Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Item 12 - Select Locally Preferred Alternative for the First Street Multimodal Boulevard Study
Public Works Agency . ;.'� www.santa-ana.org/pw � Item # 12 k City of Santa Ana 20 Civic Center Plaza, Santa Ana, CA 92701 Staff Report May 5, 2026 TOPIC: Select Locally Preferred Alternative for the First Street Multimodal Boulevard Study AGENDA TITLE Select Locally Preferred Alternative for the First Street Multimodal Boulevard Study RECOMMENDED ACTION Select Option 2 — Enhanced Bicycle and Pedestrian Zone Concept as the Locally Preferred Alternative for the First Street Multimodal Boulevard Study and direct staff to advance this concept into final engineering and design. GOVERNMENT CODE §84308 APPLIES: No DISCUSSION EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Improving the safety, accessibility, and reliability of the City's major arterials for multimodal transportation is a critical mobility and safety imperative. These key arterials service some of the highest ridership bus routes in the County. A contributing factor in the high utilization of public transit and other transportation modes such bicycling and walking is fifty-five (55) percent of city residents do not have access to a private vehicle. First Street, from Bristol Street to Tustin Avenue, is one of the City's most critical multimodal corridors, serving approximately 36,000 vehicles, 2,900 daily transit boardings, over 1,300 pedestrians, and more than 250 bicyclists each day. For comparison purposes, Harbor Boulevard, also a six-lane roadway, carries about 49,000 vehicles per day with similar transit, bicycle, and pedestrian activity. The First Street multimodal corridor experiences a collision rate over two times the national average for similar roads. Speed has been a primary contributing factor in many of these incidents, with higher vehicle speeds directly correlating to increased severity and lower survivability. In response, the First Street Multimodal Boulevard Study evaluated options to transform approximately three miles of the corridor from a car centric to a multimodal corridor. This effort was informed by detailed technical analysis and an extensive, 6-month Select Locally Preferred Alternative for the First Street Multimodal Boulevard Study May 5, 2026 Page 2 multilingual community engagement process that reached over 1,100 participants and generated more than 10,000 unique online interactions. Based on this work, staff recommends that City Council select Option 2, Enhanced Bicycle and Pedestrian Zone Concept as the Locally Preferred Alternative (LPA). Option 2 introduces a five-lane configuration that reduces crossing distances, incorporates separated bikeways on both sides of the street at sidewalk level, and provides wider sidewalks to enhance pedestrian comfort. The concept also includes key operational improvements such as Transit Signal Priority (TSP) and GIS-based Emergency Vehicle Preemption (EVP). Option 2 represents the most balanced and implementable solution. It directly addresses community traffic safety concerns while maintaining optimal vehicular traffic operations and supporting existing transit service. It is also consistent with the City's General Plan Mobility Element, Vision Zero Action Plan, and the designation of First Street as a Pedestrian Opportunity Zone. By contrast, Option 1 largely maintains the existing six-lane configuration and prioritizes vehicular travel time, resulting in only marginal improvements for pedestrians and bicyclists despite requiring full roadway reconstruction. It does not meaningfully address the corridor's safety concerns for non-motorists. Option 3, while offering a more transformative approach with dedicated transit emphasis, would significantly increase vehicular travel times, reduce landscaping opportunities, and rely on increased transit service that the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) has confirmed is not currently planned. As a result, its benefits cannot be fully realized. Selection of an LPA at this time will allow the City and OCTA to complete final design plans, specifications, and engineering estimates by the December 2026 grant deadline and position the project to competitively pursue construction grant funding. At present, construction funding has not been secured, and implementation will be contingent upon future grant awards. Construction costs are estimated to be approximately $45 million. Due to the reliance on securing grant funds and timelines related to the grant process, Staff estimates that construction would not commence until 2028, at the earliest, and in all cases would be scheduled to not commence until other major corridor projects such as Bristol Street widening and Warner Avenue widening are completed. BACKGROUND First Street, from Bristol Street to Tustin Avenue, is a six-lane arterial that serves as a major east-west transportation corridor but functions as a connection barrier between neighborhoods to the north and south of the corridor. The section of First Street between Standard Avenue and Grand Avenue is four lanes, constrained by the Metrolink overcrossing. The street is reduced to five lanes from Golden Circle Drive to the City's eastern border with the City of Tustin ("Eastern Segment"). While it Select Locally Preferred Alternative for the First Street Multimodal Boulevard Study May 5, 2026 Page 3 accommodates a high volume of pedestrians, bicyclists, students, seniors, and transit riders, the corridor's existing design prioritizes vehicular throughput. Existing conditions include high vehicle speeds, long pedestrian crossing distances, limited shade, infrequent protected crossings, and the absence of continuous bicycle facilities. These factors limit its effectiveness as a multimodal corridor and as a connection for neighborhoods to the north and south of the corridor. In 2022, the City Council adopted the updated General Plan Mobility Element, which designates First Street as a Pedestrian Opportunity Zone and calls for rebalancing the corridor to better support walking, bicycling, and transit. The First Street Multimodal Boulevard Study was approved by Council in May 2025 to identify an LPA that advances these policy objectives while remaining feasible within the existing right-of- way. Figure 1: First Street Corridor 11.0 Flower Park Plaza Artists Village ® zoo Study Corridor Santa Ana High School DMV Social Security Office I W SANTA ANA BLVD C 4TH ST 4TH ST Z FIRST STREET �� $ 55 Z v O m O E CHESTNUT AVE D Z ® E MAIN ST y D EVALUATION OF ALTERNATIVES From the original 12 concepts, three viable alternatives were advanced for detailed evaluation. The three viable alternatives are as follows: Option 1 — Multi-Use Path Concept: Maintains six travel lanes and relies on shared pedestrian and bicycle space on one side of the corridor. This approach limits safety and comfort for both user groups and does not substantively improve corridor conditions. Conceptual View Looking east on First St near Shelton 1 . P C Q \ Q �P I I T T T + ♦.L (North) 10, 76' 14' Sidewalk Roadway 100' First St Right-of-way Select Locally Preferred Alternative for the First Street Multimodal Boulevard Study May 5, 2026 Page 4 Option 2 — Enhanced Bicycle and Pedestrian Zone Concept: Introduces a five-lane configuration with separated bikeways, wider sidewalks, and reduced crossing distances. It significantly improves safety and comfort while maintaining acceptable traffic performance. Conceptual View Looking east or F,rst St near St Ca C. 4 q� 17' 66' 17' South (North) Sidewalk with (�oadvvay Sidewalk with (South) Comme Separated Bikeway Separated Bikeway 100'First St Right-of-way � s Option 3— Bus Lanes and Bikeway Concept: Prioritizes transit but results in substantial increases in vehicle delay, potential traffic diversion, and implementation challenges. Its effectiveness is constrained by the absence of planned transit service increases. Select Locally Preferred Alternative for the First Street Multimodal Boulevard Study May 5, 2026 Page 5 Conceptual View _yoking east or P •ct nea•Shel, c- p b a , 0 O � u -y t; 'r t'd 'LLI, T T 12' 76. 12' S." (North) %OtRoadway S(IUN'alk N'ili Pam �.:.., y B*away 100'First St Right-of-way CONCEPTS EAST OF ZOO LANE For the Eastern Segment (1-5 to Tustin Avenue), a consistent four-lane configuration to match the existing cross-section of First Street within the City of Tustin limits, with expanded pedestrian and bicycle zones, is proposed across all alternatives. This concept builds on Caltrans' Freeway Ramp Active Mobility Enhancement Study (FRAMES) concept on First Street between Zoo Lane and Cabrillo Park Drive and is consistent with the vision and design standards included in the Metro East Mixed-Use (MEMU) Overlay Zone. COMMON ELEMENTS ACROSS ALL ALTERNATIVES All alternatives evaluated in the First Street Multimodal Boulevard Study share a common set of baseline improvements and design treatments intended to maximize safety, accessibility, and travel experience for all users and abilities along the corridor. These elements were consistently supported through technical analysis and community feedback and would be incorporated into the final design under any LPA. Common components include: • New and enhanced pedestrian crossings, including additional signalized and controlled mid-block crossings. • Shorter and safer intersection crossings, achieved through tighter curb radii, median refuges, and improved crossing geometry. • ADA-compliant curb ramps and accessible pathways at intersections and crossings. • Pedestrian-scale lighting along sidewalks and at crossings to improve visibility and safety. • Street trees and landscaping to increase shade, improve comfort during extreme heat, and enhance the overall streetscape. Select Locally Preferred Alternative for the First Street Multimodal Boulevard Study May 5, 2026 Page 6 • High-visibility crosswalk markings and upgraded signage to improve pedestrian safety. • Transit Signal Priority (TSP) to improve bus reliability and on-time performance. • GPS-based Emergency Vehicle Preemption (EVP) for improving response times. • Upgraded bus stop amenities, including improved accessibility and lighting. • Corridor beatification including sustainable, native, and aesthetically-pleasing trees, wayfinding, and landscaping, making the corridor inviting for businesses and residents. These shared elements establish a consistent foundation for user safety and accessibility, while the individual concepts differ in how travel lanes, pedestrian and bicycle facilities, and transit treatments are configured. COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT AND FEEDBACK The City conducted an extensive outreach effort from August through December 2025, including workshops, neighborhood meetings, pop-up events, surveys, and digital engagement that included: • A dedicated project website, • 3 multiday in-person workshops at the Roosevelt-Walker Community Center, • 11 neighborhood meetings, • 10 pop-up events, • In-person outreach was augmented with a robust digital campaign, resulting in one virtual workshop, over 3,000 website views, 8,584 unique social media interactions and impressions, 521 online survey responses, and two YouTube informational videos with 875 views, • Coordination with more than 35 community-based organizations and stakeholders, and • Outreach also included both internal and external agencies such as the Orange County Fire Authority, Santa Ana Police Department, and City of Tustin. This effort reached a broad cross-section of the community and generated consistent feedback. Key themes included: • Strong support for safer walking and bicycling conditions • Preference for physically separated bicycle facilities • Desire for shorter and more frequent crossing opportunities • Support for traffic calming balanced with concerns about congestion • Interest in additional shade, landscaping, and improved bus stop amenities Among the alternatives presented, Option 2 emerged as the preferred concept, as it most effectively balances safety, accessibility, and traffic operations while aligning with community priorities and City policy goals. WORK STUDY SESSION On February 17, 2026, the City Council held a Work Study Session to review the study's findings, including existing conditions, community outreach results, and the Select Locally Preferred Alternative for the First Street Multimodal Boulevard Study May 5, 2026 Page 7 development of design alternatives (Exhibit 1). Staff presented how an initial set of 12 concepts was systematically refined to three viable alternatives through a structured process incorporating technical analysis, stakeholder coordination, community input, and policy alignment. The Work Study Session provided an opportunity for City Council to review the data- driven and community-informed approach and to offer direction prior to staff advancing a recommended LPA. This staff report reflects that input and represents the next step in the decision-making process. The staff report and corresponding presentation from the February 17, 2026, City Council meeting are provided as Exhibit 2. During that discussion, City Council provided valuable feedback and requested additional information on several key topics, including the community engagement process and specific feedback received, how that input was used in developing the concepts, OCTA support/preferences, cost implications, the potential for partnerships with UC Irvine's Playful Learning Landscapes, greenhouse gas emission reductions, and the applicability of policies such as Assembly Bill 43 (AB 43, lowering speed limits). Key findings and updates include: • Concept Development: Community preferences, specific and actual feedback (including survey results) is included in Exhibit 3, Outreach Summary Report. The three final concepts are the direct result of a structured, iterative planning process that integrated Technical feasibility analysis, Community outreach and preference surveys, and policy alignment (Adopted General Plan Mobility Element and Vision Zero). • OCTA Coordination: OCTA has confirmed there are no plans to increase bus service along the corridor, which is a critical factor in evaluating Option 3 (Exhibit 4). • Costs: All alternatives require significant investment and will depend on grant funding for construction. Rough order of magnitude costs are as follows: o Option 1 — $41.3M o Option 2 — $45.1 M o Option 3 — $37.8M • Public Education: Opportunities to incorporate innovative bus stop design, including educational and community-serving elements (such as partnerships with institutions like UCI), will be explored further and incorporated during the design phase. • Route 64 Transit Users: Approximately 76% of riders utilize OCTA's Route 64 for destinations within the City, concentrated around the Downtown, Santa Ana High School, Downtown commercial plaza, and the Zoo. • Greenhouse Gas Reduction: Option 2 provides the greatest opportunity to reduce emissions by enabling meaningful mode shift through improved walking, biking, and transit conditions. • Speed Management: Data collected supports potential speed limit reductions under AB 43, with all options incorporating design features to reduce vehicle speeds. Select Locally Preferred Alternative for the First Street Multimodal Boulevard Study May 5, 2026 Page 8 STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND NEXT STEPS Staff recommends approval of Option 2 — Enhanced Bicycle and Pedestrian Zone Concept as the Locally Preferred Alternative. This option delivers optimal safety design features, particularly for pedestrians and bicyclists, through reduced crossing distances, separated facilities, and traffic calming measures. It maintains compatibility with existing transit operations while enhancing reliability through signal priority improvements. Importantly, it achieves these benefits without requiring right-of-way acquisition or reliance on external service changes. Compared to the other alternatives, Option 2 provides the greatest overall benefit with manageable trade-offs, including a modest increase in travel time of approximately 1.5 minutes in the westbound direction. It represents a practical, balanced solution that advances the City's Vision Zero goals, supports multimodal mobility, and reflects both community input and technical analysis. Selection of an LPA at this time will allow the City and OCTA to complete final design plans, specifications, and engineering estimates by the December 2026 grant deadline and position the project to competitively pursue construction funding. Construction funding pursued will include, but not be limited to, the Transit Rail and Intercity Rail Capital Program (TIRCP) through CaISTA, the FY26 Safe Streets and Roads for All (SS4A) grant program from the US Department of Transportation, and Caltrans' Active Transportation Program (ATP), Local Partnership Program (LPP), and Solutions for Congested Corridors Program (SCCP). At present, construction funding has not been secured, and implementation will be contingent upon future grant awards. Construction costs are estimated to be approximately $45 million. Due to the reliance on securing grant funds and timelines related to the grant process, Staff estimates that construction would not commence until 2028, at the earliest, and in all cases would be scheduled to not commence until other major corridor projects such as Bristol Street widening and Warner Avenue widening are completed. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT There is no environmental impact associated with the action. Staff will return in the future for Council approval of environmental clearance in accordance with CEQA when project plans are completed for the selected Locally Preferred Alternative. FISCAL IMPACT Planning, environmental clearance, and final engineering for the selected LPA are fully funded through the REAP 2.0 grant, which expires in December 2026. With Council's selection of the LPA, staff will begin seeking grant opportunities to fund the construction of the LPA. Select Locally Preferred Alternative for the First Street Multimodal Boulevard Study May 5, 2026 Page 9 EXHIBIT(S) 1. Technical Memorandum 2. February 17, 2026 Staff Report and Presentation 3. Outreach and Engagement Summary Report 4. OCTA Memorandum Submitted By: Rodolfo Rosas, P.E., Acting Executive Director— Public Works Agency Approved By: Alvaro Nunez, City Manager Memo Date: Thursday, January 15, 2026 Proj cc : First Street Multimodal Corridor Study To: Mike Arizabal, Senior Transportation Analyst, City of Santa Ana Public Works Agency From: Dawn L. Wilson, PE TE, Project Manager, HDR Subj cc : First Street Multimodal Corridor Study Project Overview Initiated in May 2025, HDR has been working closely with City of Santa Ana to develop multimodal improvements that address mobility barriers for all users along First Street. Project extents reach from Bristol Street to Tustin Avenue, approximately 3 miles through downtown, past two schools, passes under the railroad tracks, and crosses through the 1-5 interchange. This technical memorandum provides an overview of the project's progress and the tasks completed through December2025, which included existing conditions assessment, development of 8 options and refinement to three corridor concepts, technical analysis of the options, and extensive outreach with the public, stakeholders and community groups. rroject Background The City of Santa Ana's First Street Multimodal Boulevard Study (Study) aims to transform and improve the First Street corridor between Bristol Street and Tustin Avenue (see Figure 1) for all modes of transportation. A multimodal street is one that balances the needs of all users, including people walking, biking, riding transit, and driving—while also functioning as a community space that supports social, economic, and environmental vitality. Boulevards and major streets like First Street play a vital role in cities, not only as conduits for mobility, but as central public spaces shared by residents, visitors, and people of all ages and abilities. In 2022, the City of Santa Ana (City) updated its General Plan Mobility Element (Mobility Element) and identified First Street as a Pedestrian Opportunity Zone to be reconfigured for multimodal improvements. Pedestrian Opportunity Zones are defined as an area that supports or should support high levels of pedestrian activity due to its proximity to activity centers, mixed-use development, and transit stops.These zones are intended to foster a walkable and vibrant public realm through improvements such as wider sidewalks, safer crossings, and an enhanced streetscape. Figure 2 shows examples of best street practices for pedestrian facilities. Vibrant urban boulevards with amenities and storefronts should have a minimum width of 15 feet. Urban streets with trees should have a minimum of 12 feet to still allow for comfortable pedestrian space. Streets with small trees and walking zones should have a minimum of 9 feet. A walk audit was conducted, along with traffic modeling, origin-destination analysis, and an in-depth assessment of existing pedestrian, bicycle, and transit conditions to establish the City of Santa Ana I First Street Multimodal Corridor Technical Memorandum existing conditions of the First Street corridor. This information in conjunction with the technical multimodal analysis and traffic modeling and community input resulted in the development of three potential concepts that will improve the travel environment on First Street. Ultimately, these three concepts will be reviewed by City Council, and a locally preferred alternative will be selected. The City has funding to advance this alternative into final design and is in the process of securing funding for construction. Figure 1. Project Corridor o _ N N a -1 H O _ C O m W m m E m 0 01 Oil I I Signalized Intersections •local Bus Stops •Express Bus Stop% a o r 0 o �4 lei ` aT Figure 2. Examples of Best Street Practices for Pedestrian Facilities ye. F4 • r- I _ _ r 2 FJ 1� City of Santa Ana I First Street Multimodal Corridor Technical Memorandum Funding The project was funded through a REAP 2.0 grant administered by OCTA and SCAG. The grant focuses on improving access for low-income housing through improved pedestrian, bicycle and transit options. While the City did receive a short extension, the grant will expire in December2026. Additional funding may be needed to complete the design (depending upon the timing and elements of the locally preferred alternative and the limits of the improvements). The City is working closely with OCTA to secure additional funding for construction engineering and construction of the selected improvements. Goals and Objective The goal of this project is as follows: Improve the travel environment along First Street and connect people to places through a variety of reliable, safe and affordable travel options. This can be achieved by: • Prioritizing vulnerable roadway users.The success of implementing improvements should be measured by its ability to improve safety and accessibility for pedestrians and bicyclists. • Reducing vehicle speeds and address basic safety. • Adding trees and landscape to create shade and make the corridor visually appealing. Creating a unified design for the corridor will improve the quality of the travel experience. • Adding new north-south crossings to improve connectivity across the street. With a limited number of existing controlled crossings, First Street serves as a barrier between communities north and south of the corridor. • Creating a continuous, high-quality bike network that connects to north-south regional routes. Most bicyclists currently travel on the sidewalk due to safety concerns riding in the street. Providing wider sidewalks to accommodate either a Class 1 multiuse path or Class IV bikeways improves safety for both pedestrians and bicyclists. • Enhancing and improving transit performance and the rider experience. Provide features such as dedicated lanes or bus priority to improve the efficiency of buses along this highly traveled route. Existing Conditions Pedestrians and Bicycles For this analysis, First Street is grouped into three segments, each with distinct characteristics that coincide with neighborhoods and districts identified in the City's General Plan. While district boundaries outside the city core are more flexible and may overlap due to shared characteristics such as architectural style, scale, and overall character,the 3 City of Santa Ana I First Street Multimodal Corridor Technical Memorandum introduction of newer large-scale commercial and mixed-use developments is expected to create clearer, more defined boundaries in Santa Ana. The Pedestrian and Bicycle Analysis Technical Memorandum (attached separately) provide a more detailed assessment of the findings presented in this section. V\/r ct Rrictnl Hi ih- Rrietol Rtrppt to A11oin • Neighborhoods: Flower Park, Downtown, Pico-Lowell, Heninger Park • Character: Heavily commercial with shopping centers, civic uses, and surface parking Downtown Historic Center: Main Street to Grand Avenue • Neighborhoods: Downtown, French Park, Lacy, Logan, Pacific Park • Character: Historic downtown, civic buildings, smaller retail, denser housing, transitions into mixed residential eastward. East City gateway: grand Avenue to Tustin Avenue • Neighborhoods: Saddleback View, Zoo District, Lyon Street. • Character: Motels, Santa Ana Zoo, mix of offices, high-density residential, freeway edge conditions. This section summarizes existing pedestrian and bicycle conditions along First Street and its intersection crossings.The analysis uses a customized ranking system based on the Pedestrian Environmental Quality Index (PEQI), typical First/Last Mile evaluation criteria, and Level of Traffic Stress (LTS),with adjustments tailored to the study area. This approach emphasizes the pedestrian experience and provides a more qualitative measure of walkability and bikeability. Walkability Bicycle Conditions • Land Use & Neighborhood • Facility Quality Character . Intersection Safety • Streetscape Design (roadway, . Bicycle Network Connectivity traffic speeds, sidewalk, . Level of Traffic Stress (LTS) landscape, & lighting") • Pedestrian Access • Connectivity & Safety • Intersection Safety * Lighting is notevaluated but should be studied further in coordination with the CitVs Lighting Masterplan 4 City of Santa Ana I First Street Multimodal Corridor Technical Memorandum Level of Traffic Stress or LTS is a common measure of bicyclist comfort when traveling along a roadway, with LTS 1 being very comfortable and LTS 4 being highly challenging. Below are descriptions of each LTS category and Photo 6 shows examples of LTS 1 through 3 bicycle facilities: LTS 1: Strong separation from all but low-speed, low-volume traffic; simple crossings; suitable for children. LTS 2: Physical separation from higher-speed or multilane traffic; easy crossings; comfortable for most adults, especially the "interested but concerned." LTS 3: Requires interaction with moderate-speed or multilane traffic, or in close proximity to higher-speed traffic; suitable for"enthused and confident' riders. LTS 4: Requires interaction with or in close proximity to high-speed traffic; suitable only for"strong and fearless" riders. t V Photo 6: Examples of LTS 1 (Left), LTS 2 (Right),LTS 3 (Bottom)Bicycle Facilities 5 City of Santa Ana I First Street Multimodal Corridor Technical Memorandum This segment of First Street combines commercial land uses (small scale retail, shopping centers and surface parking lots) on the east and western edges with high-density housing and schools focused near the center, between Flower Street and Broadway. The street features a landscaped median, mature shade trees, and 7 to 8 feet sidewalks with tree wells, supporting comfortable pedestrian activity. Striped shoulders are present but are below standard in width for a bicycle lane and are not clearly marked. Several cyclists were observed using sidewalks during a site walk to avoid high speed traffic. Two schools are located on the south side, Santa Ana High School and Martin R. Heninger Elementary School, which also include recreational facilities. Key crossings at Flower and Ross Streets serve students, highlighting the need for safe, well-connected pathways. North- south access would be greatly improved by adding signalized pedestrian crossings along the half-mile stretch between Bristol Street and Flower Street. Overall, the segment balances commercial, residential, and educational uses while offering potential for improved multimodal connectivity. Figure 3 shows the walkability and bikeability ratings for West Bristol Hub with an example photo of typical conditions. Figure 3. West Bristol Hub Pedestrian and Bicycle Existing Conditions O © © © © O O O O O • • �©-©-©-© Note.Mup not to scale N Walkability&Bikeability Rating Good Fair Poor W_ifim Signalized Crossing Rating Q Good r O Fair Q Poor © No Crossing No eriid-Nock Crossing With signage prohiNting pedestrian access acfoss i=irst Street. 6 F1J� City of Santa Ana I First Street Multimodal Corridor Technical Memorandum Downtown Historic Center.Main Street to Grand Avenue This segment of First Street defines the southern edge of the City's designated Downtown Core and Transit Center District. Main Street provides a key connection north to the Downtown Santa Ana Historic District and the new OC Streetcar, which links east to the Santa Ana Regional Transportation Center. The corridor is characterized by small-scale retail and shopping centers with surface parking lots. A landscaped median and mature shade trees contribute to a consistent streetscape,while sidewalks (7-8 feet wide with tree wells) support a comfortable pedestrian environment. The key exception is the section from Standard Avenue to Grand Avenue, where First Street narrows to four lanes. Figure 4 shows the walkability and bikeability ratings for the Downtown Historic Center with an example photo of the railroad undercrossing where there are four travel lanes. Challenges emerge in the quarter-mile stretch between Standard Avenue and Grand Avenue, where the Metrolink underpass creates a hostile walking environment with narrow 5-foot sidewalks, no shade, and no buffer from traffic. Bicycle facilities are minimal—aside from a short block between Main Street and Bush Street/Cypress Avenue, there are no designated bike lanes along this segment. The intersection of First Street and Downtown Plaza is a critical node for pedestrians— serving local residents,families, shoppers, bus riders, and students from the Edward B. Cole Sr. Academy. However, pedestrian safety improvements are needed. Additionally, between Downtown Plaza and Standard Avenue, the corridor has long block lengths without a north- south crossing (approximately half a mile) posing barriers to pedestrian connectivity. Figure 4. Downtown Historic Center: Main Street to Grand Avenue O O © O © © E3 © © © • N Walkability&Bikeability Rating Good . Fair '--�/n -ter, Poor ant Signalized Crossing Rating Q Good O Fair Q Poor Si devrarks narrow to under 4 teat berow the © Metro?ink andercrossing with no separation?from traffic.. and there are no designated brke raves. 7 City of Santa Ana I First Street Multimodal Corridor Technical Memorandum East City Gateway.Grand Avenue to Tustin Avenue This eastern segment of First Street is a combination of commercial (motels, small scale retail, shopping centers, office buildings and surface parking lots) and mixed-use high- density housing. The corridor is separated by the 1-5 freeway with the motels and Santa Ana Zoo to the West and a mixture of office buildings and high-density housing to the east. Overall, the lack of shade trees, and motel activity make the corridor unfriendly to walk and was rated fair to poor. Figure 5 shows the walkability and bikeability ratings for East City Gateway. Typical roadway width in this segment is upwards of 85 feet, including both landscaped and paved medians. Via Google Earth images, it appears that there were once shade trees in the median that seem to have been removed. Sidewalk widths range from 9 to 11' with tree wells, but unless added with new development, the existing mature shade trees are sporadically dispersed throughout the corridor. While the zoo is a major destination in the area, First Street is not the primary access point and may not see increased traffic during hours of operation. Overall, the lack of shade trees, and motel activity make the corridor unfriendly to walk and was rated fair to poor. Figure 5. East City Gateway: Grand Avenue to Tustin Avenue 0 4 0i4f F ©J lr i A Note:Mop not to scale N Walkability&Bikeability Rating Good Fair _ Poor Signalized Crossing Rating Q Good O Fair Q Poor jai Narrow srdeLvalks arrd no bicycle facility on FreeLyay overpass beftveen Zoo Larre and Golden Crrcre Drive. 8 FN City of Santa Ana I First Street Multimodal Corridor Technical Memorandum Overall Corridor Conditions Pedestrian and bicycle conditions along First Street reveal significant safety and accessibility challenges, with gaps in infrastructure, inconsistent facilities, and environmental factors that collectively create barriers to safe and comfortable travel for all users. The following observations highlight opportunities for improvement in the redesign of First Street. Street Conditions • Continuous sidewalk access on both sides of the street. • High frequency of driveways with no clear ADA pathway. Bicycle Facilities • No existing bicycle facilities provided. • Posted speed limits (40-45 mph)have proven fatal for cyclist/vehicle collisions. • Predominance of sidewalk cycling impacts pedestrians. • No bike-protected intersections at key north/south wheel facility connections (Bristol Street, Flower Street, Ross Street, Standard Avenue, Grand Avenue, Tustin Avenue). • Need connections to other bike routes, safe crossings under Metrolink & over freeway. Intersections&Controlled Crossings • Signalized crossings are infrequent (16 traffic signals along the 3-mile corridor) and often located far apart (approximately 1 mile west of Main Street and approximately 0.25 mile east of 1-5). • Long distances between north-south signalized crossings (typically 1/2-mile). • Major intersections with long crossing distances (100-140 feet). • Marked crosswalks are not high-visibility continental type. • Directional curb ramps (single ramp)are unsafe at intersections with large curb radii & high turning speed. • Dangerous jaywalking near activity hubs with vulnerable populations. • No protected bicycle intersections. Climate Impact • Extreme weather threatens people with disabilities. • Existing tree canopy is inconsistent. • Limited access to shade & seating. • Surrounding hardscape, landscape&buildings affect pedestrian comfort. 9 City of Santa Ana I First Street Multimodal Corridor Technical Memorandum OCTA Route 64 runs east-west along First Street, connecting Larwin Square in the City of Tustin to the Westminster Mall in the City of Huntington Beach. Route 64 has local and express stops along First Street. In addition, OCTA provides multiple north-south bus routes that intersect First Street and provide connectivity across Orange County (OCTA Routes 57, 150/151, 55, 53, 553, 59, 83, and 71). Key transfer points along the corridor include Bristol Street, Flower Street, Main Street, Grand Avenue, and Tustin Avenue. The Santa Ana Regional Transportation Center is less than half a mile north of the project corridor and serves regional transit services, including Amtrak, Metrolink, OCTA, and Greyhound. The station sits west of the railroad tracks at the intersection of Santa Ana Boulevard and Santiago Street. From First Street, several north-south roadways—such as Main Street—provide direct access to Santa Ana Boulevard. Riders can reach the station by taking OCTA Route 64 westbound and transferring to Route 59 northbound at Tustin Avenue. Ridership Daily boarding information for Route 64 was provided by OCTA for October 2024, April 2025, and May 2025. Ridership was analyzed for each stop along the project corridor in the eastbound and westbound direction (see Table 1). The highest average boarding across the three time periods occurs at Bristol Street eastbound and Main Street westbound. The busiest stops are on the west side from Bristol Street to Downtown Plaza and at Grand Avenue. Ridership is lower at local stops between Downtown Plaza and Standard Avenue and at Cabrillo Park Drive and Golden Circle Drive. Bus Stop Amenities A field check was completed to document the existing amenities at local and express bus stops between Bristol Street and Tustin Avenue. While the amenities at each stop varied, all stops included seating and signage. The provision of bus shelters aligns the busiest stops and is constructed and maintained by the City. Photo 1 shows the bus stop near Bristol Street. All stops lack dedicated shelter lighting, wayfinding signage, and real-time arrival displays. Each bus stop has basic route information from OCTA. Most bus stops have a concrete bus pad for boarding, and buses usually stop in the outside travel lane. The only exception is the westbound stop on Flower Street, which includes a dedicated bus turnout, shown in Photo 2. Individuals experiencing homelessness were observed occupying seats at some locations, leaving other riders to stand. 10 City of Santa Ana I First Street Multimodal Corridor Technical Memorandum Table 1. Ridership by Stop Daily Boardings Stop Direction Oct-24 Apr-25 May-25 5957-1st-Bristol E 368 327 342 5987-1st-Bristol W 252 223 228 5961-1st-Flower E 114 104 112 5984-1 st-Flower W 173 165 165 5962-1 st-Ross E 71 65 71 5983-1 st-Ross W 135 122 129 5964-1st-Main E 189 187 200 5981-1st-Main W 332 315 324 5965-1st-Maple E 112 104 105 5980-1st-Downtown Plaza W 194 183 191 5966-1st-Hickory E 36 33 32 5978-1 st-Lacy W 71 73 79 5967-1st-Cedar E 36 26 24 5976-1st-Standard W 42 38 38 5968-1st-Grand E 62 58 64 5975-1st-Grand W 243 228 225 5974-1 st-Lyon W 131 126 129 5970-1st-Cabrillo Park E 96 8 7 5973-1st-Cabrillo Park W 48 44 43 5971-1st-Golden Circle E 37 27 27 5972-1st-Golden Circle W 159 148 142 7152-1st-Tustin E 33 34 33 7165-1 st-Tustin W 141 140 138 Note: Colors depictthe range of boardings from highestto lowest in 50 boarding increments where green= highest numberofboardings and red=lowest numberofboardings. 11 City of Santa Ana I First Street Multimodal Corridor Technical Memorandum h. Photo 11: Bust Stop near Bristol Street TIT ; Photo 22: Bus Turnout at Flower Street 12 FN City of Santa Ana I First Street Multimodal Corridor Technical Memorandum Traffic Operations First Street is currently a six-lane divided roadway with a raised median and dedicated turn pockets at intersections. The road has a capacity of 56,300 vehicles per day at LOS E. The threshold for acceptable level of service (LOS D) is 50,600 vehicles per day. Within the study area there are 16 signalized intersections and several unsignalized intersections. The posted speed limit is 40 miles per hour (mph) despite the presence of several school and senior facilities within the study area. To assess the existing traffic conditions along the corridor, peak hour intersection volumes (vehicles, pedestrians and bicycles)and daily volumes (speed, volume and classification) were collected at locations along the corridor during a typical weekday in March 2025. Daily Volume Analysis Daily traffic volumes were collected at eight spot locations along the corridor. Table 2 below summarizes the volume and the existing level of service based on the City's level of service thresholds for roadway segments. Table 2. Existing Roadway Segment Level of Service D. . . Baker Street to Shelton Street 20,526 18,862 39,388 B Parton Street to Ross Street 21,155 19,046 40,201 C West of Spurgeon Street 20,773 16,490 37,263 B East of Garfield Street 18,417 15,626 34,043 B Standard Avenue to Grand Avenue 18,373 14,924 33,297 A West of Wright Street 18,476 15,598 34,074 B West of Cabrillo Park Drive 14,451 10,603 25,054 A Golden Circle Drive to Tustin Avenue 10,373 8,766 19,139 A As shown, all of the segments currently operate at LOS C or better. To understand the peaking characteristics along the corridor, the daily volumes at the locations with highest volume (Parton Street to Ross Street) and lowest volume (Golden Circle Drive to Tustin Avenue) were evaluated on an hourly basis. Figure 6 illustrates the volumes over a 24-hour period, which shows at both the highest and lowest volume locations there are similar peaking characteristics, which occur in the AM (7:00 to 9:OOAM) and in the PM (3:30 — 5:30PM). 13 City of Santa Ana I First Street Multimodal Corridor Technical Memorandum Figure 6. Distribution of Volume Across a 24-Hour Period Vehicles Per Hour 3500 3000 2500 2000 1500 1000 500 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o — N M LO t0 !— CO M o N M I Lid o N M N N N N Parton Street to Ross Street Golden Circle Drive to Tustin Avenue Traffic Speeds The posted speed limit along First Street is primarily 40mph in each direction. Table 3 shows the 851h percentile or prevailing speed along the corridor.As shown, the 85th percentile is generally within 5 mph of the posted speed limit. Table 3. 85th Percentile Speeds by Study Segment 85th Percentile Speed (miles RP ON - . . Over Baker Street to Shelton Street 41 40 40 5,899 (15%) Parton Street to Ross Street 41 41 41 7,158 (18%) West of Spurgeon Street 37 35 36 2,087 (6%) East of Garfield Street 42 44 43 8,687 (26%) Standard Avenue to Grand Avenue 42 40 41 6,017 (18%) West of Wright Street 43 42 43 8,160 (24%) West of Cabrillo Park Drive 40 38 39 2,754 (11%) Golden Circle Drive to Tustin 42 40 41 3,525 (18%) Avenue While the 85th percentile speeds are within a reasonable range of the posted speed limit, many vehicles were recorded traveling at or above the posted 40 mph speed limit. These excessive speeds tend to occur outside of the peak hours when the volume on the roadway is well below capacity. The lack of traffic and friction that is caused by the proximity of vehicles close to one another results in drivers traveling faster than the posted speed limit— even when they are not aware they are doing so. 14 City of Santa Ana i First Street Multimodal Corridor Technical Memorandum The section east of Garfield (between Garfield Street and Standard Avenue)experienced the highest percentage of daily traffic traveling at a speed greater than 40mph at 8,687 vehicles per day or 26% of the daily traffic on the segment. Why is this important? Figure 7 illustrates the probability of fatality in a pedestrian-vehicle crash based on vehicle speeds. The curves represent different age ranges. According to data collected by the Automobile Club of America (AAA) and illustrated by ProPublica in an interactive graph, a 70-year-old person has a 70% chance of being killed by a vehicle traveling at 40mph. While young adults have a higher chance of surviving a crash at 40mph, the probability of fatality increases exponentially as speeds increase with the chance of any pedestrian surviving being struck by a vehicle moving at 60mph of less than 10%. Identifying solutions to reduce the traffic speeds of these high-speed vehicles will significantly improve safety and reduce both severe injury crashes and fatalities. Figure 7. Fatality Rates as a Function of Traffic Speed MORE DEADLY 70% \�\\ 45% �A 36% r5 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 i Source:"Impact Speed and a Pedestrian's Risk of Severe Injury or Death", Brian Tefft(1998)—AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety. 15 City of Santa Ana i First Street Multimodal Corridor Technical Memorandum Daily traffic volume and speed are two metrics by which to analyze the existing traffic along the corridor and provide the travel patterns throughout the day. Intersections and travel time are two other key metrics that focus on the traffic during the peak four hours of the day- 7:00 to 9:OOAM and 4:00 to 6:OOPM. Two models were used to understand the existing traffic conditions along the corridor. The City recently updated their Synchro model to update the signal timing along First Street. This model was used to evaluate the intersection LOS using the Highway Capacity Manual methodology for urban signalized intersections. This method evaluates the intersection operating conditions in isolation using the signal timing and volumes collected for the corridor. Table 4 summarizes the results of the intersection analysis using Synchro. Table 4. Existing Condition Synchro HCM Results INTERSECrION AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour momm 1 1s t St.at Bristol St. 49.3 D 55.0 D 6 1st St.at Flower St. 35.4 D 37.8 D 8 1st St.at Ross St. 16.3 B 11.3 B 10 1st St.at Broadway 29.7 C 31.6 C 11 1st St.atSyca more St. 4.2 A 5.4 A 12 1s t St.at Mai n St. 43.8 D 36.2 D 13 1st St.at Bush St. 6.4 A 7.6 A 14 1s t St.at DT Plaza 14.9 B 28.5 C 21 1s t St.a t Sta n da rd Ave. 33.3 C 26.0 C 22 1st St.atGrandAve. 40.9 D 39.2 D 25 1s t St.at Lyon St. 24.0 C 16.0 B 26 1s t St.a t Zo o Ln. 28.0 C 32.3 C 27 1st St.at1-5SB 6.1 A 28.9 C 28 1st St.atCabrIIloParkDr. 19.3 B 22.0 C 29 1st St.atGoI den CircleDr. 19.6 B 14.3 B 30 1st St.atTustinAve. 21.6 C 26.1 C The analysis shows that all intersections along the corridor operate at LOS D or better during the peak hours. The greatest level of congestion is reported from Grand Avenue to Zoo Lane approaching the 1-5 southbound freeway ramps. The second model used to assess the operating conditions along the corridor is a microsimulation model VISSIM. This tool simulates vehicle travel along the corridor based on driver behavior assumptions.Where as Synchro looks at the volume at each intersection, 16 City of Santa Ana I First Street Multimodal Corridor Technical Memorandum VISSIM looks at each vehicle as is travels along the network. This allows for more accurate operational analysis and travel time modeling by travel model (passenger vehicle versus bus for example). In order to accurately assess traffic conditions using VISSIM, multiple model runs are conducted, and the results are averaged. The model is then compared to existing conditions and calibrated until the delay and travel time accurately reflects the analyzed and observed conditions. Table 5 reports the intersection delay using VISSIM for each of the study intersections. Table 5. Existing Condition VISSIM Results INTERSECTION momm 1 1s t St.at Bristol St. 41.2 D 42.3 D 6 1st St.at Flower St. 32.6 C 33.3 C 8 1st St.at Ross St. 10.7 B 6.8 A 10 1st St.at Broadway 30.5 C 34.3 C 11 1st St.atSyca more St. 10.0 A 10.8 B 12 1s t St.at Mai n St. 30.6 C 30.4 C 13 1st St.at Bush St. 8.2 A 11.7 B 14 1s t St.at DT Plaza 13.3 B 22.5 C 21 1s t St.a t Sta n da rd Ave. 32.0 C 22.5 C 22 1st St.atGrandAve. 36.6 D 46.4 D 25 1s t St.at Lyon St. 49.2 D 26 1st St.at ZooLn. 40.3 D 48.2 D 27 1st St.at1-5SB 8.1 A 5.5 A 28 1st St.atCabriIloParkDr. 15.2 B 17.9 B 29 1st St.atGoI den ClrcleDr. 14.4 B 10.3 B 30 1st St.atTustinAve. 24.0 C 27.4 C 17 O� City of Santa Ana I First Street Multimodal Corridor Technical Memorandum 'ravel Time While traffic counts were collected in March 2025, travel time data was also collected that was then used to calibrate and validate the existing VISSIM model. Table 6 summarizes the travel times collected in the field using the floating car method and the VISSIM calibrated travel times. Table 6. Existing and Calibrated VISSIM AM and PM Peak Hour Travel Times AM TRAVEL TIME START LOCATION END LOCATION Vissim I M (MM:ss) 1ST STREET EASTBOUND 1 1st St.at Bristol St. 1st St.at Zoo Ln. 11:06 8:02 2 1st St.atZooLn. 1st St.at Tustin Ave. 01:04 01:15 Eastbound Total 12:10 09:17 " 1ST STREET WESTBOUND 4 1st St.atTustinAve. 1st St.at ZooLn. 01:28 01:45 5 1st St.atZooLn. 1st St.at Bristol St. 06:22 06:49 Westbound Total 07:50 08:34 PM TRAVELTIME START I M (MM:ss) LOCATION E • LOCATION 1ST STREET EASTBOUND 1 1st St.at Bristol St. 1st St.at Zoo Ln. 08:32 08:03 2 1st St.atZooLn. 1st St.at Tustin Ave. 01:10 01:13 Eastbound Total 09:42 09:16 1ST STREET WESTBOUND mdl 4 1st St.atTustinAve. 1st St.at ZooLn. 00:58 01:26 5 1st St.atZooLn. 1st St.at Bristol St. 10:02 06:56 Westbound Total 11:00 08:22 18 FN City of Santa Ana i First Street Multimodal Corridor Technical Memorandum Safety Assessment The posted speed limit along First Street is 40 miles per hour, but field observations and crash data indicate that speeding is a persistent issue throughout the corridor. This behavior significantly contributes to safety concerns, particularly for vulnerable road users such as pedestrians and bicyclists. Over the past eight years, approximately 25% of all reported collisions were attributed to unsafe speed as a primary contributing factor. These speed-related crashes tend to be more severe, often resulting in serious injuries or fatalities. The combination of high travel speeds with limited physical separation between vehicles and pedestrians, and long crossing distances at intersections, creates a hazardous environment that demands targeted traffic calming and safety interventions. Existing available crash data was used to identify potential safety concerns or historic trends. Crash data for the most recent 8-year period (2017-2024)was obtained from the California Statewide Integrated Traffic Records System (SWITRS) crash database then `scrubbed'to address inconsistencies in how the data was logged. Table 7 summarizes the results of the crash analysis including the severity, crash type and crash factor. Of the 479 crashes reported over the eight-year period, 28 resulted in a fatality or severe injury. The majority of the crashes report were either broadside or rear end. Common causes of broadside crashes include: • Running red lights or stop signs. • Failure to yield right of way, particularly at uncontrolled or side street-controlled intersections. • Distracted driving • Speeding and/or aggressive driving Common causes of rear end collisions include: • Distracted driving • Tailgating or aggressive driving • Speeding • Heavy traffic Most crashes reported were a result of unsafe speed or right of way violations, which align with the crash types. Evaluating traffic patterns at the side street stop-controlled intersections, narrowing the roadway to reduce crossing and turning distance, physical improvements to reduce speeds and enforcement are potential measures to offset the current crash trends and patterns along First Street. 19 City of Santa Ana I First Street Multimodal Corridor Technical Memorandum Table 7. Crash Data Summary R OF REPORTED • . mmmmmmmm CRASH SEVERITY Fatallnjury 0 1 1 3 3 1 2 0 11 23% Severe Injury 5 2 0 0 3 1 3 3 17 3.6% Minor Injury 24 7 0 0 19 19 18 18 105 27.9% Complaint of Pain 70 26 0 0 54 51 80 65 346 72.2% All Reported Crashes 99 36 1 3 79 72 103 86 479 - CRASH TYPE Head-On 9 5 0 0 5 2 8 1 30 63% Sideswipe 6 3 O 0 8 9 9 8 43 ao% Rear End 25 9 0 0 26 17 32 24 133 27.8% Broadside 35 10 0 1 26 27 34 41 174 363% Hit Object 5 1 0 1 3 2 3 2 17 M6% Overturned 2 O 0 0 O 1 0 O 3 1%6% Pedestrian 10 6 1 1 10 6 14 8 56 n.7% Other or Unknown 7 2 0 0 1 8 3 2 23 4.8% All Reported Crashes 99 36 1 3 79 72 103 86 479 - CRASH FACTOR Driving Under Influence 7 1 0 0 3 4 3 2 20 4.2% Unsafe Speed 23 9 0 1 22 14 25 20 114 23.8% Wrong Side of Road 3 0 0 0 1 4 3 4 15 M7% Improper Turning 8 3 0 1 8 11 7 8 46 A6% Automobile ROW 24 7 0 0 19 13 23 21 107 2Z3% Pedestrian ROW 2 1 0 0 1 2 2 2 10 ai% Pedestrian Violation 6 2 0 1 6 3 9 4 31 65% Traffic Signals&Signs 19 10 0 0 9 10 15 17 80 167% Other or Unknown 7 3 1 0 10 11 16 8 56 n.7% All Reported Crashes 99 36 1 3 79 72 103 86 479 - The most vulnerable users along First Street are those on foot, on bike, rolling or strolling 11% along the sidewalks and crossing across the Bicycle (52) corridor. Of the 479 traffic collisions recorded 1 2% along First Street, 12% involved pedestrians 479 Pedestrian (56) (56 collisions) and 11% involved bicycles (52 collisions collisions), summarized in Figure 8. on First St (2017-2024) According to the Federal Highway Administration, the average crash rate for 77% pedestrians and bicycles along similar Vehicles,Heavy Trucks, Motorcycles corridors is approximately 4 to 5%, indicating Figure 8. Pedestrian and Bicycle that the frequency of pedestrian and bicycle Involved Reported Crashes crashes is higher than a typical six-lane corridor. 20 FN City of Santa Ana i First Street Multimodal Corridor Technical Memorandum General Traffic Condition° Based on the existing conditions analysis, the following general conditions exist along First Street: • Daily traffic volumes along most of the corridor fall below the LOS D threshold for a six-lane arterial. • Eastbound volumes are higher than westbound volumes on all segments for both peak periods. • All study intersections operate at LOS D or better. • The highest congestion occurs eastbound between Grand Avene and Zoo Lane (approaching the 1-5 freeway southbound ramp) • Speeds are at or near the posted speed limit during the peak hour. Outside of the peak hour, speeds tend to increase with a greater occurrence of speeds 10 mph or more above the posted speed limit. • Crash data indicates that speed and right-of-way issues along the corridor account for approximately half of the crashes reported over an eight-year period. Rear-end crashes and broadside crashes are the most common types of crashes,which align with the causes identified. • Pedestrian and bicycle involved crashes make up approximately 23% of all crashes reported indicating a higher than average crash rate for the most vulnerable users. Equ tv Assessment This section summarizes key equity findings from the demographics, transportation, and land use analyses within the study area and identify disparities in access and/or barriers to quality of life parity experienced by marginalized communities, compared to more resourced, abled, and affluent neighbors and communities. Key data sources for this analysis include Southern California Association of Governments(SCAG) and the United States Census Bureau. Marginalized groups and vulnerable road users are among those at risk of being most adversely impacted by changes to infrastructure and operations of a public right-of-way.This risk is due to these populations being less likely to have additional mobility options, less likely to be included in public decision-making, and more likely to have other existing barriers and challenges to accessing resources or navigating changes to the local environment. The Equity Study prepared determined that the study area has a proportionately higher poverty rate than the City and Orange County as a whole, and especially high rates of seniors living in poverty, especially on the northwest side of the corridor(refer to Figure 9). This area of the study also overlaps with proportionally higher populations of residents that speak an Asian/Pacific Island language (likely Vietnamese) and English "less than well." The corridor study area also has proportionally higher populations of residents that speak Spanish as well as English "less than well" than other parts of the City and Orange County as a whole, primarily on the south side of the First Street corridor(refer to Figure 10). Over 40%of the City's residents identify as immigrants, and the study area reflects this trend. Notably, more than half of residents in Census block groups north of First Street identify as immigrants. These demographics demonstrate significant populations that are likely to have fewer mobility options and fewer opportunities to be civically engaged (in transportation investment decisions,for example) in a welcoming language or format compared to other residents in the City. 21 City of Santa Ana l First Street Multimodal Corridor Technical Memorandum Figure 9. Poverty Rates within First Street Equity Study Area Legend First Street Multimodal Corridor Study Gensus 61ock GI-Ps, Study Area City of Santa Ana )r-1 Study Area / Poverty Rate 0%-5% �i 5I11% 25-25% 26%-40% Flrst Street 1 �csme�cm.F Midvay City Hunlinglon � "- Beach 0 0.5 1 Miles volley Costa Mesa Mm N ^ MYKw.G dLo./,•aeY.,3.aw WImJAA.ro me rI HFAE,uam-.f.CREMENTn LSLE.N - Figure 10. Map of Hispanic/Latinx Residents that Speak English Less than "Well" Legend First Street Multimodal Corridor Study Cen-selockGr—p,in Study Area City of Santa Ana p SwdyA— Spanish Speakers That Speak English Less Than"Well" 05b-10% 1r%-z0 21% 30%°6 3t�, 35gi First Street 0 0 ,e t, G,dunu.o.G N dvsyCty �.�� r_ Huaelny:nn ee h Fountains,,�'r.x va le. 0 0.5 1 Mlles � N 22 City of Santa Ana I First Street Multimodal Corridor Technical Memorandum The City has a high proportion of renters, compared to Orange County, and the study area has an even higher proportion, over half of whom are cost-burdened by their housing costs(refer to Figure 11). This demonstrates a majority of study area residents that live in housing insecurity due to a high proportion of their income devoted to housing, which increases risk of defaulting on rent payments and potential eviction. Figure 11. Renter Households within First Street Equity Study Area Legend First Street Multimodal Corridor Study Gensus Block Groups in studyarea p studyarea Renter-Occupied Households 0%-25% - 76%-100% Sh cet I 11�1'i�14 ter_ _ �arnon cro:� vnrtn avrv -IL rler, sa,ra nna 0 0.5 'I Mils N The Origin-Destination Analysis conducted for the two-mile area around the corridor shows that the highest origin-destination pairs for people living within a half mile of the corridor also had notably high proportions of people walking, ranging from 24-38%of all travel modes. Further, trips from resident originating near the cluster of seniors living in poverty on the north side of the corridor and ending in the downtown civic center area had a relatively high proportion of transit trips(5%), although these areas are less than a half mile from each other. These travel patterns show that there are very high percentages of people walking to destinations near and on the corridor, as well as higher rates of people taking transit near senior housing. This demonstrates a vulnerable road user presence in and around the corridor that may benefit greatly from safe, accessible, and comfortable mobility options. Considerations for Community Engagement and Multimodal Concept Development These demographics, land uses, and road user findings overall provide important context for the advancement of the First Street Multimodal Boulevard Study. The prevalence of marginalized demographics and vulnerable road users inform project approaches to community engagement, such as targeted outreach to include community members that are older and/or have limited safe and accessible mobility options, speak languages other than English, are more likely to experience housing insecurity, and are more likely to walk or take transit. Members of these key study demographics are typically not centered in traditional outreach methods but are likely to be disproportionately impacted by not having their needs considered in street design and operations, as they are likely to have fewer resources and alternatives to adapt to environmental changes. Figure 12 illustrates the relationship between residents over Age 65 and the poverty rate within the area. 23 City of Santa Ana I First Street Multirrlodal Corridor Technical Memorandum Figure 12. Residents Over Age 65 and Poverty Rate within Equity Study Area Legend First Street Multimodal Corridor Study Census Block Groups in j Study Area City of Santa Ana swdy area J Residents Over Age 65 0% 10% 11%-20% 21%-30h 31%-35% Poverty Rate • o%-5% • 6%-15% m First street 16%-25% 0 • 26%-40% D POrtL ..i.l 0 03 1 Mile I N Considerations for multimodal concept development include recognizing specific access needs for people walking/rolling, education and intuitive design for new street configurations, and focusing improvements on traffic safety and reduction of conflicts between different travel modes, especially vehicles and pedestrians. Examples of these considerations may include any placement of a new bi-directional bicycle facility or shared-use path on the southern side of the corridor,where there is less concentration of senior housing developments, or identifying controlled mid-block crossing locations that can better facilitate vulnerable road users access to transit. Another consideration is for providing longer crossing times for slower moving members of the community including the elderly, disabled and young children. Built Environment and Exposure to Harm This section summarizes key points of findings from this memorandum that focus on the existing conditions, built environment, and exposure to harm, specifically for marginalized and vulnerable populations. The corridor study area has a presence of community assets (grocery stores/farmers market, community centers, hospitals, libraries)that serve and are open to the public, but little green or open space. This showed that while there may be important resources, such as access to fresh food and health services, there may be inconsistent access to these resources for community members in the study area based on insurance coverage and food insecurity rates, as well as limited existing opportunities for physical activity. Most of the formal employment opportunities in the study area are within the civic or health and manufacturing sectors(refer to Figure 13). Additionally, preliminary findings show that one in three workers are in a blue-collar sector,with over one in four in the service sector. This may demonstrate a relatively steady commute demand throughout a 24-hour period that includes traditional 9 AM to 5 PM hours, as well as late night or early morning shifts. As described above, a robust informal economy of street vendors has been observed along the corridor. In the observational survey, conducted over a period of four days, the consultant team observed 30 vendors, slightly more than half serving food. In line with SB 946 and the City's and County's regulatory framework and given the placement of many street vendors along the 24 City of Santa Ana I First Street Multimodal Corridor Technical Memorandum sidewalk infrastructure,the study will assess sidewalk design and dimension needs that balance the use of space by permitted vendors and people walking and rolling. The study area shows some cleanup sites along and near the corridor(refer to Figure 14), as well as higher Disadvantaged Communities rankings,which measure environmental pollution exposure and social vulnerability, around the east side of the corridor,just west of the 1-5 freeway and near several cleanup sites. Given preliminary level of service assessment findings of vehicle congestion around this part of the corridor,this may reflect the value of shifting travel modes away from single occupancy driving to reduce vehicle miles traveled and emissions. Figure 13. MajorEmployers and Employment Hubs Near First Street First Street Multimodal Corridor Study Reg—el Regional Cen[anOrange_Canter of County Orange County Santa Ana P I 1 Universa I Protection Service Orange County Global Medical Orange ounry OCenter JadlClal Board oT Council of Supervisi rs' t California Team Al-7 Santa Ana FirS[AmeriCan Insurance District City Public Property&CSLT Stale Compensation Services __-_Attorney Works _= Ins -co Funtl - Santa is I Orange County .Orange County Orrice('First Street�- Of Medical Waste Management me Dianct Attorney - Olfice Department •Santa Ana Patrol One I High School - Legend Can—Block Groups in Study Area Study Area Markland Number of Jobs Industries Inc 5-250 na ,dp 251-5.000 ni caravn c,ova 5.001-15.000 r.7.t:•..r "i 15,001-25.000 t nxay car Motor Employers weam,i tar .. ..,�anymn sA�i.. " h Fountain ��' 0.5 1 Mlles I. Vaauy 1 N Figure 14. Identified Hazardous and Clean Up Site First Street Multimodal Corridor Study Legend Census Bock Groups In Study Area City Of Santa Ana O Study Area © _ DTSC Hazardous Waste SBes 0 DTSC CA—up Sites U nr _First Street.. O anlOn ^d eii D2ng9 -_' � - Gordan Gmve NOM Midway City r sJ Tustin Westnti Huntington u tin ^'i' Dunearn Santa Ann ,ally � 0.5 1 Mles cosh nasa in.n '. • N Source:Department of Toxic Substances Control(202)e 25 FJ 1� City of Santa Ana I First Street Multimodal Corridor Technical Memorandum Community engagement Community engagement is a key component of identifying barriers to mobility along First Street. Beginning in June 2025 and wrapping up in December2025, the outreach strategy reached over 900 participants, summarized in Figure 15. In order to achieve balanced input throughout this process, a multi-tiered outreach strategy was conducted, which included: • Broad community outreach through workshops, pop up Neighborhood events and targeted small Association meetings group meetings. L�� Community • Stakeholder engagement with Workshops both city and government officials as well as active organizations in the t)c 1 Working Group community Digital Flyers• Community working group meetings with community- based organizations who F P7 assisted with driving Community participation at the community Events events and bringing r awareness to the project. • Presentations to Neighborhood Associations Figure 15: Multi-tiered Outreach Strategy along the corridor. Information at key points in the project was disseminated through workshops and then shared with the community through on-line surveys, pop up events, videos, and presentations at stakeholder, community working group and neighborhood association meetings. The timeline for sharing information about the project is summarized in Figure 16. In this section, the results of Workshop 1 are summarized. Input from the communityfrom Workshop 2 and Workshop 3 are summarized in the Options and Concepts sections of this technical memorandum as the results align with preference surveys and input collected related during those phases of the project. 26 City of Santa Ana I First Street Multimodal Corridor Technical Memorandum Figure 16. Community Engagement Timeline Workshop . . 2 Workshop July-August 2025 September-November 2025 December 2025 This workshop looked at how This workshop reviewed eight This workshop will review three people use First Street today preliminary design alternatives refined design concepts and what improvements would developed from Workshop 7 developed from Workshop 2 make traveling the corridor safer input,technical analysis,and input,technical analysis,and and more comfortable. feedback from the virtual survey. the virtual poll.Community feedback gathered during this What we heard: What we heard: workshop will be presented to City Council in early 2026.The Need for safer walking and Preference for six,five,and goal is to identify a locally biking access four travel lanes with bus lane options preferred alternative and move Several locations missing forward with final engineering crosswalks Protected bike paths from in 2026. Mixed feedback on adding street traffic bike lanes Transit signal priority at Interest in improved sidewalk intersections amenities(bus stops,lighting, More shade trees and shade) landscape areas Concerns about peak-hour Mid-block controlled crossings traffic increases to reduce jaywalking and improve pedestrian access Need for sidewalk safety and street lighting improvements Workshop 1 : Barriers to Mobility The first set of workshops and outreach events provided an opportunity to introduce the First Street Multimodal Boulevard Study and gather community input on making First Street a healthier and safer experience for all residents who utilize the corridor. The goals of the workshops were to encourage participants to connect with the Project Team, share experiences traveling along First Street, suggest improvements to access and travel options, and learn more about the project. To provide multiple opportunities to learn about the project and provide feedback, the Project Team hosted one in-person workshop(Tuesday, August 26, 2025), one virtual workshop (Wednesday, August 27, 2025), conducted an on-line survey, and attended multiple in- person pop-up events in the community. A total of 40 people attended the two workshops and over 60 people were engaged during the Chicano Heritage Festival. Photos 3 through 5 on the following pages illustrate activities at both the pop-up event and at the in-person workshop. Feedback received during the in-person and pop-up events regarding improvements the public would like to see along First Street indicated protected, off street bicycle facilities; wider sidewalks and mid-block crossings for pedestrians; improved transit stops with real- time bus information; and shade with places to sit along the corridor were amongst the top priorities for those who participated in the preference survey. Figures 17 to 19 summarize the results of the survey. For the virtual meeting and through the on-line poll, participants were asked to share information about their travel experience and their travel barriers. Results of the on-line surveys are summarized below in Figure 20. 27 City of Santa Ana I First Street Multimodal Corridor Technical Memorandum AQQ -1_IEO AOL - A.YTA ANA Photo 33: Chicano Heritage Festival Booth WN E]Moving � Eul� • • Forward • • • • •• • • = o ••• •• �� on First i ii i•°••i• ••• • • j f•i�i �••••° soft S PEDESTRIANS, 1 •.. TRANso 1 i ' a _ PEATONES, •�� • • •006 • TRANSITO �• 00 %••O °•° : •t• • NGUOI DI BO.GIAO It GANG CONG • : •• !ft,:. .rs.;: : • p Moving Forward ••S ti •• •°• • i o •°• ° • on First • s• •• • • o • •• • • °Q • • •• • • WIMPBICYcusTs 0000 ncusrws -- NG Vbl DI XE DAP x y unn e�iu we�tw aw,loop C •— ,a f` - °••�•S • • °• • • • • •• •••O• •. o••o •Si• e�•�i•• °• ° = • ©°•�•• • Photo 44: Preference Survey Boards from Workshop and Pop-Up Events 28 City of Santa Ana I First Street Multimodal Corridor Technical Memorandum Ilk go ...14 r -�'.' J/-•ems. - _ Photo 55: Workshop 1 Activities 29 City of Santa Ana I First Street Multimodal Corridor Technical Memorandum Figure 17. Bicycle Improvements Preferences Off-street bike path or shared-use trail ■Protected or separated bikeway 21% 6% Bike lane - Bike lane with painted buffer Shared transit/bike lane Bike-friendly intersection % ■Protected intersection for bicyclists 8° Bike repair station Bike parking Figure 18. Pedestrian Improvements Preferences Wide/extended sidewalks 8% ■Mid-block crossing with signals Sidewalk lighting Shade Trees 12% Wayfinding and signage Street furniture/places to sit 22% ■Bus stop improvements and amenities 4% Real-time bus information Figure 19. Safety Improvement Preferences ■Curb ramps ■High visibility crosswalks 46% >% ■Sidewalk repair or replacement Landscaping and medians Street Lighting 29% Raised Medians 30 City of Santa Ana I First Street Multimodal Corridor Technical Memorandum Figure 20. Summary of On-Line Survey How often do you travel along First Street? (select one) 43 �qL lip ■Daily ■A few times a week ■Cccasio-c When you travel to or on First Street, mode of transportation do you use the most? (select one) m Drive a car ■carpool 2 5 o Bus ■Walk m Bike ■Mix of different modes When you travel to or on First Street,where are you going?(select all that apply) 80 70 6e 60 50 40 30 24 20 ' 13 t0 Home Yrork School Shopping Soaal Driving Other through What specific challenges do you encounter traveling on First Street? (select all that apply) 90 80 70 63 60 50 40 40 3531 320 010 1 1 0 Too ,_ Takes too Feel unsafe Feel unsafe Feel unsafe Too hot or Too many traffic or long to drive to walk or taking transit not enough obstacles or congestion ride a bike or waiting at shade tripping a bus stop hazards on the sidewalk 31 K1� City of Santa Ana I First Street Multimodal Corridor ) Technical Memorandum Options Development and Workshop 2 The development of potential multimodal improvements along the corridor began with the development of options. A total of eight options were developed that integrated a variety of pedestrian, bicycle, transit and vehicular features within the existing 100' to 104' right of way available along the corridor. The options were presented at Workshop 2. Each of the options are presented on the following pages. Table 8 below summarizes and compares the features of each option considered. Table 8. Summary of Options Presented at Workshop 2 6 Lanes with Sidewalk 6 83' B EB& WB Option 1 6 76' S N S EB& 6 Lanes with Multi-use Path WB Option 2 4 74' S N B EB& 4 Lanes with Bike Lanes&Path WB Option 3 EB& 4 Lanes with Directional 4 58, B B WB Bikeway Option 4 EB& 5 Lanes with Directional 5 62' B B WB Bikeway Option 5 EB& 5 Lanes with Bi-Directional 5 66' B N WB Bikeway • • • Option 6 EB& 4 Lanes with Bike Lane& Bus 4 86' B B WB Lane Option 7 EB& 4 Lanes with Shared Bike/Bus 4 78' B WB Lane Option 8 5 Lanes with WB Bus Lane& 5 78' B WB Directional Bikeway Note:N =North side of the Street,S=South side of the street,B=Both sides of the street,WB=Westbound,EB =Eastbound 32 City of Santa Ana I First Street Multimodal Corridor Technical Memorandum FIRST STREET MULTIMODAL BOULEVARD DESIGN OPTIONS Option 1: 6 Lanes with Multiuse Path O-I�O Adds Protected Path Shared by Peds&Bikes Shorter Crossing Distance (4 Reconstructs Median 3O -- -- s F. . Maintains 6 Lanes O4 F, Buses Stop in Outside Lane $0 .� Transit Signal Priority at Intersections 5 3 5 1 4 4 2Pod/Bike Zone ✓ Benefits: x Challenges: • Physical Barrier Between Bikes&Cars Improves Comfort • "Fearless"Cyclists Prefer Road Riding • Sufficient Space for Landscape&Streetscape • Limited Safety or Speed Reduction Strategies • Maintains Traffic Flow and Bus Flow • Utilities May Be Impacted with Curb Relocation • Reduces Crossing Distance for Pedestrians • Buses Stop in Outside Lane • Narrower Travel Lanes May Reduce Traffic Speed • Limited Room for Bus Shelters on Path Side •Transit Signal Priority Improves Transit Performance • Pedestrians&Bicyclist Travel at Different Speeds 0 ®Moving �* Stay Updated FOCWdrd bit.ly/Moving ForwardOnFirst 0 on First 33 KR City of Santa Ana I First Street Multimodal Corridor Technical Memorandum FIRST ■ EET MULTIMODAL BOULEVARD DESIGN OPTIONS Option 2: 4 Lanes with Bike Lanes & Path A0 Adds Shared Path& Dedicated Bike Lanes O a Shorter Crossing Distance O2 Reconstructs Median* •." GQ•. Reduces Lanes from 6 to 4 O Buses Stop in Bicycle Lane F Transit Signal Priority at Intersections 3 5 5 1 4 4 2Ped/Bike Zone ✓ Benefits: x Challenges: • Bicycle Can Be Separate from Pedestrians • May Result in Delay Increase for Vehicles • Bicycle Facilities Meet Needs of Users with Varying Skill/Comfort • May Result in Delay Increase for Buses • Sufficient Sidewalk Space for Landscape&Streetscape • Utilities May Be Impacted with Curb Relocation • Lane Reduction Reduces High Vehicle Speeds • Buses and Right Turns Use Bicycle Lane • Fewer Lanes of Traffic for Pedestrians to Cross Improves Safety • Limited Room for Bus Shelters on Path Side • Transit Signal Priority Improves Transit Performance E {. ® Moving p Forward Stay Updated bit.ly/MovingForwardOnFirst ® on First o�E��wosno. 34 City of Santa Ana I First Street Multimodal Corridor KR Technical Memorandum FIRST ■ EET MULTIAODAL BOULEVARD DESIGN OPTIONS Option 3: 4 Lanes with Directional Bikeway O*O Add Protected Bikeway&Separate Sidewalk lO Shorter Crossing Distance O2 Reconstructs Median 30 Reduces Lanes from 6 to 4 04 Buses Stop in Outside Lane 0 —� Transit Signal Priority at Intersections 1 5 3 5 1 4 4 2 ,/ Benefits: x Challenges: • Physical Barrier Between Bikes&Cars Improves Comfort • May Result in Delay Increase for Vehicles • Separate Space at Sidewalk Level for Peds&Bikes • May Result in Delay Increase for Buses • Sufficient Sidewalk Space for Landscape&Streetscape • Utilities May Be Impacted with Curb Relocation • Lane Reduction Reduces High Vehicle Speeds • Buses Stop in Outside Lane Reducing Capacity to 1 Lane • Fewer Lanes of Traffic for Pedestrians to Cross Improves Safety • Transit Signal Priority Improves Transit Performance ® Moving z= i LE Tom, Forward E+;� Stay Updated bit.ly/Moving ForwardOn First on First 0 a oA. Nima„�„�oosno� 35 City of Santa Ana I First Street Multimodal Corridor KR Technical Memorandum FIRST ■ EET MULTIAODAL BOULEVARD DESIGN OPTIONS Option 4: 5 Lanes with Directional Bikeway O,�LO Add Protected Bikeway&Separate Sidewalk 1( Shorter Crossing Distance 2( Reconstructs Median(* Reduces Lanes from 6 to S (4 - { Buses Stop in Outside Lane O Transit Signal Priority at Intersections 1 5 � 1� 3 4 4 - ,/ Benefits: x Challenges: • Physical Barrier Between Bikes&Cars Improves Comfort • May Increase Delay for Vehicles&Buses(Westbound) • Separate Space at Sidewalk Level for Pedestrians&Bikes • Peak Direction May Be Variable or Change over Time • Sufficient Sidewalk Space for Landscape&Streetscape • Utilities May Be Impacted with Curb Relocation • Maintains 3 Eastbound Lanes to Aid with Traffic Flow • Buses Stop in Outside Lane Reducing Capacity to 1 Lane • Reduces Crossing Distance for Pedestrians in the Westbound Direction and 2 Lanes Eastbound • Transit Signal Priority Improves Transit Performance of-:�:,;30 p Moving z= i�L4..,C � � Forward E Stay Updated .. bit.ly/Moving ForwarclOn First on First Oi a �oosno 36 City of Santa Ana I First Street Multimodal Corridor KR Technical Memorandum FIRST ■ EET MULTIAODAL BOULEVARD DESIGN OPTIONS Option 5: 5 Lanes with Bi-Directional Bikeway 011�0 Add Protected Bikeway&Separate Sidewalk 1O Shorter Crossing Distance ) - yy. I' Reconstructs Median 0 r J 4 Reduces Lanes from 6 to S 0 Buses Stop in Outside Lane POW Transit Signal Priority and Bike Signal at Intersections 5 3 ,11 X - 1` Pod/Bike Zone Roadwny Zone(66') 1 � r 2 Ped/Bike Zone ✓ Benefits: x Challenges: • Physical Barrier Between Bikes&Cars Improves Comfort • May Increase Delay for Vehicles&Buses(Westbound) • Separate Space at Sidewalk Level for Pedestrians&Bikes • Peak Direction May Be Variable or Change over Time • Sufficient Sidewalk Space for Landscape&Streetscape • Utilities May Be Impacted with Curb Relocation • Maintains 3 Eastbound Lanes to Aid with Traffic Flow • Driveways&Unsignalized Intersections Challenging for • Reduces Crossing Distance for Pedestrians Two-Way Bicycle Flow • Transit Signal Priority Improves Transit Performance • Buses Stop in Outside Lane Reducing Capacitytol Lane in the Westbound Direction&2 Lanes Eastbound G) 0 © Moving MM�3 OKIC.. � Forward Stay Updated bit.ly/Moving ForwardOn First on First 37 KR City of Santa Ana I First Street Multimodal Corridor Technical Memorandum FIRST ■ EET MULTIAODAL BOULEVARD DESIGN OPTIONS Option 6: 4 Lanes with Bike Lane & Bus Lane O O Adds Protected Bikeway&Adjacent Sidewalk 10 Longer Crossing Distance 4) _ Reconstructs Median 0 _ �1 ill Reduces Lanes from 6 to 4 0 Buses Stop in Dedicated Bus Larl + Transit Signal Priority&Bike Signal at Intersections Los Angeles,CA_ $ 3 � l 1 Vill F qV 4 4 Pod/Bike Zore Roadway Zone(86') 2Pad/Bike Zero ✓ Benefits: x Challenges: • Protected Blkeway at Sidewalk Level Improves Comfort • May Increase Delay for Vehicles • Sufficient Space for Landscape&Streetscape • Limited Barrier Between Bikes&Pedestrians • Improved Bus Performance • Utilities May Be Impacted with curb Relocation © Moving Stay Updated M Forward� .. bit.ly/MovingForwardOnFirst � on First 38 City of Santa Ana I First Street Multimodal Corridor KR Technical Memorandum FIRST ■ EET MULTIAODAL BOULEVARD DESIGN OPTIONS Option 7: 4 Lanes with Shared Bike/Bus Lane O�O Bikes Sha re with Buses, Bypass at Stops lO 0 Shorter Crossing Distance _.., Reconstructs Median 3O Reduces Lanes from 6 to 4 0 Buses Stop in Dedicated Bus Lane 10��4�os Angeles,CA Transit Signal Priority and Bike Signal at Intersections � 5 5 3 1 4 4 2 Benefits: x Challenges: • Bicycle Shares Bus Lane Providing Wide Lane • May Increase Delay for Vehicles • Bikes Bypass at Bus Stops&Reduces Conflicts • Bicyclists May Not Feel Comfortable without Buffer • Improved Bus Performance • Bikes,Buses and Right Turning Vehicles Converge at Intersections • Sufficient Rooms for Landscape and Streetscape • Utilities May Be Impacted with Curb Relocation • Buses Not Impacted by Vehicle Queues of-' 0 p Moving Forward E �+;4 Stay Updated bit.ly/Moving ForwardOn First on First 39 City of Santa Ana I First Street Multimodal Corridor KR Technical Memorandum FIRST ■ EET MULTIAODAL BOULEVARD DESIGN OPTIONS Option 8: 5 Lanes with Westbound Bus Lane & Directional Bikeway O�O Adds Protected Bikeway and Separated Sidewalk 10 hShorter Crossing Distance OZ Reconstructs Median 3O Gam.. Reduces Lanes from 6 to 5 04 "' Buses Stop in Dedicated Bus Lane(WB) Transit Signal Priority at Intersections b 3 1 4' 4 2 ✓ Benefits: x Challenges: • Physical Barrier Between Bikes&Cars Improves Comfort • May Increase Delay for Vehicles(Westbound) • Bicycles Transition Behind Bus Stop to Reduce Conflicts • Buses&Right Turns Converge at Intersections • Dedicated Lanes&Signal Priority Improve Bus Performance • Utilities May Be Impacted with Curb Relocation • Limited Room for Landscape and Streetscape • Buses Not Impacted by Vehicle Queues Moving Stay Updated M Forward .. bit.ly/MovingForwardOnFirst on First 40 KR City of Santa Ana I First Street Multimodal Corridor Technical Memorandum Workshop 2 Input The in-person workshop was held over two consecutive days (September 17 and 18 from 5:00 to 7:OOPM)as an open house style with Spanish and Vietnamese interpreters on hand to assist participants. A series of stations were set up to help participants navigate the eight options being presented (refer to Photo 7).The stations included"Existing Conditions", "Design Options","Aerial Maps", "Curb Space and Bus Stops",and"Railroad Tracks Configuration" as well as a welcome table and a family table. Workshop participants were encouraged to provide feedback on potential design options for the corridor,connectwith the ProjectTeam,suggest improvements to access and travel options,and learn more about the next stages of the project. A total of 69 attendees signed in at the workshop over the course of the two days and 30 comment cards were collected.Participants were encouraged to participate in a preference activity where they placed pom-pom balls in containers that represent the options that they liked.While three pom-pom balls were provided to each participant, additional balls were provided if requested. The preference activity(pom-pom balls) revealed a strong preference for bus lanes. Figures 21 and 22 below break down the results of the preference survey by lane configuration and by pedestrian and bicycle zone configuration. Figure 21. Percent of Responses Related to Number of Lanes by Option 130/4 Six Lanes • Four Lanes ■ Five Lanes Four+ Bus Five + Bus Figure 22. Percent of Responses Related to Pedestrian and Bicycle Zone Configuration 6% ^Multi Use Trail ■Multi Use Trail +Bike Lanes rd ■Sidewalk+ Directional Bikeway Sidewalk+ Bi-Directional Bikeway Shared Bus-Bike Lane 41 City of Santa Ana I First Street Multimodal Corridor Technical Memorandum The following is a summary of comments received: • Like the smooth connectivity of buses, bikes and cars in Option 6 • Consider bicycle parking • Protected bike lanes are a must • Take bicycles off the sidewalk; put bikes on the street • Prefer bicycles at sidewalk level, not in a bus lane • Like the separated bicycle lane on both sides of the street • Consider at grade bus boarding at bus stops • Maintain ADA access at all bus stops for wheelchair users • Need traffic calming at all intersections • Reduce crossing distance for pedestrians and shorten distance between crosswalks across First Street • Add a crosswalk at the First Street and Halladay intersection • Add a crosswalk at Hickory intersection • Need additional street lighting between Standard and Spurgeon • Like the trees or landscape separating bicycles and pedestrians • Homeless take up the bus stops and benches —creates safety concerns walking or taking the bus • Homeless walking and biking on First Street cause hazards. Address the issue before adding bicycle facilities • Keep the six lanes —traffic piles up • If there is a bus lane, make sure it is shared with traffic • Consider a center running bus lane and move the bicycles to Chestnut or parallel streets • Eastbound from Standard (or DMV) to Zoo Lane traffic backs up especially in the morning • Opposed to removing lanes, adding bicycle lanes or crosswalks. Keep traffic moving • Don't start construction until Bristol Street is complete � b 1 .. 1. . " X B Photo 6: Participants Engaging in Interactive Stations and Preference Survey 42 FN City of Santa Ana I First Street Multimodal Corridor Technical Memorandum Concept Development Based on feedback from the community,technical analysis and field assessments,three Concepts were developed for the corridor. Conceptual layouts in plan view, illustrative renderings and cross sections were developed to illustrate the components of the design concepts that were then shared with the public during Workshop 3. Technical analysis, including traffic modeling and pedestrian / bicycle analysis, was conducted to assess the benefits of each alternative compared to the existing conditions. In response to the existing conditions assessment and concerns about safety and pedestrian access,the following features were integrated into all the concepts presented: • New MR h1 w 4M why 1 � Figure 23. New Controlled Crossing at Shelton Street Mid-Block Crossings—These four crossings are proposed at Shelton Street, Booth Street, west of Wright Street and between Golden Circle Drive and Tustin Avenue. Each location would be equipped with a HAWK signal, high visibility markings and signage and a paved area in the median as a refuge island, as shown in Figure 23. With these crossings,the average distance between controlled crossings is approximately 0.25 miles and a controlled crossing is located at or near an existing bus stop. • Tighter Curb Radius— Most existing curb radii are 35' with some larger such as at the 1-5 southbound ramps. For all City intersections,the curb radius is tightened to 25', which slows the turning speed of vehicles and improves safety for pedestrians. • High Visibility Crosswalks —At all signalized intersections and on STOP controlled side streets, high visibility bicycle crossing and crosswalks are recommended. Continental style with high retro reflectivity is recommended for maximum visibility at night. Crosswalks near school zones should be evaluated for yellow markings and signage. 43 City of Santa Ana I First Street Multimodal Corridor Technical Memorandum • Improved Street lighting—This includes evaluating the corridor to ensure minimum lighting requirements are met and adding pedestrian scale lighting within the pedestrian and bicycle zone. • Transit Signal Priority—Adding technology to the buses and to the traffic signal to help bus on-time performance is critical to improving access to transit. The City will work with OCTA to identify the appropriate technology and implementation strategies. • Improved Landscape and Streetscape for the Corridor—Street trees, low level landscape, drainage swales and other treatments will be integrated to help reduce the heat envelope along the corridor and to capture urban run-off. Additional places to rest and improved bus stops are also key to the overall corridor design. Creating a uniform plant palette and furniture design will create a cohesive feel and character along the corridor. Potential plant options, consistent with the City's design guidelines, are presented in Figure 24. 44 City of Santa Ana I First Street Multimodal Corridor Technical Memorandum Figure 24. Potential Street Tree Options for First Street �r Flatanus acerrfoiia Loiphostemon conferlus (London,Pkine) (8rrsbane sox] r f - t -J lapersdrovmia indice Jacaranda mim osifoWa (Crape Myrtle) (3ac❑ronda) ow ��y�,�, �y� a J� L J Roaftnus tn&jdcc a f'fnus canottensif (Mexican Syeomare) (Cunory is fond Pure] 45 FN City of Santa Ana I First Street Multimodal Corridor Technical Memorandum West Side and East Side Conceptt Due to planned projects along First Street, the corridor was divided into a west side and an east side when developing concepts. The west side extends from Bristol Street to Zoo Lane, which aligns with the Caltrans right-of-way. The east side extends from Zoo Lane over the I- 5 freeway to Tustin Avenue. Caltrans has developed concept plans for First Street as part of the Freeway Ramp Active Mobility Enhancement Study (FRAMES), illustrated in Figure 25. Concepts illustrated in this technical memorandum reflect the recommendations in that report. However, the City is currently working with Caltrans to identify alternative solutions that align with the concepts for the west side of the corridor. Modifications to this section may be proposed based on the ongoing coordination with Caltrans and the locally preferred alternative for this project. Figure 25. Recommendations in Caltrans FRAMES - -- { 1 B � _, , �,,,.,r �cl.ry •ly.yi9i//I��v tl nc•.r •[,5.�;,.�.;��;rinv ,. . .. `c w .W no IVPv L[MII. s crs 5 [_.,.Po v[tla ,.uYL•q{.'w!tl`IIfoz.11 r I J Source:Caltrans,February 2024. Freew ay Ramp Active Mobility Enhancement Study(FRAMES). Based on traffic volumes for the existing and future conditions east of 1-5, the concept developed for the east side of the corridor assumes the four-lane condition. Narrowing the road to widen the sidewalks builds upon the Public Realm Plan for this area by extending the curb to construct 17' to 20' wide pedestrian zones.This allows additional improvements within the pedestrian and bicycle zones as described later in this section and is consistent with the City's Metro East Mixed-Use Overlay Zone. A complete set of conceptual layouts for the three West Side and the one East Side concept is provided as an attachment to this technical memorandum. 46 FJ 1� City of Santa Ana I First Street Multimodal Corridor Technical Memorandum West Side Design Concepts Wlti-Ilse Path (7nnr-PPt This concept includes a multi-use path on the south side of First Street. This space is shared by pedestrians and bicyclists and is approximately 14' wide. This area would narrow to 10' near trees, light posts, utilities and bus stops. Distinct colors or textures on the pavement could be used to help delineate areas for pedestrians and bicycles within this space; however, there would be no physical separation between those who are walking or rolling and those on a bicycle. On the north side of the street, a sidewalk would be provided for pedestrians. As such, the bicyclists would be permitted only on the south side of the street. Illustrations of this concept are provided in Figure 26. This concept provides six travel lanes and left turn pockets at intersections, consistent with existing conditions. To provide additional space on the south side of the street for the multi- use trail, existing lane widths are narrowed to 11' and the center median is narrowed to 12'. Figure 26. Illustrations of the Multi-Use Path Concept Conceptual View Looking east on First St near Shelton St r b Tt Q 0 <L (North) 10, 76' Shared Pedestrian/ (South) Roadway Brcycle Path 100' First St Right-of-way R` o s o � 'I o 0 o 47 FJ 1� City of Santa Ana I First Street Multimodal Corridor Technical Memorandum Enhanced Pedestrian and Bicycle Zone Concept This concept includes directional Class IV bikeways on each side of First Street (north and south side) as well as a dedicated sidewalk. With 17' feet within the pedestrian zone, there is sufficient space to construct a physical barrier such as a plantable strip between the bikeway and the sidewalk and provide trees along the curbline. Distinct color or texture on the pavement could also be used to help delineate areas for pedestrians and bicycles. At 66' feet wide curb to curb,this concept is the narrowest of the three concepts developed. Illustrations of this concept are provided in Figure 27. This concept provides five travel lanes and left turn pockets at intersections. As shown in the existing conditions section of this technical memorandum,the traffic volume in the eastbound direction is higher than in the westbound direction in each peak hour as well as over a 24-hour period. Therefore, this option removes one travel lane in the westbound direction to provide the space within the pedestrian zone. Lane widths in this option are 10 to 11' wide and the median is 12' wide. Figure 27. Illustrations of the Enhanced Pedestrian and Bicycle Concept Conceptual View Looking east on First St near Shelton St G� 17' 66' 17' South (North) Sidewalk with Roadway Sidewalk with Commerc,al/ Conunerc',. Separated Bikeway Separated Bikeway Parking 100' First St Right-of-way --t a Ilk a a o - - d d d r 48 FN City of Santa Ana i First Street Multimodal Corridor Technical Memorandum Bus Lanes and Bikeway Concept This concept includes directional Class IV bikeways on each side of First Street (north and south side) as well as a dedicated sidewalk. With 12' feet within the pedestrian zone, a 6' bikeway and a 6' sidewalk can be delineated. Bicycles would travel closest to the roadway and would need to weave around bus stops,trees or other landscape areas and utilities such as streetlight poles. Where these obstructions occur in the bikeway, the bicycles would merge with the pedestrians in a shared 10' to 13' space.This may create a sort of meandering bikeway visually but will require careful navigation through these shared areas. Distinct color or textures on the pavement should be used to help delineate areas for pedestrians and bicycles. Figure 28 illustrates the features of the Bus Lane and Bikeway Concept. This concept provides four travel lanes, two bus only lanes and left turn pockets at intersections. As discussed in the existing conditions section of this report, Route 64 is one of the highest traveled routes in Orange County and experiences over 2,900 boardings and alighting each day within the study area. Figure 28. Bus Lane and Bikeway Concept Looking eas:on Rrsr S[wear Shelxon 5t C2 f 12' 761 112` S u u thi� s Roadway ��tlBw,alk wii:h cbtnrvYts�C;ial; F F :'..�.,k;.�. Parking tiOr First St Right-of-way +; �':�3 .f +Y�.' YJ j 49 City of Santa Ana I First Street Multimodal Corridor Technical Memorandum Providing a bus lane provides benefits to vehicular traffic and buses. Vehicles may enter the bus lane to make a right turn at intersections. This moves the decelerating vehicles into the bus lane and reduces the potential for rear end crashes. With buses in a dedicated lane, there would be no queuing of vehicles behind buses at bus stops. Vehicles maneuvering around stopped buses is also a potential cause of rear-end and sideswipe crashes that would be reduced with this option. Bus on-time performance and delay would also improve. Coupled with bus priority, travel time for buses along the corridor are forecast to improve significantly. This City has discussed with OCTA options to increase frequency of bus service along the route if dedicated. Additional discussion and analysis are needed to determine if expanded or more frequent service is possible. East Side Design Concepts From Cabrillo Park Drive to Tustin Avenue, the City will be constructing new medians and buffered bicycle lanes. This project will also reduce First Street from six lanes to four lanes. While this will improve the bicycle amenities on this portion of the corridor compared to existing conditions, feedback during community outreach meetings suggests that bicyclists would prefer to be at sidewalk level as opposed to street level. Figure 29 provides the cross section and the pedestrian and bicycle zone illustrations. Figure 29. East Side Illustrations I ti f 40 T T ` 1r 20' lNcprth] V.0pook�- 65 �•n, I5o�rll 102'First S1 Right-of-way i PK:�� Sidewalk with Separated Bikeway 50 City of Santa Ana I First Street Multimodal Corridor Technical Memorandum Therefore, a four-lane concept was developed that provides for 17 to 20' pedestrian and bicycle zones,four travel lanes and a raised median. With these improvements, the median constructed by the City would remain in place the curbs on the north and south sides of the street would be moved to the edge of the buffered bicycle lanes thereby bringing the bicycles to sidewalk level. This would allow for directional bikeways on each side of the street, physically separated from the sidewalk by a low planting strip or other edge treatment. rr;�ffir 4n;j1v_SV The VISSIM microsimulation model was used to forecast the intersection delay and travel time along the corridor for each of the three design concepts on the west side of the corridor in the AM and in the PM peak period. Two study years were evaluated — Project Opening Year (2028) and Project Design Year (2048). Future year volumes were determined by applying a growth rate to existing conditions traffic volumes. The growth rate of 0.6% per year was determined using the OCTA OCTAM model. Tables 9 and 10 summarize the results of the level of service from Bristol Street to the 1-5 SB Freeway Ramps in the AM and PM Peak Period for the No Build (maintain existing roadway lanes, intersection configuration and signal timing) and for each of the three concepts presented (Multi-Use Path Concept, Enhanced Pedestrian and Bicycle Concept and Bus Lane/Bikeway Concept) for the west side of the corridor for the Opening Year and Design Year. Turn pocket lengths, signal timing and intersection configurations in addition to the modification to the number of lanes were modified in the VISSIM network for each of the concepts presented. Since only one concept was developed for the east side (1-5 SB Ramps to Tustin Avenue), Tables 11 and 12 summarize the intersection LOS for the Opening Year and Design Year. The City has approved a new traffic signal at the intersection of First Street and Lacy Street. Currently this intersection is side-street stop controlled. As the signal is fully funded and currently in the final design stage, this new traffic signal has been added to all study scenarios, including the No Build condition. West Side Opening Year Conditions As shown in the tables on the following page, most intersections operate at LOS D or better under all study scenarios by year 2028 in the AM Peak Period. The exceptions to this are the intersections at Bristol Street and Flower Street under the Bus Lane / Bike Lane option. It should be noted that under the No Build condition, Lyon Street is forecast to operate at LOS F. Signal timing and geometric improvements in the three Options address queuing issues at Lyon Street that improve the delays and queues. In the PM Peak, most intersections continue to operate at acceptable LOS D or better. However, the intersections at Bristol Street, Flower Street, Downtown Plaza, Grand Avenue and Lyon Street are all forecast to operate at LOS E or F under for at least one concept in either the AM or the PM per period. Lyon Street experiences the greatest increase in delays. This is largely due to the reduction in right turn lanes onto the 1-5 freeway southbound from one shared right-through and one dedicated right turn lane to a single right turn lane. Additional analysis is being conducted at all these intersections to determine geometric modifications and signal timing improvements to determine if delay can be improved to an acceptable range. 51 FN City of Santa Ana I First Street Multimodal Corridor Technical Memorandum West Side Design Yea, For all study scenarios,the future year volumes are based on an average growth rate of 0.6% per year applied to the existing ground count traffic volumes, which suggest no changes in traffic patterns over the next 22 years. The results of the Design Year analysis indicate that with the reduction in lanes to either five lanes or six lanes, there will be a significant increase in delays if traffic patterns remain unchanged. The City is currently working with OCTA to run the OCTAM model for the five lane and the four-lane with bus lane conditions to determine if the lane reduction would result in a redistribution of traffic to other routes. As this is currently a grid network and there are several parallel or alternative routes in the area, this model will help provide more accurate long-term travel patterns. Results of the Enhanced Pedestrian and Bicycle Concept and Bus Lane/Bike Lane Concept will be re- evaluated once the model runs are completed. East Side Analysis Operational analysis for the east side evaluated the baseline six-lane option and the proposed four-lane option. The results of the analysis show that all intersections east of 1-5 are forecast to operate at LOS D or better with the four lanes under both Opening Year and Design Year Conditions. travel Time Analysis Travel time calculations were conducted for the west side (Bristol Street to Zoo Lane) and the east side (Zoo Lane to Tustin Avenue) for the Opening Year and Horizon Year for all study scenarios. Travel times were calculated for both buses and passenger vehicles in order to understand the benefits and the impacts to each mode. Tables 13 and 14 summarize the Opening Year and Design Year travel times for the corridor for automobiles and Tables 15 and 16 report the same data for buses. 52 1 �� City of Santa Ana I First Street Multimodal Corridor r Technical Memorandum Table 9. Opening Year Delay and Level of Service (VISSIM) - West Side • _ Multi-Use Path INTERSECTION WOMMOMOM AM PEAK HOUR[7:308m-S:3Oam] 1 lst St.at Bristol St. 42.6 D 45.2 D 46.0 D _ 6 1st St at Flower SL 33.6 C 38.4 D 47.2 D E 8 1st St.at Ross St. 10.8 B 10.6 B 8.9 A 14.2 B 10 1st SL at Broadway 30-2 C 26.7 C 21-4 C 36.3 D 11 lstSt at Syc a more St. 10.2 B 16.7 B 13.2 B 16.5 B 12 lstSL at Main St 30.5 C 42.7 D 41.6 D 38.7 D 13 1st St.at Bush St. 8.0 A 20.2 C 24.2 C 18.6 B 14 1st St at DT Plaza 13.8 B 21.0 C 26-2 C 27.0 C 18 1st St.at Lacy St. 3.1 A 28.5 C 14.7 B 23.3 C 21 lstSL at Standard Ave. 31.1 C 38.3 D 29.5 C 36.2 D 22 1 st St.at G ra nd Ave. 42.6 D 52.5 D 41.4 D 41.8 D 25 1st St at Lyon St 103.9 F 32.1 C 32.4 C 325 C 26 1st St.at Zoo Ln. 45.0 D 27.6 C 26.4 C 26.5 C 27 lst St.at 1-5 SE 9-1 A 10..5 B 10.2 B 10.3 B PM PEAK HOUR[5:OOpm-6--00pm] 1 1st St.at Bristol St. 46.7 D 47.3 D i E 51=.S E 6 1st St at Flower SL 33.0 C 41.6 D 5i5.S E -1.5 E 8 1st St at Ross St. 7.0 A 8.1 A 16.9 B 14.5 B 10 1st SL at Broadway 33.7 C 19.2 B 20.2 C 29.7 C 11 1 st St.at Syc a me re St. 10.5 B 12.2 B 13.5 B 2a6 C 12 1st St at Main St 30.3 C 39.1 D 40.8 D 34.3 C 13 15t St.at Bush St. 11.6 B 10.0 A 21.5 C 18.5 B 14 lstSL at DT Plaza 22-3 C 11.5 B 56.5 E 42.7 D 1S 1st St.at Lacy St. 2.7 A 8.1 A 38.3 D 23.6 C 21 1st St at Standard Ave_ 21-6 C 28.4 C 41.4 D 37.7 D 22 1st St.at Grand Ave. 59.4 E =.5 E 59.3 i E 59.3 E 25 1st SL at Lyon St. 105.7 F 128.8 F 146.6 F 12C 4 F 25 1st St.at Zoo Ln. 40.8 D 37.2 D 30.4 C 29.1 C 27 1st St at 1-5 SB 5.5 A 8.3 A 8.2 A 8.2 A 53 City of Santa Ana I First Street Multimodal Corridor Technical Memorandum Table 10. Design Year Delay and Level of Service (VISSIM) - West Side Multi-Use Path INTERSECTION AM PEAK HOUR[7:30am-8:30am] 1 1st St.at Bristol St. 46.9 D 48.9 D 51.6 D 113.1 F 6 1st St.at Flower St. 39.6 D 46.0 D 50.1 D 95.6 F 8 1st St.at Ross St. 12.1 B 9.6 A 11.5 B 24.8 C 10 1st St.at Broadway 34.9 C 30.7 C 31.6 C 45.5 D 11 1st St.at Sycam ore St. 12.7 B 14.8 B 17.8 B 22.5 C 12 1st St.at Main St. 33.5 C 40.3 D 47.2 D 45.1 D 13 1st St.at Bush St. 8.4 A 10.8 B 16.5 B 21.9 C 14 1st St.at DT Plaza 13.5 B 8.2 A V.9 B 15.8 B 18 1st St.at Lacy St. 4.4 A 16.7 B 21.5 C 22.5 C 21 1st St.at Standard Ave. 40.5 D 38.2 D 44.8 D 42.4 D 22 1st St.at Grand Ave. 48.2 D 46.7 D 44.6 D 25 1st St.at Lyon St. 181.4 F 117.7 F 121.0 F 86.7 F 26 1st St.at Zoo Ln. 52.8 D 98.9 F 108.1 F 98.2 F 27 1st St.at 1-5 SB 15.3 B 12.4 B 12.8 B 11.8 B PM PEAK HOUR[5:OOpm-6:OOpm] 1 1st St.at Bristol St. 49.9 D 54.8 D 63.0 139.3 F 6 1st St.at Flower St. 37.6 D 47.9 D 60.0 97.2 F 8 1st St.at Ross St. 7.7 A 8.3 A 29.9 C 37.5 D 10 1st St.at Broadway 39.1 D 33.5 C 42.4 D 46.1 D 11 1st St.at Sycam ore St. 14.8 B 21.2 C 30.9 C 24.2 C 12 1st St.at Main St. 34.2 C 40.7 D 47.1 D 42.4 D 13 1st St.at Bush St. 12.3 B 12.5 B 50.0 D 53.8 D 14 1st St.at DT Plaza 23.5 C 12.4 B E 55.5 E 18 1st St.at Lacy St. 6.5 A 10.8 B E 48.8 D 21 1st St.at Standard Ave. 38.1 D 38.5 D E 83.3 F 22 1st St.at Grand Ave. 88.1 F E 84.3 F 25 1st St.at Lyon St. 173.9 F 155.1 F 145.7 F 125.5 F 26 1st St.at Zoo Ln. 49.3 D 53.2 D 57.9 E 51.7 D 27 1st St.at 1-5 SB 5.6 A 9.3 A 9.3 A 9.3 A 54 ORCity of Santa Ana I First Street Multimodal Corridor Technical Memorandum Table 11. Opening Year Dela and Level of Service VISSIM — East Side Option I Four Lane INTERSECTION AM PEAK HOUR[7:30a m-8:30a m] 28 1st St.atCabrlIIOParkDr. 14.8 B 14.9 B 29 1st St.at Golden Circle Dr. 14.7 B 17.5 B 30 1st St.at Tustin Ave. 24.1 C 24.9 C PM PEAK HOUR[5:00pm-6:00pm] 28 1st St.at Ca brillo Pa rk Dr. 18.0 B 18.0 B 29 1st St.at Golden Circle Dr. 9.8 A 9.3 A 30 1st St.at Tustin Ave. 26.3 C 26.1 C Table 12. Design Year Delay and Level of Service (VISSIM) — East Side OptionNO BUILD Four Lane # INTERSECTION AM PEAK HOUR[7:30a m-8:30a m] 28 1st St.at Cabrillo Park Dr. 16.4 B 15.2 B 29 1st St.at Golden Circle Dr. 15.0 B 17.6 B 30 1st St.at Tustin Ave. 24.5 C 25.2 C PM PEAK HOUR[5:00pm-6:00pm] 28 1st St.at Ca brillo Pa rk Dr. 18.9 B 18.6 B 29 1st St.at Golden Circle Dr. 10.6 B 9.3 A 30 1st St.at Tustin Ave. 26.8 C 26.0 C 55 City of Santa Ana I First Street Multimodal Corridor L e- Technical Memorandum Table 13. Opening Year Travel Time IAVERAGE TRAVEL TIME (mm:ss) # START LOCATION END LOCATION Enhanced IME Ped-Bike AM PEAK HOUR[7:30am-8:30am] 1 1stSt.at Bristol St. 1stSt.atZooLn. 10:00 07:59 07:53 10:27 10:53 2 1stSt.atZooLn. 1stSt.atTustinAve. 01:16 01:12 01:11 01:11 01:11 Eastbound Total 11:16 09:11 09:04 11:38 12:05 4 1stSt.atTustinAve. 1stSt.atZooLn. 01:48 01:36 01:39 01:35 01:36 5 1st St.a t Zoo Ln. is t St.at Bristol St. 06:50 06:59 07:29 07:30 07:29 Westbound Total 08:38 08:35 09:08 09:05 09:05 PM PEAK HOUR[5:00pm-6:00pm] 1 1st St.a t Bri stol St. 1s t St.a t Zoo Ln. 10:37 10:27 10:36 12:34 12:24 2 1st St.at ZooLn. 1st St.atTustinAve. 01:12 01:12 01:12 01:11 01:12 Eastbound Total 11:48 11:39 11:48 13:46 13:36 4 1stSt.atTustinAve. 1stSt.atZooLn. 01:29 01:21 01:21 01:21 01:22 5 1st St.a t Zoo Ln. 1st St.at Bristol St. 07:26 06:35 09:04 10:06 10:34 Westbound Total 08:55 07:56 10:25 11:26 11:56 Table 14. Design Year Travel Time START LOCATION END LOCATION Enha nced Bus/Bike Lanes I ME Ped-Bike AM PEAK HOUR[7:30am-8:30am] 1 1st St.at Bristol St. 1st St.a t Zoo Ln. 14:26 10:28 10:40 13:19 13:41 2 1st St.at Zoo Ln. 1st St.atTustinAve. 01:18 01:13 01:12 01:12 01:12 Eastbound Total 15:44 11:41 11:52 14:30 14:53 4 1stSt.atTustinAve. 1stSt.atZooLn. 02:25 01:43 01:45 01:46 01:39 5 1s t St.a t Zo o Ln. 1s t St.a t B ri stol St. 07:21 07:10 08:09 07:58 08:22 Westbound Total 09:46 08:54 09:55 09:44 10:01 PM PEAK HOUR[5:00pm-6:00pm] 1 1st St.a t Bri stol St. 1s t St.a t Zoo Ln. 14:46 14:02 13:05 16:55 16:25 2 1st St.at ZooLn. 1st St.atTustinAve. 01:13 01:12 01:13 01:13 01:13 Eastbound Total 15:59 15:15 14:18 18:08 17:38 4 1stSt.atTustinAve. 1stSt.atZooLn. 01:32 01:23 01:23 01:24 01:25 5 1stSt.atZooLn. 1st St.at Bristol St. 08:25 06:56 12:24 13:17 14:04 Westbound Total 9:57 8:19 13:47 14:41 15:29 56 [ - City of Santa Ana I First Street Multimodal Corridor -e-'' Technical Memorandum Table 15. Opening Year Travel Time - Buses AVERAGE TRAVEL TIME (mm:ss) START LOCATION END LOCATION Enhanced I ME Ped-Bike AM PEAK HOUR[7:30am-8:30am] 1 1st St.a t Bristol St. 1s t St.a t Zoo Ln. 15:03 11:27 11:19 11:12 11:53 2 1stSt.atZooLn. 1stSt.atTustinAve. 02:35 02:14 02:08 02:12 02:06 Eastbound Total 17:38 13:41 13:27 13:24 13:59 4 1stSt.atTustinAve. 1stSt.atZooLn. 02:53 04:03 03:57 03:57 03:34 5 1st St.a t Zoo Ln. 1st St.at Bristol St. 11:17 12:19 13:11 12:06 11:11 Westbound Total 14:10 16:22 17:08 16:03 14:45 PM PEAK HOUR[5:00pm-6:00pm] 1 1st St.a t Bri stol St. 1s t St.a t Zoo Ln. 16:22 14:23 14:38 12:45 12:41 2 1st St.at ZooLn. 1st St.atTustinAve. 02:27 02:09 02:10 02:10 02:05 Eastbound Total 18:49 16:32 16:48 14:55 14:45 4 1stSt.atTustinAve. 1stSt.atZooLn. 02:57 02:38 02:37 02:37 02:38 5 1st St.a t Zoo Ln. 1st St.at Bristol St. 12:25 12:02 14:21 11:23 10:22 Westbound Total 15:23 14:40 16:58 14:01 13:00 Table 16. Design Year Travel Time - Buses START LOCATION END LOCATION Multi- Enha nced Bus/Bike Lanes I E Use Path Ped-Bike AM PEAK HOUR[7:30am-8:30am] 1 1st St.a t Bristol St. 1s t St.a t Zoo Ln. 19:46 12:57 12:57 11:39 12:08 2 1stSt.atZooLn. 1stSt.atTustinAve. 02:34 02:18 02:09 02:10 02:10 Eastbound Total 22:20 15:16 15:06 13:49 14:18 4 1stSt.atTustinAve. 1stSt.atZooLn. 03:09 04:06 03:51 04:08 03:39 5 1st St.a t Zoo Ln. 1st St.at Bristol St. 12:24 12:33 13:39 12:00 11:30 Westbound Total 15:32 16:40 17:30 16:08 15:09 PM PEAK HOUR[5:00pm-6:00pm] 1 1st St.a t Bri stol St. 1s t St.a t Zoo Ln. 21:00 18:00 17:21 12:58 12:44 2 1st St.at ZooLn. 1st St.atTustinAve. 02:18 02:12 02:14 02:09 02:06 Eastbound Total 23:18 20:12 19:35 15:07 14:51 4 1stSt.atTustinAve. 1stSt.atZooLn. 03:06 02:40 02:39 02:42 02:39 5 1st St.a t Zoo Ln. 1st St.at Bristol St. 13:01 12:26 17:39 12:01 11:12 Westbound Total 16:07 15:05 20:18 14:44 13:51 57 FJ 1� City of Santa Ana I First Street Multimodal Corridor Technical Memorandum Evaluation of Concept Benefits Using the goals of this project, concerns raised by the community and the technical analysis conducted to date, a comparison of the benefits for each concept was developed. The comparison is based on how each concept improves conditions by mode compared to the existing conditions. Table 17 below summarizes the results of this exercise. Table 17. Comparison of Three Design Concepts AA I QA Enhanced Pedestrian Bus Lane/Bike Lane & Bicycle Concept Concept Pedestrian&Bicycle Add buffer/barrier between cars O • • Safety &pedestrian/bike zone Pedestrian Add new controlled crossings • • • Connectivity Pedestrian/Bicycle Reduce crossing distance across • Exposure Time First Street Provides Dedicated Creates separate spaces for O • Bicycle&Pedestrian space pedestrians and bikes Travel Time for Buses Improves travel time(solid) Opportunity to Increases space for new trees • O Improve Streetscape/ and landscaping Landscape Traffic Speeds Potential to reduce traffic speeds O • (solid=high potential) Travel Time for Autos Potential to increase travel time • O (SOVs)-Lowest,High) (solid=low potential) Delay for Autos Potential to increase delay • O (solid=lowest) Traffic Diversion Potential to divert traffic to • O other routes(solid=lowest) Consistency with Concept reflects goals of O • • Mobility Element multimodal corridor 58 FN City of Santa Ana I First Street Multimodal Corridor Technical Memorandum Workshop 3 Workshop 3 was conducted on December 9 and 11, 2025 at the Roosevelt Walker Community Center. Over the course of the two days, 82 attendees signed in representing a broad range of representatives from the community including youth. Participants were encouraged to visit stations around the room that provided information on the three west side concepts,the east side concept and landscaping and then completed a feedback form (refer to Photo 8). The form asked them to share what elements of the concepts presented would improve their travel along the corridor. Responses to each concept are summarized on the following pages. General Comments Aside from the specific comments on each concept presented and the landscape design, the following comments were received either in the "Other Notes" section of the comment form, on comment cards or on the available note pads. • Community feedback strongly emphasizes pedestrian and bicyclist safety, calling for raised crosswalks, protected intersections, complete sidewalks, and fully separated bike paths. • Lighting, reflective elements, and tree shade are requested to improve usability and safety, especially for students and daily walkers. • Residents express concern about maintaining vehicle travel lanes to avoid worsening traffic congestion while recommending design features like narrower lanes and speed controls to ease traffic. • There is also strong support for underground utilities, clear sidewalks, and separated bus lanes. • The community is interested in a design that balances traffic with safety, accessibility, and environmental enhancements. • Appreciation expressed for the workshop and answers provided. l�s y t Photo 8: Participants Involved in Interactive Stations at Workshop 3 59 FJ 1� City of Santa Ana I First Street Multimodal Corridor Technical Memorandum Multi-Use Path Concept: Co n,,ptu,l V1ew I.ooki,g east on First St near Sh,[o St Six travel lanes with a shared pedestrian and bicycle patch on the south side of First Street C o tJ P Bicyclist Improvements ra • Requests for dedicated, clearly T T T Q marked bike lanes on both sides „• (North) Sid gwalx Roadway v,a..,,,,, (South) of the street, buffers/barriers o•m between bike lanes and 100'First St Right-of-way sidewalks, and improved bike and bus separation. • Support for protected bike paths rather than shared paths, clear pavement markings, and signage to identify bike zones. • Concerns about bike lanes accumulating trash and debris. • Some people support expanded bike lanes for safety while others oppose additional bike lanes due to concerns about traffic impacts. Pedestrian Improvements • Requests for additional crosswalks near schools, churches, and bus stops. • Requests for elevated crosswalks, all-way crossings, and shorter crossing distances at smaller intersections. • Support for wider sidewalks, sidewalks flush with street, and trees that supply shade for pedestrians. • Reduction of obstruction in pedestrian zones such as utility boxes and poles. Safety improvements • Requests for traffic signals for controlled pedestrian crossings, restrictions for right turns at red lights, additional guardrails, barriers, and buffers. between pedestrians, cyclists, buses, and vehicle lanes. • Requests for additional street lighting and illuminated/glowing crosswalks. • Concerns regarding vehicle speeds. Roadway/Driver Improvements • Support for lane reductions to reduce traffic speeds and support for separation of vehicles, buses, bikes, and pedestrian zones. • Suggestions to reduce it to two lanes in each direction and eliminate or consolidate turn lanes. • Request for dedicated bus lanes, improved bus operations, and improve mobility for bus turning movements. • Opposition towards reduced travel lanes due to congestion concerns. 60 FN City of Santa Ana I First Street Multimodal Corridor Technical Memorandum 51 Enhanced Pedestrian&Bicycle Zone "Ce " "ew o, Concept: Five travel lanes with a sidewalk and a + separated bikeway on each side of First P Street O O O Bicyclist Improvements L I. T T T • Support for separated and ,H o„h - 1 Roada•way ,r „ protected bike �,._dB. ., lanes highlighting this concept 100'First St Right-of-way as the most bike-friendly and most complete. • Support for bike lanes on both sides of street, bi-directional bike lanes rather than one-sided, and barriers between bikes and traffic such as curbs and planters. • Requests for complete bike paths through intersections, bike-specific signals, separation between cyclists and pedestrians, and enhanced striping positioning for bike lane (green conflict zone on North Lyon Street). • Requests for multilingual bike signage (English, Spanish, Vietnamese). Pedestrian Improvements • Requests for additional and clearly marked crosswalks,z-crossings near schools, and all-way crossings at major intersections. • Requests for elevated and protected sidewalks at underpass at N WClay Street and widened sidewalks. • Requests for guardrails, reflective lighting, and improved lighting for pedestrian visibility. Safety Improvements • Support for concept citing it is the safest, most complete, and best option. • Support for the narrow streets for reduction in traffic speeds as well as raised/protected crosswalks. • Requests for protected intersections, curb extensions, and barriers between traffic and bicyclists for accident prevention. • Concerns raised for blind spots near buildings and trash/debris from vehicles affecting safety. Roadway/Driver Improvements • Support for concept citing it accommodates high volumes of pedestrians and cyclists as well as balances safety improvements with traffic. • Support for five lanes or three lanes in one direction to manage congestion as well as support for lane reductions for safety and walkability. • Support for adding bus lanes on the three-lane side of street and dedicated bus lanes to improve reliability and encourage ridership. • Requests for bioswales in medians, simpler driveway access, shorter crossings • Interest in learning more regarding hours for bus lanes (all day or rush hour). • Concerns of bus lanes increasing congestion. 61 FN City of Santa Ana I First Street Multimodal Corridor Technical Memorandum Conceptual View n g cis[on First St near Shelton St Bus Lane & Bikeway Concept: Four travel lanes and two bus p lanes awith a separate dedicated bikeway 4 0 and a sidewalk on each side of First Street Bicyclist Improvements (Noithi 12 76' 12' .ii... • Requests for continuous bike 100'Fret St Right-of-way paths through intersections, protected bike lanes with physical barriers like curbs and planters, and clear signage in English and Spanish. • Support for bi-directional bikeways and lanes on both sides of the street. • Concerns for bicyclists traveling around buses, lack of separation/barriers, and single bike lane provided. Pedestrian Improvements • Requests for additional crosswalks near schools,z-crossings to address jaywalking, and curb extensions to shorten crossings and improve visibility. • Requests for improved push button placement and countdown signals, longer crossing times for wheelchair users, and improved curb ramp alignment for accessibility. • Concerns for drainage and potential flooding at corners. Safety Improvements • Support for separation among all modes of transportation, reduction in intersection width, protected curbs at intersections,traffic signals and crossings spaced throughout corridor. • Requests for left and right turn signals and enforcement tools such traffic signal cameras for pedestrian safety. • Concerns for pedestrians and bicyclists about travel conflicts in shared areas as well as visibility issues without curb extensions. • Improved vendor and pedestrian safety due to exclusive bus lane. Roadway/Driver Improvements • Support for dedicated bus lanes due to improved bus reliability, better wait times, incentivized public transit, and mitigation of traffic impacts on buses. • Mixed opinions on bus lane impacts to traffic. Some note it will improve flow while others feel it will worsen congestion. • Suggestion to add dedicated bus signals at busy intersections. • Interest in learning if bus lanes will have dedicated hours (full-day or peak) and if two car lanes in each direction are necessary. 62 FN City of Santa Ana I First Street Multimodal Corridor Technical Memorandum Enhanced Pedestrian&Bicycle Co phial Vi...Looking east on Fm St near Colden Circle Dr Zone Concept: Four travel lanes with a sidewalk and a o separated bikeway on each side of First Street p Bicyclist Improvements T T bdl I ,r_ SO • Support for extended bike ll. tom, -,_wry infrastructure throughout corridor and separate and protected bike lanes/paths • Requests for physical buffers and barriers to protect bike lanes such as planters. Pedestrian Improvements • Support for the concept specific to separating pedestrian walkways for safety and comfort. • Requests for all-way pedestrian crossings, incorporation of cross paths at all intersections, and curb bulb-outs to shorten crossing distances and protect pedestrians. • Concerns for physical pedestrian obstruction near Caltrans parking lot. Safety improvements • Support for this design, citing it is the safest for all modes of transportation due to separation, can reduce accidents, and narrows roadway widths leading to slower traffic speeds. • Improved safety outcomes through buffers, planters, and curb extensions. Roadway/Driver Improvements • Request to narrow the roadway to slow traffic speeds, reallocate space from wide lanes or medians to protect bike and pedestrian zones. • Concern for traffic impacts with new bike lane. Streetscape and Landscape Participants also provided input on potential street trees for the corridor. The results of the input are summarized below: • Use California native plants and trees, particularly within bioswales. • Discouraged the use of Mediterranean climate plants and expressed frustration with overplanted species, such as crepe myrtle, citing poor appearance and overuse in the area. • Clear support for prioritizing native vegetation in the project's landscape design. 63 1 �� City of Santa Ana I First Street Multimodal Corridor r Technical Memorandum Next Steps With the development of the three concepts, the next step in the project is to select a locally preferred alternative. In order to select that option, the following steps will be completed: • Complete the OCTAM model and assess the redistribution of traffic related to potential lane reductions and update the levels of service. • Conduct meetings with the Stakeholder Group and the Community Working Group to receive additional feedback on the three Concepts. • Present and receive direction from City Council. Once a locally preferred alternative is selected, the project team will move forward with the final engineering, feasibility study and environmental document for the corridor. Due to project funding, this phase of the project will need to be completed by December 2026. The City is currently seeking funding to finalize the engineering, prepare bid documents and construct the project; however, additional funding may be needed for construction depending upon the concept selected. 64 Public Works Agency . � https://www.santa-ana.org/pw r Item # 7 City of Santa Ana 20 Civic Center Plaza, Santa Ana, CA 92701 Staff Report February 17, 2026 TOPIC: First Street Multimodal Boulevard Study AGENDA TITLE First Street Multimodal Boulevard Study Work Study Session RECOMMENDED ACTION Discuss and provide direction to staff. GOVERNMENT CODE §84308 APPLIES: No DISCUSSION The Public Works Agency is responsible for the administration and oversight of all Capital Improvement Projects in the City. Per the approved General Plan Update, First Street between Bristol Street and Tustin Avenue is envisioned as a multimodal corridor through a series of safety and infrastructure improvements and enhancements. The goal of these improvements is to benefit all users of First Street, including pedestrians, cyclists and public transportation users who utilize Orange County Transportation Authority's (OCTA) Route 64, identified as one of the highest ridership bus routes in Orange County. BACKGROUND On April 12, 2023, OCTA submitted an application to the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) for Regional Early Action Planning (REAP 2.0) grant funding on behalf of the City. REAP 2.0 seeks to reduce vehicle miles traveled and facilitate the implementation of adopted regional and local plans to achieve these goals. On July 6, 2023, SCAG awarded OCTA REAP 2.0 grant funds for planning, outreach, transit, active transportation, and transit signal priority projects, which included funding for the First Street Boulevard Multimodal Study. The study examines options to enhance transportation along First Street by evaluating the feasibility of various infrastructure improvements through extensive community outreach, field data analyses, modeling, design, and environmental clearance with the intent of identifying and designing a Locally Preferred Alternative (LPA). The study evaluates multimodal improvements that promote the safety and transportation goals included in the City's recently adopted General Plan Mobility Element Update. First Street Multimodal Boulevard Study February 17, 2026 Page 2 A Request for Proposals (RFP) was issued on February 25, 2025 seeking qualified firms to provide traffic engineering and transportation planning services for the First Street Multimodal Boulevard Study. On May 20, 2025, HDR Engineering, Inc. (HDR) was subsequently awarded an agreement to conduct the study. The Study commenced June 4, 2025 with a grant deadline of December 2026. Due to the compressed schedule, selection of an LPA in early 2026 will allow adequate time to develop 100% final engineering and design. OCTA has been awarded grant funding of up to $2 million for the construction of the LPA but this falls significantly short of the amount that will be needed for construction. THE STUDY The First Street Multimodal Boulevard Study is a comprehensive effort to re-envision approximately three miles of First Street from Bristol Street to Tustin Avenue as a safer, more accessible, and more equitable corridor for all users, including people walking, bicycling, riding transit, and driving. Initiated in May 2025, the Study responds to the City's General Plan Mobility Element and community-identified needs to improve safety, reduce speed-related collisions, enhance access to transit, and better serve the corridor's diverse and often vulnerable populations. The presentation is included as Exhibit 1. The analysis, findings, and detailed technical documentation is summarized in a technical memorandum. The Technical Memorandum (Exhibit 2) documents existing conditions, traffic and safety analysis, equity assessment, community outreach, alternatives development, and evaluation of design concepts. The Study corridor extends approximately three miles from Bristol Street to Tustin Avenue, crossing downtown Santa Ana, the railroad underpass, and the 1-5 freeway interchange. Figure 1: First Street Corridor Flower Park Plaza Artists Village Zoo ® Study Corridor Santa Ana High School DMV Social Security Office I W SANTA ANA BLVD C 4TH ST 4TH ST I Z FIRST STREET • • m r ; �v O 55 O D Z Z O - f O ECHESTNUT AVE O D O m O H y Z E MAIN ST The Study evaluated existing conditions, conducted extensive technical analysis, and implemented a robust, multilingual community engagement process that reached more than 1,100 participants. Eight (8) initial multimodal options were developed and First Street Multimodal Boulevard Study February 17, 2026 Page 3 evaluated. Based on performance metrics, policy alignment, and community and stakeholder input, three concepts emerged as the most viable alternatives. PROJECT BACKGROUND The City of Santa Ana's First Street Multimodal Boulevard Study aims to transform and improve the First Street corridor between Bristol Street and Tustin Avenue for all modes of transportation. A multimodal street is one that balances the needs of all users, including people walking, biking, riding transit, and driving—while also functioning as a community space that supports social, economic, and environmental vitality. Boulevards and major streets like First Street play a vital role in cities, not only as conduits for mobility, but as central public spaces shared by residents, visitors, and people of all ages and abilities. In 2022, the City adopted its updated General Plan Mobility Element, identifying First Street as a Pedestrian Opportunity Zone. This designation reflects the corridor's importance as a place, not just a roadway, and its potential to support walking, bicycling, transit use, economic activity, and community life. The First Street Multimodal Boulevard Study was initiated to: • Improve safety for vulnerable roadway users; • Reduce vehicle speeds and severe collisions; • Enhance pedestrian comfort, shade, and amenities; • Provide safe, connected bicycle facilities; • Improve transit performance and rider experience; and • Reconnect neighborhoods divided by wide roadway crossings. Pedestrian Opportunity Zones are defined as an area that supports or should support high levels of pedestrian activity due to its proximity to activity centers, mixed-use development, and transit stops. These zones are intended to foster a walkable and vibrant public realm through improvements such as wider sidewalks, safer crossings, and an enhanced streetscape. Figure 2 shows examples of best street practices for pedestrian facilities. Vibrant urban boulevards with amenities and storefronts should have a minimum width of 15 feet. Urban streets with trees should have a minimum of 12 feet to still allow for comfortable pedestrian space. Streets with small trees and walk zones should have a minimum of 9 feet. Figure 2: Best Street Practices �,, (7 F.� 20,000 to OCTA Route 64 36,000 Speed Limit Up to 2,900 vehicles per day 35 to 40mph Daily Boardings in Study Area First Street Multimodal Boulevard Study February 17, 2026 Page 4 EXISTING CONDITIONS AND KEY FINDINGS A walk audit was conducted, along with traffic modeling, origin-destination travel pattern analysis, safety analysis, and an in-depth assessment of existing pedestrian, bicycle, and transit conditions to establish the existing conditions of the First Street corridor. An equity assessment was also completed as part of this analysis. The following presents a high-level overview of the existing conditions analysis. Additional information, including methodology, data, and other detail can be found in the Technical Memorandum (Exhibit 2). Key multimodal findings include: • Continuous sidewalks exist, but widths are often constrained and crossings are infrequent; • No continuous, protected bicycle facilities currently exist, resulting in widespread sidewalk riding; • Posted speeds of 40-45 mph are incompatible with the surrounding land uses and pedestrian activity; • Signalized crossings are spaced far apart, creating barriers between north—south neighborhoods; • Existing tree canopy is inconsistent with limited access to shade; • Bus stops lack dedicated shelter lighting, wayfinding signage, and real-time arrival displays; • Pedestrian and bicycle crashes account for approximately 23% of all reported collisions—significantly higher than typical for similar arterials. Figure 3: Key Findings • �olii�iona 0 O onrirrA sw 92J73 " Walking 250+ Bikes per 30%of Trips Day Travel E/W Along Corridor 85%on Sidewalk 071! Key findings from the existing traffic operations analysis include: • Daily traffic volumes generally operate at level of service (LOS) C or better; • Intersections operate at LOS D or better under existing conditions; • Excessive speeds outside peak hours are common and strongly correlated with severe crashes. First Street Multimodal Boulevard Study February 17, 2026 Page 5 Per the City's General Plan Mobility Element (Policy M-1.4, Motor Vehicle Level of Service), intersections of arterial streets shall maintain at least a LOS of D, except in areas planned for high intensity development or traffic safety projects. EQUITY CONSIDERATIONS The study area has higher than average rates of poverty, seniors living in poverty, renters who are cost-burdened, and residents with limited English proficiency. Travel behavior analysis shows high rates of walking and transit use, particularly among seniors and lower-income residents. These findings underscore the importance of prioritizing safety, accessibility, and comfort for those who rely most on walking, bicycling, and transit. COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT Robust community engagement was conducted from June through January 2026 using a multi-tiered strategy that included: • In-person and virtual workshops; • Pop-up events at community festivals, events, and meetings; • Surveys, dedicated project website, and online tools; • Stakeholder, agency, and interdepartmental meetings; • Community working groups and neighborhood association meetings; • Spanish and Vietnamese interpretation. More than 1,100 people and 35 community partners were engaged throughout the process. Across all phases, consistent priorities emerged: • Strong desire for protected bicycle facilities; • Wider sidewalks, additional and safer crossings, especially near schools and bus stops; • Improved bus stops, lighting, and shade; • Concerns about speeding and traffic safety; • Interest in designs that balance vehicle movement with safety and livability. A summary of all outreach and engagement conducted is provided in Exhibit 3. CONCEPT DEVELOPMENT The following presents an overview of the breadth of options developed, including the top options that emerged through the process. Initial Options Eight (8) multimodal design options were developed within the existing right-of-way, varying in: First Street Multimodal Boulevard Study February 17, 2026 Page 6 • Number of vehicle travel lanes; • Type and placement of bicycle facilities; • Type, placement, and size of landscaped medians and buffers; • Pedestrian zone width; • Transit treatments, including bus lanes. These options were presented at Workshop 2 and evaluated through technical analysis and a variety of public preference activities. Based on evaluation results, three (3) concepts advanced for detailed technical analysis and public review at Workshop 3. Each concept incorporates the same corridor-wide safety enhancements, including: • New signalized mid-block crossings. These four crossings are proposed at Shelton Street, Booth Street, west of Wright Street and between Golden Circle Drive and Tustin Avenue. Each location would be equipped with a HAWK signal, high visibility markings and signage and a paved area in the median as a refuge island. • Tighter curb radii to slow turning vehicles. Most existing curb radii are 35' with some larger such as at the 1-5 southbound ramps. For all City intersections, the curb radius is tightened to 25', which slows the turning speed of vehicles and improves safety for pedestrians. • Intersection improvements. Based on the traffic analysis, improvements to intersections will include extending left-turn pockets in areas where queuing has the potential to block through traffic and the provision of new right-turn pockets at locations with high pedestrian and bicycle activity. • High-visibility crosswalks. At all signalized intersections and on STOP controlled side streets, high visibility bicycle crossing and crosswalks are recommended. Continental style with high retro reflectivity is recommended for maximum visibility at night. Crosswalks near school zones should be evaluated for yellow markings and signage. • Improved street lighting. This includes evaluating the corridor to ensure minimum lighting requirements are met and adding pedestrian scale lighting within the pedestrian and bicycle zone. • Transit signal priority (TSP). Adding technology to the buses and to the traffic signal to help bus on-time performance is critical to improving access to transit. The City will work with OCTA to identify the appropriate technology and implementation strategies. • Emergency Vehicle Preemption (EVE). All traffic signals will include GPS-based preemption technology to improve emergency response times. • Improved landscape and streetscape for the corridor. Street trees, low level landscape, drainage swales and other treatments will be integrated to help reduce the heat envelope along the corridor and to capture urban run- off. Additional places to rest and improved bus stops are also key to the overall corridor design. Creating a uniform plant palette and furniture design will create a cohesive feel and character along the corridor. First Street Multimodal Boulevard Study February 17, 2026 Page 7 CONCEPT OVERVIEW Fact sheets for each concept are provided in Exhibits 4, 5, and 6. Option 1: Multi-Use Path Concept • Maintains six vehicular travel lanes; • Introduces shared pedestrian/bicycle path on the south side at the sidewalk level; • Sidewalk on the north side; • Maintains existing vehicle capacity but includes shared spaces. Conceptual View Looking east on First St near Shelton St P b r, C ^] Q Q 14' 10' 76 South Roadway -na�rd Pedestrian/ Aryde Path 100' First St Right-of-way First Street Multimodal Boulevard Study February 17, 2026 Page 8 Option 2: Enhanced Pedestrian and Bicycle Zone Concept • Five travel lanes; • Separated, protected bicycle facilities on both sides; • Wider sidewalks with landscape buffers; • Reallocates one westbound travel lane to prioritize safety and comfort; • Includes bus pull outs to maintain traffic flow; • Extends left-turn pocket lengths and introduces new right-turn pockets at intersections identified to have operational impacts; • Some traffic operational tradeoffs, but overall can be implemented without significant impacts to traffic. Conceptual View Looking east on First St near Shelton St b t 4 Q Q ®] O — a I ¢ 9 I; i i I I T T T F4� I I 1 17' 66' 17' South (North) Sidewalk with Roadv x Sidewalk with Separated Bikeway Separated Bikeway immerclal/ Parking 100'First St Right-of-way * �V $ O { n J a � Y F Y First Street Multimodal Boulevard Study February 17, 2026 Page 9 Option 3: Bus Lanes and Bikeway Concept • Four general-purpose lanes plus dedicated transit-only bus lanes; • Protected bicycle facilities on both sides; • Significant transit performance benefits; • Greatest potential mode shift but highest traffic operational tradeoffs. Conceptuai v+ew o p 4 O � r T T �E 12' 76' 12' Roadway 100'Fist St Right-of-wry r 4P }5 4 CP LA ' c7 1 i Concepts East of Zoo Lane For the eastern segment (1-5 to Tustin Avenue), a consistent four-lane configuration to match the existing cross-section of First Street within City of Tustin limits with expanded pedestrian and bicycle zones is proposed across all alternatives, building on a planned First Street Multimodal Boulevard Study February 17, 2026 Page 10 City rehabilitation project and Caltrans' Freeway Ramp Active Mobility Enhancement Study (FRAMES) concept. This configuration is consistent with the vision and design standards included in the Metro East Mixed-Use Overlay Zone. The Fact Sheet for the East Side Concept is provided in Exhibit 7. Conceptual View L�oking east on First St near Golden Circle_ A lip • T T w INwtnl �•r '.� Sidewalk with 1W FiN M MOM of Separated Bikeway TRAFFIC EVALUATION OF CONCEPTS Traffic modeling using VISSIM was conducted for opening year (2028) and design year (2048) conditions. Detailed traffic operational results are included in Exhibit 1. Key findings include: • All concepts generally operate at acceptable levels of service in the opening year with targeted intersection improvements; • Some intersections experience increased delay under lane-reduction scenarios, particularly near freeway ramps; • End-to-end travel times increase slightly under the five-lane concept and increase significantly under the four-lane concept; • East-side four-lane configuration operates acceptably in both opening and design years; • Long-term traffic patterns will be further evaluated in coordination with OCTA to account for potential traffic redistribution. EVALUATION OF CONCEPT BENEFITS Using the goals of this project, input and feedback from the community, and the technical analysis conducted to date, a comparison of the benefits for each concept was developed. The comparison ("Harvey Ball" rating) is based on how each concept improves conditions by mode compared to the existing conditions. The table below summarizes the results of this exercise (full shade = meets goal; not shaded = does not meet goal). First Street Multimodal Boulevard Study February 17, 2026 Page 11 Bus Lane/Blke Lane ,. Concept Pedestrian&Bicycle Add buffer/barrier between cars O • • Safety &pedestrian/bike zone Pedestrian Add new controlled crossings • • • Connectivity Pedestrian/Bicycle Reduce crossing distance across • Exposure Time First Street Provides Dedicated Creates separate spaces for Bicycle&Pedestrian O Space • pedestrians and bikes Travel Time for Buses Improves travel time(solid) 0- - 0 • Opportunity to Increases space for new trees � • O Improve Streetscape/ and landscaping Landscape Traffic Speeds Fbtential to reduce traffic speeds O • (solid=high potential) Travel Time for Autos Potential to increase travel time • O (SOVs)-lowest,High) (solid=low potential) Delay for Autos Potential to increase delay • O (solid=lowest) Traffk Dhrersion Potential to divert traffic to • O other routes(solid=lowest) Consistency with Concept reflects goals of O • • Mobility Element multimodal corridor NEXT STEPS Staff will carefully review the analysis, findings, and community input and prepare a Final Technical Memorandum. Based on community input and technical analysis, staff will return to Council with a recommendation for selection of the Locally Preferred Alternative. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT There is no environmental impact associated with the action. FISCAL IMPACT First Street Multimodal Boulevard Study February 17, 2026 Page 12 There is no fiscal impact associated with this action. EXHIBIT(S) 1. Presentation 2. Technical Memorandum 3. Outreach and Engagement Fact Sheet 4. Option 1: Multi-Use Path Concept Fact Sheet 5. Option 2: Enhanced Pedestrian and Bicycle Zone Concept Fact Sheet 6. Option 3: Bus Lane and Bike Lane Concept Fact Sheet 7. East Side Concept Fact Sheet Submitted By: Rodolfo Rosas, P.E., Acting Executive Director— Public Works Agency Approved By: Alvaro Nunez, City Manager • � � O i � 4W ^�, IA r W^ v , 4W > 4J tA (D p o L 00 . z was Q N E }' N c6 0 _ O O V V L i -0 O i >O V � N • E ■ O4.1 N I O COs m 4.1 cn Ln 4.1 0 m N >fuLn +� Ln Ln co � rn o � i co U cu N 0 f Q V • O cn �j C6 N VJ Ln N N N VV a a T DN CD •v E E o o O v mQj In y 'Q) V) O °° � cn ; Q M O O o � � o O O O O m3 � " 1� v) N LA : (y) m mv- m o ^, O ' ^ M O ,� L.n V fu U ` Q� N v a O N 3 ILL bA 1 M� r i Gl -0 C N O O O CL 2` •_ + O Ln N N c* _ o 195 L cnQJ � V � Nam ® en �' . � V ° p 71 r� M o s ' /l J ° N v) : ; \ -- 4-, All. 1 L; Q� N 0 o rn V � �N -0 O O a) 3: N D V N m N NLL N N - a CD 2 1 N a 00 Op N ate-+ a--+ }I }r LL N tD Lq N N > M � L co � N � •� OO cn N 0 U M m Tom Do Tom � T ti }� N (� V > a--+ _ U A O U O • I` > —j - • N V� cam- • � +J C) M � � L N `v • M N O � C U o O T �tn . •O �J V OLn • ca O • a-1 : cn >�Co : . 7 : U O U : 41P Tv . - IL Y� E 1r l•4 A. .Y W -= z v) a-+ 7�_ N 0 V � N O V 0 }, LL. u i N �, � OCo x — �' D 4- W N v L/) �o O a� 4-1 p u zm ® 4- • +-+ V) Ln L Ln ca v, O � � Lo o 4- u 4- J � o o �� O mu0co a, Q � «� +-+ O N • '0 m Q O z • a m zcr, W a z J N 45 AaAAOI J ca o 0 u � v — • m i • +-+ u 10 � N • 4S lO4siaB m u W a (JO r Z7) Q� N v a O ` V � 4-1 ti • 1 v a-1 N • �. a--' N 5 L i'�tb f I • W V 4� \ Q� N O V Ni U i ?, 0 �6 4--j LL N 00 C� O 4--Jco o �I V 06 V � W W W � �rf� 7• +� N V ' +' _-- • �,�, tom,:�e4= �� - ai I ` ��. � • � ie,dry /'- • ' is i� L. ��•��, I • - f. 4-j Ln f -�1 t 1 • • *t. t -.t r A 1 � - Q WJMI rrNO O V U -0 O _ � L � N • 73 LL 4 4.1 4.1 • N • la) Q • � Q W �o 4- ,J t� 4-1 o Eir = p V -a O 4.1 �i... s 'i � V cn � +� O w z ,,. �r 1 • , �fir.:z+-•w:f -f'.- -•4.IOU•f r•. 1 ' • f f� • 4-j Co Ln LL Ln 4-j (10 !' • Ln4-j was T4 �t Q � W Q N v V n ] i Ilk i � V � O � J W • � -�,�I ���icy: � , , Ilu» V m v � � i V LL I..L Ln >1 cu O -1 I jo0 Ln r�5 0 4j W O CL 1 CL � , Q N O O O ° v � O 0 0 73 4.1 u EL 4.1 1 LA O '— V4.1 E X U � ° � CA O �N +a � cn O rj •� a� +� E — U . •� Ln � ca .� O cn E Q O4— +� c� p U — . +J U a� U - V 0 ° U Ln U w E U p[ •— ca +� — cn V m m • O cr' ca N O O V ._ ' cm U � Np � c6 w cn L7 +- cn aD - *09, U 2 o- Q N O o V � O +�' -0 0 (� 4� a) 3 4-1 v 4- a� a a 4.1 4.1 o •� 1 cz > o O 4-5 a--+ +-+ O (U > O O 4.1 N O Q Ln % Q o . _ Z o � Q Q O V H 0) 70 Q V O VV .� m Ln O o ol �_ ^, N W is Ul U �O�S118 rtr Y� of •t! �, -E4-■.1 � �14 - ~ N • i O V —�.. U �! + -0O i O JLL a.., t1 � � I � w V ` I .41 W la) ,+ ��. Of • x a--+ 1 m • � +1y1 � LL �f l 1 • ,1r V r. -Se m V �` ks v N '^ 06 v a N V �Q Q N • l0 01 Ln N N !r-I Ln N N N LnU Q U L O N N m N O O V DO N O i D L L L � V �ci N 00 It Ln O O lD ci I� L.L o —4 to -4 O 00 �o a--� N � i N N Lfl -1 -1 -1 ri m LO N • N � F u c-i O O O -4 O O O O O E N • T c-i O O O -4 O O O O O O Inc O r1 m -1 �D O O o m m v O c-I Ln Zt O O Ln ZT (n b co _ U p U O w ( M m N } O s } r • � ] c in F- W d U W d U 7 N > ZQ i i i O > i i O N ON Ln OC C N w �_ c C 2 v) c v Q 2 J c (U a U i vO U Q U OC z i U) U Q W TT '� c6 O (3) 4—f L— Q_ 4--' _0) O u o 4—j L� � � cn • O •Ln � / Q� N v a O N a� 1 � M L Ln 00 0 W — W J C� c] LLI (A J Q N V � ON W cr �� U i ow '� -a C)co LL OL V L ::3 LO a--+ LO L L S Or O �O N r _0 CV) Ln N O CV LO LO O O O O � 1 s © V � o • O V (/I (n o _ U i >, O N O a - L o L V L (� Lfj lfl O o +— N LM L ry) 1po� ::3 i (D V ~ Q ® a o 1 ulooj- + u 11 i L d C 1 N 0 N 1 1 p > 4LL •L mm 1 1 ' 1 •� O � v' any pue»• 1 — L V O 1 1 a oa 1 mJ � p N 1 1 w ISAePetleNS 1 1 p S 4oaiN 5 ,s,eo LU � p 1 -0 ! V 1 1 � _ / 06 • 1 C) \✓ w S V 4wJ4 1 N L C — 1 5 c N IS very Q ::a C • 1 1 U' o � © � Ae r o.0 s O `n 1 ra 1 � 1 1 p "a r L = 1 N (3) a` • S a 1 m Lf) N a` 3 • CD Q C) CD CD CCD CD Co CD Co — Q 3 3" U) O Ln Cl Ln > 3 W N N A s-eHs Q 3 3 IS IoPIM N IS Iolsu8 S • 6 T O vi • T • • U a 0 `~ •N N N • • • • 7 4.1 4.1 a� 4.1 cn OOP i LL N40a , cn O cn CL0 4— .Q LM V z • co L (1) +-J N >1 C: • Ln v 'vN—i • •a-=� Ln Ln Goo. Ln � cn • aL A � Q . g Ln 0 +, ° m ca 4-J � Now - N }' � v � 4-J Q) O O 410 C) V a_ O � � � V cn I-F r — aS 00 � 0 � + ON �Oo m � Q Q N O V � N 4 c O +� N L C bA E > N+� L bn C a) [p N C (� L L L 1 O � c6 � O � � � � U V U L C6 L a..+ U = — 4-1 (n f6 UA -0 a) Ln C 'O � • 73 C O .V LL GA }' a c U OU d d U� a) � O U } � a) � 41 L � L i m >` v a) 0 a p ++ C L (n �aa- , O M Ln o W v v4— Q; o ))a, kA OUi I W o Q' O oc u CL Ln +� NN Z) roa�i +, a a) o N s Q � °� N a) �a > • D CL ro o ro o 4 N O ca O L a, >, a, +, > ro _ O 1 Q _ x M bz v Z O i C � c N a) C L a> le a- U a) 0> ° )ro cn C L C > a) C +' U — L + +� a)EF _0p_ > a) Q o `a o a .� � L Q bn z of > Y N f6 4�O �O > O • ° -0 c'Lu N Y 4� >' Y C � N N o � Y p > o Q Q N 0 � �a � o N + L o 41 o � � � -0 o Qf a) a) a) O MO C `� +' +� v0i LA Q ° a, a) � � ra , C °J O75 _ 4� V) Q� N v 4� -0 0D 4-a a- J u • V V) V) U • � L.L C3) 4—J a--J -j CO V) LU V) cry • V • — +� N N Em 0 w rM 0 V V � o S 73 LL v� . _ Ln O O M N � O O O VCLCL CL Lr) O O Ooo 0 � cn � 4-0 r E N O M E I E . O E O O U O CN O ^ oo °� ^ c� Cl) oo � N CL .— o acn o O M M Q. M CL toO cAO 0 O— iQO i Cl) Q O O O (C) O � - O N > M � a t •�y ,IE V 1 � O � N U Cll 4-0 O Q N >' Q can co N U =3 CD -C co N �--' LL J '0 O L W O O O (1) U) 00- Co 0 O U) > O 4- J LL O Co, U O Co Cll cn U C) U) N cn — O O � L O LU O cn L.L = Oco Q Q .X J +� TD Q coOco m }, D - W co m co O a) � i.LU) CU - cnv) QCULLz i/1 V ZQ Q� N V � ON o\ U i O -0 O D _0 N � ::3L 4.1 1 a- j O � O � N 4-0 . Q U • � c� o V p .� cn O O QN 06 4-0 ^ ^ U O � O ^ a� p CO CU CU U O � O ' - O O Cu U Cu - (� Ln N (n o O N O • Lf O � 0 D C: •_ LL _ N 0 � � a � s � o � a� _ C � a) (n O cn (n 0 Q� }, cn O to C: � O O O �-+ r � O a)Q U U Q M Q • _ N -0 N O Q v a) DC U N � a� (3) Oo LO O � cn (n • n O V O 'cn cn (n LO 0 N ~ O QL O LM U E LO LO 0 _0 Q N 0 00 .S m CD -1 a--, ._ m _cn > 47w W Cl) > V 00 O ce) (A 00 : o V 0 ° D 00 j : N Co � (a a O O U4.1 O ' m 'V O 0 : CO co � O J Ln cn =3 U cOn 2 0 U O : O O o c� O O Ucu J U Q = Q U 0) 0 O > Q O m O O ca W OU U) U 2 U) a -j cry N U. Q - U O 0MENEM .— . U QCL O U LU) < OO 0 LU N ol U) OMENEM U. CD IZ- Utz � U O O N � � O IN. •-O ■- >+ >+ > L.L -IMMMMJ t� t� U t� 0 0 0 0 can w Q (./ / . . . . 0 0 0 Q� N v f a O � V 10 � � d N 0 _.r Dona U co m _ 0 � E cn4-0 to4-0 c� U p pO O O }' E >, s � a 0 w — E E OO M Co U W O 70 O N — 70 IL >, w Q O a� 0 0 U CD CD Co Q O LLJ O Q o L � > Q � Q � O ca m co co o O M co 70 c� cn w 0� a- j . V) Q� N v a O � V � N N i N L V 1 4-0 a--r (,� N C 0 — OU Q� > 4 U O O a)� t � E cn E cn }, 4-0N Q E 0) L E IDO 0 c �> +� cn E O 4� o L � o � C: Cn CD > �� m o w o 0 U > O .> N L4, 0 0 -0 � N (� O m �-' Ca U O C6 0 -0 4� Q a) Q a) < = N 4- 4-0 V C: cU C: E c m m w m c1) 0cnUa- O F-- O cnJ O L.� V V 16. CCL LL Ln u LM LL 0 u M E cn 0 LL C. m c _ ri u c . z _ Q rh Vl U � -0 O i V � 3 LL I � O i u wr � rn live O a I �. Q i a_+ N � cu .O v � x 1' Co 75 T In V •N •N N >, a_+ N a--+ 4-+ l� c E N C V +- Q CIO a--+ N � .- C C Qv LE N N N O i tun N 4— V N Q c6 is I. • E C u _ =� m to V �Q +-; . 0 o V� � V) V Ln ew-, V) U n V � p � ;W o vnmzv) m � w w • 0 o V O o anV W-D N® W O w a W 04wp w� r ®Av wm��s s ••1 rY 1 • w �S nepell•HS — I � 05 •S 4ay�iH S � w w E v� i5+1•o 1 P V�n �S alEryy L , w N U O° W nE Urrc O 9 N 3 oi m • N a Y 3 _-- . � • 1� � _ � _ �s�o�wvs� 5 3 3 Q • � 3 3 IS lols"O N Io35u8 S Q� N O N V -0 O D V r- N � . N d 4--J •kA 1© V � s_ J Vf O O M V o W N Ln M Q � V) a� s U ti N s 4- j J Z Lf) _O o Q V) ~ N N p a p 4-J N O +� N 4- o • L Ln M Ln Ui c O o Vf O }' y • N � U }S 10451.18 m m a Q� N O -0 O � � d � u N i ® a + l/) N t � M � Q N c (� a� t U to � N � � > N LL CL Q o 0 Q � m 0 Q 0 ~ o Z J � N • 3 0 Cl) VI m a� N U �S �O�S118 Q14- N O v V a--j E � CT) j Q _ O LO V I _ u a • Ln M N ro a VO O Ln 1 O 66 N 0 ' + cn H . . Co co a m > m LLJ m 0- LL c o L N �� U 4-1N N � — U U O C al — V) >O N U C +`+ L � a, cn (� a) U Ln In a) n3 � (n N Ln 7 X l0 l0 � �, CO fB O a) O U :3 LnQ a--� tin + CA C)+ v O Ln - O ' a) C • V1 aJ In i O U � O � N O Q� U O X Q Ln *' v ra N 4- 3 a1 Ln N 3 70 O cn a) o Ln r a, -00 �n o Ln . aQ ° o � Q� � � o V / a--+ N M 01 41 Q fu 0 04 , n OE � N O -jO = 41 Q v al M p O a--+ LA to 41 al a� 41 0 41 N i 'Q QJ m N Ln Q u Ln a E in a V V , s Q N • O "m `"s N a 'm,nm O V da -0 O IY VIN W 3 LL co Q) L a L V � r C • 'o EY c L da d co � T U Oo/� � m w L M CL cc L cn o c . to -C a� • 4-j n o cn c +-J o iL 4� •� �' a� c - ro o �_ o 0 4--, co _ u _ X V u O L � V (!� u o E • -- o U ` t q6: , R I r ��s• � r�+• _ . R 1 a � r Q N V � ON 7 � � � o N 9 p c� � ° co D • CDa • (�'? } _ i� 11 L + ■s T` 's W co O N co CD Qw CO LLJ a) c� c� a� V) � o Ln O U O O }, _ U (� U to O Ln � O a Ln LA U 0 C aLn O U 70 O U (B O CDU a� Ln M 0 U V 00 3 O 0) in -0 M C i • CD 4, o � mE ate, = _00 � Ln ° " w VJ +_' CD a) - (D �� 70 — 1 ar i aa, • � a, C a, V O 70 0 ry �c • u Cl C +, t/i L- vi Yf � E .0 o - O O C 0) ; 0 g m — > a � U � V '� O) f4 ra -0 m E 0 _ c Ln O o0 40 0 3 >, di CD c� � O a)� o � � � ; a°, 3c � YL way, ,no _ N V W 3 0 u u � � 4, c m o) .a �a +-' � i � � � .0 do CD 0 � dE � u tea, � � _ LnWm cnm - QU7) t0 -0 GCcroU uE ® • V > V Lu •� 0 0 Q N zL j, v -0 O a D v � � vn a .U d � N u a 4 � LL U cm A\ C VJ 6� 4--J E v p d co U in n rd N � a--Jco s a ® N 4 - • LL Co U� O• _ (o N Vco4 0 V ^ 3 _ � Y — s NN u W on : LL U ZE C U i ,i44 ; ; ..:f ow s , + I y T . z I Ii • "�� - 1 11�11 � • rl *#' dk �r i a ti I I b 1 ill III III IYYlI 1 Ir YID I I� La mip Om rw.s I I 1 I rs I I 1 f Q Q14- N 00 O vi f� . . CA -0 O H C + N � ca a D • + + .u � \ \ Q LL I a • � � N � p p + O + + 's ate-+ C6 . . . t cn v N Q W Cc LU O N jo (6 t c ra � � 0 a-+ a c '� r6 0 Q L io c . �, c ], � +� v► L r6 nc Ln . (V 1 V Ln 0 f6 i &F . c O Q� OL tA Ln U co Q Ln .0 fr3 Ql VI +L+ W 4-0 � to - L D 0 L Ln so to c C O {fy 0 •— CL L Q Ln rl U" OVEN c ul 1b O 0 OF c]J c 3 JA IA lali N * C3 C: '" .— ui C: lLn O ql -0 Ln 0 m OMEN CD V (� its VI ro VI rD r� 0) OG c r� Q m _ O : um V - 0 00 Q N V � V 3 T U O Y 3 -0 LL L i • N ++ 000 e � a e III u e •V vOa U O Y A r 3 Y L n y cu �1 Qc o sco (10 v� cc v o (� cn LL o (3) oy Lo _ � : v a V W V LL o U 0 Z c ... 0 U ,., �• �4 w �'. _ �-� r �'` i ..I � �' � y � _c I� � x t � t�; r � _ .� r � ' � � � N :} �� e' � I� �', L' � ,� e ..� 1 .. . . ,s � `• � �I- ;r�s _ �� �!. '. inµ � _z <���'. ram..t'�>.�\, �f _p4:!! � �� w��� (! .=a�'ewd"°'_' � � it / _' ... 1 � r i ii i � �' .x _. _ fa , o-�I a� 7. w .t _ �rT • � • � �-- - � � ' � �� �� a �' �; �+. M 1� ,�"=��:i������� � � a �� t � 4 . �`_ � �" --' � _ i� � � . z � , � �__ H �� WDm • _ O M N O N � N M :1 u N r O M O G r {p N 'o O �� ■■ ■, O O ^ O O O r O ^ O O ^ O Vi v N ' �/ �■ Q M N O M 7: � d c co N E N M Of ■ p O O O O O O O O O I,.I ate-+ • • C/') • O �_ P M �_ N N a--' t0 O O N O n ] u O O p O O O O O i W u • Q LAQ N O J .� J �O J .� J O in O LAO in O � • N H N m N H N m � 00 • f�0 (YO N cYo fY0 N N N J .s a 4. LU (A Ln U0 Ul) Lr) Ul) Ln N E O O O M O LA • • O N N 17 N rp O m N H N f6 f0 a+ fp a �0 f�0 —O mO N N U N N O O U-) cn In 0 'O O cn cn ~ cn cn 'a y n 3 Y j ) 3 O O O O a a s w r w N m � to N m C7l O O CC) O � p m O O M + + + V � m � Om N a O O O O O LU LU LU 7 7 a Nn ,� NO MO r r NO NO Q� N • •• , (V O N Ln O O LO M M O V fV �� �• �• r O O O NO r O V U • ' O OOO M Ql NM W O O O O U • LL N MM p e d • O p O NO • M U7 OD M C N m Ll N M a--+ • • O M M rf1 N N -t !n N N C/) N — N r 0 � 0 „ O O W u Q Q O Y J O] J JJ O Y O � N � • ) N N FZ) N �7 � 0 o ro ro ro ro ro ro ro n n n n n n n o 0 6O0 • ' o n Q o n Q O M O J _ C J O J _ f6 co � D CON N O CO N H N f— = co co co ro c = co ro ro co c n ) N 7 �i cn 0 O qY cn N cn U1 O • � W a N v a N a, ra ro Q N W "T Ln a lV W In m _ Ln rnn o CD m CD N + + + V N cn Ln L Ln mM N N CD i + + m + m m m m m LU - Imp 0 Ln N _0 N O c N U i N N 5 m N v u co > cu cc L Od cn > +� > > O m � +� � u }' _ � c0 O Q }, N a cn Co Ca N �--+ C6 }' � >� O a) •i i cn Nn cn Q u co coC6 -0 � Q +-� v = (, N Ln E o I �, � � � � CU J 0 Z � 7 N i : : • • � d • O 00000 • • • • 00 dddd • �I • O • �5OOd 0000O ■ I � j Q � ma rA v = E mdK - T N W C ` G •.GG > W C A o 0 Q N Q ,Z V O V � O � � � d ++ N i ® a + L • � u IA M 0 0 Ln Q la) CL C � ..0 U l/7 Vl � � j N Q O Z � • Q m Cl) LU U Z J Q • • �5 ,IaMO�� � � o N � u M � N QJ � +' N U �S �O�S1,18 a Q N $� O z ar O V y ,c m >, ii �o v O Co to CL .U d � N 3 a . — 4 1 �--� 1 u Q V/ ` i Ln cc l w 4--J c LL a--j 0 LL Q� co }, J cu C� L4t - V r - • L o r , u i/1 V t„O Q� N O V � N V -0 O � V � � � d i�spa N i z . - O o a T � LI'f C z bk r ' PEI- w Santa Ana First Street Multimodal Study COMMUNITY OUTREACH SUMMARY August 2025 — January 2026 ® Moving • • Forward 0 on First FIRST STREET MULTIMODAL BOULEVARD STUDY COMMUNITY OUTREACH SUMMARY Contents ExecutiveSummary................................................................................................................ 3 Background............................................................................................................................ 8 Purpose and Engagement Goals............................................................................................ 9 StudyAudiences .................................................................................................................... 9 EquitableEngagement.......................................................................................................10 Strategyand Methodology.....................................................................................................12 Community and Stakeholder Activities, Tools, and Tactics....................................................12 Stakeholder Engagement Activities....................................................................................12 OutreachTools ..................................................................................................................30 Key Outcomes and Community Input....................................................................................41 Achievements ....................................................................................................................41 Challenges and Lessons Learned .........................................................................................42 LessonsLearned ...............................................................................................................42 Next Steps and Recommendations .......................................................................................43 Recommendations.............................................................................................................43 APPENDIX A: Community Workshop Series.........................................................................44 Community Workshop Series 1 ..........................................................................................44 Community Workshop Series 2..........................................................................................54 Community Workshop Series 3..........................................................................................75 APPENDIX B: Pop-up Events................................................................................................81 APPENDIX C: Website Metrics..............................................................................................86 APPENDIX D: Educational Materials.....................................................................................88 APPENDIX E: Equity Framework Technical Memorandum....................................................90 First Street Multimodal Boulevard Study—2 COMMUNITY OUTREACH SUMMARY Executive Summary From August 2025 through January 2026, the City of Santa Ana, together with HDR, Costin Public Outreach Group, Inc., and Cityworks Design, launched a comprehensive multilingual outreach campaign (campaign) for Santa Ana's First Street Multimodal Boulevard Study (Study). Through a range of in-person and digital tools and tactics, they reached over 1,100 community members in six months. The Study covers a 3-mile corridor on First Street, a major east-west arterial. The study area extends from Bristol Street on the west to Tustin Avenue on the east, and is a key route for people driving, walking, biking, and riding Orange County Transportation Authority's (OCTA) high-ridership bus Route 64. The campaign aimed to promote a collaborative process in which the existing conditions, public input, technical analysis, and preference survey were meaningfully integrated into design concepts. Gathering input from, informing, and educating people who travel, work, and live along the corridor was instrumental throughout the Study. These efforts guided the creation of eight design options, which later evolved into three design concepts presented to the City Council in February 2026, each reflecting community priorities. This transparent and inclusive approach presented an opportunity to educate residents about road safety, elevate diverse community voices, and promote equitable participation in shaping the future of multimodal travel along First Street (Figure 1). I • ►Mail I Is � off° .•• : • .. � e � t r _� e .Lam• Figure 1: Community members review project boards on display at the City's Chicano Heritage Festival on Aug.24,2025. First Street Multimodal Boulevard Study—3 COMMUNITY OUTREACH SUMMARY w_ The campaign combined in-person and digital engagement activities in English, Spanish, and Vietnamese to reach as many community members as possible, including: • Hosting community workshops. • Attending and disseminating information at local events. • Visiting local businesses to inform them about the Study and inviting them to participate and share feedback at upcoming events. • Presenting at various neighborhood association meetings. • Conducting in-person surveys at a local school to collect feedback. • Partnering with community-based organizations (CBOs). • Engaging in open dialogue with local stakeholders such as the City Council, OCTA, and the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans). Digital activities included virtual community meetings, online surveys, and multilingual informational videos explaining design options. A dedicated Study website served as an ongoing resource for the community, providing background information, goals and objectives, public insights received at workshops that informed design development, an overview of multimodal benefits, options to share feedback, and an email registration opportunity to stay informed. Throughout the Study, feedback was continuously received and thoughtfully considered (Figure 2). As expected, responses varied, and while some participants expressed satisfaction with the direction and outcomes, others raised concerns. Some common themes were: • Traffic congestion: This includes concerns that reducing vehicle lanes would worsen traffic congestion, increase commute times, create safety hazards, and negatively impact daily life for drivers, families, seniors, and emergency vehicles. • Lane preservation: This includes the desire to preserve the existing number of lanes, as well as the need to expand current sidewalks and include more amenities such as dedicated bus lanes or shade trees. • Bike lane usage: This includes the belief that bike lanes are underutilized and do not reflect how residents primarily travel (by car) and that First Street should work for all types of travelers, as well as the idea that bike lanes should be protected with physical barriers separating vehicles and cyclists. • Safety: This includes the focus on safer, transit-oriented street design, as well as pedestrian safety and concerns that the current corridor feels unsafe due to high traffic speeds and wide crossings. • Distrust of prior citywide infrastructure changes: This includes concerns about long- term maintenance costs and ongoing construction impacts, as well as an appreciation for the opportunity to voice community concerns during the Study phase. 16. First Street Multimodal Boulevard Study—4 COMMUNITY OUTREACH SUMMARY e - 0.1 i i r 5 Figure 2: Project team members interact with the community at the Santa Ana Senior Center during the Free Lunch Program on Sept.24,2025. This report summarizes the feedback and input received to date and how that information has been utilized in the development of potential concepts for the corridor. This range of perspectives highlights the complexity of the Study and underscores the importance of an inclusive outreach approach to inform decision-making. For this reason, it is recommended to perform ongoing outreach throughout project funding and construction, followed by a comprehensive educational campaign upon completion to address potential concerns, improve understanding of enhanced transit equity, and counter misinformation. An overview infographic highlighting the Study's outreach process and reach metrics— including hosting 13 presentations (three stakeholder one-on-one presentations and 10 presentations at events), using various digital channels to promote the Study, and meeting with multiple working group stakeholders, including five CBOs and 28 different stakeholder groups that were invited to participate in meetings and receive updates —are shown on the following pages. First Street Multimodal Boulevard Study— 5 COMMUNITYOUTREACH PPESENTATIONS 3 10 Stakeholder Presentations One-on-one at Events Presentations • Jim Rodeo p Moving • Santa Ana City (Jim Thorpe Forward Projects Review Elementary School) 0 on First Meeting • Fiestas Patrias FIRSTS RE MULTIMODAL Santa Ana Fire SEVA Food Pantry BOU UDY Department Drive Thru (2) • Santa Ana Police Chicano Heritage Department Festiva Latino Health Access Senior Group • Walk to School Day • Santa Ana High School Youth Club Meeting • Santa Ana College Career Fair ATP Mixer 3 2 1 4 Surveys YouTube Multilingual Social Media Videos Website Posts 503 Interactions 875 31180 73 7 Views Views Likes Reposts 66 4 Shares Comments First Street Multimodal Boulevard Study— 6 COMMUNITYOUTREACH WORKING ■ ■ STAKEHOLDERS 5 01 QVIR12#44! CEOs The BiCiCl6 LATINO W (� HEALTH OCCORD e' a SANTA ANA ACTIVE STREETS ACCESS BUILDING COMMUNITY POWER The Bicycle Orange County Santa Ana Latino Health Orange County Tree Environmental Active Streets Access Communities Justice Organized for Responsible Development 28 - StakeholdersW2 VIM I UJI I N - -__ _-- lal&ans OCTA Stakeholders invited to participate in City of City of Tustin Caltrans Orange County meetings and who Santa Ana Transportation received updates Authority and information throughout the outreach process. Orange County Mercy House John F. Kennedy Fire Authority Santa Ana Historical Elementary School • Environmental Preservation Society Roosevelt-Walker and Transportation Thrive Community Academy Advisory Committee Land Trust Santa Ana • Santa Ana Senior LIUNA - Local 652 City College Center • SEIU USWW - Martin R. Heninger Orange County Local 1877 Elementary School CEO's Office • Santa Ana Unified Santa Ana • OC Health Care School District High School Agency Edward B. Cole • County of Orange ' Raymond Villa Academy Fundamental y • Orange County Intermediate School Rancho Santiago Business Council Carver Elementary Community • Santa Ana Chamber College District • Garfield Elementary of Commerce School First Street Multimodal Boulevard Study—7 COMMUNITYOUTREACH Background First Street is currently a six-lane street with a raised median between intersections and left-turn pockets at intersections. It serves OCTA's OC Bus Route 64, one of the highest-ridership routes in Orange County, with nearly 50 stops in Santa Ana alone. In 2022, the City of Santa Ana identified First Street as a corridor for multimodal improvements and updated the Mobility Element of the City's General Plan, which proposed downgrading First Street's classification from a Major Arterial (six lanes) to a Primary Arterial (four lanes). I n 2024, the City's Vision Zero Plan identified it as one of the top five corridors requiring safety enhancements, particularly for vulnerable road users, including pedestrians and bicyclists. The Study explored the breadth of potential roadway configurations for purposes of identifying viable options to transform and improve the corridor into a truly multimodal corridor for all modes of travel, regardless of age or ability. The Study also evaluated concepts that enhanced access to businesses, residential neighborhoods, educational facilities, and other key destinations (Figure 3). Al NAM MR a• Figure 3: Image of Flower Street signal from the Study walk audit on July 16,2025. First Street Multimodal Boulevard Study— 8 COMMUNITY OUTREACH SUMMARY Purpose and Engagement Goals The outreach campaign supported the technical team by gathering input from, informing, and educating a diverse range of Santa Ana residents and stakeholders about potential multimodal improvements (Figure 4). Ilk Figure 4: Project staff shares information about the Study at the Santa Ana Senior Center on Sept.24,2025. The campaign's goals were to: • Engage diverse audiences and use their input to inform the Study, while emphasizing transparency, community voice, and equitable participation in shaping the corridor's future. • Engage partners and stakeholders early and throughout the process to identify shared goals, understand concerns, and balance competing needs. • Help build trust, improve project outcomes, and ensure that street changes better reflect the priorities of the community, while remaining technically and operationally feasible. Study Audiences This Study highlights the importance of equitable community engagement while recognizing the roles of stakeholders, including elected officials, partner organizations, and the business community. A demographic analysis of the 1-mile radius around the corridor found a diverse population, including significant numbers of Spanish-speaking households and a strong presence of Spanish-language digital platforms. Along with higher rates of public transit use, carpooling, and lower homeownership than in Orange County overall, this indicates housing insecurity and positions the project to connect First Street Multimodal Boulevard Study—9 COMMUNITY OUTREACH low-income households to resources through improved transportation. In addition, the analysis showed the percentage of: • Residents who lack access to a private vehicle: 55% • Residents who own smartphones, enabling mobile-focused engagement strategies: 94%. • Blue collar workers in the area: 31%. • Service workers, often traveling outside traditional commuting hours, highlighting the need for flexible mobility options: 25%. • Homes that lack internet access: 15%. Equitable Engagement The team developed a technical memorandum evaluating the equity framework (framework) related to existing conditions and connectivity to needs within the community, which can be found in APPENDIX E: Equity Framework Technical Memorandum. The framework incorporated multiple indicators that threatened residents' health, safety, and quality of life. The team leveraged community analytics and extensive experience in equity-based geographic analysis, utilizing tools such as CalEnviroScreen, the California Department of Education, the California Healthy Places Index, and CDC PLACES data, to illustrate risks and needs across census tracts. The preliminary equity analysis revealed that all census tracts within the study area were categorized as SB535 Disadvantaged Communities. East of Interstate 5, the community analytics showed other equity concerns, including low healthcare access and high exposure to diesel particulate matter due to its location between two freeways. The assessment became comprehensive by integrating multiple data sources, community feedback, and on-street observations. Field investigations documented informal economic activities, such as street vendors, and identified opportunities for bus stop amenities, and designed alternatives to support micro-community spaces. Crash data compiled in geographic information systems (GIS) overlaid on land-use maps to examine correlations among crash density, income levels, and proximity to transit or community services. Further analysis explored disparities in race, ethnicity, and income to inform transportation access, engagement strategies, and safety measures. The memorandum provided a detailed snapshot of socioeconomic and demographic characteristics, environmental conditions, and health outcomes along the corridor. This baseline informed stakeholder engagement and guided the development of multimodal concept alternatives to improve equitable health outcomes, while addressing risks. It included maps of disadvantaged census tracts using common metrics such as income and environmental hazards, as well as nuanced measures, including housing security, health factors, and food access. Examples of these maps are shown in Figure 5 and Figure 6. First Street Multimodal Boulevard Study— 10 COMMUNITYOUTREACH Legend First Street Multimodal Corridor Study Census Bock Groups m .f Study Area City of Santa Ana O study Area Pmerty Rate 0%-5% 6%-10% 11%-25% 28%-a0% Frs,Street 1� D � D -n rantrn ww L _ ti Figure 5: Map of poverty rate 0.5-mile walking distance from the Study area. First Street Multimodal Corridor Legend Fnsl Sbeni Prup..l Cuu, City of Santa Ana . FMiles Street � • • Diabetes crude Prevaln 01. • • 9.9-72.1 • • • 12.1-U. • currant asthma • 1%1 5.7-9.5 9.6-10 • • • 11-11 12-12 1J-21 • ' ..1.a.e y • 1 vas•vm qq 0.5 1 Miles N Figure 6: Map of asthma and diabetes rates in and around the Study area. First Street Multimodal Boulevard Study— 11 COMMUNITYOUTREACH Strategy and Methodology To enable a transparent, inclusive, and community-driven design process, outreach and engagement were integrated into the technical analysis and concept development throughout this planning phase of the project. Community and stakeholder engagement events were aligned with key Study development points, including understanding existing conditions (engagement Phase 1), identifying the 8 options (engagement Phase 2), and refining the options to 3 concepts (engagement Phase 3). The coordination of the outreach events relative to the technical analysis is outlined in Figure 7 below. low OUTREACH AND ENGAGEMENT PHASE _V_ PHASE PHASE2 PHASE3 PHASE May 2025-June 2025 July 2025-September 2025 October 2025-December 2025 December 2025-May 2026 EXISTING CONDITION ANALYSIS AND ASSESSMENT Website S.ial Media Updates OUTREAENGAGEMENT ENGAGEMENT Community Pop Up Events, :r Meetings,Neighborhood Meetings,Ward Updates :r CONCEPTUAL PLANNING r •r r Figure 7:A phased schedule was used that integrated outreach and engagement throughout the technical analysis and concept development in the planning phase. Community and Stakeholder Activities, Tools, and Tactics HDR presented an equity-centered Outreach and Engagement Plan (Plan) in line with the strategy, which was updated and refined in coordination with the City of Santa Ana. This Plan includes a breakdown of audiences, strategies, and communication tools and tactics for each group. :stakeholder Engagement Activities To verify appropriate engagement ensued, a broad internal stakeholder group was identified. To bring them to the table and encourage participation, the team identified various subcategories and meeting types to accommodate their availability. These included Stakeholder Groups, Presentations to Mayor and City Council, Community Working Groups, Presentations to Neighborhood Associations (NA), CBO Working Groups, and Community Workshops. First Street Multimodal Boulevard Study— 12 COMMUNITYOUTREACH STAKEHOLDER GROUP As shown in the infographic included in the Executive Summary, the outreach team invited representatives from the City of Santa Ana, the City of Tustin, OCTA, Caltrans District 12, the Orange County Fire Authority, educational institutions, local businesses, and community-based organizations to meet to discuss the corridor's existing conditions and design concepts. The group met in person three times at Santa Ana City Hall, providing feedback throughout the Study. In addition, an online Study introduction meeting was held to encourage participation. Feedback Received These stakeholder discussions allowed the team to gather valuable feedback from key partners, including: • Emphasizing safety as a top priority for all users along the corridor. • Highlighting the need for separated bicycle and pedestrian facilities, improved crosswalks, and measures to address vehicle speeds. • Considering bus pullout lanes to reduce conflicts and improve transit operations. PRESENTATIONS TO MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL The team conducted briefing meetings with City Council members and the Mayor's office throughout the Study to inform these elected officials of the project progress and integrated outreach and concept development plan. In addition, the team provided City staff and other personnel with the necessary information, data, tools, and talking points to deliver clear and concise briefings. These updates included recommending a locally preferred alternative for the City Council to address this Study publicly on March 3, 2025, at the City Chamber. In October 2025, the team also attended and presented the Study at the City's Faith Leaders Meeting with the Mayor, and at Coffee with the Mayor events. Feedback Received Across the board, council members: • Emphasized safety along the corridor as their highest priority, especially given the high rate of pedestrian and bike accidents and fatalities. • Requested solutions to address traffic congestion and increase pedestrian crossings. • Sought opportunities to enhance corridor aesthetics, add shade trees, and improve street and amenity lighting. First Street Multimodal Boulevard Study— 13 COMMUNITYOUTREACH NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION PRESENTATIONS The Study spanned wards 2, 3, 5, and 6, as seen in Figure 8, but its impact is anticipated to benefit all neighborhoods in the surrounding wards. The team reached out to NAs and engaged with residents to provide information about the Study, emphasize its importance, address community concerns, collect comments, and invite them to attend the workshops to better incorporate their vision into the concepts and options when selecting the locally preferred alternative. wards and Neighborhoods Around the Study Area > 17TH ST ¢ 17TH ST WASHINGTON AV© 34 L51 62 z a Z LO 21 CIVIC CENTER DR C 49 3LO 5 28 SANTA ANA BLVD 63 6 U 1ST ST 1sT ST s5 60 57 v~i Z _ W UJ t7 36 41 0 alp 60 53�v� 2 L ¢ 6 1 LL O LL � MC FADDENAV 40 4B 20 0 10 I5� EDINGER AV m 47 EDINGER AV 33 a 148 18 35 — 11 < — 16 j 15 m �12] c9 =Study Area WARD 1 WARD 3 WARD 5 WARD 6 Council Member: Council Member. Council Member: Council Member: Thai Viet Phan Jessie Lopez Johnathan Ryan David Penaloza 30 Windsor Village 7 Saddleback View Hernandez 1 Logan 53 Windsor Village North 49 Mabury Park 4 Washington Park 5 French Park 60 Lyon Street 6 Lacy 21 Artesia Pilar(2) WARD 2 62 Grand Sunrise 22 Mar-Les 10 Wilshire Square 65 Zoo District 11 Santa Ana Memorial Park Council Member: 28 Flower Park 12 Delhi 34 Willard Benjamin Vazquez WARD 4 57 Casa Bonita 25 French Court 63 Downtown 47 Madison Park 8 Heninger Park(2) Council Member: 48 Cedar Evergreen Co-Op 9 Pacific Park(3) Phil Bacerra 51 Cornerstone Village 20 Mid-City 60 Lyon Street 36 Central City 15 Bristoi/Warner 40 Bella Vista 16 Laurelhurst 41 Pico-Lowell 18 Centennial Park 46 New Horizons 33 Shadow Run 35 Valley Adams Figure 8: Map indicating the City of Santa Ana Wards and the Study area. First Street Multimodal Boulevard Study— 14 COMMUNITY OUTREACH The team visited the following neighborhood associations at least once during the Study; in some cases, they met more than once, as shown in Figure 9, Figure 10, and Figure 11. In total, 12 meetings took place with NAs. • Artesia Pillar (Aug. 21, 2025) • Downtown, Flower Park, and Artesia Pillar Combined (Oct. 16, 2025) • Heninger Park (Sept. 10, 2025, and Nov. 12, 2025) • Pacific Park (Sept. 9, 2025, and Jan. 13, 2026) • Pico Lowel (Sept. 17, 2025) • Saddleback View and Zoo District Combined (Oct. 22, 2025) • Willard (Sept. 8, 2025) • Valley Adams, Centennial Park, Laurelhurst, and Shadow Run (Jan. 14, 2026) • Neighborhood Association Presidents Meeting (Oct. 28, 2025) Feedback Received During the neighborhood association meetings, residents shared their input, including: • Voicing a wide range of safety-related concerns. • Expressing hesitation about reducing vehicle lanes, particularly given other ongoing infrastructure projects throughout Santa Ana. • Worrying that lane reductions could worsen traffic congestion or shift vehicles onto nearby residential streets. • Agreeing on the need to reduce vehicle speeds to help prevent accidents and minimize the risk of serious injuries or fatalities in the neighborhood. • Expressing frustration with the current unhoused population situation and indicating that they would prefer not to add amenities such as additional trees or benches if those improvements might encourage people experiencing homelessness to sleep or gather in those areas. • Sharing that they were pleased to learn the project is currently in the study phase and stating that they appreciated the opportunity to provide feedback, as they felt their concerns were being heard as part of the decision-making process. First Street Multimodal Boulevard Study— 15 COMMUNITYOUTREACH Awl '. .y RG►,- Figure 11: Presentation at Downtown, Flower Park,and Artesia Pillar Neighborhood Associations' meeting on Oct.21,2025. o _ AN Figure 9: Study presentation at Heninger Park Neighborhood Association meeting on Sept. 11,2025. Figure 10: Study materials on display at the Willard Neighborhood Association meeting on Sept. 8,2025. First Street Multimodal Boulevard Study— 16 COMMUNITYOUTREACH COMMUNITY-BASED ORGANIZATION WORKING GROUP The team organized a Community Working Group (CWG) comprising local grassroots CBOs to build strong relationships with key populations along the corridor. The CBOs that participated are: • Latino Health Access • Orange County Communities Organized for Responsible Development • Orange County Environmental Justice • Santa Ana Active Streets • The Bicycle Tree These organizations hosted engagement efforts and shared educational materials and event information through their channels, as demonstrated in Figure 12 and Figure 13. Additionally, CWGs reviewed and provided culturally competent, linguistically inclusive feedback on educational and communication materials. Hello, this is OCCORD!The City of Santa Ana wants your input on how to make First Street safer& more accessible �, Watch the videos of the 8 design options&vote for your top 3 by Oct 10! M Videos: English w/Vietnamese subs: www.youtube.com/watch? v=IkLLAspZVdc Espanol:www.y_qutube.com/ watch?v=ZW8d0050KoY Poll: English:hdr.iotform.com/team/ public/first-street-survey Espanol:hdr.jotform.com/team/ public/f irst-street-survey-sspanish Tigng Vitt:hdr.jotform.com/team/ public/first-street-survey_ vietnamese Figure 12: Short Message Service(SMS)sent by OCCORD advertising the multilingual videos and the design option poll. First Street Multimodal Boulevard Study— 17 COMMUNITY OUTREACH About SAAS _ ocWbtt 15-0radber3- AOVocdtN _ Educates _ 28 First Street Multi Modal Study SURVEY p Moving Acuvatc _ Thc Uty of Santa Ana's F,IW Sncal M..,c'rwda BCul—C Study alms to—a onn and lnprore ble p F o r wa r d r"Sbeef cortba tween be Bnwol Sleet and Tusbn Avenue fora,modes of tramponaton,hiding EVM� buses bicycles wrs.and pedeztAans wish enh--access to h:sinezxs 1-i—tal Donate neigrComoods ed—tgnil facllrp aM olntt k,*oes0r•Jom Tile s6K7y Mends W Ord on First inproverieres� .i p i November 2025 November 10 Q 6 OC prn-7 30 p^ n za t Q aaCtiveztreels Advocate Subcommittee Join us for the return of.... Join,o,lr!tt�leo Oaln,yr,—aonnacrrve I—Vo aboninSantaAmaridon cnge ty SAAS ADVOCATE Jo our monnry A*—te Sub,—.ee and ion me donversatgn.AQMW topes may lnoude bus SUBCOMMITTEE Figure 13: The Santa Ana Active Streets website advertised the Study's survey. Feedback Received The CWG met virtually three times in addition to the quarterly Stakeholder Group meetings throughout the Study. In addition to fostering meaningful community participation and understanding of the Study, the organizations emphasized several common themes during these meetings: • That this project should not be seen solely as a bike lane initiative, but as a multimodal, inclusive effort for people of all ages and travel preferences. • Emphasized the importance of incorporating community feedback in the design options to build trust with the community. • Encouraged that Public Works delivered a comprehensive briefing and work study session to the City Council prior to a selection of a locally preferred alternative. It was also noted that, while traffic is undesirable, the corridor is often empty during the day, when accidents are most likely to occur. When presented with all options, the CWG was not in favor of the concept that maintained all six travel lanes. They noted that such a concept would not be in alignment with the multimodal goals of the project. First Street Multimodal Boulevard Study— 18 COMMUNITYOUTREACH COMMUNITY WORKSHOPS Community input was central to this Study. The series of workshops provided an opportunity to introduce the Study and gather community input on making First Street a healthier and safer corridor for all residents who use it. The in-person workshops were held at the Roosevelt-Walker Community Center, located under a quarter-mile south of First Street and Standard Avenue, providing convenient access for nearby residents (Figure 14). The goal was to provide multiple in-person and virtual opportunities for participants to connect with the team, learn about the Study, share experiences traveling along First Street, and suggest improvements to access and travel options. The workshops were conducted in multiple phases, each serving a specific purpose in the proposed project development process. Additional pictures of the workshops and comments are provided in APPENDIX A: Community Workshop Series. CIVIC CENTER DR � 5 0 SANTA ANA BLVD O m JST ST JST ST m CHESTNUT AVE Z - cj Q O q_ J LC ' - MC FADDEN AV Q Q o UJ Z Q co Q EDINGER AV m O N z of m VI = Roosevelt-Walker Community Center = Study Area Figure 14: Map of the Roosevelt-Walker Community Center and its proximity to the Study area. I� First Street Multimodal Boulevard Study— 19 COMMUNITY OUTREACH SUMMARY Workshop Series#1 —Study Introduction and Issue Identification During Phase 1 of the outreach and engagement strategy, two workshops were held in August 2025 to introduce the proposed project and solicit participants' input regarding pedestrian and bicycle safety, transit, and general mobility challenges. One workshop was held in person, and the other was held virtually. The in-person workshop included a large-format aerial map of the corridor (Figure 15), on which attendees were asked to share challenges, preferences, and concerns using sticky notes placed at locations across the corridor. Ole- .y, Figure 15: Workshop 1 participants notated comments on aerial maps regarding corridor enhancements during the event on Aug.26,2025. Feedback Received A total of 45 community members participated and 102 comments were collected on comment cards (Figure 16), design option boards (Figure 17), and aerial maps of the corridor via sticky notes. Overall, participants supported a safer, slower, and more transit- focused First Street that would encourage active transportation and community use. A summary of the comments include: • Many expressed strong support for prioritizing bicycle, pedestrian, and transit improvements along First Street, particularly protected Class IV bike lanes with First Street Multimodal Boulevard Study—20 COMMUNITY OUTREACH physical barriers and dedicated bus-only lanes, including potential center-running configurations. • Many stated that the current corridor felt unsafe due to high traffic speeds and wide crossings, and they advocated for traffic calming measures such as reduced target speeds (20 MPH), fewer lanes at intersections, bulb-outs, protected mid-block crossings, and shorter crossing distances. • Respondents emphasized the need for wider sidewalks, shade trees (excluding palm trees), enhanced lighting, high-quality bus stops with buffers and ADA access, and improved left-turn safety at key intersections. • Several individuals suggested viewing portions of the corridor as an extension of the urban core, incorporating canopy coverage, alley access strategies, and transit- oriented development. • Some participants, while supportive of improvements, raised concerns about long- term maintenance costs and cautioned against reducing vehicle lanes citywide without broader community input. The online workshop was recorded and uploaded to the City's YouTube account to amplify accessibility and reach, and a multilingual pinpoint digital survey, discussed later in the report, was conducted to replicate the in-person exercise. comment/question Card ©Moving Comment/Question Card Moving Name Forward Name' s Forward ph.— ® 0 on First I Phone: on First Email. Email: comment/Qesnon: Wnment/Question: k C I S ovrd7 -14 c: yr is!-Nm Viefis 1> \IpU arc COkl4de.htiV 7 Q m+ki1.✓�_ fYH Ol iA15 ';Wf IVI.{D OK bCI, QiRA t Irtcolnsi erl ov plie-A e doylf Shv,_+s cm CID P.IAIh AAu K"VIe smeds 0-f- Ow, 1�Ine. JA118 k aln iln l \jWjWr(, fD( C hjft*lI Dv aj- CDInW"r 0n vo#y, MVY) VnW (� wugln�n✓1�ooeCs Thankyoutoryour panMpatlonl Yourfeedbackisvaluabletous. I Thank you for your participatiorl Your feedback is valuable to us. Figure 16: Example of several comment cards completed from Workshop 1. First Street Multimodal Boulevard Study—21 COMMUNITYOUTREACH A0 .: Angeles, • n T I' t? 44 ing - rC� �e'l fart dv a41ea4\ ��� CGryi/�-S •• • �• •• • `.i�aniynrx�hcoG •• : •• �• .: • r lk(Ud2 Lu''tk ZA 1 �� �mpruvPnrenti -rher-s houtie,, bud rot pi.at;b ( 5:4-�!*-Se now-V y — V(,rsSw•\k5 (P/`jam ✓ y. S�r,,� �F.l. i S r • • • • a+i;"oM • •• • • • •aa�.��—ti.nb Figure 17: Example of several comments on design option boards from Workshop 1. First Street Multimodal Boulevard Study—22 COMMUNITYOUTREACH Workshop Series#2—Design Options Review During Phase 2 of the outreach and engagement strategy, two in-person workshops were held in September 2025. Building on input gathered during Workshop 1 and from additional stakeholder outreach, a total of eight corridor design concepts were developed and presented in Workshop 2 (Figure 18). These concepts directly reflected community and stakeholder feedback. Among the options shown were the undercrossing and various bus stop concepts, which were highlighted in response to specific community interests. Large poster boards displayed renderings of each design option and explained the design's multimodal benefits and challenges. Large-format aerial maps were also available for comments. Participants reviewed the design options, learned about the benefits and trade- offs of each option, and provided feedback on safety, comfort, accessibility, and connectivity. This input helped the team better understand community priorities and use that understanding to develop three corridor concepts. lanes with sikeLanes6Nth athGCr ng Dz•a2 �t *0s 16t` t na19rA+rY ac v 3 � 1 5 1 i• w eke{��"� �°`` T Figure 18: Workshop 2 participants discussed design options with Study staff during the event on Sept. 17,2025. First Street Multimodal Boulevard Study—23 COMMUNITY OUTREACH SUMMARY Feedback Received A total of 70 community members were engaged, and 88 comments were submitted on comment cards and via sticky notes on aerial maps. The community input reflected strong but mixed perspectives. Overall, the community sought a balanced approach that improved safety, accessibility, and transit reliability while maintaining reasonable traffic flow and addressing neighborhood security concerns. A summary of the comments include: • Many participants expressed support for a safer, more connected multimodal corridor — particularly protected bike lanes and dedicated bus lanes, with Option 6 most frequently favored and Option 8 also receiving support in congested segments. • Residents emphasized ADA-accessible bus stops, traffic calming, improved lighting, additional crosswalks, and clear separation between bikes, pedestrians, buses, and vehicles. • Some participants opposed removing travel lanes due to concerns about congestion and ongoing construction impacts. • Several individuals raised broader issues related to homelessness, cleanliness, and public safety. Following the event, a video presentation was posted online to give community members an additional opportunity to learn about the eight concepts, along with an Eight Design Options Preference Poll to identify which concept people preferred most. The video presentation and the poll are discussed later in this report. More than 690 views and more than 640 responses were received in the corridor preferences poll. First Street Multimodal Boulevard Study—24 COMMUNITYOUTREACH Workshop Series#3—Preferred Alternative Features Feedback During Phase 3 of the outreach and engagement strategy, two in-person workshops were held in December 2025. Building on feedback from Workshop 2, the Design Options Poll, the project video, and additional stakeholder outreach, three refined corridor design concepts were developed and presented during Workshop 3. This indicates an iterative planning process that incorporates prior community input and stakeholder engagement to narrow options into more defined proposals for further consideration (Figure 19). Each design concept was printed on large poster boards, and corresponding aerial maps were available for each concept. Participants were invited to comment on specific design features, identify remaining concerns, and suggest final adjustments to ensure the selected alternative best reflected community needs and the Study's goals. 11 �J r P Figure 19: Workshop 3 participants discussed one of three design concept aerial maps at the community workshop event in December 2025. On Nov. 20, 2025, the outreach team visited 14 locations adjacent to and along the Study corridor to invite stakeholders to participate in the December Workshop 3 series. Study fact sheets, postcards, and posters in English, Spanish, and Vietnamese featuring information about the Study website and Workshop 3 were distributed at each location for display and sharing with visitors (Figure 20 and Figure 21). During these visits, outreach staff engaged directly with community members and increased awareness of opportunities to provide feedback and help inform the Study's design concept development. First Street Multimodal Boulevard Study—25 COMMUNITYOUTREACH Businesses visited as part of the Workshop 3 outreach efforts included: • El Salvador Community Center • Orange County Environmental Justice • Assistance League Thrift Shop • Santa Ana Senior Center • The Frida Cinema • Roosevelt Walker Community Center • Delhi Community Center • Santa Ana DMV • Cho Tam Bien Market • Metro East Senior Center • Thanh Long Market • Saigon Supermarket • Vien Dong Seafood Market • Santa Ana College School of Continuing Education (located in Centennial Park) 4r R1Nti m 1 Ir Figure 20: English and Vietnamese posters for Workshop 3 were on display at the Saigon Supermarket in the City of Westminster,adjacent to the Study area. First Street Multimodal Boulevard Study—26 COMMUNITY OUTREACH J f a 1 1 L_= Figure 21:Workshop 3 flyers were displayed at the CA DMV on First Street in Santa Ana. Feedback Received A total of 85 community members were engaged, and 237 comments were collected via comment cards, feedback forms, sticky notes on aerial maps, and large notepads next to the design concept boards. Although attendees were not asked to select a preferred design option, several consistent priorities emerged. Overall, the community is seeking a balanced corridor design that maintains traffic flow while improving safety, accessibility, environmental quality, and overall usability. A summary of the comments include: • Community members strongly emphasized pedestrian and bicyclist safety, requesting raised crosswalks, protected intersections, complete sidewalks, and fully separated bike paths. • Participants highlighted the importance of improved lighting, reflective features, and tree canopy to enhance safety and comfort, particularly for students and daily walkers. • Residents expressed concern about preserving vehicle travel capacity to prevent increased congestion, while suggesting measures such as narrower lanes and speed management strategies to calm traffic without eliminating lanes. • Several participants shared support for underground utilities, clearly defined sidewalks, and separated bus lanes. • Community members expressed appreciation for the opportunity to participate and for the clarity of information provided. First Street Multimodal Boulevard Study—27 COMMUNITYOUTREACH COMMUNITY PRESENTATIONS (POP-UP EVENTS) To reach residents beyond those who attended the workshops, the team recognized that engaging people in spaces where they already gather was important. This strategy creates multiple feedback loops, offering more accessible, hands-on opportunities for community members to explore potential project concepts and share feedback in a comfortable, informal setting. The team attended 10 community events across all Study phases and engaged with approximately 260 residents to answer questions and gather input (Figure 22, Figure 23, and Figure 24). These events also provided opportunities to direct the public to other digital resources such as the Study's website and surveys, and to distribute outreach materials like multilingual fact sheets. The events included: • Chicano Heritage Festival (Aug. 24, 2025) • SEVA Food Pantry Drive Thru (Sept. 13, 2025) • City of Santa Ana Fiestas Patrias Festival (Sept. 14, 2025) • Santa Ana Senior Center Free Lunch Program (Sept. 24, 2025) • Classic Cars with Santa Ana Police Department (Sept. 21, 2025) • Latino Health Access Arts and Crafts Class for Seniors (Sept. 29, 2025) • Santa Ana Art Walk (Oct. 4, 2025) • Heninger Elementary Walk to School Day (Oct. 8, 2025) • Santa Ana High School Active Streets Club Presentation (Oct. 15, 2025) • Santa Ana College Career Fair (Oct. 15, 2025) Additional pictures of the pop-up events are provided in APPENDIX B: Pop-up Events. aI. w ,' Ott �- 6. IR J� Figure 22: Study presentation at the Chicano Heritage Figure 23: Study presentation at the Latino Health Festival on Aug.24, 2025. Access arts and crafts class on Sept.29,2025. First Street Multimodal Boulevard Study—28 COMMUNITYOUTREACH ! 4 t r r Ill r J �i Figure 24: The Study team interacts with community members at Heninger Elementary during Walk to School Day on Oct.8, 2025. First Street Multimodal Boulevard Study—29 COMMUNITYOUTREACH Outreach Tools The team collaborated with the City to deliver information through traditional and digital channels, enabling community members to track the Study's progress, provide feedback, and share details with friends and neighbors. Our community analytics profile indicated high smartphone ownership and significant Spanish-language digital use across the corridor, and the digital strategy was aligned accordingly. All materials and content described below were made available in English, Spanish, and Vietnamese, with automated translation features on the website and, where applicable, traditional assistance from bilingual staff, especially for social media artwork, captions, and surveys, to ensure cultural sensitivity. The team recommended additional translation and/or interpretation vendors when needed. STUDY LANDING PAGE AND WEBSITI In addition to a landing page on the City's official website (Figure 25), a multilingual, mobile- friendly dedicated Study website was launched in July 2025 (Figure 26), with the custom URL bit.ly/Moving Forward OnFirst. The website included sections on the background, corridor overview, engagement updates, survey and video engagement, Study schedule, and multimodal benefits education. As of Jan. 31, 2026, the English site received 2,091 visits, the Spanish site 552, and the Vietnamese site 537. The website metrics report is provided in APPENDIX C: Website Metrics. Project Website f::i,..nih:,L.rii:rii:r of Ihr prr{.r l ., ii r•i:l..rr I•�l..rnp.erlty...A:..r 1+..+rl...nd hr ll•..• Project Goals and Objectives •ApafrrhMSt/e.`.t. •Belle ncenfn—gh biwe to—lk.b4.ride n.ollmrrsl Saeet. •ACLTOpr lhat SLLlp=Ri aLiltM llt_STYI:S Ter CV]N rnC'nper Oi pl:r:GMInUIRj. Corridor Study Map 7he3 1e:tutrym•6da1ie:nhehemtof mla fva.ccnrair¢peapelo insmtant srrri:es.diriry entertal-cm.and"IMAI pJNIL-ccs• Figure 25: The Study's landing page on the City of Santa Ana's website. First Street Multimodal Boulevard Study—30 COMMUNITY OUTREACH SUMMARY Um oving First Street Multimod V Forward Boulevard Study Scroll down to learn how you can join the onCity of Santa Ana as it transforms First Street M • • •BOULEVAIRD STUDYor[ep the Innguege icon in the[op righ[corner First Street Multimodal Boulevard • COMMUNITYOUTREACH SOCIAL MEDIA The City shared five posts on their Facebook and Instagram accounts to raise awareness of the Study and encourage community participation, as seen in Figure 27 and Figure 28. The project team drafted social media content such as graphics and captions and provided it to the City's Public Affairs Information Officer for publication on the city's social media accounts. Below is a performance summary of the posts. Posts F_Ili�tik' P :Is Fi�lltrr. ci L.+i�1 S irri[;�rin n w i r:•--�.7r-.:.yn� cityalsantaana a ... Alter hosing TrOrn thrt*4mhwnh v tNs summer, we created eight dmirgn concepts to make the corrldar safer and me accessible for everyone. Moving Missed ftworkthom?W4'ch the canccpta Forwa rd here:yeutube.DDm,hnatch?�r-IkLLA5p2VdE a nd on First to us whirl)WL-&ytbu 13rerelr by rilliwj WE L-•; farm hdr.jDtfccm.ccen4ean�wb4c�irst-street survey ergo to the link In our boo. - IEstamos evanzandD en First Street! Despu�s de esouchar a la comunidaa ege verano.creamas ocho conceptor.de dlsenio pars hater el corredor m&s seguro y accesible Para todos. Seperdid los taller-es?Corro u:zci3 IDsroeptas r argsi:hllps:l fwwvr.-yuutube.corf�waleh? y=24V8d0C54KDY y cuentanas cujks prefieras :a Ilmunda esta encuesta:ht":J ttdr_Aforrr xo" l�+rrNfp~rtali�firShslr�ti-sur+rep••s1'aalnisha�I,B�I mace an nuestra bio. ` ` -Chung toi se Tan hanh DV an tren First Stmell 7E_L US YOUR FAVORITE u khi I6rsg rlgh-�I ki6n Cuai'x� d6riq Rrorlg r FtJ OTF" `M.CO Mi T EAM XP U 8 L I C I mua he nay,chOng tdi da taa ra tjm Y t bng thin k6 nh�rn glop tuVAn aLf6ng trd rkn an icin vb d9 ticp can hen cho mpi ngudi. Qu}}-di ob bd 10 c h-buai hdi Wa<h&ng7 Hjy xrui y 1Lr2Yvy Ihirl kiL*�QAy;y431Jliilu!.r:r3rYiPAgi1Ch? v=Ikl_LAspZVdc va tho ch ing toi bik slug vi thich j+tikN nho bang cjch diilin vM n,e u nray https:ff eltwifsanlaana we are MmIng Forytarid on hdr.jotFarm.corniteam/publi;rFirst-slnset.s+uruey- First Street! vietnamese hoot vaa during din trong bio dAa o�r�g kbi, After heari'rg knr the comm.,-r,r this sunmer, I . ....a. .I - -L• 1.... . .,. . . a Q IT11 T `r-1 Figure 27: City of Santa Ana's Instagram post on Oct.9,2025, promoting community participation in the Design Options Poll. First Street Multimodal Boulevard Study—32 COMMUNITYOUTREACH City of Santa Ana-Municipal Government O 34 m �i Join us for the final two community workshops about the First Street Multimodal Boulevard Study on Dec.9 and Dec.11,at the Roosevelt-Walker Community Center(816 E.Chestnut Ave.). These workshops will present the top three conceptual designs based on community input,field evaluation and data analysis.You're encouraged to attend and let us know which features you like and want to see advanced to the next phase of design. Brief overview presentations will be provided at 5 p.m.and 6 p.m.each day.The same information will be available on both days. Learn more about the project at bit.ly/Moving Forward On First. Acompa6enos en los dos talleres comunitarios finales sobre el First Street Multimodal Boulevard Study,que se Ilevaran a cabo el 9 y 11 de diciembre en el Centro Comunitario Roosevelt-Walker(816 E.Chestnut Ave.). Durance estos talleres se presentaran los tres disenos conceptuales principales,desarrollados a partir de los comentanos de la comunidad,las evaluaciones en campo y el anafisis de datos. Invitamos a toda la comunidad a participar y compartir cuales propuestas consideran prioritarias Para avanzar a la siguiente fase de diseho. Se ofreceran presentaciones informativas breves a las 5 y a las 6 de la tardeambos dias.La misma informacion estara disponible en cada ses16n. Para obtener mas informacion sobre el proyecto,visite:bit.ly/MovingForwardOnFirst Hay tham gia cuing chung toi trong hai bubi hoi thao cling d8ng cu8i cuing v€Nghien cdu Dai to Da phdong teen First Street vao ngay 9 va 11 Thing Mddi Hai tai Trung tam Cong dong Roosevelt-Walker(816 E.Chestnut Ave.). Cac budi hqi thao nay se gidi thieu ba thiet ke y tu`6ng hang dau dua tren y kien cgng dong, danh gia thtfc dia va phan tich dU lieu.Chung tdi khuyen khlch quy vi tham du'va cho chung to biet nhCrng da,c diem quy vi thich va muon dd4c dda vao giai doan thiet ke tiep then. Phan tnnh bay tong quan ngan se ddoc thifc hien luc 5 p.m.va 6 p.m.moi ngay.N6i dung se giong nhau cho ca hai ngay. Tim hieu them 0 dU an tai:bit.ly/Moving Forward Onfirst. See translation Figure 28: City of Santa Ana's Facebook post on Dec.3,2025, promoting the Community Workshop 3 in English, Spanish,and Vietnamese. Post Topic and Date Views Reach Interactions Click Links (Facebook) Study Introduction and Community 17,758 3,097 128 5 Workshop 1 Promotion (Aug. 13, 2026) Post-Community Workshop 1 Survey Push 14,844 4,375 35 8 (Sept. 5, 2025) Post-Community Workshop 2 Design 3,939 660 6 19 Options Poll (Oct. 9, 2025) Design Options Poll Closing Reminder 19,266 5,939 10 42 (Oct. 23, 2025) Post Community Workshop 3 Design 13,932 5,558 16 4 Concepts (Dec. 3, 2025) First Street Multimodal Boulevard Study—33 COMMUNITY OUTREACH SUMMA14 As part of their involvement in the Community Working Group, representatives were invited to distribute materials through the print or digital communication channels that best fit their organization. Each participating CBO selected the approach that aligned with how they typically engage their members and share important information, as shown in Figure 29. TAM a a asantaanaactivestreets Advocating for safe and accessible transportation systems in Santa Ana, CA. (0 ►r First Street Survey CVietn[7dllese) First Street Encuesta de disenos [Espanol] First Street Design Dptions Survey [English] �e Opciones de Diser)o Biel Bulevar Multimodal de Firs.-First Street Multimodal Boulevard Design Options Figure 29: SAAS Link Tree was updated with quick links to project surveys and information. The organizations listed below chose to distribute materials via their social media channels to broaden the Study's visibility. • Santa Ana Active Streets o Online flyer and updated link tree for voting, videos o Instagram: 2,798 • Latino Health Access o Facebook: 1,789 o Instagram: 2,637 First Street Multimodal Boulevard Study—34 COMMUNITY OUTREACH SUMMARY • Orange County Communities Organized for Responsible Development o First round of stories (workshop promotion) o Story 1: approximately 200 views, 2 interactions (likes) o Story 2: approximately 160 views o Design options and poll stories o Approximate reach across five stories: Views per story: approximately 151-209 In total, the CBOs that participated in social media generated 8,584 cumulative views of materials and information shared across their social media platforms. NEWSLETTERS Information about the Study was shared through newsletters distributed by the City, and partner organizations with established audiences and subscriber bases. Leveraging these existing communication channels expanded the reach of Study updates, promoted engagement opportunities, and connected with community members who may not have been reached through other outreach methods. The City of Santa Ana, the Santa Ana Chamber of Commerce, and members of the CWG performed the following tasks: • The Bicycle Tree o On Sept. 9, 2025, an email blast was sent to 289 subscribers promoting Workshop #1. • Latino Health Access c Throughout the Study, eight email blasts were sent to 756 subscribers promoting Workshop #1. • Orange County Communities Organized for Responsible Development o On Sept. 12, 2025, an email blast was sent to 257 subscribers promoting Workshop #1. o On Oct. 1, 2025, an email blast was sent to 256 subscribers promoting Workshop #2. • Orange County Environmental Justice o On Oct. 14, 2025, an email blast was sent to 25 subscribers promoting Workshop #2. o On Oct. 14, 2025, another email blast was sent to 15 subscribers in the Getting Residents Engaged in Empowering Neighborhoods, a resident-led program, promoting Workshop #2. • Santa Ana Active Streets o On Nov. 21, 2025, an email blast was sent to 825 subscribers promoting Workshop#1. o On Dec. 9, 2025, an email blast was sent to 825 subscribers promoting Workshop#2 (Figure 30). First Street Multimodal Boulevard Study—35 COMMUNITYOUTREACH TODAY!First Street Multi Modal Blvd Study Workshop;3 final design options D 0 L Dorian Romero<dorian@saascoalition.org> Q Dec 9,2025,11:22AM to Programs,Advisory Join HDR at this final community workshop to showcase the 3 final design options for First Street MultiModal Blvd Study.Come share your thoughts and vote for your preferred design option!Flyer attached "In this workshop,we will present the top three conceptual design alternatives for the three-mile corridor on First Street These alternatives are based on community input, field evaluation,and data analysis-City staff and project team members will be available to answer any questions or concerns. The same information will be provided on Tuesday and Thursday in an open-house format,with brief group presentations at 5 and 6 p.m.Feel free to join us when it is more convenient for you,either day between 4:30 and 6:30 p.m.,and feel free to bring a friend or neighborl Information will be available in English,Spanish,and Vietnamese_More details on the Flyer." � Dorian Romero,She/They Project Director,Santa Ana Active Streets 714-340-5186 LCI tl6944 )7a saasctwestreets Figure 30:A Santa Ana Active Streets newsletter was sent on Dec.9,2025,to promote Workshop 3. First Street Multimodal Boulevard Study—36 COMMUNITYOUTREACH SURVEYS Pinpoint Map Survey During Phase 1, the team developed a user-friendly, multilingual pinpoint map survey in ArcGIS that integrated a geospatial data tool, enabling residents to share ideas and concerns about the corridor, including pedestrian safety, green space, and traffic flow at specific locations along the corridor. The focus was on identifying key objectives, including enhancing multimodal transportation, improving accessibility, and fostering community engagement. Engaging survey questions were crafted to gather meaningful insight into the community's priorities, such as accessibility, bicycling, driving, safety, and transit. The team developed a comprehensive distribution strategy that leveraged the Study's website, email blasts, social media, partner toolkits, and geotargeted ads to effectively reach the community. In-person distribution at community events and throughout the Study area included QR codes for digital responses and printed surveys for increased accessibility. Following data collection, survey responses were summarized and presented to the City to inform the Study, highlighting key trends and insights. This comprehensive approach to survey development, implementation, and analysis enabled a wide variety of stakeholders to have their voices heard. The pinpoint survey was active from Aug. 27 until Oct. 7, 2025. In total, it yielded eight results, four of which appear to come from one user, all in English, and mostly focused on quality-of-life issues, such as drug activity and unsanitary conditions related to trash and unhoused populations. Q&A Online Survey In September, the team created and shared a traditional Question and Answer (Q&A) survey on the Study website to offer a range of online feedback options alongside the pinpoint survey. This survey asked questions similar to the pinpoint map prompts, including the issues users encounter on First Street, their frequency of use, and the reasons for using the corridor. The survey was offered in English, Spanish, and Vietnamese, and was distributed to the CWG and at NA meetings to increase community participation. The survey questions and results are shown in Figure 31, Figure 32, Figure 33, and Figure 34. First Street Multimodal Boulevard Study—37 COMMUNITYOUTREACH What specific challenges do you encounter traveling on First Street? (select all that apply) 90 � 80 70 n3 60 30 20 10 0 Too much Takes too Feel unsafe Feel unsafe Fee nsafe Tao hot or Too many traffic or long to drive to walk or ta_-;ng transit not enough obstacles or congestion ride a bike or waiting at shade tnpping a b.s stop hazards on the sidewalk Figure 31: Results from the online survey question 1 from a sample of 114 people. When you travel to or on First Street, where are you going?(select all that apply) 80 VJ 70 60 F� 6L 60 ,C 50 t2 40 30 24 20 10 I r-. El Figure 32: Results from the online survey question 2 from a sample of 114 people. First Street Multimodal Boulevard Study—38 COMMUNITYOUTREACH When you travel to or on First Street, mode of transportation do you use the most' (select one) 4 ■Drive a car 3 ■Carpool 2 5 ■Bus ■Walk ■Bike ■Mix of different modes Figure 33: Results from the online survey question 3 from a sample of 114 people. How often do you travel along First Street? (aeiect once) 14 ILq 57 43 ■ L�s��, ■".fe;. -s a�A� ■ Occasie.^aiiv Figure 34: Results from the online survey question 4 from a sample of 114 people. First Street Multimodal Boulevard Study—39 COMMUNITY OUTREACH The Q&A survey was open for 35 days and yielded 114 results. Several of the survey response results are shown below. • The primary responses for First Street challenges were "too much traffic or congestion" (81) and "feel unsafe to walk or ride a bike" (60). • Respondents overwhelmingly selected "driving" as their primary mode of transportation (81), with the next highest being "mix of different modes" (14), and only a few other modes, such as "bus" (5), "bike" (4), and "walk" (3). Design Options Poll and Video In late September, the team developed two videos outlining the eight design options presented at the second Community Workshop. They were posted on the Study website, along with a short poll asking viewers to select up to three preferred design options. One video featured a Spanish voiceover (Figure 35), and another featured an English voiceover with Vietnamese closed captions (Figure 36). The YouTube links were distributed to the CWG and at NA meetings to increase community participation. As of Jan. 31, 2026, the videos received the following engagement: • English with Vietnamese subtitles: 689 views and 13 likes. • Spanish: 186 views and 1 like. The poll was open from Sept. 30 through Oct. 31, 2025, and received the following engagement: • English: 195 responses • Spanish: 12 responses • Vietnamese: 0 responses Moving I p Moving Forward — 0 Forward 0 on First - 0 on First FIRST STREET MULTIMODAL _ — ! FIRST STREET MULTIMODAL BOULEVARD STUDYNNW BOULEVARD STUDY IY II. Opciones de Diseno del Bulevar Multimodal de First Street First Street Multimodal Boulevard Design Options city gr sama Ana Q A Shra Q cay o/sanla Ana 613 q 7 Share Q sa.e 1 Save ••• � 1 e6 News amonthsago 68g elews amonM ago aoudad de Same Ana esta estudiantlo coma mnverut laralle Fuse enveanstoly iuslittm un caretlor mis seguoy mWumotlal.limws 1.Gty of Santa Ana is-dying how to make Fvst Street hetwem&,slot sPd T,—asaler.morem 11—da1caridor Yh have li—w to scuchado las - de la comunidad Para ho de tliseiw la calla.Este Ndeo ex lira ratla do I le MirA n...nny lecmrk to come ur`nM1 8 tlesign optima Iw the mrm.This vitleo will explain each optan atd then ask you to mnk your TOP 3 at the ognioxs pr n,oc opctones para p opci Yuego P pollwae Fi St—sure, .. qua rakeque wsva lawnas en laencuesla aqd EMvesla ae First sue, ... Figure 35:Video in Spanish outlining the eight design Figure 36:Video in English with Vietnamese captions options presented at Workshop 2. outlining the design options presented at Workshop 2. First Street Multimodal Boulevard Study—40 COMMUNITY OUTREACH w_ Most respondents are concerned that reducing vehicle lanes would worsen traffic congestion, increase commute times, create safety hazards, and negatively impact daily life for drivers, families, seniors, and emergency vehicles. Many believe bike lanes are underutilized and do not reflect how residents primarily travel (by car). There is frustration about previous projects on streets such as McFadden, Civic Center, Bristol, and Edinger, which residents feel increased congestion and accidents. Concerns also include construction disruption, impacts on local businesses, insufficient public outreach, tax and spending priorities, and a perceived lack of data-driven decision making. On the other hand, supporters emphasize the need for protected bike lanes, dedicated bus lanes, pedestrian safety, shade trees, transit reliability, and long-term multimodal planning. These respondents prioritize safety, transit efficiency, and physical barriers between vehicles and cyclists. In summary, the dominant themes are: • Traffic congestion • Lane preservation • Bike lane usage • Safety • Distrust of prior infrastructure changes The secondary theme is the focus on safer, transit-oriented street design. PRINTED MATERIALS The team prepared ADA-compliant multilingual educational materials throughout the Study. Creative services were leveraged to produce fact sheets, poster boards, PowerPoint presentations, and comment cards, among other materials. Refer to APPENDIX D: Educational Materials for Study fact sheets and workshop announcement flyers. Key Outcomes and Community Input Achievements Outreach during the study phase resulted in broad community participation, meaningful design refinements, and stronger public trust. This is a result of the variety of events and channels utilized, including: • Three stakeholder one-on-one presentations. • Ten presentations at events hosted by a different organization. • Three surveys and 503 community member interactions. • Two YouTube videos and 875 views in total. • Multilingual project website and 3,180 views. • Four social media posts and 150 interactions. • Community Working Group with 5 local CBOs engaged. • Two stakeholder meetings with 28 stakeholder groups invited. First Street Multimodal Boulevard Study—41 COMMUNITY OUTREACH SUMMARY Feedback from residents, businesses, and corridor users directly informed key elements such as safety improvements and multimodal access, while transparent communication helped address concerns and reduce misinformation. The process documented clear community support and built partnerships that positioned the project for successful implementation and future funding opportunities. Challenges and Lessons Learned Lessens Learned Multilingual engagement (English, Spanish, Vietnamese) was essential for equitable participation. Translation and interpretation services were necessary at many of the outreach events and activities. While the Study website and social media posts generated thousands of views, online surveys had limited participation in Spanish and Vietnamese. This suggests that digital engagement should be complemented by robust in-person outreach for non-English speakers. Pop-up events proved to be an important engagement tool by allowing the project team to meet people where they already are— at community events, transit stops, schools, and local businesses. Recognizing that not everyone can attend a traditional open house, these on-the- ground interactions expanded participation, captured a wider range of perspectives, and created informal opportunities for meaningful conversations. This approach made the outreach process more accessible, inclusive, and reflective of the broader community. Students showed strong interest in multimodal improvements and were highly engaged throughout the outreach process. Many rely on buses, especially with access to free fare programs, and shared thoughtful input about reliability, frequency, and stop accessibility. Their feedback highlighted a clear desire for safer connections, improved service, and infrastructure that better supports daily travel to school, work, and activities. First Street Multimodal Boulevard Study—42 COMMUNITY OUTREACH SUMMARY Next Steps and Recommendations Recommendation Overall, the community demonstrated interest in participating in the Study phase and appreciated the information provided and the space to voice their concerns. Throughout the Study, the team heard: • Community members recommend an education campaign on how to use the corridor once it opens. • The CBOs recommend that the project continue to be socialized as a multimodal initiative and not as a bike initiative. Taking these two ideas into consideration, the team recommends continuing to prioritize meaningful community engagement throughout the construction process and as the project is finalized, thereby ensuring long-term success and addressing misinformation. Early and consistent outreach through public meetings, pop-up events, school partnerships, and digital updates can help residents understand construction timelines, anticipated impacts, and the long-term benefits. An effective outreach strategy framework should revolve around trust, accessibility, and meaningful participation, including: • Inclusive and multilingual engagement • Meeting people where they are • Partnership with trusted community organizations • Accessible and flexible participation options • Clear and visual communication First Street Multimodal Boulevard Study—43 COMMUNITYOUTREACH APPENDIX A: Community Workshop Series Community Workshop Series ' Comment cards and additional photos from Community Workshop Series 1, where community members were introduced to the project and identified corridor issues. 44 ' t 41 1 - ! r.-Y First Street Multimodal Boulevard Study—44 COMMUNITYOUTREACH Comment/Question Card p Moving Name: �-J Forward Phone: • • t on First FIRST STREET MULTIMODAL BOULEVARD STUDY Email: comment/Question: 1 Kviow `Iou V\we rn <;\noaA- kimeCcne� iysA- 'fi q-SV Fza„— t3hS�o1 +z-^ s4n Is ce N a kip n vr4� A5 a ��ITs t'f e5-� o f g 1 i Cosh b/ h a /tlsID h-ac% R- i> �yrl_tens -aye hAolci buf k'� n b r Thank you for your participation!Your feedback is valuable to us. Comment/Question Card Q Moving Name - Porward phone: on First �- FIRSTSTREETMULTIMODAIL BOULEVARD STUDY Email: Comment/Question: Tym t 0 I'-I Thank you for your participation!Your feedback is valuable to us. First Street Multimodal Boulevard Study—45 COMMUNITYOUTREACH Comment/Question Card p Moving Name: *W. i� Forward Phone: 0 on First FIRST STREET MULTIMODAL BOULEVARD STUDY Email: Co ment/Question: hQ_ A-k%' v0Q 9S r SW l2_. I a } j <<f ,R02 1 S n e.eSea- di Sri 1 r 14 A4y-e it 1'4t C-,-L s lud ei Thank you for your participation!Your feedback is valuable to us. Comment/Question Card p Moving Name: ~'� Forward Phone: ' ® on First T` FIRST STREET MULTIMOOAL BOULEVARD STUDY Email: omment/Question: ►' iv►�e- la►'►S I� p� Gc.r� GOfn.siG�?�: (Y\A ol, i vL f o OKL La m-z- i�(�St or nlutk doof r3lnePfs �m C ovwlcdvd t,�u.Ah awl wwvie stm45 a.v, oKg, i 11 I:p1IP�V►i�V�!^C, �Y Ga�!u��rs. 0 v wf' 1�aS� C Dk5149r cA- tiotV, CNM VXW kAJ VVagn lz�y�c�s Thank you for your participation!Your feedback is valuable to us. First Street Multimodal Boulevard Study—46 COMMUNITYOUTREACH Comment/Question Card s; Q Moving l Forward Name: �.- h on First Phon FIRST STREET MULTIMODAL BOULEVARD STUDY Email: Comment/Question: Thank you for your participation!Your feedback is valuable to us. Comment/Question Card p Moving Name: Forward Phone: on First ! FIRST STREET MULTIMODAL BOULEVARD STUDY Emai. comment/Question: a rD�Q T A /s. u1V-I ZuNZ ! tle P v2la� 2 D u 7 s 5 ee z Thank you for your participation!Your feedback is valuable to us. Igo sir f U-e ~" & we a/r First Street Multimodal Boulevard Study—47 COMMUNITYOUTREACH Comment/Question Card p Moving Name: �. [Al Forward 0 on First Phone: FIRST STREET MULTIMODAL BOULEVARD STUDY Email: comment/Question: 54 �b o ��H�, ��d �c��5 `fb be 5&, Smge� w�erc � ti� rx�se ] �GN �0 redllr� C'rvSL�1T�w,� (lv✓`�tr (� ( n2S (2,A all I,-k" 40 Sc.�s b�� ►�,����J.,c�� ah 1(F�.L �f� 5�'"•z,;�, C„rPf ,� 3- I+c Ao J'gL5u1vk11 'Jy S KT S oe,4 ,, k,-,e 6ee`, k'll)P) I Ff'�f Q f ^� �1 I1 ram! 4S1 J(2 yPrrs Thank you for your participation!Your feedback is valuable to us. Comment/Question Card p Moving Name: l _ Forward Phone: on First T FIRST STREET MULTIMODAL BOULEVARD STUDY Email: Comment/Question: Thank you for your participation!Your feedback is valuable to us. First Street Multimodal Boulevard Study—48 COMMUNITYOUTREACH Comment/Question Card p Moving Name: Forward 0 on First Phone: T I FIRST STREET MUL7IMODAL BOULEVARD STUDY Email: comment/Question: / l , I �or -� Sac ✓ 6c:_�� -C-. �Yti ✓rr�c �-E'F /a-r��, ,� AC'�t��c�w/ /'�1^� l.l� o-t Is-I— ai AiS� n1�ii f a le-44- -�l-�n, ��'Sy�� cN Thank you for your participation!Your feedback is valuable to us. Comment/Question Card p Moving f Name: - Forward 0 on First Phone: � FIRST STREET MUL7IMODAL BOULEVARD 57UDY Email: Comment/Question: „C IVLS� �Si V Crr�c- �r 5Gt�kJ4 Thank you for your participation!Your feedback is valuable to us. First Street Multimodal Boulevard Study—49 COMMUNITYOUTREACH Comment/Question Card p Moving Name: �► Forward Phone: on First ®� FIRST STREET MULTIMODAL BOULEVARD STUDY Email: comment/Question: kP n(, 0Pd-eS a.r1 imt21'Uvevr\vtA-, on b� would make- nr(-eCC-,rt U G n, 0 1 `f t I I a 1 OVJCAr n d 0u I a 1 �lt- J e Thank you for your participation!Your feedback is valuable to us. Comment/Question Card l p Moving Name: _ /� J Forward 0 on First Phone. FIRST STREET MULTIMODAL BOULEVARD STUDY Email: comment/Question': aUt( tfllclS clec(t'c he4 (0,V-eC l P[P,4Q fool- C, boS { r c,rurf r to �( CA a (dU c -T ' t1n !^� pclt`Ca�tc �PcnG+✓ UUwk uv-e rf Qua Pie - Tk 6,Lbo �t,Vq (;4-,'11r C�fL � c�t� UJI Thank you for your participation!Your feedback is valuable to us. First Street Multimodal Boulevard Study— 50 COMMUNITY OUTREACH SUMMARY - SANTA ANA � � Ists Bike Repair Station Estacion de reparacion de bicicletas Tram stla chL7a xe dap INN ( ngeles,CA First Street Multimodal Boulevard • COMMUNITY OUTREACH SUMMARY Bus Stop Improvements and Amenities Mejoras y comodidades en las paradas de autobus Cai thien va Tien nghi Tram xe buyt ,4 - COMMUNITYOUTREACH '-3 r A on rc�v .r' vris q bud to Slto ioww- WOW First Street Multimodal Boulevard Study— 53 COMMUNITYOUTREACH Community Workshop Series 2 Comment cards and additional photos from Community Workshop Series 2, where community members were introduced to the eight design options and selected their top three preferences. i - _ C0V9. Q6 4. _ p S I� First Street Multimodal Boulevard Study— 54 r *COMMUNITY OUTREACH 7 o Moving Forward on First Draw what your ideal First Street looks like! V V, (F U�n CP 1. �L '1� ����..�."' yn'°{ IKr p••s '" Fla. �r � f,.�/Aw'� •a m�: 7 ::(fry',.., �' / . �.r...r Oyu ••—•-1 1 r ' - - - N /r , .r L.,UuL.Juu uu First Street Multimodal Boulevard Study— 55 COMMUNITY OUTREACH SUMMARY • . Moving Forward on First Draw what your ideal First Street looks like! OW ° • l First Street Multimodal Boulevard Study— 56 COMMUNITYOUTREACH _ le d Moving Forward on First Draw what your ideal First Street looks like! frf• f ( �i' 1' ;4 4 r { l n I` I � I I � ° i I j i First Street Multimodal Boulevard Study— 57 COMMUNITY OUTREACH SUMMARY + i + 0 Moving Forward on First Draw what your ideal First Street looks like! rr r e�k P , f + + First Street Multimodal Boulevard Study— 58 COMMUNITYOUTREACH v • 0 PC M ovi n g 900 Forward on First Draw what your ideal First Street looks like! , o J -- U l? K f r - �3 1 i + " First Street Multimodal Boulevard Study— 59 COMMUNITYOUTREACH Comment/Question Card p Moving Name: *4 — Forward Phone on First FIRST STREET MULTIMODAL BOULEVARD STUDY Email: Comment/Question: Thank you for your participation!Your feedback is valuable to us. Com p Moving Name: f Forward Phone: ® on First "��'� FIRST STREET MULTIMODAL BOULEVARD STUDY Email: r .I' mment/ou`st!Q,n� Thank you for your participation!Your feedback is valuable to us. First Street Multimodal Boulevard Study— 60 COMMUNITYOUTREACH Comment/Question Card p Moving Name: Forward 0 on First Phone: ;R FIRST STREET MULTIMCC6L BOULEVARD STUDY Email: Comment/Question: rm MV & be crr�[t1fi `C�`e� ln e5 �rY1 �aJ'�► s�des Thank you for your participation!Your feedback is valuable to us. Comment/Question Card p Moving Name: _ i Forward � • 0 on First Phone �! FIRST STREET MULTIMODAL BOULEVARD STUDY Email: Comment/Question: 4 L4 A i C c w nQ,)i a 4A)--: C-7L,,(-P CQ V�r k4wl c l Q lctr r T(71 kko Thank you for your participation!Your feedback is valuable to us. First Street Multimodal Boulevard Study— 61 COMMUNITYOUTREACH Comment/Question Card p Moving 51 Name: 2 0-d Forward Phone: INITHIMMIM 0 on First FIRST STREET MULTIMODAL BOULEVARD STUDY Email: Comment/Question: 0 o pV,'oe, 6 r s Z cfesSqb�L-C'Z 1 L 0o SPQ q CPHFf✓ �0S q(/(e!(Aghy(. D/0/7� 1 am PfO�J �� C Cli` CIwC� JSP/g' [(�Pcnf-�r �(}(nf�t` dP rC4K avp woJlct avar`d 65 COV �& S f woC)I add PS6 V t fftt Co,n NCB bOk CIJV (qK hP uCropo/a' a arm ld� Ct lra l^Q 1 Q Thank you for your participation!Your feedback is valuable to us. AMINk Comment/Question Card p Moving Name: A Forward Phone: 0 on First � FIRST STREET MULTIMODAL BOULEVARD STUDY Email: Comment/Question: SC/ - �5 Ac4r-j a Thank you for your participation!Your feedback is valuable to us. First Street Multimodal Boulevard Study— 62 COMMUNITYOUTREACH Comment/Question Card p Moving Name: % Forward Phone: 0 on First 1� ! FIRST STREET MULTIMODAL BOULEVARD STUDY Email: Comment/Question: y o� -lank you for your participation!Your feedback is valuable to us. Comment/Ques 'o Card p Moving Name: - ~' Forward Phone: on First FIRST STREET MULTIMODAL t I BOULEVARDSTUDY Email: Vm � & L Comment/Question: ba% t �I Y(./a 9,-ice Usitrv/31a��s W—) awa as LOaws "hank you for your participation!Your feedback is valuable to us. First Street Multimodal Boulevard Study— 63 COMMUNITYOUTREACH Comment/Question Card p Moving Name: \r%r Forward Phone: on First FIRST STREET MULTIMODAL BOULEVARD STUDY Email: comment/Question: — ti/�3 ��e�Zr97� /LG Gf}r�c $cam Gr/f�dfi%S 17- ar Thank you for your participation!Your feedback is valuable to us. Comment/Question Card © Moving Name: Forward Phone: on First ! FIRST STREET MULTIMODAL BOULEVARD STUDY Email: Comment/Question: "" �.�('�G� d///�� L�i✓� /�! S��/ f �GDi Off/ ��T Thank you for your participation!Your feedback is valuable to us. First Street Multimodal Boulevard Study— 64 COMMUNITYOUTREACH Comment/Question Card © Moving Name: r�_ Forward C�7 on First Phone: FIRST STREET MULTIMODAL BOULEVARD STUDY Email: comment/Question: ,iv 9 of al l,/C- 6401 0/j Sao-y —C)7170i ;V)— &91,iE Thank you for your participation!Your feedback is valuable to us. Comment Question Card Moving Name: Forward 0 on First Phone: FIRST STREET MULTIMOOAL BOULEVARD STUDY Email: Comment/Question: VJI r - ao �`Sq �r �NaYI? ���5 , br►�� � �nU on bo�� sdPs Thank you for your participation!Your feedback is valuable to us. I� First Street Multimodal Boulevard Study— 65 COMMUNITYOUTREACH Comment/ uestion Card © Moving Name: Forward Phone: on First FIRST STREET MULTIMODAL BOULEVARD STUDY Email: Comme t/Question- ihk A('6 vVj`I 16q q, qrjq,� 1�(Cj,h b(AU fr l ho- er f ro m cats _ 13vs , Thank you for your participation!Your feedback is valuable to us. Comment/Question Card © Moving Name: T' Forward Phone: on First FIRST STREET MULTIMODAL BOULEVARD STUDY Email: f Comment/Question: So e X U d --Rt- `tl � �,w�ruve�r�-�en ate, Y-R)d" i I n wov of H , aM a( cxdh vt (, K6rke a ["A�e � Cj� Aa c d Lour yXL�11 a1 S� ���5��o�e�12 KC Thank you for your participation!Your feedback is valuable to us. First Street Multimodal Boulevard Study— 66 COMMUNITYOUTREACH Comment/Question Card © Moving Name: Q! Forward Ph on 0 on First FIRST STREET MULTIMODAL BOULEVARD STUDY Email: Rcomment/Question: � 1� b �ut.l Lea-A ?2f --S—Z, 6u� -10 �> oov- CD J N - G�- Thank you for your participation!Your feedback is valuable to us. Comment/Question Card © Moving Y� Name \ . W Forward on First j Phone: FIRST STREET MULTIMODAL BOULEVARD STUDY Email: Comment/Question: O r d �V 4 Q � n N9 Thank you for your participation!Your feedback is valuable to us. First Street Multimodal Boulevard Study— 67 COMMUNITYOUTREACH Comment/Question Card p Moving Name: �, Forward Phon 0 on First MFIRST STREET MULTIMODAL BOULEVARD STUDY Email: comment/Question:— I y -5e 1. -o, S "C dvice 4 o M i o- s s CU 1, -f,, " 1 �, cSII� �e� Snsgiw,^%y , i o� I�ss �e s�{crnss�g Y�-f'C✓C.Q. G'ia dlti�^ p s� ) V) O ^s Iry BSc,I� ,)— Y,.� G.rc nw r-s e 2� ram! C I k lei Thank you for your participation!Your feedback is valuable to us. Comment/Question Card p Moving Name: Forward 0 on First Phone: FIRSTSTREETMULTIMODAL BOULEVARD STUDY Email: comment/Question: 2� D-�-WL- Uffi4 26�US QW 1—T-A-�c 9 TP CA ' 4 kc) Thank you for your participation!Your feedback is valuable to us. I� First Street Multimodal Boulevard Study— 68 COMMUNITYOUTREACH Comment/Question Card p Moving Name: p Forward OWNWI M on First Phone: FIRST STREET MULTIMODAL BOULEVARD STUDY Email: Comment/Question: JEDle4jzg) 8:y:, IIF� DI-71/ T-I, loco C'07-,7c,,J � ay5 ,,� �8 1,)I,2 �v5 Sal Driy 5Goc.,e-5 trams —r-flfrr-/c Thank you for your participation!Your feedback is valuable to us. i Comment/Question Card *M-AM., Moving Name: j Forward Phone: on First ® "��'� FIRST STREET MULTIMODAL BOULEVARD STUDY Email: Comment/Question: TAU Q L-?A de d:cx c d VDIAS \C,,v Q_ w l d V'-4e .\��-�v�t- heo.•r�\� c�,� s�cc� o ,rc"s, c, ins \c.t--Q— C'kA t Thank you for your participation!Your feedback is valuable to us. I� First Street Multimodal Boulevard Study— 69 COMMUNITYOUTREACH Comment/Question Card p Moving ONION""= Name: \ ti Forward Phon 0 on First FIRST STREET MULTIMODAL MIN BOULEVARD STUDY Email: comment/Question: �,laun Jp-�. y1i,hVlQ�ss ���iw+ �Iuwv��i►'s�- � �v�-�y�. . � ��L�AW oppowd -fy mrncy iv q� oF -k7biffi(, Ir,ms s so W rrnQ ► aye c 6ut m _ Z l v s ► —Lti m(& ' L cwssvJ-cQks do v e ova A(A0 blsi cfmn 4hp mti(" 4 p�Wk.. set kS 49- hwro"ess —4xym uy) —Nv, ` ;% hcrv�et . teCi�r{ u car n `► N l�h 1 y M Cron` ,even W K C Thankyou or yo r p rticipati !You eedba Is valuable to us� W Alt a&hOLS 06C Comment/Question Card p Moving Name Forward Phone: • ' . . 0 on First � �,�'� FIRST STREET MULTIMODAL BOULEVARD STUDY Email: Comment/Question: i tY1i�K may 1st It \s q uadv many Pen sale (lye yuy-\ " �j8In itcoYY1 j At driyi no—Jim Us env Wn (kn,�klya� �.�Q1� liu:e. �y�ye.Y �t0�1 bran �� c�nhnue t� coo cn ctio� nen P�cisS.�l ixeVkn O� CAM n kp Me Al yied to NP eIm ,a Q . Thl Nrne1 sc eml onic (YUM �5j tYte 0(1 icy Idt keno or hiyi na nvjfl Rirf� M11 N of nYd UO im t k �nnrn2lel�s i�axmDmp.nrJ = Ck- ri� -m 1-WAY) Q . thQn WQ Can abdgy c Vo 1.009,T-P v61) Iac� n�sciF;2��. Ylcihr114. 4A L YMA tS WDV M. Thank you for your participation!Your feedback is valuable to us. First Street Multimodal Boulevard Study—70 COMMUNITYOUTREACH JL Comment/Question Card © Moving Name: Forward r Phone: on First r BOULEVARD STREET MU U LT MODAL Email: Comment/Question: `(a o e Ajo& cad rr 4 H / ✓r e It P4 I-C Thank you for your participation!Your feedback is valuable to us. Comment/Question Card p Moving Name: Forward Phon on First FI PST STREET MULTIMODAL BOULEVARD STUDY Email: Comment/Question: Yo KccdYD c��a 1f,�s ►�a-ic. Cy USQ y row SP�yL�A Thank you for your participation!Your feedback is valuable to us. First Street Multimodal Boulevard Study—71 COMMUNITYOUTREACH Comment/Question Card p Moving Name: Forward y Phone: on First FIRST STREET MULTIMODAL 83ULEVARD STUDY Email: Comment/Question: v�aUld I j F f io set widtr fi matt PY6fet►td 4V h4ltf 11Iso fif► P rerau1P f�l' fihe c� (l rms gulr� It r!I H- . Thank you for your participation!Your feedback is valuable to us. Comment/Question Card p Moving Name: ellForward U Phone: on First FIRST STREET MULTIMODAL BOULEVARD STUDY Email: comment/Question: HUw S00n Would {1^e3-e CWA✓-al Sr W!Vx lIt -k)()I.I ya �Dr��pc� � b<.. C c��lv�1-c� ? W ou1� h-t-her o���v►'��'i-e x y,le- GlrIdkt- AID k-C-k2 4+-e.. G k 6= C I e ra✓' 19Y ,S h C GIe-,f VV16YC 1iQhhr. eyc. Thank you for your participation!Your feedback is valuable to us. First Street Multimodal Boulevard Study—72 COMMUNITYOUTREACH Comm nt/Question Card p Moving Name: - -' Forward Phoni 0 on First cmxm=�_ ��� FIRST STREET MULTIMODAL BOULEVARD STUDY Email: Comment/Question: U' e � v Thank you for your partiapation, our dback is valuable to us. Comment/Question Car p Moving Name ,, Fz-�- Forward Phon on First imFIRST STREET MULTIMODAL BOULEVARDSTUDY Email: Comment/Question: f7U UD V U d �f� � L Thank you for your participation!Your feedback is valuable to us. First Street Multimodal Boulevard Study—73 COMMUNITYOUTREACH Comment/Ques ' n Card p Moving Name: �, Forward Phone: on First � ��,� BOULEVARD STUDY FIRST STREET MULTIMODAL Email: 1 "� ��-t Com ent/Qu�stion: r D'n"� lar- M ©t- I cr�S 0. r o o"s n �O 0., ek,- corms � t � Thank you for your participation!Your feedback is valuable to us. V LC -0 Comment/Question Card p Moving Name: S` Forward Phone: Mon First I ! FIRST STREET MULTIMODAL*Ww- BOULEVARD STUDY Email: Comment/Question: d V)4 0jMA a(1�-t� ► t� Thank you for your participation!Your feedback is valuable to us. a. First Street Multimodal Boulevard Study—74 COMMUNITYOUTREACH Community Workshop Series 3 Comment cards, concept feedback sheets, and additional photos from Community Workshop Series 3, where community members were invited to comment on specific design features for the preferred alternative. YII C 1. r COOP OEM Y Yr r , Ilk I� First Street Multimodal Boulevard Study—75 COMMUNITYOUTREACH Comment/Question Card Moving Name: Forward on First Phone. GIBS STPEET MULT MODAL 80ULEVARD STUOv Email: Comment/Question: q �,U e 4 II -- I M U S� V d/) 1,.,/ �I� � S'.�ti,✓o��I� U n dz.r-nearf,� -f-�p �-t�x,�� �'r-o�G1�s 2Q rvovv �1r d (-p-,�p)e Ci' ,le_- +a.a c +0 t 4i 61� Thank you for your participation!Your feedback is valuable to us. Comment/Question Card Moving Name: Forward on First Phone: FIRST STREET MULi1MOOAL � BOUIEV.RDSTUDY Email: Comment/Question: Vl l l bei oy\ L1 S Thank you for your participation!Your feedback is valuable to us. First Street Multimodal Boulevard Study—76 COMMUNITYOUTREACH Comment uestion Card Moving Name. Forward on First Phone I W Wwr ar.ta*w�nwwa .ana...o srvc. Email: Co ment/Ques 70 cY1 P 54- G k4� l �( do 4- lil7� ,Je ^� SLi VJ Y`LiS fJ Y 0� � ► l� S� r�(il r 4 e,0 XV C2 ;y �1r►�YIP un Thank you for your participation!Your feedback is valuable to us. fT1Sa;� M �n lay iS wt Sat r Comment/Question Card nillhi Moving Name Forward '. on First Phone: •tratlr Ml�nr00: Email. Comment/Question: 1 I All p4- 14- dp,, 6, 084-5 a^G of LSOt[ic)1-� 1�r` rk 1 4 tc-ti., nr,r^.i,Zi kit L VP Cf 4t tt1 ,11 ��,ro✓S hr t . A+� rR .IJ�'^�'7 S�P. 31 I 01111p� 4--e ler, khd10 a. , 20 a�'►G rk.� o� LlLiwa- T4 C A1 be rp4j tk)Irn,. 01) _r ()P5I {l, ve Lle s."A x OrIysc S. w- 5 �k 6f '1t roc �.•},-<s, ,ee-&-e Thank you for four partn�ation! our feed s valuable to us. First Street Multimodal Boulevard Study-77 COMMUNITYOUTREACH experienceFIRST STREET CONCEPTS FEEDBACK What elements of these contepts 4cou)d improve your West segment from Bristol Street to . . Lane Mufti-rise Path Concept- A trcrkW ygneS w0 h a Or ,.:.u,onj b,r)KA,porh car'+the=wh Lille*fFvst Sneer !tea fr� e • w ti • f So vei,o Ie Enhanced Pedestrian& Bicycle Zane Concept; F rat?t r yoo Jones uv,rh ri 5 7rV. `k r:nq 7 Pg)vj i - 14e+�np East trprn S.hei[on'+C/r'e1 T- f` d " { `L" like. ll Bus Lana 3 Sikeway CorcepL* Fouf trv.Hlanes and row bus kM"mfh4 sepr.: 7odi ?amd&kem;yanda sotymofkan each We of First Street VMkkVV East hem&-V~Simmt - �- i 4 � ii r� f�T 11 .t 1+ More on the back --� First Street Multimodal Boulevard Study—78 COMMUNITYOUTREACH COMENTARIOS, SOBREtw DE DISEA0 DE FIRST STREET iQu#elemen tos •e*stos conceptos podrfan mejorar SegmenloloogelsTe"Me"Mcalle Bristol a Zoo Lane Como pto do sendero de usos multWes: Se•stam,'rsdeurrudoiximi ton unwrnmetgMpurf�aaparo 1.0 of J'JfFt Stlerf Hlr.tirls Mein`,!tfei dwdr Sfi.JFan jr.re e s b 'r � • � e 7 �1� 9 � d Concepto de zones mejorado porn peatones y bkkietas: cinch to irues ae r irr ures rancor)un+3 GJngjrTa Y wo 4XODV�a moop' „cU?o ra s tle Fusf 51rc+ef rr4..ow of nrs dwlr frm Ycnt _{ r • � r 4± / 1 _ r \ f k> C3. 1 Concepto de corrUes pars ourobuses y cicrovim Cuorrt)t Qrrlrer deCirc Woad-)y dkAS ecru,k s JiUry eut:,busrr[trn Wr.U bun jLmaI ur,a t r d sr,7 o coft l2do de�Firssf ifrre# MfWrtidn ftwf Ns.er rMA mwwmu r mrr.f 1 i ��tj r y,\ C7 First Street Multimodal Boulevard Study—79 COMMUNITYOUTREACH COMENTARIOS SOME • • DE DISEF40 DE FIRST STREET Sogmmmto*it*desde So . . . C+antepto do mono mejoradc Pam txatorws y bkkhmm CW1 f 1 cvmk•a e0 cn ut x w$i CW una o c h"k�-xj de f i.st 3t n t! LA �•" 1 1 �l T I OTf:ASti'dTA� I�SLi.�.' t�- I � �_ ��1L1t1- � JI• 1 C,211CAIII Wilt j fJ kJ ti t. � �� [aun�r#i cbcliga Qq parr o6trnrr D Avanxando ��* mis inrafrmac160 y fiUwiblrsa a ia■ an First Stre*tFI �} .nuallsaclonar dad proysclo. ISiU010 ML UU►[VA �T�,{�' Ot1.lylMwingiarvrardonflrs! _ MUIfiMQOAL /� f+'w IIT.W.1cryra an ri.vnc„7W v+kNiA�irl b+ry tiJY 4 +i,uiAgurnr+uvrm,uyvs:ldo.�minafr[ukb� First Street Multimodal Boulevard Study— 80 COMMUNITYOUTREACH APPENDIX B: Pop-up Events Chicano Heritage Festival (Aug. 24, 2025) Community members visited the Study booth to learn about the Study and provide input on proposed design options. "-7; --- 0 Firy/ wn" N N ■ I� First Street Multimodal Boulevard Study— 81 COMMUNITYOUTREACH City of Santa Ana Fiestas Patrias (Sept. 14, 2025) Outreach staff disseminated Study fact sheets to community members and displayed a feedback board at the event booth to gather safety improvement priorities from stakeholders. 1 �.r Moving _ Forward ^on F. r.t '- - ' 1 - . , r First Street Multimodal Boulevard Study— 82 COMMUNITY OUTREACH SUMMAIdr- w_ Latino Health Access Arts and Crafts for Seniors (Sept. 29, 2025) Latino Health Access members learned about the Study during a pop-up presentation at an arts and crafts class. A 1�L_ �O First Street Multimodal Boulevard Study— 83 COMMUNITY OUTREACH SUMMARY Hen inger Elementary Walk to School Day (Oct. 8, 2025) Outreach staff conducted surveys to gather feedback on what commuters who travel on First Street would like to see and what could be improved along the corridor. • �r ZZ f _ I� I� First Street Multimodal Boulevard Study— 84 COMMUNITY OUTREACH SUMMARY Santa Ana High School Active Streets Club Presentation (Oct. 15, 2025) Staff conducted a presentation to youth to raise awareness about the Study and learn about their ideas for improved travel on First Street. I Santa Ana College Career Fair (Oct. 8, 2025) Study presentation and informational materials were shared at career day for college students and staff. 1 - i 22 First Street Multimodal Boulevard Study— 85 COMMUNITYOUTREACH APPENDIX C: Website Metrics Usage details for the period Jul 21,2025 Jan 21,2026 Pev 6 months Item nc— Avcragc acm news per day 2,091 11 .62 Usage time series over the past 6 months IV i2] IV aD e) a] at J ].••...................... • •/S iw}I �uq] aq]a Wro SOC 11 5ap)] an6 i Ne.' Nor�a Na.}e �9 o.c}} lr� In I} Figure 37:Website visits in English as of Jan.21, 2026. Usage details for the period Jul 21,2025-Jan 21,2026 Pan 6 months Item news Avcragc acm neva ocr day 552 3.07 Usage time series owr the past 6 months aJ ]5 20 5 o.................... -. _ - -A-- -- - - ...A.. - ni 2' Au9] Au919 Jua 2a ap n aso" ens Will Mw 1 Nov la Nov 29 Dx 9 Dac 22 Jena Jon Il o.r.INe1 Figure 38:Website visits in Spanish as of Jan.21,2026. I� First Street Multimodal Boulevard Study— 86 COMMUNITY OUTREACH SUMMARY Usage details for the period Jul 27,2025-Jan 21,2026 Item news Average item views per day 537 2.98 Usage time series over the past 6 months j x +s +e o......«. ...... -. LIA.— .....A... ... ... Jr 21 X43 tip+6 M,020 Srp it $023 One Oa IB ^1r., Nmu 1r 25 iieq Orr 22 Ant Jen t, r...um Figure 39: Website visits in Vietnamese as of Jan.21, 2026. I� First Street Multimodal Boulevard Study— 87 COMMUNITYOUTREACH APPENDIX D: Educational Materials Workshop #1 Announcement Flyer: OIN US . • • • TALLER WORKSHOP 0- NG DONG COMUNITAR10 A healthier and safer experience for eyeryone who wo,I kai bikes - thinh m6ttwingle,thi do ph udectidd,t4d IdI,,too,hd, he tit A Hda'Wl, the corre". La Ciudad de Santa Ana eaud,buscan do su opinion Fort hacar de First$I reet .I nyj di bo,d.p.,di..may,as sh host,hi x.docithei dWhs,hay Priftiklipate in an or virtual workshop wharoyo,can shor,yaur un.expoi..a.I 0i i poe toclos lci�qua earn ho n,a nda,a, IN-PERSON TRUC TillTuesday,August 26,2025 ' ';� •.,c._'n. ;ty' �`'t PRESENCIAL •- • h0 Be.ngay 26 thong 8 tram 20256:011-7 Ls.Ta. p.m. Mertes,26 de onto de 2025 y C 6d10-730 t6i -y'�t p Roosevelt-Walker Community Center, ai Ct^kl i..aFs J�If,f'L' 6:00-7:3 . S,tam cgng ding Roosevelt-Walker, 816 E.Chestnut Ave..Santa Ana P.m• S"tr..-P ■-�` B16 E.Chestnut Ave.,Santa Ana ��- Centre,Comunitario Roosevelt-Walker. ,itiT ir. •=; -t +, VIRTUAL ssa„M a"'"a°t° 816E-Chestnut Ave,Santa Ana 0- a%3%'E=_. TRUC TUVEN Tss Wednexs da ru,«August u ust 27,m20 2«5mx ••••n-a+•u�•aw�a-�te°a° s � wA°°" mw,gsaP^ 27 y hJ TJ,ngaytngom15 6:00-7:30 p.m. VIRTUAL -7 d or biCly/FirstSteetYVorkshop Mlfrco2eagostode2025 wrowu 6:0030 tot 6 a° n bltJy/FlrstStreetWorkshop :00-730 n p.m. -H .eo...sl x •s..cw un .,,, c•.... na r blt.ly/RrS[StrcctWorkshop ®Forwar ®Moving - ®a.,,- d / 0 Tien TINTutdng Lei ©on First ©AVANZANDO ®Tren Oddng First 0 EN RRST STREET ®NGNIEN Clhl CAI DUZING FIRST TIANH UN LA BA PMU6NG TIEN '. uuinraamr LEVAR Fact Sheet: FACT SHEL7HOW ARE ALTERNATIVES • DEVELOPED AND SELECTED? Existing data including Dash history,traffic counts, © :\ - field vislts,transit ridership and community Input moving s being collected tP idemify the halla,ges ISUMMER'2025-FALL 2025 Pablo experience trovaling.tang Firm Street. Forward Gatherin g nformatea fervccludes barr'wato ae using key communiy This City is working with consultants to i as,bcal retail adds employ—M centers- / study the street`:uses and chaYengas The consultant roam uses this information to 0 a n First while gathering im portent feedback identify salutiors that address these travel — - fron residents,businesses,and ssues and barriers.All of the im nts &OUL11 TREETMULTIMODAL wr munitymembers, oacquie will be made without the need to acquire 6OULEVAi7b 5TU fA! FALL 2025-WINTER 2026 r19hi or progeny. Concept Development Different roadway configurations will he PROJECT BACKGROUND Thee alterratives 11 he developed developed to demonstrate options that fit In 2022,the City et Sarta.Ana updated ha(ia—iii Pan Neblhy=lament and identified Frst Street based on feedback from the community, within this available space.Analysis-11 be as a corrdor to ha rewnfgured for muhimodal improvemar'T>,In 2024,the Santa Ana Vision Zero Ran stakeholders,City Council,and others conducted to detnrrrana rho benefits for exit prbri[izec hir st Street as a topflue projed that.neeJec soIeLy rnhanrx+nchu,espLrle illy for vu lrmeble The communiry will have an oppareurcry, aharrntwo,and input will da gathered from tho to provide feedback an these three a it This will be nted to Ca,nci user.likepe ple.relking and6iryding.Tho City of S.an.as.nx is Fxrtnerirg with Orxrge County wmm n y. grace Gao afternativec in a series of design for wr.cideraFon and direction.Ultimately,n.porction Authonty;OCTAI on this p•ojrct.funding is Forid�d oy Sautkrn C,oliforni..Ass«ir.tin-, Cltarrettee and a,,bres common' rots, a ofaG -rnre SCAG'. mr events locally preferred aharnative wi ll be selected GOALS AND OBJECTIVES FIRST STR Ell MVLTI MODAL B ENEFITS JANUARY 2026 and final ergineering will hegin. Im d mfct for those 11—ling .Im t-end a tio'n that Fnl le Selecting a Path Forward Lr --� prove y y provemen_ P P Pe°P • • on First str.-.-t of ull agrs and abiliti—tro—I'long Fro Street The Santa Ana City Council will select -.. •Be--ter access for peop a wanting to walk,bike, •Improved heahh and eafetyfor people a locally preferred concept that meets f _3ij_•-i�l•.T rP`� / ride,drive,or roll on First Street traveling First Street or living r•_arity muhimodal goals and community needs. A camMrr-s,,-supparcc her.khy L'fnstylns k,r .Supporo-.l«al bus.,«sas by mating it-sir WINTER 2026-SPRING 2026 every+�?mbar pf our cgmm„n ip, for t—olpr,to access stores.restaurants,and Getting Ready for What's Next ; � tr•t• �J Improved traFFlcfleN and transit travel Jmes other businesses along the corrdor The locally preferred ahernaiive will be • i�iSiLtT'r lV further developed through 60 cent O •Enhanced test^.tics,more 5'+ade srd pe per better lighting engineering design and environmental LEARN MORE clearance. ®bit ly;MovingForwardOnFirst STUDY CORRIDOR MAP SPRING 2026 THROUGH FALL 2026 g FkstStrcotMultimodala ante-ana.org xoo Final Engmeering Design r Flower Palx Plaza Artists VIIlege :cooly c.•ric., and Project ZIP Up 8 PROJECT MANAGER: sanra Ana High—el DNv IDsocial serurhy otrlce Final engineering design and bid package Mike Ar—LallmarizahalGsankaarra.org _ will be completed by the design team, ..•.,..•.•.,.., 5 Due to grant funding,the project must be leted by the d of 2026. • * �.^ • he Cityand OCTA a en already, a dy, «' _ identifying grant opponunitias to ,� ! ' continue to move this broiled forward 00 First Street Multimodal Boulevard Study— 88 COMMUNITYOUTREACH FAQ: ®Moving WHAT IS THE TIM ELI NE FOR THE STUDY? 0 Forward lhbaci«l ar nt, p cusp dwnc 6 ipdi,hr Q r,a�, n [a m,rinmga c f,.rL.Jvi:::,LIr_srt:`:prx.�.,rkaalw,.ln:56xJr1v,Jrc;rrd o-,.o rv,.Yptwn'a M on First P w w w w 5lJN1 Nt=F-FALL 2025 F WINTER2025 JAW-2026 SPRING 2026 -r. kvJ M. _r ..I"I"pnfanad Fryi:exringt`ew?,N WHAT IS THE FIRST STREET MULTIMODAL BOULEVARD STUDY? raannsa ni .ht Artigr rMnmmnrrt_(rtnfrrax denl?n dup,. -n'amd dulg,aMrxra T y- Mann ng nR,rhhH trryyM. rry Ann r,rx rwgvwaTnk,-reHrnif,a S,xnr,lmm Brurnl:6mrr kx:i W 4rt Jwvra'uxs vaps a T rir Pvervx• r-mpr.r:e tr.R._w,lxsy and sxnn I:xtnx r I and r 't r.rh d ry Ixdxmr ara,kvcyrkra,howl np 1M1 WHAT DOES"MULTIMODAL"MEANT WHEN WILL CONSTRUCTION START? WHAT a:al"rc"MULTmJ.nirwAL"Ms(wall rtaflon,rwt rot cam.Ih'x lwaWn n'alltlr akir Tr_ILop •IFc1_*isp&,igrrak:alY,,,2'rc'dalLLrralir:.C,xs4Ncxx m•ld bca part c(expa'utc pFwvc' typaa of Fmryo r ry 3 I,c h wI c'ri ?01 t,c nd trod crs:cr w pvpc<lcd to be nmdexd L`Y rcer of LVL6 44rcc Tent F.P.tt+r,N.M,ilnrccMl stmam am saki,n'r—ple,rxr beetr,.fcr cvnmurm• i„3ng Is H 'f n:1 ew-vM, , �:.kt'�n is nsEn Glad to rzart 1,X://A�J fnra nh„-1x'rrpacts',MI ao tavryh and Ival b:,wircxsna [rvrrvrnva-si'.�nII v xS.Tn-n WHY IS THE CITY CONDUCTING THE STUDY IN THIS SPECIFIC SECTION WHV WOULD THE CITY ADD A BIKE OR BUS LANE?EVERYBODY DRIVES ON FIRST STREET. F . I I c II r J d,Ir . tll' nrG li 'r Ar clli'r::J,.l 'alvu r:'xl 'h.J W' w,.V rxvcL..r VI'�Iv yre lhr..wx walk kvk ur r',Il.a:'i .w J.reF. c`"2J. -L.t z FL wf h I Ic f WI l.. v ( l R !I-' s'r L, .11rw,nr JY urriJw b i:J r +I a.u.,.:al ar.wew.urd M'>.w.k n -phl'%KWM act.,cvlwr6. A a s.::F:as xnbr..c,ldmr,arvd pctyk with�blir s WILL A MULTIMODAL DESIGN CAUSE MORE TRAFFIC CONGESTION? WHAT ARE THE GOALS OF THE STUDY? IFc aitra:y oF,r':ct,c of d'h Pr::jccl is Ic ij•:nL'Y.v:�'L c,:icr wlulkvw I(aL r�airl.:n Iralfw Ikhv'wfak poiv'Sng sak T'SIwyL N-n'ry.fcJ is to i,iy'- ,a(r;v lw al wfw•huvsl ur Fi'.I SzrrL G'w gwls um.a. ar:d accc:v h xcn p - bk'r rcJl'g. d Ikrq Lcskn opt crw ec"rr6rnod f»' • f,h:u,rn wvxah:r ne brp„Mfa,q.dndny xnd hwuir travrt nrd salary lysxx�ry I.mbn rn atr'et M. mhasal thr,ga rr[,a+Jasnm • S:J;,en fxulthy liixmylwv and mmmr.r' nwn-brr nc IS THE STUDY LOOKING AT STREET PARKING OR PICK UP AND DROP OFF AREAS? • IvT•iuv�nullklsw urd uu'eil a:wllirrev • e,uwi(;Lh._.:,r'w:":nij,LLI.n lighRnR ilh k,a'+d a.alhwli;s TFa 51,.J,s',,I vck n Jl n'uy.l:uu4"r'_:Il:r nra.wA.ryf,,IS,w-In.kx:i,�Ji>auau like w'6rranuyvrw�:k Mid.',Ww,G kua�drrr vlfs,fa`ra.ia':and unr c•'ar,n.:c:alJcl:crk-,J:vyI'w:cri;br:Thc'i'ncv:.cf Ihw G:viccl h:x,L HOW I5 THE STUDY FUNDED? Lu-rucdus-:cv;Irc'ct perkirK'.. T G', IU f rhJ ll.ur:j lfc vxlr4 Rc• I A '- E -.L wF12U ::, stc'q.(d HOW WILL THE CITY ADDRESS SAFETY CON CERNS ON THE CORRIDOR? rLl,. af�rr ILJIIItwrof!-zna nrcvxa TFG:y.+s.,fl F.L-aF. „r, o_-k,sxarrgam( -e J.J_I'xy-a uivr rr:drr.such,[.tvirlk h:rak'+�ILnia.Uki .::J roll"�.FJ;,I:x..l lz:ia[rrrl.:d la Fnu I•l,t,(:a lu Auu PcFx Ds.'Wrlra IVa':croall- I.GraKtt_>::vloJrwap4s.lo-rckiry Ohl xxt'pHim ll'r 5ads' arJ(c+nt=a.kcv srtdvvyr:in:r*Ls.oakxic a„krY Tfa Ci.r:t3zJrt'r�tfv k'anris:eroidc:'nJnwp dv»gn and in(rarouwr cnhaxchrnu that n•ep.CmTarilrrprx'^ma apwt prtarprwn6.1 he prlprilipsbr tFc g'ant fu,ding HOW IS DATA BEING COLLECTED? Fx th.s St,,*M p pmpl,g fyr a,d affo-dabk 1,a q,wNr+cm also tHp ll t AW,g rsprJ.rny and kvrN!svx+N. sd:-Rion.aarpr> f+f.rry II arq.apt cal=d t'PtF ; rR,tkn lhm,gh t::rn u�r+trvfwl Makx'r:rr<:u6c+c'!ht'. TMS.,dy:tr Ln:Wl,anr'as Jr.,yatcyd +rviro,mpnallxs 9n,roaddr:!s rt,s¢prrvns • Ikwing ev.pwrsnn nrxl si-:.a emrkvh:rpa 'hya viesxrx:.,:rrxvwrrxrmmx PI .IinL Ty I'4 I 'r.l'_wv,avu divrdiliwm HOW CAN I STAY INFORMED OR GET INVOLVED? C:L•�I #Ld J w • r:Hr.nll:w:n capon Fa.r nfl vwkW uuW..ru My deer y r.nel rrdxs Ti ewrlau rd rNG arm iliev Iva pva irY `�-II»!V:`:Inlra ailaxrl/ur ugri 4'('x llw J rr„ -r.nwliid�iG' Gaonxi.rr:al i'ra > r�alirry F'rslSvwtMultimoddOanwnwrq WILLTHE RESULTS OF THE STUDY BE AVAILABLET,THE PUBLIC? •bnhAwoNiRgForwardontlrm kx. 1 N 4 2726,f J 3 I - r> l av�IJde.0 I'.I..I:li�-rn.:.r 4 ..n w-a da...mi 1.lw+.xwlyr.- nr.unn tx•Y r-rlra 21Frst5tI eW Ibmoda14ant.-anawq 8 PRUJGCI MANA(I,E Mikekr Pal Imxizabalansantr-arragrg Workshop #3 Announcement: p Moving i t , Forward 0 onx First JOIN US FOR COMMUNITY • ' • The City of Santa Ana is seeking ways to make First Street a healthier and safer experience for everyone who walks,bikes, rides,rolls,or drives down the corridor. These workshops will present the top three conceptual designs based on community input,field evaluation,and data analysis. You're encouraged to attend and let us know which features you like and want to see advanced into the next phase of design. 1 Tuesday,Dec.9-d O 4:30 630 P.M. Thursday,Dec.11 ORoosevelt-Walker Community Center 816 E.Chestnut Ave.,Santa Ana Stop by on a day and time that works best for you. The same informotlon and activities will be ovallable on both days. Brief overview presentations will be provided at 5 p.m.and 6 p.m.each day. Questions will be answered throughout the evening. CLICK HEPE TO LEAPN MOPE First Street Multimodal Boulevard Study— 89 COMMUNITY OUTREACH SUMMARY APPENDIX E: Equity Framework Technical Memorandum Extract from pages 21-25 of the Technical Memorandum: Equity Assessment This section summarizes key equity findings from the demographics,transportation, and land use analyses within the study area and identify disparities in access and/or barriers to quality of life parity experienced by marginalized communities, compared to more resourced, abled, and affluent neighbors and communities. Key data sources for this analysis include Southern California Association of Governments(SCAG) and the United States Census Bureau. Marginalized Groups and Vulnerable Road Users Marginalized groups and vulnerable road users are among those at risk of being most adversely impacted by changes to infrastructure and operations of a public right-of-way.This risk is due to these populations being less likely to have additional mobility options, less likely to be included in public decision-making, and more likely to have other existing barriers and challenges to accessing resources or navigating changes to the local environment. The Equity Study prepared determined that the study area has a proportionately higher poverty rate than the City and Orange County as a whole, and especially high rates of seniors living in poverty, especially on the northwest side of the corridor(refer to Figure 9). This area of the study also overlaps with proportionally higher populations of residents that speak an Asian/Pacific Island language (likely Vietnamese) and English "less than well." The corridor study area also has proportionally higher populations of residents that speak Spanish as well as English"less than well" than other parts of the City and Orange County as a whole, primarily on the south side of the First Street corridor(refer to Figure 10). Over 40%of the City's residents identify as immigrants, and the study area reflects this trend. Notably, more than half of residents in Census block groups north of First Street identify as immigrants. These demographics demonstrate significant populations that are likely to have fewer mobility options and fewer opportunities to be civically engaged (in transportation investment decisions,for example) in a welcoming language or format compared to other residents in the City. First Street Multimodal Boulevard Study—90 COMMUNITYOUTREACH Figure 9. Poverty Rates within First Street Equity Study Area Legend First Street Multimodal Corridor Study Census 61ock Groups in Study Area City of Santa Ana __ o study Area Poverty Rate 0%-5% n 6%-10% V 11%-25% >� 264'0-40% F rs'Strut D tell, 0,5 1-11es a,�ta F%e.a rv�r N Figure 10. Map of Hispanic/Latinx Residents that Speak English Less than "Well" Legend First Street Multimodal Corridor Study Oee,.s Block Groups In Study Area City of Santa Ana r_1 SWdy Area Spanish Speakers That Speak © English Less Than"Well" o%-10'. r� 11%-z0% 21'6-30"6 ® 31%-35% First Street h Igo LJ V r \crt� / 0 0.5 1 Miles ra:nn N First Street Multimodal Boulevard Study— 91 COMMUNITYOUTREACH The City has a high proportion of renters, compared to Orange County, and the study area has an even higher proportion, over half of whom are cost-burdened by their housing costs(refer to Figure 11). This demonstrates a majority of study area residents that live in housing insecurity due to a high proportion of their income devoted to housing,which increases risk of defaulting on rent payments and potential eviction. Figure 11. Renter Households within First Street Equity Study Area Legend First Street Multimodal Corridor Study Census Block Groupsin stedyArea -ity of Song Ana O smdyArea Renter Occupied Households 0%-25 - 2 6%-50 61%-75% 76%-100% �h;rrt �I p IA Gt—n" vnrtn 11 T vin r acrv -wren, aa,ra nna 0 0� i R41Ic•: The Origin-Destination Analysis conducted for the two-mile area around the corridor shows that the highest origin-destination pairs for people living within a half mile of the corridor also had notably high proportions of people walking, ranging from 24-38%of all travel modes. Further, trips from resident originating near the cluster of seniors living in poverty on the north side of the corridor and ending in the downtown civic center area had a relatively high proportion of transit trips(5%), although these areas are less than a half mile from each other. These travel patterns show that there are very high percentages of people walking to destinations near and on the corridor, as well as higher rates of people taking transit near senior housing. This demonstrates a vulnerable road user presence in and around the corridor that may benefit greatly from safe, accessible, and comfortable mobility options. Considerations for Community Engagement and Multimodal Concept Development These demographics, land uses, and road user findings overall provide important context for the advancement of the First Street Multimodal Boulevard Study. The prevalence of marginalized demographics and vulnerable road users inform project approaches to community engagement, such as targeted outreach to include community members that are older and/or have limited safe and accessible mobility options, speak languages other than English, are more likely to experience housing insecurity, and are more likely to walk or take transit. Members of these key study demographics are typically not centered in traditional outreach methods but are likely to be disproportionately impacted by not having their needs considered in street design and operations, as they are likely to have fewer resources and alternatives to adapt to environmental changes. Figure 12 illustrates the relationship between residents over Age 65 and the poverty rate within the area. First Street Multimodal Boulevard Study— 92 COMMUNITYOUTREACH Figure 12. Residents Over Age 65 and Poverty Rate within Equity Study Area Legend First Street Multimodal Corridor Study Census Block Groups in of j Study Area City o!Santa Ana -- Stutly Area _ Residents Over Age 65 11%-20% 21% 30h 311% 35% P-orty Rate 0%-5% • 6%-15% • a. First Street • 16%-25% ® • z6%-aoro • o � � D re 9SGr.4• Tustln Sanla Ana l,. 1 Mile=. I r I c=t,r.:r=5a rrur, N Considerations for multimodal concept development include recognizing specific access needs for people walking/rolling, education and intuitive design for new street configurations, and focusing improvements on traffic safety and reduction of conflicts between different travel modes, especially vehicles and pedestrians. Examples of these considerations may include any placement of a new bi-directional bicycle facility or shared-use path on the southern side of the corridor,where there is less concentration of senior housing developments, or identifying controlled mid-block crossing locations that can better facilitate vulnerable road users access to transit.Another consideration is for providing longer crossing times for slower moving members of the community including the elderly, disabled and young children. Built Environment and Exposure to Harm This section summarizes key points of findings from this memorandum that focus on the existing conditions, built environment, and exposure to harm, specifically for marginalized and vulnerable populations. The corridor study area has a presence of community assets (grocery stores/farmers market, community centers, hospitals, libraries)that serve and are open to the public, but little green or open space. This showed that while there may be important resources, such as access to fresh food and health services, there may be inconsistent access to these resources for community members in the study area based on insurance coverage and food insecurity rates, as well as limited existing opportunities for physical activity. Most of the formal employment opportunities in the study area are within the civic or health and manufacturing sectors(refer to Figure 13). Additionally, preliminary findings show that one in three workers are in a blue-collar sector,with over one in four in the service sector. This may demonstrate a relatively steady commute demand throughout a 24-hour period that includes traditional 9 AM to 5 PM hours, as well as late night or early morning shifts. As described above, a robust informal economy of street vendors has been observed along the corridor. In the observational survey, conducted over a period of four days, the consultant team observed 30 vendors, slightly more than half serving food. In line with SB 946 and the City's and County's regulatory framework and given the placement of many street vendors along the First Street Multimodal Boulevard Study— 93 hill sidewalk infrastructure,the study will assess sidewalk design and dimension needs that balance the use of space by permitted vendors and people walking and rolling. The study area shows some cleanup sites along and near the corridor(refer to Figure 14), as well as higher Disadvantaged Communities rankings,which measure environmental pollution exposure and social vulnerability, around the east side of the corridor,just west of the 1-5 freeway and near several cleanup sites. Given preliminary level of service assessment findings of vehicle congestion around this part of the corridor,this may reflect the value of shifting travel modes away from single occupancy driving to reduce vehicle miles traveled and emissions. Figure 13. MajorEmployers and Employment Hubs Near First Street First Street Multimodal Corridor Study Regional Regional CantarvOrange_Center of County:range County City of Santa Ana Unive I** ! © Protecuon Service Orange County Global Medical Orange County OCenter Jodicial Board of Council of Supervisiors Cell/omia Team Al-7 Santa Ana FlrstAmerlcan Insurance District City Public Property&CSLT State Compensation Services, Attorney WOrKs Insurance Fund Santa Ana. Orange County .Orange County Office MelioiF; �ShCEt office Waste Management me Dlstnot Attorney Department •Santa Ana Patrol one High School Legend CeCo nsus Block Groups In Study Area 7-1 Study Area Marklantl Number of Jobs Industries Inc 1 5-250 stamen u I 251-5.000 a ,C> Garden Greve '—'-' 7 5.001-13,000 r.7.t:•..r "I 15,001-25.000 Mtl1Afer car Mator Employers waam,i ear .. Hanrnym" sAl. eeacn Fountain "' 0 0.5 1 Mlles 1 VaNny I N Figure 14. Identified Hazardous and Clean Up Site First Street Multimodal Corridor Study Legnnd Census Block Groups in Study Area City of Santa Ana O Study Area DTSC Hazardous Waste Sites m9. 0 DTSC Cleanup Sites C ...r _ i ,.aO First Street'. `_4 I ry z e _ ? O v: 1-17 $la1llOn nNol ..,a Dranga Gartlan Grove T-li n Midway City Tusti - Westmi t5r �'. Huntington J tin Hearh F 0.5 1 M unearn Sanfi An. - sll y aes I corn rrasa �u N Source:Department of Toxicrr Substances Control(2025) t First Street Multimodal Boulevard Study— 94 Attachment 4 OCTA MEMO March 13, 2026 To: Mike Arizabel, Public Works Agency, City of Santa Ana From: Charles Main, Section Manager— Transit Service Planning Subject: OCTA Recommendations — First Street Multimodal Boulevard Study Thank you for collaborating with the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) on the development of the First Street Multimodal Boulevard Study in the City of Santa Ana. First Street is a key transportation corridor and includes OC Bus Route 64, one of OCTA's busiest routes, operating at 12-15 minute weekday frequencies. Multimodal improvements along First Street would enhance transit access through dedicated bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure, as well as transit priority treatments to improve speed and reliability. Traffic calming enhancements would also improve safety for all modes of travel. OCTA has reviewed the three conceptual alternatives and provides the following recommendations for consideration: Option #1: Six General Purpose Lanes with a Shared Pedestrian/Bicycle Path in One Direction OCTA recommends incorporating transit priority treatments identified in OCTA's Transit Optimization Study, including queue jumps and bypass lanes, bus bulbs and floating islands, stop consolidation, relocating stops to the far side of intersections, and converting bus pull-outs to in-lane stops. A full list of transit priority treatments, including locations, benefits, and costs, is provided in Attachment A. Option #2: Five General Purpose Lanes with a Sidewalk and Separated Bikeway in Both Directions OCTA supports applying the Transit Optimization Study recommendations noted under Option #1. In addition, OCTA suggests avoiding dedicated bus pull-outs, as buses using pull-outs must merge in and out of traffic, introducing variability into travel times and reducing reliability. Option #3: Four General Purpose Lanes with Dedicated Transit Lanes in Both Directions, a Multi-Use Path/Sidewalk in One Direction, and a Sidewalk with Bikeway in the Other Direction OCTA supports applying the recommendations described under Options #1 and #2. Dedicated transit lanes can provide significant benefits to bus speed and reliability. However, OCTA does not currently have long-term plans to increase Route 64 frequencies (currently every 12-15 minutes) to the 3-6 minute levels typically needed to fully optimize dedicated transit lanes. If the City of Santa Ana elects to proceed with Option #3, OCTA recommends conducting additional studies to evaluate both capital and operational improvements that could enhance service frequencies along the study area corridor. In the near term, this includes advancing treatments identified in the Transit Optimization Study to improve speed and reliability on First Street. These improvements would help make transit more competitive with the automobile and build ridership, potentially supporting increased service frequencies and the future implementation of dedicated transit lanes. We look forward to continued collaboration as the City of Santa Ana engages the community and advances the First Street Multimodal Boulevard Study. Please keep OCTA informed throughout the planning process so that our comments can be fully captured and incorporated into the project. If you have any questions or would like to discuss further, please contact me directly at (714) 560-5904 or cmain@octa.net. 2