My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Agenda Packet_2024-06-04 (Revised)
Clerk
>
Agenda Packets / Staff Reports
>
City Council (2004 - Present)
>
2024
>
06/04/2024
>
Agenda Packet_2024-06-04 (Revised)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/4/2024 12:09:40 PM
Creation date
6/4/2024 11:52:44 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Clerk
Doc Type
Agenda Packet
Agency
Clerk of the Council
Date
6/4/2024
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
2601
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
SANTA ANA VISION ZERO PLAN <br />RECOMMENDED ENGINEERING IMPROVEMENTS <br />95 <br />A group waiting to cross 17th Street <br />6.3 Field Review of Top 20 Projects <br />On May 24th-25th, 2023, the project team conducted a field review <br />of Santa Ana streets, prioritizing the project list, to observe existing <br />conditions and user behavior of people walking, bicycling, and driving. <br />The team noted the immediate land uses, surrounding destinations, <br />and existing infrastructure. While the existing conditions analysis from <br />Chapter 2 helped proposed project locations based on collision den- <br />sity and infrastructure gaps, this exercise helped to identify elements <br />and patterns understood from observation. The field work helped to <br />finalize the prioritization process and solidify project ranking. <br />Some examples from the site visits include crosswalks shown in aerials <br />that had since been faded in some locations, bicyclists were seen rid- <br />ing on sidewalks even when bicycle facilities are present, and bicyclists <br />were spotted riding contra-flow, or against traffic, on both residential <br />streets and primary arterials. Additionally, several near-collisions were <br />witnessed, motorists were driving over the speed limit on wide roads, <br />motorists were running red lights, and there were numerous instances <br />of jaywalking, informing the team that pedestrian crossings are too far <br />apart. These are some behavioral occurrences that can not be identi- <br />fied from data alone and emphasize the significance of field work. The <br />general recommendation is to have protected pedestrian crossings in <br />commercial and mixed use areas at least every 500 feet, usually pro- <br />tected with a pedestrian signal or a Pedestrian Hybrid Beacon (PHB.) <br />Some examples from this field work are pictured to help illustrate these <br />observations. <br />Tustin Avenue is wide and undivided <br />Pedestrian Hybrid Beacon Downtown <br />Bicyclist riding on the sidewalk <br />Existing traffic circle on 16th Street <br />Curb extensions on Main Street <br /> <br /> <br />City Council 32 – 100 6/4/2024
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.