Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2006/09/19 Item 20 COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT Item c9D Meeting Date 09/19/06 ITEM TITLE: Status Report on the Major Intersection Safety Program allowing the City Council to provide policy direction regarding the potentia! use of red light camera enforcement in the city. Acting Director of Engineering fl"'{l., 1" 1..-17- Chief of Police'))\l.i.l; r~ift~ Interim City Manager (j I (4/S'hS Vote: Yes _ No..x.J 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 potentia! use of red light camera enforcement in our city. SUBMITTED BY: REVIEWED BY: RECOMMENDATION: That Council accepts 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 forma! 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. 20-1 Page 4, Item dO Meeting Date 09/19/06 ;y 40% did not see the signal; ;y 25% tried to beat the yellow light; ;y 12% thought they had a green light; ;y 8% intentionally violated the signal; ;y 6% were unable to bring their vehicle to a stop ;y 4% followed another vehicle into the intersection and did not look at the signal indication; ;y 3 % were confused by another signal at the intersection; ;y 2% were varied in their cause. Our evaluation and development of recommendations for the top 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 of those 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. .officer Enforcement: This enforcement method is frequently requested and is generally regarded as successful in reducing violations but is labor-intensive. Officer enforcement 2 2005 Chula Vista Police Department Resident Opinion Survey conducted by SANDAG 20-4 :)0 Page 5, Item_ Meeting Date 09/19/06 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 of this tool as an enforcement option. Research done by the Texas Transportation Institute in cooperation with the FHWA 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 top 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 reduction in collisions at signalized intersections but rather a toolbox of measures all of which have a role to play. 20-5 Page 6, Item dO Meeting Date 09/19/06 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 of total 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 ofred light cameras · That number increases to 72% when respondents learn about the potential reduction in right-angle crashes . 15% needed more information before making a decision . 13% opposed the use of red light cameras Red Light Camera Installation in Chula Vista In reviewing the City's top 20 intersections, the study list initially showed 18 intersections to be potential candidates for the red light camera installation. However, recommendations for eight of the 18 intersections indicated implementation of protected turn lanes occur before further consideration of red light cameras. Therefore, at this time, ten intersections are recommended for further red light camera evaluation in this first phase of program implementation (see Attachment 1). Of those ten, 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. 20-6 Page 7, Item dO Meeting Date 09/19/06 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 c.ertain 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. 20-7 Page 8, Item dO Meeting Date 09/19/06 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., carjacking 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 20-8 Page 9, Item d () Meeting Date 09/19/06 releases. The campaign also includes new traffic safety messages to be released quarterly during the upcoming year again utilizing the communication vehicles mentioned above. DECISION MAKER CONFLICTS: Staff has reviewed the property holdings of the City Council and has found no property holdings within 500' of the boundaries of the property which is the subj ect of this action. FISCAL IMPACT: 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 final 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 - Major Intersection Safety Recommended Red Light Camera Locations Attachment 2 - Stop on Red Public Education Brochure Attachment 3 - Stop on Red Banner J:\Engineer\AGENDA \CAS2006\09~ 19-06\Status Report. Stop On Red.doc 20-9 A TT ACHMENT # 1 Major Intersection Safety Recommended Red Light Camera Locations Intersection 1 Broadway & Palomar Street 2 Palomar Street & Industrial Boulevard 3 Third Avenue & "H" Street 4 East "H" Street & Del Rey Boulevard 5 East "H" Street & Paseo Del Rey 6 East "H" Street & Otay Lakes Road 7 Telegraph Canyon Road!Otay Lakes Road! La Media Road 8 Otay Lakes Road & Eastlake Parkway 9 Telegraph Canyon RoadlHeritage Road! Paseo Ranchero 10 Olympic Parkway & La Media Road 20-10 Jl '- ,~ ~ , ; t'~~.- BE SAFE 1. Keep an eye out for traffic signals. Forty percent of rede' ,running crashes happen because drivelS d6 ee the traffic signals. 2. Don't try to heatth Twenty-five pere because drivers light in timec t. crashes happen 'rough the yellow 3. Don't inte~tio'n~llt, light. Be patient, and save, yourself and others a trip to the hospitaL.art,",e mor~~e. ',--",;o-,',c';-""'_ -" ~,,- , -",'~':-'" -- '" -- ". "-"'-":'''''-',:> ',-i_l.- __ """'-',", and _'_:"_',:_''-',':',<',:'::<.'''':.:_'_:~'',::,,?__\.;>:,c \v'hat we're doingt6:ii~lp:;ke~ your fami]y safe:~' The Engineering and Police D~pa<ip1ent'~~;wo;ki~g,: '.. . together on a comprehensive:NeighbiJrfWod"Traffic and'. Pedestrian Safety Programthatrincluges :;';focu~ on majo; . . . ~ .'_;-:_':' -;",:'_"";,_ ,:.t,;:".,,-_"__-., >:f:"'--/", -,,~ intersectIon salety. ' . '.. .:.,c.':; 'J ,<}io'i' .^ . We're surveying you think are the '^,!/,ii,\'<:'-'" mifi ihtersections ;'r0:~;:'~'::'-' . Intersections with the. . ". t,d highest resident concern levels are b!,irig"~fudi ,dt~'id",ntify'pofential engineering enhan~elJl,,~h~. ;:d',\ \' ::';, ':;, . ;"--,'.w.:,,~ aign' -~i9rs-. '-',,___',c'CC-""'-- To learn more; go to '-",-:>,;?'f:;' -- <<) ~ z w ::E :J: ~ .~ 20-12