My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Agenda Packet_2026-05-05
Clerk
>
Agenda Packets / Staff Reports
>
City Council (2004 - Present)
>
2026
>
05/05/2026 Regular, HA
>
Agenda Packet_2026-05-05
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/1/2026 9:47:48 AM
Creation date
4/30/2026 2:01:27 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Clerk
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.
/
4373
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
COMMUNITY OUTREACH SUMMARY <br /> physical barriers and dedicated bus-only lanes, including potential center-running <br /> configurations. <br /> • Many stated that the current corridor felt unsafe due to high traffic speeds and wide <br /> crossings, and they advocated for traffic calming measures such as reduced target <br /> speeds (20 MPH), fewer lanes at intersections, bulb-outs, protected mid-block <br /> crossings, and shorter crossing distances. <br /> • Respondents emphasized the need for wider sidewalks, shade trees (excluding palm <br /> trees), enhanced lighting, high-quality bus stops with buffers and ADA access, and <br /> improved left-turn safety at key intersections. <br /> • Several individuals suggested viewing portions of the corridor as an extension of the <br /> urban core, incorporating canopy coverage, alley access strategies, and transit- <br /> oriented development. <br /> • Some participants, while supportive of improvements, raised concerns about long- <br /> term maintenance costs and cautioned against reducing vehicle lanes citywide <br /> without broader community input. <br /> The online workshop was recorded and uploaded to the City's YouTube account to amplify <br /> accessibility and reach, and a multilingual pinpoint digital survey, discussed later in the <br /> report, was conducted to replicate the in-person exercise. <br /> r <br /> Comment/Question Card Moving Comment/Question Card ©Moving ' <br /> Nam Forward Name: j L'Forward i <br /> MW on First Phone: Mon pFirst <br /> one <br /> Ph :.., M ao <br /> Email j <br /> co,.,mer,t/Qesson: Wnment/Question: <br /> , •la iLQ U 4 c'n U' F/ 'oved/ kv v i is r rLifum-- 910fi5 1� \{DU ar6 ewt6id&i V <br /> 0 A 10115 S W I KfD OKL i.a44_�plekSe Ve100Si ZYI OV b(eA% e dohf �hye S <br /> AXt C oyw6t eA 6 U A1`1 a Vi GI V"M RWA5 ape, ou2- <br /> coy, ulLurk a�n i�(D\IPIIIPM(! �r Gnwnarhof<. Ov <br /> CDkn ller fin. VDT MVV1 heM [24 wGiglnla <br /> I <br /> Thankyauforyour participation!Your feedbackievaluable to us Thank you for your participation!Your feedback is valuable to us. <br /> Figure 16: Example of several comment cards completed from Workshop 1. <br /> City Council 11 5/5/2026 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.