Item 32 - Santa Ana Vision Zero Plan

Home Browse Search

6.1 Overview This chapter focuses on the key outcomes of the Plan: the recommen- dations and initial project implementation to support Santa Ana Vision Zero. Section 6.2 presents an overview of the project prioritization process and shares a list of the ranked projects. Section 6.3 shares a field review summary from site visits at each location. Section 6.4 includes the specific corridor designs and corresponding cut sheets that show initial project recommendations and what measures should be implemented at each location. A key concept of Vision Zero is that countermeasures shouldn'tjust be implemented at key locations where collisions have already occurred. Rather, they should be proactively im- plemented at locations where collisions are likely going to occur, es- pecially high -severity collisions. The call outs on the aerial photos are intended to be used to pursue grant funding for implementation. Some cut sheets take projects further with preliminary engineering drawings. 6.2 Project Prioritization Developing the project prioritization criteria was a combined data -driv- en and interactive process consisting of cumulative scores derived from the various criteria, shown in Table 6-1. The project list with as- signed scores is shown in Tables 6-2 and 6-3. The prioritization pro- cess was developed in collaboration with focused partners, with equity for all users and transportation modes in mind. See Chapter 4 for the list of public, private, and local advocacy partners who helped develop this criteria with objective and equity -based data. The equity impact assessments of the proposed projects and strategies, as well as the population demographics, were a key concern during the analysis and project recommendation process. Ultimately, the projects recommend- ed are all in the underrepresented and underserved areas of Santa Ana and the policies and strategies recommended, focused on ad- dressing equity concerns. Figure 6-1 maps the top twenty priority proj- ects as per the prioritization process as well as the project corridors from the 2016 SMSA study. Table 6-1: Project Prioritization Criteria Crit Descripti KSI/mile The KSI/mile Score represents the number of people Killed or Seriously Injured (KSI) per mile. Each fatality and serious injury received one point, no weight was applied. The higher the KSI, the more likely a corridor needs Vision Zero countermeasures implemented. Street Lane The street lane score represents the number Score of lanes on a corridor. Each lane received one point, 6 being the highest. The more lanes a street has, the more dangerous it is for people walking and bicycling. Median Island Median Islands are one of the most effective Score Vision Zero countermeasures. A Corridor that has a median receives a 0, a partial median receives a 4, and no median receives an 8. Equity, Public, This score is compiled of the number of sur- and Professional vey comments, stakeholder input; professional Score judgment from the project team and the City of Santa Ana on the need of a corridor to receive countermeasures, and it includes results from the Equity Analysis. Total Score The Total Score represents the sum of each pri- oritization criteria. The top 5 scores are to be the top five projects, which will go into more detailed conceptual design. 90