trails “that improves the safety for its users”. For the most part, only engineering projects are eligible, but the FAST act also permits funding for data collection by law enforcement, Funding awards are administered by the State through a biannual funding call for projects.
Data Collection,
Countermeasure
Implementation
Federal Highway
Administration (FHWA)
Active Transportation
Infrastructure
Investment Program
(ATIIP)
Focuses on connecting pedestrian and bicycle networks that improve safety, access, and mobility for people walking and biking. Eligible projects include multi-modal investments supporting the creation of continuous, connected active transportation corridors that close gaps and strengthen multimodal connections within and between communities.
Active Transportation,
Planning, Design,
Implementation
US Department of
Transportation (USDOT)
Better Utilizing
Investments to Leverage
Development (BUILD)
Eligible projects include advancing safety, mobility,
community connectivity, economic competitiveness, and
state-of-good-repair outcomes.
Active Transportation,
Vulnerable Road
Users
US Department of
Transportation (USDOT)
Safe Streets and Roads
for All (SS4A)
The purpose of SS4A grants is to improve roadway safety by significantly reducing or eliminating roadway fatalities and serious injuries through safety action plan development and implementation focused on all users, including pedestrians, bicyclists, public transportation users, motorists, personal conveyance and micromobility users, and commercial vehicle operators.
Roadway Safety,
Active Transportation,
Planning & Design,
Education and
Enforcement, Data
Collection
California Department of
Transportation (Caltrans)
Safe Streets and Roads
for All (SS4A)
The purpose of SS4A grants is to improve roadway safety by significantly reducing or eliminating roadway fatalities and serious injuries through safety action plan development and implementation focused on all users, including pedestrians, bicyclists, public transportation users, motorists, personal conveyance and micromobility users, and commercial vehicle operators.
Roadway Safety,
Active Transportation,
Planning & Design,
Education and
Enforcement, Data
Collection
California Air Resources
Board
Sustainable
Transportation Equity
Program (STEP)
Aims to address community residents’ transportation needs, increase access to key destinations, and reduce greenhouse gas emissions by funding planning, clean transportation, and supporting projects particularly in disadvantaged and lowincome communities via two types of grants: Planning and Capacity Building Grants and Implementation Grants.
Countermeasure
Implementation
Table 6.1: Funding Opportunity Summary
San Bernardino Safe Streets for All Baseline Street Safety Study 92 Intersection Total
Crashes
Control EPDO/Crash
Cost Score
Total
Collision
Score
Community
Engagement
Mentions
Total
Prioritization
Score
Potential
Funding
Opportunities
W Baseline St & N
Arrowhead Ave
41 Signal 5 5 1 11 ATP, HSIP, SS4A
Baseline St & Sierra
Way Ave
48 Signal 5 5 10 HSIP, SS4A
E Baseline St & N
Waterman Ave
66 Signal 4 5 9 ATP, HSIP, SS4A
W Baseline St & N
G St
36 Signal 4 5 9 HSIP, SS4A
W Baseline St & N
H St
34 Signal 4 4 1 9 HSIP
W Baseline St & N
D St
29 Signal 5 4 9 ATP, HSIP,
W Baseline St & N
Medical Center Dr
30 Signal 3 4 7 ATP, STEP, ATIIP
W Baseline St & N
Mt Vernon Ave
24 Signal 3 4 7 SS4A
E Baseline St & N
Lugo Ave
11 Unsignalized 5 2 7 ATP, HSIP,
W Baseline St & N
E St
38 Signal 1 5 1 7 SS4A
Table 6.2: Priority Project and Potential Funding
San Bernardino Safe Streets for All Baseline Street Safety Study 93 Potential Funding Opportunities for the
Road Diet
One component for funding opportunities not
represented in the table is the road diet implementation as this improvement encompasses a multitude of
locations. Baseline Street’s road diet extends from
Meridian Avenue to Mount Vernon Avenue, comprising
almost the entire western portion of the corridor.
A roadway reconfiguration is highly recommended
to be implemented as one large project instead of
spot treatments by individual roadway segments or
intersections. Grants suitable for a large infrastructure project such as this include BUILD, SS4A, and ATP. HSIP may be an alternative opportunity but has restrictions
on the calculation of crash BCA’s depending on the
design of the road diet.
Funding Strategy Summary
As seen in Table 6.2, multiple intersections may be
competitive for multiple types of the same grant
funding opportunities. It is advised for the city to
bundle up projects for specific grant opportunities
instead of pursuing applications based on individual
intersections. The grant funding recommendations
from this chapter are preliminary in nature and only
consider a few surface-level factors of crash trends and countermeasure types to determine the funding type
applicability. More in-depth analysis will be required to determine which intersections and countermeasures to
include in an application during the grant preparation
process.
Also note that not all funding opportunities fund all
types of countermeasures. This chapter provides
some initial insights on which funding opportunities
fund which types of improvements, but it is highly
recommended to refer to each guideline at its source to identify which countermeasures are most appropriate
for the respective funding opportunity. It is also
beneficial to include some of the other 47 intersections not in the top 10 as part of a funding opportunity,
assuming that they coincide well with the rest of the
project.
Benchmark and Evaluation Metrics
Aside from the physical implementation of the
recommendations, evaluation during the postimplementation periods is also a crucial step to ensure the efficacy and effectiveness of the proposed
strategies. While the infrastructure improvements in this plan have been identified as proven countermeasures
by federal agencies such as USDOT, they may not
completely eliminate all fatal and severe injury (KSI)
crashes.
It is unfeasible for recommendations to be implemented
immediately so best practices generally measure
collision statistics for about five years to identify
general trends. If there are still a few KSI Crashes
consistently occurring on Baseline Street after that
period, the City is able to consider smaller scale
strategies to address the last remaining KSI crashes.
Just as this Baseline Street Study supplements the
Dilemma Zone Study that has been implemented
since 2024, so should the City continue to utilize other strategies to reduce any remaining KSI crashes.
Evaluation and benchmark metrics may come in several
forms, such as:
San Bernardino Safe Streets for All Baseline Street Safety Study 94 ° Yearly reduction of KSI crashes by a certain
percentage so that a benchmark percentage may
be achieved on Baseline Street by a certain year
° The number of implemented recommendations in a
certain number of years on Baseline Street, based
on a list of projects, such as the top 10 priority
projects
Table 6.3 presents the yearly percentage reduction
needed for KSI crashes to achieve a 75% reduction by
2036 on Baseline Street.
Year Average Annual
KSI
Reduction Per
Year
2026 8.6 0.645
2027 7.955 0.645
2028 7.31 0.645
2029 6.665 0.645
2030 6.02 0.645
2031 5.375 0.645
2032 4.73 0.645
2033 4.085 0.645
2034 3.44 0.645
2035 2.795 0.645
2036 2.15 0.645
Table 6.3: Average Annual KSI
Based on the 2019 to 2023 crash data, an average of
8.6 KSI crashes occur on an annual basis. Assuming a
reduction of 75% by the year 2036. While this equates
to an average reduction of approximately 0.6 KSI
crashes per year over a 10-year period, crash reductions are not expected to occur linearly. Meaningful
reductions will primarily be realized following the
implementation of key infrastructure improvements.
Therefore, measurable decreases in KSI crashes may
not occur until project components are constructed
and fully operational. The overall timeline for achieving the target reduction will depend on funding availability, project delivery schedules, and completion of design,
environmental, and construction phases.
San Bernardino Local Roadway Safety
Plan Amendment
Purpose
The City of San Bernardino adopted a Local Roadway
Safety Plan (LSRP) in 2022 to identify corridors in need of safety improvements. In 2026, a follow-up plan was
developed to analyze and recommend improvements
on Baseline Street, one of the top corridors prioritized through the LRSP process.
The Baseline Street Study incorporates granular
analysis of safety trends in the corridor and identifies appropriate countermeasures to mitigate safety
challenges. Additionally, the Baseline Street Study
also included a comprehensive outreach effort to
ensure that stakeholders and local residents had
opportunities to comment and provide feedback on
recommendations throughout the planning process.
As the LRSP did not include an extensive outreach
San Bernardino Safe Streets for All Baseline Street Safety Study 95 process, this amendment summarizes the outreach
methodology used in the Baseline Street Study. It
provides lessons learned from the planning process for
a potential comprehensive citywide outreach effort.
Supplementing the existing LRSP with a citywide
outreach component will be a major step toward
adapting the document into a Safe Streets for All
(SS4A) - compliant plan (i.e., Comprehensive Safety
Action Plan), opening avenues for additional grant
opportunities for the entire city, not just Baseline Street.
Community Engagement Methodology
Utilized in the Baseline Street Study
Disadvantaged Communities Analysis
The first step before conducting field outreach was
to perform a spatial analysis of census tracts around
Baseline Street. The SS4A program and numerous other
grant opportunities award higher points to applications that benefit underserved communities. For the Baseline
Street Study, two state indicators and one federal
indicator were reviewed, such as:
State
• CalEnviroScreen 4.0 (CES 4.0)
• Healthy Places Index (HPI)
Federal
• Areas of Persistent Poverty (APP)
As shown in Figure 6.1, the entire length of Baseline
Street falls under disadvantaged indicators for CES 4.0 and APP. No census tracts near Baseline Street fulfilled the disadvantaged threshold for HPI.
Identifying disadvantaged communities early in the
planning process enables a more holistic approach
to designing and strategizing engagement activities
in the field. This is a crucial step, as engagement,
especially engagement in underserved communities,
is an integral component of a comprehensive safety
action plan. The exercise of targeting engagement in
underserved communities was relatively simple in the
case of the Baseline Street Study, as Baseline Street
is entirely located within underserved communities.
For the supplemental citywide engagement process,
however, it is highly recommended to conduct a
disadvantaged communities analysis early on to ensure
that engagement includes opportunities for residents in these areas to participate in the project.
Identification of Engagement Methodology
Once the underserved communities had been
identified, the Baseline Street Study project team
identified the most effective way to gather feedback
from residents who use Baseline Street most often.
Engagement methods include:
• Creation of a project webpage alongside online
mapping and text-based surveys, in both English
and Spanish
• Attending community-based events near Baseline
Street with pop-up tables and in-person surveys
• Cooperating with local schools and public
organizations to provide project-specific
presentations and discussion meetings
Project Webpage and Online Surveys
As it is common for working adults in the area to
be unavailable during the work week for additional
gatherings outside their daily schedules, an online
platform was created so they could still share thoughts, recommendations, or concerns throughout the project
San Bernardino Safe Streets for All Baseline Street Safety Study 96 phase. Communities around Baseline Street also had
high percentages of Spanish-speaking-only adults, so
online materials were translated into Spanish.
Note that the two surveys were made available to the
public during specific project milestones, and each
was open for comments for several months before
closing. The online mapping survey was opened
during the existing conditions portion of the project
and was available for comments until late 2025. The
priority projects survey was opened during the project
recommendations stage and remained open for
comments until mid-2026.
In-person Pop-up Booths at Community Events
Another important aspect that required early planning
was identifying community-based events suitable
for hosting a pop-up booth by the project team.
Cooperation with the City of San Bernardino was an
integral step, as they assisted the team in identifying 0 0.42 0.85 Miles ¯
Legend
San Bernardino City Boundary
Baseline Crashes
Dense
Sparse
CalEnviroScreen 4.0
Areas of Persistent Poverty
Healthy Places Index
Baseline Street
Figure 6.1: Disadvantaged Community Indicators
San Bernardino Safe Streets for All Baseline Street Safety Study 97 which events would be largely attended by community
members and had the highest chance of reaching the
most participants. Early coordination was needed as
some events required registration and coordination
with the event team. Community events the team
appeared at include:
• Mt. Vernon Bridge Re-opening Community
Celebration
• 12th Annual Rendezvous Back to Route 66
• San Bernardino Lunay New Year Festival
Project-specific Meetings and Gatherings at Local
Community Locations
Once general comments and understandings of existing
conditions have been collected from the community,
the project team combined these findings with data
from the safety analysis. A selection of projects was
developed and presented to the community for
another round of feedback and engagement. Meetings
dedicated to discussing this project were organized at
schools and libraries near Baseline Street to provide a convenient meeting place for residents, such as:
• Martin Luther King Jr. Middle School
• Arroyo Valley High School
• Gomez Elementary School
• Feldheym Library
Tips and Lessons Learned for Citywide
Engagement
As is evident throughout the discussion of the
engagement methodology, public participation
and feedback were actively sought throughout the
project life, not just during the initial stages. The
engagement process had both ups and downs during
the coordination and “in-the-field” stages, so a brief
discussion of several takeaways and tips that were
learned throughout the engagement process:
• Convening a stakeholder group consisting
of various local organizations, agencies, and
community groups at the onset of the project to
make them aware of the project goals and gather
their feedback throughout the development
process.
• Creating a stakeholder group will also
allow for more focused feedback from
community members with local knowledge
to identify key issues and potential
solutions.
• Leverage existing relationships with school staff
to ensure that families and school personnel have
opportunities to engage with the project team.
• Continue to participate in well-attended
City-hosted events to maximize community
engagement efforts.
San Bernardino Safe Streets for All Baseline Street Safety Study 98 • Prepare a resolution to be adopted by City
Council, formalizing the City’s commitment to
improving roadway safety.
• As part of the LRSP augmentation process,
identify a target date and develop a schedule
that outlines how the City will be able to reach
its goal of achieving zero fatalities and serious
injuries.
Planning Structure
As part of the Action Plan development process, SS4A
requires that a committee, task force, implementation
group, or similar body was established and charged
with the plan’s development, implementation, and
monitoring. The City’s LRSP did lead to the creation
of a Stakeholder Group consisting of representatives
from the City’s Police Department, San Bernardino
City Unified School District, and the San Bernardino
Neighborhood Association Council. However,
engagement with stakeholders was not as extensive
in order to fulfill the Planning Strcuture component
requirements.
The proposed strategies are recommended for the City
to consider and implement to ensure that a Planning
Structure has been established:
Developing an SS4A-Compliant LRSP
When applying for federal funding through the USDOT
SS4A program, the City will need to complete a SelfCertification Elibility Worksheet. This worksheet serves as a checklist tool for applicants to determine if they qualify for SS4A funding. The checklist outlines several components that are required for all Comprehensive
Safety Action Plans, including LRSPs. These
components include:
1. Leadership Commitment and Goal Setting
2. Planning Structure
3. Safety Analysis
4. Engagement and Collaboration
5. Policy and Process Changes
6. Strategy and Project Selections
7. Action Plan Date
The components in bold are areas that the City should
focus on expanding when augmenting the existing
LRSP, and are discussed on the following pages.
Leadership Commitment and Goal Setting
This component requires that the eligible Action Plan
inlcudes a formal commitment from a high-ranking
official/governing body to reach the eventual goal of
zero roadway fatalities and serious injuries; and set a timeline to acheive this goal by a specific date. There are several steps that the City can undertake to ensure that the LRSP can fulfill this component:
San Bernardino Safe Streets for All Baseline Street Safety Study 99 • Invite stakeholders from other agencies and
organizations (e.g., advocacy groups, senior
residents, etc.) to participate in the LRSP
development process and gather different
perspectives.
• Confirm that the Stakeholder Group involved
in the development of the LRSP augmentation
process and the stakeholders who participated in
the Baseline Street Study can evolve into a task
force (i.e., Safety Committee) to assist with the
implementation and monitoring of the LRSP.
Engagement and Collaboration
This Action Plan component involves the following:
• Engaging with the public and relevant
stakeholders, including the prviate sector and
community groups;
• Incorporation of information received from the
engagement and collaboration into the plan; and
• Coordiantion that includes inter- and intragovernmental cooperation and collaboration, as appropriate.
Building on the key takeaways that were discussed in
the previous section, the City should utilize a similar approach that was used to conduct public outreach
and engagement throughout the development of the
Baseline Street Study. These engagement strategies
should be expanded to conduct outreach on a citywide
scale versus on a corridor-level. The current LRSP
showed that additional engagement is needed with
stakeholders to fully satisfy the requirements in this
component.
Moving forward, the City should refer to the SelfCertitification Eligibility Worksheet when augmenting the LRSP to ensure that the revised document will be
able to meet the Action Plan components listed on
the checklist. Upon confirmation that each component
has been met, the City will be able to apply for federal funding through the SS4A program.