HomeMy WebLinkAbout2006/08/22 Item 27
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item 27
Meeting Date 08/22/06
SUBMITTED BY:
Status Report on the Major Intersection Safety Program allowing
the City Council to provide policy direction regarding the potential
use of red light camera enforcement in the city
Acting Director(oJ Engineering~
Chief ofPolic~ /
Interim City Manager (/, (4/SthS Vote: Yes_ No..x)
ITEM TITLE:
REVIEWED BY:
In 2005, the Neighborhood Traffic & Pedestrian Safety Program was created in order to
focus on neighborhood traffic calming, major intersection safety and pedestrian and
bicyclist safety The importance of this effort was underscored by the results of the 2005
Chula Vista Police Department Resident Opinion Survey, which indicated that four of the
five top areas of concern for our residents were traffic related. This item provides a
status update on program efforts in this area and provides the opportunity for the City
Council to have a policy discussion regarding the potential use of red light camera
enforcement in our city
RECOMMENDATION: That Council accept the report and direct staff to proceed
with further investigation of the potential to utilize red light camera enforcement in the
city
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: The (Traffic) Safety
Commission has received presentations on the Neighborhood Traffic and Pedestrian
Safety Program, as well as the Major Intersection Safety effort and provided many
suggestions and indicated general support.
The Public Safety Sub-Committee received a presentation regarding Major Intersection
Safety at its June 28, 2006 meeting. The Sub-Committee provided additional ideas and
suggestions and indicated general support.
DISCUSSION:
Beginning in Fiscal Year 2006, the Engineering Department began development of a
formal Neighborhood Traffic and Pedestrian Safety Program (NT&PSP) with the
intention of updating our City's approach to problem solving in three areas of focus:
Neighborhood Traffic Calming, Major Intersection Safety, and Pedestrian and Bicyclist
Safety The approach to problem solving incorporates the "Three E's"--Engineering,
Enforcement and Education.
27-1
Page 2, Item_
Meeting Date 08/22/06
During calendar year 2004 (the most recent year for which data is available), Chula Vista
had a total of 1,650 vehicle collisions! resulting in five fatalities; 67 involved pedestrians
and 40 involved bicyclists.
NT &PSP goals include:
· Reduction of the number of collisions within intersections
· Reduction of the number of accidents involving pedestrians and bicyclists
· Improvement of pedestrian safety and vehicular circulation adjacent to schools
The importance of this effort has been underscored by the results of the recent resident
opinion survey done by the Chula Vista Police Department showing that top concerns for
our residents include speeding vehicles, aggressive driving, vehicles running red lights
and traffic accidents.
This report focuses on the Major Intersection Safety component of the work completed to
date and is intended to provide an update on current status, next steps and to respond to a
Council Referral (April 11, 2006) regarding red light cameras. Although the tendency is
to want to begin this effort with a discussion of red light cameras, it is critically important
to fully analyze each intersection for potential engineering and/or enforcement
enhancements with red light cameras being considered only as one of the enforcement
tools available for consideration, if authorized by Council.
MAJOR INTERSECTION SAFETY
Background
According to the Office of Traffic Safety, Federal Highway Administration (FHWA),
more than 2.8 million intersection-related crashes occurred in the year 2000, representing
44 percent of all reported crashes. Approximately 8,500 fatalities (23% of the total
fatalities) and almost 1 million injury crashes (more than 48% of all injury crashes)
occurred at or within an intersection environment. Intersection safety is one of the
emphasis areas in the American Association of State Highway and Transportation
Officials Strategic Safety Plan, as well as the Safety Action Plan developed by the
Institute of Transportation Engineers.
Driving near and within intersections is one of the most complex conditions drivers
encounter The crossing and turning maneuvers that occur at intersections create
numerous opportunities for vehicle-vehicle, vehicle-pedestrian, and vehicle-bicycle
conflicts, explaining the high concentration of traffic crashes, injuries and deaths
occurring at intersections.
I Due to a change in our approach to data collection to support the new program, this number includes 183
incidents that would not have required a report in the past.
27-2
Page 3, Item_
Meeting Date 08/22/06
Evaluation Approach
Although Chula Vista's approximately 250 signalized intersections meet all engineering
standards and requirements, this program began with the intention of reviewing the City's
top 20 intersections given the latest in state-of-the-art research and tools for enhancement
of intersection safety.
Intersections were selected for further evaluation after consideration of traffic volumes,
total collisions, accident rates, frequency of injury and, given program goals, collisions
involving pedestrians, bicyclists and fatalities. The data review encompassed a three-
year time period (October 2002 through September 2005) to allow like comparison to
statewide accident rates, which are calculated in this manner. Also taken into
consideration was community input (further discussed in the "Red Light Running"
section below). Due to tie numbers in the scoring and the desire to include intersections
that had experienced fatalities during the last three years, the final study list included 31
intersections (see Attachment 1).
Intersection site visits are being conducted and enhancement recommendations will be
developed based on the following objectives:
. Reduce frequency and severity of intersection conflicts through traffic control and
operational improvements including ensuring appropriate number of signal heads;
high visibility of signal heads; appropriate all-red and yellow intervals; potential
use of advance warning signs and advance yellow flashing lights; setting of
appropriate approach speed; optimal traffic signal coordination; modifying signal
phasing; providing pavement markings; and revising and/or restricting turn
movements.
. Maximize sight distance at signalized intersections by ensuring clear sight lines in
each quadrant of an intersection.
. Improve driver awareness of intersections and signal control by optimized
signing, delineation, lighting and, potentially, pavement textures.
. Improve driver compliance with traffic control devices through public education
and enforcement to reduce traffic law violations. Automated enforcement (red
light cameras) of traffic signals is an increasingly common approach to improving
driver compliance with safety traffic laws. At certain intersection approaches,
implementing speed-reduction measures may provide an approaching driver with
additional time to make safer intersection-related decisions.
For reasons outlined in the "Red Light Running" section below, the engineering
evaluation also specifically includes a review of all factors identified as important to
reducing red light running as provided by the FHWA, the National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration and the Institute of Transportation Engineers.
These evaluation areas are included as a result of a FHW A study that showed the
following causes for red light running reported in a review of 139 crashes where traffic-
signal violation was established as a contributing factor
27-3
Page 4, Item_
Meeting Date 08/22/06
)0> 40% did not see the signal,
)0> 25% tried to beat the yellow light;
)0> 12% thought they had a green light;
)0> 8% intentionally violated the signal,
)0> 6% were unable to bring their vehicle to a stop
)0> 4% followed another vehicle into the intersection and did not
look at the signal indication;
)0> 3% were confused by another signal at the intersection;
)0> 2% were varied in their cause.
Our evaluation and development of recommendations for the 31 Chula Vista intersections
also includes a review of collision reports to learn more about accident victims and
witness perspectives regarding factors contributing to accidents.
Red Light Running
A comprehensive literature review and best-in-class survey conducted during program
development led to special attention on what is considered to be the primary cause of
crashes at signalized intersections-red light running.
The FHWA's 2002 figures indicate a national incidence of 218,000 red light running
crashes resulting in 181,000 injuries, 880 fatalities and an economic loss of $14 billion.
The FHW A states that red light running is on the rise with other aggressive driving
behaviors, which is of particular interest to us given the resident survey data2 ranking
aggressive driving as the second top resident concern behind speeding vehicles.
In order to further our understanding of resident concerns in this area, an additional
survey was distributed in both English and Spanish via email to over 500 residents. A
22% response rate was achieved with the following results:
· 86% are concerned about red light running
· 51 % witness red light running several times a week
· 82 intersections were identified as areas of concern
. 30 ofthose intersections were mentioned by more than one respondent
Enforcement
Each intersection evaluation also includes consideration of enforcement as an
intervention where engineering enhancements are not warranted or until engineering
measures can be installed. Enforcement activities used to treat safety problems can be
categorized as one of two types: officer and camera.
22005 ChuIa Vista Police Department Resident Opinion Survey conducted by SANDAG
27-4
Page 5, Item_
Meeting Date 08/22/06
Officer Enforcement: This enforcement method is frequently requested and is generally
regarded as successful in reducing violations but is labor-intensive. Officer enforcement
is typically done by a single officer taking an inconspicuous position at an intersection
where the signal can clearly be seen. After observing a violation it is necessary to follow
the violator through the intersection in order to stop and cite the driver.
A safer alternative requiring a higher staff commitment, involves the use of separate
observer and pursuit officers. The first officer witnesses the violation and then radios the
information to the second officer who is commonly located downstream of the signal and
will stop the driver and issue the citation.
Enforcement lights are an alternative to team enforcement. An enforcement light is
attached to the signal head and is wired directly to the corresponding red light. These
lights are illuminated while the traffic signal indication is red. They allow a single officer
stationed downstream of the signal to observe vehicles entering the intersection and note
whether the signal indication is red. Enforcement lights eliminate the need for team
enforcement and, therefore, have a lower operating cost. More importantly, they increase
the safety of single officer enforcement. Our intersection evaluations include
consideration ofthis tool as an enforcement option.
Research done by the Texas Transportation Institute in cooperation with the FHW A and
Texas Department of Transportation indicates that officer enforcement strategies vary in
effectiveness depending on whether the approach is overt (officer and vehicle visible) or
covert. Visible officers are likely to have a more significant impact on violation
frequency than hidden officers. However, the effectiveness of the enforcement
diminishes rapidly once the officer leaves the intersection with violation rates returning to
pre-enforcement levels within a day or so after. The more successful officer enforcement
efforts are likely those that are implemented on an area-wide basis with innovative
enforcement strategies (e.g., visible officer presence and random location selection) and
include a public awareness campaign.
Since Chula Vista has over 250 signalized intersections each with multiple approaches,
sworn officers can monitor compliance at only a few intersections for only a few hours at
a time.
In light of the data discussed above and best practices in place in other cities (both in the
United States and in the United Kingdom), new strategies are being developed for testing
in our City These include the implementation of a more systematic approach to officer
enforcement at the 31 priority intersections using high visibility tactics and advance
warning strategies.
Camera Enforcement: Red light cameras have been deployed with the greatest success
where they have been implemented as one element of an overall traffic safety
management program. Red light cameras should not be viewed as the sole solution to red
light running. There is no one remedy for the traffic safety enhancements or the
27-5
Page 6, Item_
Meeting Date 08/22/06
reduction in collisions at signalized intersections but rather a toolbox of measures all of
which have a role to play
The most comprehensive study to date regarding the impact of red light cameras on
serious crashes (U.S. Department of Transportation, 2005) included seven jurisdictions
and 132 intersections using red light cameras. Findings included the following:
· 25% decrease oftotal right-angle crashes
· 16% decrease of injury right-angle crashes
· 15% increase of rear-end crashes
· 24% increase of injury rear-end crashes
It is important to note that right-angle crashes are more likely to result in more
significant injuries than rear-end collisions. The Federal Highway Administration
supports the trade off in accident types noting that the severity of rear-end crashes and
type of injuries typically sustained in rear-end crashes are usually much less than
damages experienced in right-angle crashes.
Cities using red light cameras have also begun to report reductions to collisions citywide
along with reductions just at enforced intersections suggesting a potential "halo effect" of
positive benefit. While cities using red light cameras are required to post "Photo
Enforcement" signs at red light camera intersections, they are also permitted to post the
signs at entrance points to the city, as well as at unenforced intersections. Ventura,
California indicates a 29% collision reduction citywide and an 80% reduction at enforced
intersections. Data from Escondido, California shows a 40% collision reduction citywide
and a 40% reduction at enforced intersections.
The emailed resident survey discussed above also included questions regarding the
potential implementation of red light cameras in Chula Vista. Responses indicate the
following:
· 65% support implementation of red light cameras
· That number increases to 72% when respondents leam about the potential
reduction in right-angle crashes
· 15% needed more information before making a decision
· 13% opposed the use ofred light cameras
Red Light Camera Installation in Chula Vista
As noted above, 31 major intersections are undergoing evaluation (see Attachment 1). It
is anticipated that approximately ten to fifteen intersections will be identified for further
evaluation for potential red light camera installation. Of those ten to fifteen, should
Council support continuing with red light camera evaluation, it is anticipated that five to
ten locations will be recommended for installation of cameras in Phase One of a red light
camera program.
27-6
Page 7, Item_
Meeting Date 08/22/06
Should Council direct proceeding with evaluation of red light camera enforcement; a
Request for Proposals (RFP) will be issued before the end of the calendar year. The RFP
will model the most successful and comprehensive points incorporated in other
jurisdictions and ensure that all issues raised by the State Auditor's evaluation (discussed
in more detail below) are addressed. Of significant importance is the requirement for the
vendor to set up test cameras at the potential Phase One locations to collect actual data
regarding traffic safety and vehicle violations before a final determination for red light
camera installation is made. Recommendations for installation of actual cameras would
be brought back to Council in coordination with the FY 2008 and 2009 budget process.
Future recommendations for additional red light cameras, if any, would consider the
results of the first phase.
Red Light Camera Considerations
In order to better protect public agencies from litigation, significant legislative changes
were put into place in 2002. These included.
. Program must be managed by the public agency (not by a vendor)
. Vendors paid based on a fixed monthly fee (not per ticket)
. Increased technical requirements for Red Light Camera and traffic signal
operation
In spite of those changes and requirements as identified in the California Vehicle Code,
significant due diligence is required to ensure implementation of a comprehensive and
fair program. Areas requiring special attention are summarized below
Operational Weaknesses: In 2002, the California State Auditor issued an audit report
concerning the implementation, application and efficacy of red light camera programs
statewide done at the request of the Joint Legislative Audit Committee. The report
concluded that red light cameras have contributed to a reduction of accidents (3% to 21 %
in six of the seven study cities); however, significant operational weaknesses were
identified in the programs studied.
The report recommended that local governments take several actions to ensure that they
comply with state law for using red light cameras, maintain control over their programs,
and minimize the risk for legal challenges. Recommended actions included conducting
more rigorous oversight of vendors, establishing shorter periods for destroying certain
confidential information, developing added controls to ensure that vendors only mail
authorized and approved citations, and periodically inspecting red light camera
intersections. Before installing red light cameras, local governments were encouraged to
consider whether engineering measures would improve traffic safety and be more
effective in addressing red light violations. Finally, to avoid overlooking dangerous
intersections that are state owned, local governments should diligently pursue the
required state approvals through Caltrans, despite any resulting delays to installing their
cameras.
27-7
Page 8, Item_
Meeting Date 08/22/06
All information regarding rigorous program administration is being thoroughly reviewed
by staff to develop policies, procedures and business rules for management of a potential
red light camera program.
Legal Considerations: There are significant legal requirements that must be met with
implementation of red light cameras and the issuance of citations for violations. There
are also legal considerations in light of previous legal challenges. This dimension
includes questions such as whether photographs can be used for purposes other than to
prosecute red light violations (e.g., c<Ujacking with a homicide, hit-and-run accident,
armed robbery, etc.) These areas are also being thoroughly reviewed by the City
Attorney's Office and staff to ensure compliance and comprehensive inclusion in
policies, procedures and business rules.
Court System. There have been varied reports regarding the success of red light camera
programs in relation to the court systems within different jurisdictions. The next phase of
staff work includes continuing our dialogue with the EI Cajon Police Department and the
East County Court to understand their success to date and inviting our South Bay Court
into the process to do all that we can to ensure success with this aspect of the program.
Revenue and Cost Considerations: The State Auditor's Report was based on a review of
seven cities and supported survey data we gathered from 16 cities indicating that most
programs were breaking even at best with some having to budget funds for program
support.
A preliminary review of best practices and program audits indicates that additional
staffing and funds may be required to meet the engineering and police requirements, as
well as construction inspection and legal support. Should the Council direct proceeding
with implementation of a red light camera program; a full program recommendation
addressing this issue will be brought forward with the FY 2008 and 2009 budget.
Public Outreach and Education
A more comprehensive public outreach and education campaign is being launched in
conjunction with this action. Public education campaigns trying to address driver
behavior face special challenges. Surveys from across the nation show high percentages
of drivers having significant concerns in common areas (e.g., red light running, speeding,
driver inattention/cell phone use, eating while driving, etc.); and high percentages
indicate a desire for stiff penalties to curb these behaviors, but high percentages also
indicate that they themselves regularly engage in those troubling behaviors.
The outreach plan includes development and distribution of a public information
brochure (see Attachment 2); awareness banners posted at major city gateways and close
to shopping malls (see Attachment 3); collaboration with local schools to distribute
information and display marquee messages; launching of an updated web page; coverage
in the City's Spotlight publication, Communique and E-Brief; and enforcement sweeps
incorporating the advance warning and high visibility tactics mentioned above; and press
27-8
Page 9, Item _
Meeting Date 08/22/06
releases. The campaign also includes new traffic safety messages to be released quarterly
during the upcoming year again utilizing the communication vehicles mentioned above.
FISCAL IMP ACT: To date, staff work has been absorbed within existing budgeted
funds with public outreach materials funded through the NT &PSP Capital Improvement
Project. However, it is anticipated that eventual program implementation
recommendations will identify the need for additional staffing, staff time reimbursement
and educational outreach funds. Amounts will be dependent on the [mal
recommendations related to the NT &PSP Staff anticipates that these recommendations
will be done in conjunction with the FY 2008 and 2009 budget process.
Attachments: Attachment I - 3 I Major Intersections
Attachment 2 - Stop on Red Public Education Brochure
Attachment 3 - Stop on Red Barmer
J :\EngineeMGENDA\CAS2006\08-22-06\StopOnRed.doc
27-9
ATTACHMENT 1
Major Intersection Safety
31 Evaluation Intersections
Intersection
1 H Street and Otav Lakes Road
2 E Street and Broadway
3 H Street and Third Ave
4 Paseo Ranchero and H Street
5 Telegraph Canyon Rd and Otav Lakes Rd
6 J Street and Broadwav
7Wildaur St and Medical Center Dr
8 Palomar Street and Broadwav
9 H Street and Broadway
10 Third Ave and L Street
11 Third Ave and Orange
12 I Street and Fourth Ave
13 H Street and Fifth Ave
14 Otav Lakes Rd and Gotham Street
15 Palomar Street and Industrial Blvd
16 I Street and Broadwav
17 H Street and Paseo Del Rey
18 Fourth Ave and E Street
19 Telegraph Canvon Rd and Paseo Ranchero
20 Moss Street and Broadway
2! Oxford Street and Broadwav
22 H Street and Del Rev Blvd
23 Naples Street and Broadway
24 L Street and Broadwav
25 Olympic Pwv and La Media Rd
26 Otay Lakes Rd and Eastlake pwy
27 H and Hidden Vista Drive
28 H Steet and Tierra De! Rev
29 Bonita Road and Bonita Glen Drive
30 Main Street and Melrose Avenue
31 H Street and Hilltop
27-10
BE SAFE
1. Keep an eye out for traffic signals.
Forty percen nning crashes happen
becau e traffic signals.
ht.
crashes happen
ugh the yellow
3.
But it
if yo
,
PROTEJASE
1.
Est. alerta alas sefiales de trafico. EI 40 por cienlo
de los choqu el semafora en luz raja
se debe no yen las sefiales
de trafi
2.
en luz amarilla.
or pasarse el
105 conductores
I?' del semafQro
3.
,
pero $J.
elno
\C)
t-
:z
w
~
:t:
(.)
~
<(
27-15