| Back To Agenda | Print Page | ||
|
|
|||
|
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF CITY COUNCIL FROM: DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS DATE: JULY 1, 2003 SUBJECT: VIA RIVERA PILOT PROGRAM – FINAL REPORT Staff Coordinator: Nicole Jules, Sr. Engineer RECOMMENDATIONS: 1. Receive and File Via Rivera Pilot Program Final Report.
BACKGROUND At the January 7, 2003 City Council Meeting, Council approved and funded a three-month traffic calming pilot program as a means of reducing vehicle speeds on Via Rivera. This report presents the results of the pilot program, and recommends a long-term solution. The Via Rivera Community traffic-calming project has an extensive history. The following is a chronological list of Via Rivera action:
DISCUSSION The Via Rivera Traffic Calming Pilot Program was conducted over a three-month period to determine if a combination of speed trailers and intermittent police enforcement would be successful in reducing vehicle speeds along Via Rivera on a long-term basis. The program began on Tuesday, January 21, 2003 and concluded on Friday, May 2, 2003. The first element of the pilot program was a pair of rented speed trailers, one for each direction of travel. They were placed on Via Rivera at strategic locations for high visibility to traveling motorists. The speed trailers operated 7AM and 5 PM, Monday through Friday. The third element of the pilot program was increased enforcement by the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department. The department deployed an officer for two hours daily to enforce the speed limit on Via Rivera. The officer’s enforcement time was selected at random and the enforcement location was not clearly visible to on-coming traffic so as not to influence driver behavior. When vehicles reached the point of enforcement, however, the Sheriff’s car was visible to motorists to let motorists know that there is heightened enforcement in the neighborhood. Table 1 summarizes traffic enforcement activities during the pilot program. In all, the Lomita Sheriff Deputies spent 118 hours and issued 71 citations of which 59 were for violation of the 25 mph speed limit on Via Rivera. The Lomita Sheriff’s Via Rivera Traffic Enforcement Reports are attached as Attachment "A". TABLE 1 – CITATION SUMMARY
The third and final element of the pilot program was a device to measure vehicle speeds. This monitoring equipment, which was not readily visible to motorists, was deployed on a 24 hour/seven days a week basis, for four weeks during the pilot program and an additional two weeks after the program ended. Table 2 displays the days in which speed surveys were taken.
Table 2 - Via Rivera Speed Survey Summary
*Data not used May 2, 2003 concluded the enforcement element of the pilot program. During the following week speed trailers were deployed for an additional week without enforcement. Speed measurements were taken during this time to capture vehicle speeds without the presence of law enforcement. The last speed survey was taken during the week of May 26, 2003. This post-program count measured vehicle speeds without enforcement and without the speed trailers. Table 2 summarizes the speed data collection times. As mentioned by the Lomita Sheriff’s Department in previous public forums, speeding violations are typically enforced when a driver exceeds the posted speed limit by at least 10 mph. On Via Rivera, citations were issued for vehicles traveling 35 mph or higher. For the purpose of this report and correlation with law enforcement statistics, an analysis of vehicles traveling over 35 mph is presented in Attachment "B". Attachment B presents in tabular form the percentage of vehicles traveling 35 mph or greater. For any given day, the enforcement time blocks are highlighted and the corresponding number of citations issued on that day, are indicated at the bottom of the table. Conclusions that can be drawn from Attachment B:
A more dramatic illustration of this is a comparison of vehicle speeds for the final three weeks of counts when enforcement was stopped but vehicles speeds measured.
Attachment C is a graphical representation of Attachment B. Attachment C charts vehicle speeds during a twelve-hour day. Conclusions that can be drawn from Exhibit C are as follows:
For discussion purposes, a comparison of the 85th percentile speeds during the pilot program is presented in Appendix D. The posted speed limit on Via Rivera and all residential streets is 25 mph. The 85th percentile speed is used when determining speed limits on streets other than residential street. As seen in Appendix D, during the pilot program period (March 3, through May 2, 2003), the 85th percentile speed was approximately 30 and 31 mph in each direction of travel. During the week of May 5, 2003, when the trailers were operating without enforcement, the 85th percentile speed increased, especially towards the end of the week. Finally, during the week of May 26, 2003, when the trailers and enforcement were absent, the 85th percentile speeds approached 35 mph which was the 85th percentile when vehicle speeds were first measured along Via Rivera approximately 18 months ago. The cost of the pilot program is outlined below: Table 3 - Pilot Program Final Cost Summary
CONCLUSION The Via Rivera Pilot Program has concluded that vehicle speeds can be reduced on very short-term basis through the use of speed trailers and increased enforcement. There is little carry over effect of enforcement. Via Rivera needs a traffic calming solution to help reduce vehicle speeds on a more permanent basis. Staff and the Traffic Committee recommend the installation of speed humps for Via Rivera. Speed Humps are being recommended based on their success in the upper Basswood Avenue community. The before and after data for the Basswood Speed humps are as follows: Table 4 Basswood Avenue Speed Profile Statistical Data
Looking at Table 4, the percentage of vehicle traveling over 35 mph was reduced from 20% before the speed humps were constructed to 0% after the speed humps were reconstructed properly. Additionally, the percentage of vehicles traveling 30 mph or lower increased from 2% without the speed humps to 100% with the new speed humps. The speed humps have significantly reduced speeds. It is noted that the ‘before speed hump’ speeds on Basswood Avenue significantly greater than the current speeds along Via Rivera. In accordance with the Traffic Calming Program the residents along Via Rivera circulated a petition in November 2001 to those property owners within the segment of Via Rivera where speed humps are proposed. The petition stated that speed humps are proposed but since a final design has not been prepared, it did not state exact locations of the speed humps. The petition was signed by 89 percent of property owners. A copy of the petition is attached. During the course of the several Traffic Committee meetings, the City received written letters, e-mails and phone calls from individuals in opposition to the speed humps. Those in opposition state traffic delays, personal inconvenience, and damage to vehicles as the principal reasons for their opposition. Additionally, at the September 17, 2002 Council Meeting, a petition bearing 226 signatures against the installation of speed humps on Via Rivera was submitted. The petitioners against the installation of speed humps live in the Via Rivera neighborhood and use Via Rivera as their main access to and from Hawthorne Blvd but do not live within the block where speed humps are proposed. A copy of the petitions received is attached. The Los Angeles County Fire Department has expressed concerns regarding speed humps. At the September 17, 2002 City Council meeting, Battalion Chief Steve Martin submitted the County of Los Angeles Fire Department’s Speed Hump Information Sheet and Speed Hump Policy. The Fire Department was notified of this proposal and is expected to attend the meeting. A copy of the Los Angeles County Fire Department’s Speed Hump Information Sheet and Speed Hump Policy is attached. When speed humps were proposed for Basswood Avenue, two letters, dated February 25, 1999 and April 6, 1999, respectively, were received from the County Fire Department. Both letters advise against the installation of speed humps. In a memorandum from the City Attorney’s office to the Traffic Committee, the City Attorney addresses the legal principal governing liability from the installation of speed humps. The memorandum indicates that additional emergency response time caused by the installation of speed humps, by itself, should not give rise to City liability. A copy of the City Attorney’s memorandum to the Traffic Committee is attached. Staff recommends that the City Council approve a project to install speed humps along Via Rivera, however, it is also recommended that no action take place until a funding source other than the general plan is identified. The rationale is that projects such as this are typically funded with gas tax funds, but at this time the Gas Tax Fund has a zero fund balance. It is likely that once the current year closes there will be a positive balance in the gas tax fund and if this is the case staff will bring back to the City Council a plan on use of those funds with a prioritized list of eligible projects. ALTERNATIVE Alternative recommendations are:
Authorize the expenditure of up to $45,000 for the final engineering and construction of speed humps, signs and pavement markings along Via Rivera. Adopt Resolution 2003- , A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes Amending Resolution 2003-42. The Budget Resolution for Fiscal Year 2003-04, for a budget adjustment to the City’s General Fund. Alternative Actions One and Two approve the concept of speed humps. Alternative Action One authorizes the expenditure of $7,000 for the final engineering, and Alternative Action Two authorizes the expenditure of $ 45,000 for the engineering and construction of the speed humps. Staff recommends against these actions because adequate funding is not available in the gas tax fund for these expenditures. Based on the just completed pilot program, Alternative Action Three will likely prove to be ineffective at reducing speeds on a long-term basis. The pilot program failed to create a lasting influence over driver behavior and the ongoing cost of increased enforcement is significant. Alternative Action Four was presented to the City Council on September 17, 2002. Staff concluded that this recommendation would be more costly than speed humps, be less effective, and have greater negative impact on the community. Table 5 compares the cost for alternate traffic calming options Table 5 – Cost Comparison
*Cost based on 5 hours per week of enforcement versus 10 hours per week. FISCAL IMPACT Staff’s recommendation does not result in the expenditure of any funds. The cost of a project for speed humps along Via Rivera is as follows:
Respectfully Submitted, ___________________________ Reviewed, __________________________ Attachments: Attachment A – Lomita Sheriff’s Department Via Rivera Enforcement Reports |
