Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 6c. 2018 & 2019 Traffic Safety Report Item 6c Department: Public Works Cost Center: 5010 For Agenda of: 3/15/2022 Placement: Business Estimated Time: 60 Minutes FROM: Matt Horn, Public Works Director Prepared By: Bryan Wheeler, Transportation Planner / Engineer SUBJECT: 2018 & 2019 TRAFFIC SAFETY REPORT RECOMMENDATION 1. Receive the combined 2018 and 2019 Traffic Safety Reports (Attachment A) and recommended traffic safety measures; and 2. Modify the Traffic Safety Report/Vision Zero reporting process to improve focus and efficiency of the program to support the Vision Zero goal of eliminating severe injury and fatal collisions. REPORT-IN-BRIEF The following report summarizes the Traffic Safety Program and the latest edition of the Annual Traffic Safety Report (TSR) for two years, 2018 and 2019, which includes recommended safety projects to address high priority collision locations. The TSR reflects analysis from the previous calendar year’s collision data, as it often takes several months for collision reports to be finalized and several additional months to conduct the data- driven analysis that guides the conclusions and recommendations presented in the TSR. For this iteration, the TSR is based on combined data from 2018 and 2019, as preparation of this annual report was delayed due to limited staffing resources that were fully deployed during the 2020 and 2021 years for COVID-19 response. In addition to identifying proposed safety improvements based on analysis of recent collision data, the TSR also provides a status update to currently funded or completed safety projects identified in prior Safety Reports or completed as part of other transportation projects. While not every recommended measure can be feasibly funded given resource limitations (both financial and staffing) of the City, this report identifies which projects can be funded with currently allocated funding, and which projects will require additional funding consideration as part of the next financial plan. Page 885 of 984 Item 6c DISCUSSION Background The Annual Traffic Safety Program (“Program”) began in 2002 as an effort to identify high collision locations within the City and actively pursue mitigation measures at those locations. Now in its 19th year, the Program has demonstrated continued effectiveness and lasting outcomes. This Program has had long-term success in reducing total collisions, with a 63% reduction in citywide collisions since the program began. Recent Collision Trends The 2018 & 2019 TSR identified the following recent collision trends, which are also illustrated in the charts on the following pages:  Total Collisions o 2018 – Reduction of 14% from 2017 (lowest collision total since 1999) o 2019 – Reduction of 6% from 2017  Injury Collisions o 2018 – Reduction of 18% from 2017 o 2019 – Reduction of 14% from 2017  Bicycle Collisions o 2018 – Increase of 18% from 2017 o 2019 – Reduction of 10% from 2017  Pedestrian Collisions o 2018 – Reduction of 32% from 2017 o 2019 – Reduction of 10% from 2017 In both 2018 and 2019 the total number of reported collisions decreased by 14% and 6% respectively from the 2017 reporting year. Those are both the lowest number of collisions reported since the Program began, with 2018 being the historic lowest number of reported collisions on record since the Program began. Total injury collisions decreased 18% and 14% in 2018 and 2019, with total injury collisions down by more than 45% from the peak in 2004. Collisions involving bicyclists were up 18% in 2018 but decreased by 10% in 2019 compared to 2017 levels, continuing to follow a general downward trend from peak levels in 2009. Pedestrian collisions dropped in both 2018 and 2019 compared to 2017 levels; however, overall trends in pedestrian collisions over the past decade show a generally flat trend line. There was one traffic-related fatality on City streets in 2018, which involved a single- vehicle collision with a fixed object adjacent to the roadway on South Higuera near Chumash Drive, allegedly related to a driver medical emergency. Page 886 of 984 Item 6c There were three (3) traffic-related fatalities in 2019, with all three involving pedestrians being hit by vehicles. Two of the collisions occurred when pedestrians crossed roadways in an unsafe manner mid-block outside of legal crosswalks, despite the availability of signalized crossings within one block—these incidents occurred on Higuera Street north of South Street and on Madonna Road between the Madonna Inn and El Mercado. The third collision occurred at the intersection of Calle Joaquin and Los Osos Valley Road, with the pedestrian crossing illegally against the “DO NOT WALK” signal phase. Following investigations, the drivers of the vehicles in these three collisions were found not to be at fault. Each of these collisions are tragic in nature and no deaths on City streets should be acceptable. Following detailed analysis and design review of each of these incidents, no specific engineering solutions appeared to be warranted at these individual locations; however, the general context of these incidents illustrates the need for a more wholistic, systemic review of how vehicle speeds and pedestrian needs are managed along the City’s higher-speed arterial corridors, where most pedestrian fatalities have historically occurred in our community. Overall Vehicle Collision Trend 910 1023 1140 1256 1097 1207 1089 873 866 793 683 598 619 594 570 548 531 482 501 431 470 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 Total CollisionsYear Page 887 of 984 Item 6c Injury Collision Trend Pedestrian Collision Trend 240 267 268 309 308 315 285 250 257 240 236 233 220 191 207 201 220 197 202 166 173 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 Injury CollisionsYear 24 37 19 41 24 41 26 27 18 25 24 22 24 26 39 24 23 27 31 21 28 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 Pedestrian CollisionsYear Page 888 of 984 Item 6c Bicycle Collision Trend Fatal Collision Trend 52 46 45 53 55 50 55 61 59 59 73 69 67 69 63 50 56 50 39 46 36 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 Bicycle CollisionsYear 2 2 1 1 0 4 3 2 0 0 0 3 1 2 0 1 1 1 1 1 3 0 1 2 3 4 5 Year Fatal Collisions Page 889 of 984 Item 6c 2018 & 2019 Traffic Safety Report - Key Findings and Recommendations In addition to tracking citywide collision trends, the Annual TSR includes focused, data- driven analysis of collisions at all intersections and street segments citywide to recognize common patterns, trends and collision factors. This information enables staff to prioritize work efforts and inform policy makers and the co mmunity. Based on these patterns, recommendations are made for the highest collision locations of each intersection and street segment by classification. In addition, collision data is used to better understand the types of environments and behaviors that tend to contribute to injury and fatal collisions. This process can guide proactive systematic safety improvements citywide to reduce the potential for serious collisions to happen in the future. Collision trends at individual locations will naturally fluctuate from year to year, often known as regression to the mean, and ongoing monitoring may be recommended for locations with no discernable collision factors. The current process typically takes six months after the end of the calendar year for all collision reports to be reported, received, and analyzed. Often late collision reports are filed by private parties and extended investigation periods are needed before collision reports are finalized. Thus, the annual TSR is generally released a year following the calendar year of the collision data being evaluated. For this iteration of the TSR, limited staffing resources and impacts associated with the COVID-19 pandemic have further delayed release of the TSR; thus, this report includes ana lysis for calendar years 2018 and 2019. The 2020 TSR is already under development and plans to be completed in 2022, returning to the traditional schedule for release of each annual report. The TSR identifies patterns for the highest -rate collision occurring on similar street classifications and then are separated for the following transportation modes: Automobiles, Bicycles, and Pedestrians. These locations are narrowed down, and the top five locations are analyzed to identify possible mitigation strategi es to address safety issues. For example, all arterial segments are compared to each other to establish the highest rate locations and thereby establish the priority order for mitigation or safety improvements. To determine if corrective measures could reduce the likelihood of a collision type identified in the pattern, a comprehensive review of each location is conducted. This review includes a survey of the field conditions and travel behavior. Table Index: Table 1a: Safety Improvement Project Recommendations – New from 2018-19 TSR Table 1b: New Safety Improvement Projects in CIP Program Table 1c: Unfunded Safety Improvement Projects Table 2: Safety Improvement Projects – Funded and Underway or Recently Completed The tables below summarize the high-ranking locations identified in the 2018-19 TSR where new recommended safety improvement projects were identified to address safety concerns. The Traffic Safety Program typically receives recurring annual funding to implement lower-cost improvements, while more significant (and costly) projects are Page 890 of 984 Item 6c prioritized and funded as stand-alone capital improvement projects. Alternatively, these improvements may be combined with other large projects, such as with annual paving project or utility upgrades. Table 1a identifies the new safety projects can be reasonably funded with current traffic safety program funds ($318,500 currently available). Table 1a: Safety Improvement Project Recommendations – New from 2018-19 TSR New Projects to be Funded from Traffic Safety Program 1 Monterey and Grand Convert EB left turn to protected signal phasing. $10,000 2 California and Monterey Implement measures to reduce bike conflicts with right- turning vehicles, such as addition of bike signal phases or installation of illuminated “yield to bike” signs. (Currently in design) In the long-term, (a) implement planned bikeway improvements along Pepper Street per Active Transportation Plan to provide alternate route for SB cyclists connecting from Railroad Safety Trail and (b) explore potential to widen intersection for NB & SB dedicated right turn lanes and channelized bike lanes. $60,000 3 California and Palm Extend green bike lanes through intersection and install “right turn yield to bikes” warning signage. In the long-term, implement planned bikeway improvements along Pepper Street per Active Transportation Plan to provide alternate route for SB cyclists connecting from Railroad Safety Trail. $15,000 4 Marsh and Nipomo Consider measures to reduce vehicle speeds along Marsh Street, such as implementation of a three-to-two lane road diet (planned with 2022 Paving Project), extension of the existing 25 MPH business district speed zone west of Broad Street, and installation of speed feedback signage on Marsh to help slow EB vehicles approaching intersection. $15,000 5 Johnson and Laurel Install protected left signal phasing for NB Johnson left turn traffic. $10,000 6 Higuera and LOVR Implement flashing yellow arrow or protected-only left turn signal phasing for northbound left turn lane. $15,000 7 California and Hathway Relocate fire hydrant to alternate location and/or install high- visibility flex posts around hydrant to increase visibility. $5,000 8 LOVR and Descanso Install near-side signal head and/or high-visibility signal backplates to increase visibility of signal indicators. Pursue other measures to reduce speeds on LOVR, such as visually narrowing roadway with installation of protected bike lanes on LOVR, as planned by Froom Ranch development project. $15,000 9 Santa Rosa and Palm Install hi-visibility signal backplates $1,500 10 Higuera (Santa Rosa to Nipomo) Implement permanent road diet, reducing to two auto lanes. Consider measures to reduce auto speeds, such a re-timing traffic signal progression and extension of existing 25 MPH business district speed zone west of Broad Street. $10,000 11 LOVR (Froom Ranch to Calle Joaquin) Pursue measures to reduce speeds on LOVR, such as visually narrowing roadway with installation of protected bike lanes on LOVR, as planned by Froom Ranch development project, speed limit reductions and/or additional speed feedback signs $15,000 Page 891 of 984 Item 6c New Projects to be Funded from Traffic Safety Program 12 Madonna (US 101 to Dalidio) Install Speed Feedback signage for EB and WB traffic. $15,000 13 California and Foothill Consider measures to reduce vehicles speeds on Foothill Boulevard, such as installation of speed feedback signage, to help slow WB and EB vehicles approaching intersection. Consider striping changes as part of future paving project to narrow vehicle lanes and install protected bike lanes, as proposed in Active Transportation Plan. Complete railroad crossing safety enhancements (currently in design). $10,000 14 Johnson and Lizzie Evaluate feasibility of bikeway enhancements at this location as part of planned 2023 paving work on Johnson Avenue, including assessing feasibility of road diet (reducing from 2 to 1 auto lane in NB and/or SB directions) to provide width for buffered/protected bike lanes, green bike lane markings and installation of “left/right turn yield to bikes” signage. $2,500 15 Systematic Safety - Pedestrian Crossings Proactively install systematic pedestrian crossing improvements, such as Rapid Rectangular Flashing Beacons (RRFBs), median refuges and Pedestrian Hybrid Beacons at uncontrolled pedestrian crossings citywide, where warranted. Install ADA-compliant pedestrian signals with countdowns and lead pedestrian intervals at signalized intersections. $70,000 16 Systematic Safety - Bicycle Facilities Proactively install systematic bicycle safety improvements along bicycle facilities located on high-speed arterial streets, including measures such as warning signage, striping modifications, green bike lanes, bicycle signals and bike boxes, and quick-build protected bikeway separation where feasible and consistent with Active Transportation Plan. $50,000 Total $318,500 Table 1b describes three safety projects, identified in the report, which are to be fully completed with existing CIP projects and are currently funded and slated for construction. No additional funding from the Safety Program is required to complete these three projects. Table 1b: New Safety Improvement Projects in CIP Program No. Location Recommended Action Construction date 1 Santa Rosa and Monterey Install Flashing Left Yellow Arrow signal phasing for EB & WB Traffic. Upgrade crosswalks to hi-vis style markings. Increase pedestrian lead interval. Consider a pedestrian scramble crossing at his location. 2022 2 Marsh and Osos Implement road diet on Marsh Street, reducing to two vehicle lanes. Upgrade crosswalks to hi-vis style markings. Increase pedestrian lead intervals. 2022 Paving Project 3 California & Taft Reconstruct intersection as roundabout. (Planned for 2023 construction) 2023 Page 892 of 984 Item 6c Table 1c describes projects for two high collision rate locations where recommended mitigation measures required high-cost improvement projects, greater than the current traffic safety program funding allocations. Additionally, these projects are not part of other planned capital improvement projects. Future Capital Improvement Projects may be considered to address these safety projects. Table 1c: Unfunded Safety Improvement Projects New Projects Unfunded with Current Program Funding 1 Broad and Higuera Implement permanent road diet on Higuera Street, reducing to two vehicle lanes and upgrade crosswalks to hi-vis style markings. (This scheduled as part of the 2022 Paving Project). Investigate installation of overhead signal mast arms for NB & SB Broad approaches with overhead streetlight luminaires. Install additional “yield to pedestrian” signage for northbound and southbound approaches and increase pedestrian lead intervals. $300,000 2 Marsh and Chorro Implement road diet on Marsh Street, reducing to two vehicle lanes. (This is scheduled for the 2022 Paving Project.) Adjust pedestrian lead intervals. Consider installing “hardened centerlines” on Chorro Street approaches. Evaluate installation of mast-arm signal poles with overhead luminaires for north and south approaches. $300,000 Page 893 of 984 Item 6c Additionally, safety projects were recently completed, in construction, or planned to be completed for several high-ranking locations identified in previous reports. Table 2, below, lists several of these priority projects, although this list is not exhaustive. The table also includes projects to be completed in 2022. See the detailed TSR (Attachment A) for a more comprehensive list. Table 2: Safety Improvement Projects – Funded and Underway or Recently Completed Location Project Description Traffic Signal Improvements 1 Downtown Core Signal Timing* Completed implementation of Lead Pedestrian Intervals at several downtown intersections (Pedestrian signal crossing head-start). Implementation to remaining signals citywide underway. 2 Foothill & Broad* Install Flashing Yellow Left-Turn Arrows. Additional crosswalk and signal improvements are required as part of private development at 790 Foothill Blvd., to be completed by spring 2022. 3 Chorro & Higuera* Completed relocation of pedestrian signal heads at west crosswalk to adjacent signal poles to improve visibility of pedestrian indications for motorists and pedestrians. 4 Industrial & Broad* Upgrade and add signal indicators for more visibility. Investigate the installation of officer assist red light enforcers (secondary signal indicators used by PD for red-light running enforcement). Installation in progress by City signal technicians, to be complete winter 2022. 5 Santa Rosa & Mill* Upgrade and add signal indicators for more visibility. Investigate the installation of officer assist red light enforcers (secondary signal indicators used by PD for red-light running enforcement). Signal indicator upgrades complete. 6 Broad & Marsh* Install mast arm signal poles at Broad Street approaches to increase visibility of signal heads. Partially complete-- NB approach completed in 2021. Pole at SB approach requires reconstruction of corner, planned as Page 894 of 984 Item 6c Location Project Description part of proposed 2023-24 Downtown Beautification CIP Project. 7 LOVR & Calle Joaquin* Converted NB and SB approaches to protected left turns only. Pedestrian & Bicycle Improvements 8 Montalban Crosswalk at Santa Rosa* Paint crosswalk on Montalban at Santa Rosa. Completed in 2019. 9 Tank Farm Crosswalk at Poinsettia Installed in-roadway pedestrian crossing signs and Rapid Rectangular Flashing Beacon (RRFB) system. 10 Broad Street at Woodbridge Pedestrian Hybrid Beacon installation complete in in 2021. 11 Foothill at Ferrini Pedestrian Hybrid Beacon installation complete in late 2019. 12 Osos & Pismo* Implemented lead pedestrian intervals and “yield to pedestrian” warning signage. 13 Grand & Loomis* Install “yield to bike” sign for NB left turn approach. 14 Various Locations In-roadway pedestrian yield signs installed at 15 uncontrolled pedestrian crossings citywide. RRFB beacon systems planned or in progress at numerous uncontrolled pedestrian crossings in 2022, including at Johnson/Sydney, South/King, Marsh/Toro, Johnson/Higuera. Roadway Improvements 15 California & Taft Roundabout* 90% design complete. Final design and right-of-way negotiation underway, with construction planned for 2023. 16 Orcutt & Tank Farm Roundabout Construction in progress, with completion expected in spring of 2022. 17 Higuera at Bridge* Final design and right-of-way coordination with Caltrans underway, with plans to proceed to construction by end of 2022. Signing & Striping Improvements 18 Mill at Osos* Refreshed SB stop bar and pavement legend to improve driver compliance at stop sign. Page 895 of 984 Item 6c Location Project Description 19 Higuera & Vachell* Installed “Keep Clear” striping and signage. Intersection reconstruction to restrict left-turns planned in 2023 as part of Avila Ranch development. 20 Johnson & Buchon* Installed high-visibility median markings and signage to improve visibility for drivers. 21 Johnson & Toro Installed all-way stop signs 22 Broad & Pismo* Restriped WB Pismo approach to better channelize bicycles and right- turn movements. 23 Several locations Reduced speed limits where feasible pursuant to policies in California Vehicle Code Recent on several streets, including upper Monterey Street, Tank Farm east of Broad Street, South Street, and Santa Barbara Street. *Project recommended in previous Traffic Safety Report Local and Nationwide Traffic Safety Trends – 2019 to Current While the focus of the current report is to present the findings of the TSR for calendar years 2018 and 2019, it is important to acknowledge the traffic safety trends occurring locally and nationally in recent years. Over the 10-year period from 2010 to 2019, there was an average of 1.4 fatal collisions per year in San Luis Obispo. In the past three years (2019, 2020, 2021), there have been eight (8) total fatal collisions, an average of 2.7 per year. Of these eight (8) fatal collisions, five (5) involved pedestrians and two (2) involved bicyclists hit by vehicles. This is an alarming trend and not isolated to our city; per the U.S. Department of Transportation, recently U.S. traffic deaths have surged, including an increase of 12% in the first nine months of 2021 compared to previous years. Total traffic fatalities from 2021 represent the highest number of fatalities since 2006 and the highest percentage increase over 15 years in the history of the U.S. Fatality Analysis Reporting System. Pedestrians are disproportionately reflected in these national trends, with the number of people killed while walking increasing by 45% over the last decade (2010 -2019) and the four most recent reporting years representing the deadliest years for pedestrians since 1990. A combination of factors appear to be contributing to these trends, includ ing increasing size/weight of passenger vehicles sold, increases in distracted driving, apparent behavioral changes related to the COVID-19 pandemic, and changing priorities about law enforcement priorities and changing viewpoints towards police contact ab out routine traffic violations. Page 896 of 984 Item 6c More specifically, according to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, while vehicle miles traveled and traffic congestion were down in 2020 and into 2021, the drivers who remained on the roads tended to engage in riskier behavior. In general, motorists tended to drive at a higher rate of speed, demonstrated higher disregard for the safety of others, and appeared less concerned about the risk of getting ticketed by law enforcement, as many law enforcement agencies were impacted by staffing challenges and/or were less likely to engage in direct contact with the public due to health/safety concerns. There needs to be a strategy to reverse these trends or otherwise they will normalize in coming years and potentially reverse years of progress. This data further highlights the need for this City and other communities throughout the U.S. to increase focus on systematic safety improvements proven to reduce and eliminate fatal collisions from occurring. Investments in street designs, policies that reduce high-end auto speeds, enforcement, increases in physical protection and availability of safe crossings for bicyclists and pedestrians have been shown to result in positive improvements for all road users. Focusing on Vision Zero – Proposed Refinements to TSR Procedures While the City’s Traffic Safety Program and corresponding Annual TSR have proven effective at reducing overall collision citywide since the inception of the Program, the TSR analysis and reporting process could use refinements to better align with the City’s Vision Zero goals and the nationwide best practices in reducing and eliminating severe injuries and deaths on our streets. While the content in the City’s Annual TSR has expanded over the years to include more focus on collisions involving vulnerable users (pedestrians and cyclists), and some limited systematic/preventative safety analysis has been incorporated in the past few years, TSR analysis approach and mitigation recommendations treat all collisions with a similar level of attention and importance, and predominantly results in reactive solutions, rather than proactive preventative measures. In addition, the current process of preparing a comprehensive Annual TSR primarily using data from a single calendar year may produce data blind spots, as year-to-year traffic patterns and collisions can fluctuate with some randomness. Studies have shown that all locations have a baseline risk of traffic collisions based on physical factors present at the location, and the inherent behavior of drivers on roadways. The current report is unable to determine if a location’s collision pattern is higher or lower than this mean collision pattern. Under the current TSR procedures, a certain intersection may rank highly and receive focused analysis due to a random spike in minor collisions, while another intersection may never reach a high rank if overall collision totals remain low, despite an ongoing pattern of severe injury collisions over several years. Further, the current process of producing a comprehensive annual report requires significant staff time (several months of analysis/preparation each year), which leaves less time and resources to focus on implementing the safety improvements recommended in each report. Page 897 of 984 Item 6c For these reasons, staff is recommending several procedural changes to the Traffic Safety Report analysis and reporting process to improve focus and efficiency of the program to support the Vision Zero goal of eliminating severe injury a nd fatal collisions. The proposed changes are summarized in Table 5 below, and would be implemented with the next Traffic Safety Report iteration, pending Council concurrence. Table 5: Proposed Modifications to Traffic Safety Report Analysis and Reporting Procedures Topic Current Traffic Safety Report Process Proposed Changes to Traffic Safety Report 1 Reporting Cycle  Comprehensive Annual Report  Comprehensive report every 5 years  Condensed fact sheets published annually showing overall trends and status of safety project implementation 2 Data Used  1 year data used in most analysis  3 years data used for ped/bikes only  All analysis uses latest 5-year collision data 3 Method for Ranking High- Collision Locations  Intersections and segments ranked based on total collision rate (# of collisions per vehicle volume served)  Intersections and segments ranked based on weighted ranking factor, applying more weight to locations with injuries, severe injuries, and fatalities 4 Approach to Roadway Segments  Exclude collisions occurring at intersections when studying road segments, generally highlights access management issues at driveways and minor intersections  Include collisions at intersections and mid- block on roadway segments to better identify corridor-wide factors, such as high speeds 5 Systematic Safety Analysis  Mostly reactive analysis of previous collision trends  Greater focus on systematic safety analysis, identifying common factors and street design characteristics related to injury/fatal collisions Page 898 of 984 Item 6c Topic Current Traffic Safety Report Process Proposed Changes to Traffic Safety Report  Limited systematic safety analysis of common factors contributing to bike and ped collisions  Continue to identify appropriate corrective measures, but greater emphasis on proactive/preventative strategies, such as corridor-wide street design measures to reduce high-end vehicle speeds and conflicts w/ vulnerable users The proposed changes to the TSR would not limit the ability for the city to immediately address any emergent and obvious safety concerns and issues should they arise and the TSR will not be the sole basis for taking action. Policy Context The Traffic Safety Program and Report are consistent with the General Plan, Specific Plans, Bicycle Transportation Plan, City’s endorsement of the NACTO bicycle design guidance, and the City’s 2016 adopted Vision Zero Policy (Attachment B) to eliminate traffic-related fatalities and serious injuries by 2030. Public Engagement Many minor, operational, and non-controversial projects identified in the Traffic Safety Report would not otherwise be presented to Council if not part of the Traffic Safety Report. The Council has delegated authority to carry out these types of projects to the Public Works Director or their designee through the City’s Municipal Code. For these types of projects public engagement will be limited to this Council meeting. Larger, more complex, and potentially higher visibility projects that may cause changes to traffic patterns or turn movements for example will include public engagement per the City’s Public Engagement Manual as they move forward. There is flexibility within the broad description of the recommended mitigations specifically to allow for refinement from public engagement and feedback. CONCURRENCE The Police Department has reviewed the 2018-19 TSR and concurs with its findings. Page 899 of 984 Item 6c ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW The California Environmental Quality Act does not apply to the recommended action in this report, because the action does not constitute a “Project” under CEQA Guidelines Sec. 15378. Even if the TSR is a project, it would be categorically exempt from environmental review per CEQA Guidelines 15306 (Information Collection). Individual projects may require varying degrees of environmental review that will be determined as they move forward. FISCAL IMPACT Budgeted: Yes Budget Year: FY 2021-22 Funding Identified: Yes Fiscal Analysis: Funding Sources Annualized On-going Cost Available Balance Capital Outlay $153,438.00 91607 2015 Traffic Safety $153,438.00 Citywide TIF $100,000.00 1000073 Transportation Safety & Ops $100,000.00 LRM $218,508.00 1000073 Transportation Safety & Ops $39,851.00 91295 Traffic Safety Implementation $17,657.00 91607 2015 Traffic Safety $30,000.00 91295 Traffic Safety $131,000.00 SLR TIF $10,000.00 1000073 Transportation Safety & Ops $10,000.00 Total Available $481,,946.00 Reserved for Other Capital Projects ($163,438.00) Total Available for Identified Projects $318,508 The available funds shown includes carryover funds from previous fiscal years, as several of the identified safety projects were also identified in previous reports and are still in planning/design. Implementation of each individual project identified in this report will follow the City’s standard approval and purchasing policies. Staff is recommending that new projects listed in Table 3 above be funded through the City’s currently appropriated Traffic Safety Program allocation, which has a current balance of $318,500. Implementation of all the projects identified in Table 3 would utilize the full balance of existing Traffic Safety Program funds; however, and additional appropriation of $50,000 is programmed for FY 2022-23 and would be available to address any new projects identified in the next annual update to the TSR or for potential emergency safety projects needs that may arise over the next year. Page 900 of 984 Item 6c In addition, as identified above, there are two other high-cost safety projects estimated at $600,000 which cannot be funded through the current allocation of traffic safety report funding. These projects include significant traffic signal reconstruction at the downtown intersections of Broad/Higuera and Marsh/Chorro. These projects would be funded as potential future capital improvement project requests as part of future Financial Plans. ALTERNATIVES The Council may choose to direct staff to continue the current Traffic Safety Report analysis and annual reporting process in lieu of modifying the process as suggested in the discussion above. This is not recommended, as staff believes that modifications are warranted to bring the City’s Traffic Safety Program in line with current Vision Zero best practices and to allow more staffing resources to be focused on implementation of actual safety improvements. ATTACHMENTS A - 2018-2019 Traffic Safety Report B - Resolution No. 10746 (2016 Series) Page 901 of 984 Page 902 of 984 Public Works and Police Department March 2022 City of San Luis Obispo 2018 & 2019 TRAFFIC SAFETY REPORT Page 903 of 984 i 2018 & 2019 Traffic Safety Report March 2022 Table of Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................................................................................................. 1 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................. 4 BACKGROUND ................................................................................................................................ 4 VISION ZERO ................................................................................................................................. 5 MEASURING PROGRESS ................................................................................................................. 6 HOW TO NAVIGATE THIS REPORT .................................................................................................... 7 CITYWIDE COLLISION TRENDS................................................................................................... 8 INJURY COLLISION TREND .............................................................................................................. 8 OVERALL COLLISION TREND ......................................................................................................... 10 PEDESTRIAN COLLISION TREND .................................................................................................... 11 BICYCLE COLLISION TREND .......................................................................................................... 11 HUMAN AND ECONOMIC IMPACT .................................................................................................... 13 TRAFFIC ENFORCEMENT MEASURES ..................................................................................... 14 CITATION TRENDS ........................................................................................................................ 14 DUI ARRESTS .............................................................................................................................. 15 CITATIONS BY VEHICLE CODE SECTION ......................................................................................... 16 TRAFFIC SAFETY EDUCATION CAMPAIGNS AND COMMUNITY PARTNERSHIPS ............. 18 COMPLETED/PLANNED SAFETY PROJECTS & PROGRAMS ................................................ 19 2018 & 2019 HIGH COLLISION RATE LOCATIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS ........................ 22 WHERE COLLISIONS ARE OCCURRING ........................................................................................... 22 HIGH COLLISION RATE LOCATIONS – PEDESTRIANS ....................................................................... 35 PEDESTRIAN RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................................................ 36 HIGH COLLISION RATE LOCATIONS – BICYCLES ............................................................................. 38 BICYCLE RECOMMENDATIONS ....................................................................................................... 39 HIGH COLLISION RATE LOCATIONS – ARTERIAL/ARTERIAL INTERSECTIONS ..................................... 40 ARTERIAL/ARTERIAL INTERSECTIONS RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................................. 41 HIGH COLLISION RATE LOCATIONS – ARTERIAL/COLLECTOR INTERSECTIONS ................................. 43 ARTERIAL/COLLECTOR INTERSECTIONS RECOMMENDATIONS ......................................................... 44 HIGH COLLISION RATE LOCATIONS – ARTERIAL/LOCAL INTERSECTIONS .......................................... 45 ARTERIAL/LOCAL INTERSECTIONS RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................. 46 HIGH COLLISION RATE LOCATIONS – COLLECTOR/COLLECTOR INTERSECTIONS .............................. 48 HIGH COLLISION RATE LOCATIONS – COLLECTOR/LOCAL INTERSECTIONS ...................................... 48 LOCAL/LOCAL INTERSECTIONS ...................................................................................................... 48 HIGH COLLISION RATE LOCATIONS – ARTERIAL SEGMENTS............................................................ 49 ARTERIAL SEGMENTS RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................................... 50 HIGH COLLISION RATE LOCATIONS – COLLECTOR SEGMENTS ........................................................ 51 HIGH COLLISION RATE LOCATIONS – LOCAL SEGMENTS ................................................................ 51 Cover Photo: Joe Johnston, SLO Tribune, 2018 Page 904 of 984 ii 2018 & 2019 Traffic Safety Report March 2022 APPENDIX A – COLLISION ANALYSIS METHODOLOGY List of Figures Figure 1: 2018 Citywide Collisions ...................................................................... 23 Figure 2: 2019 Citywide Collisions ...................................................................... 24 Figure 3: 2018 Citywide Pedestrian and Bike Collisions ..................................... 25 Figure 4: 2019 Citywide Pedestrian and Bike Collisions ..................................... 26 Figure 5: Citywide Uncontrolled Marked Pedestrian Crossings .......................... 32 Figure 6: 2018-19 High Collision Intersection Locations ..................................... 52 Figure 7: 2018-19 High Collision Rate Roadway Segments ............................... 53 Page 905 of 984 1 2018 & 2019 Traffic Safety Report March 2022 Executive Summary The Public Works & Police Departments are pleased to present the 18th cycle of the City’s Annual Traffic Safety Report. The Annual Traffic Safety Program began in 2002 in an attempt to identify high collision locations within the City. In addition, the program actively pursues corrective measures intended to reduce collision rates and improve safety within the City. This program has resulted in a 60% reduction in citywide collisions since inception, despite increasing traffic volumes. Due to limited staffing resources and impacts related to the COVID-19 pandemic, this iteration of the annual Traffic Safety Report provides a combined summary of collision data from years 2018 and 2019. In both 2018 and 2019, the total number of collisions decreased to the lowest recorded number since the report began. W hile reducing the overall collision rate continues to be a priority, the safety program is increasing focus on the most serious collisions—those that result in severe injuries or death. Because injury collisions require a police report and an investigation by a peace officer, these reports provide a clearer picture of the collision circumstances and can establish a more reliable year-to-year trend. As compared to the 2017 baseline, injury collisions decreased by 17% in 2018 and 15% in 2019. Injury collisions overall have decreased by 28% from 2002 when the safety program began. There was one traffic-related fatality on City right-of-way in 2018 and three fatalities in 2019. A medical emergency is suspected as the cause of the fatal traffic collision in 2018, while three pedestrians were hit and killed by vehicles in 2019. The Traffic Safety Program aligns with the City’s Vision Zero Policy and includes thorough evaluations of safety for vulnerable road users, such as cyclists and pedestrians, who are disproportionately represented in severe injury and fatal collision trends. In 2018, bicycle collisions increased 18% from the previous year; however, 2019 represented the lowest total annual bicycle collisions recorded in the history of the Traffic Safety Program, with an 8% decrease from 2017 and a 22% decrease from 2018. Overall, bicycle collisions have declined by 51% from peak levels in 2009, despite an increase in bicycle mode share. Annual pedestrian collisions have averaged 28 collisions per year since the report began in 2002. Although 2019 saw an 30% increase over 2018, it was a 3 collision decrease over 2017, and followed the average pedestrian collision trend over the past several years. The following report displays trends in collision history, traffic citations, and traffic safety measures and identifies high-collision rate locations in 2018 and 2019. As in previous Traffic Safety Reports, staff reviewed all high-collision rate intersections and street segments and has recommended measures to increase safety at the top five locations in each category. Our Vision Zero goal is that the combination of data-driven analysis, appropriate corrective and preventative measures, and consistent and focused education and Page 906 of 984 2 2018 & 2019 Traffic Safety Report March 2022 enforcement will continue to reduce traffic collisions, eliminating injury and fatal collisions and improve the safety of our streets for all users. The 2018-19 Traffic Safety Report identifies 18 new recommended project locations, with several projects identified for each location. Additionally, the report identifies further systemic safety projects throughout the City. The new project recommendations are listed in the following table, in order of appearance in the report: Summary Recommendation for New Projects No. Location Recommended Action 1 Santa Rosa and Monterey Install Flashing Left Yellow Arrow signal phasing for EB & WB Traffic. Upgrade crosswalks to hi- vis style markings. Increase pedestrian lead interval. Consider a pedestrian scramble crossing at his location. (Planned for 2022 construction) 2 Marsh and Osos Implement road diet on Marsh Street, reducing to two vehicle lanes. Upgrade crosswalks to hi- vis style markings. Increase pedestrian lead intervals. (Planned for implementation with 2022 Paving Project). 3 Broad and Higuera Implement permanent road diet on Higuera Street, reducing to two vehicle lanes and upgrade crosswalks to hi-vis style markings.. (This scheduled as part of the 2022 Paving Project). Investigate installation of overhead signal mast arms for NB & SB Broad approaches with overhead streetlight luminaires. Install additional “yield to pedestrian” signage for northbound and southbound approaches and increase pedestrian lead intervals. 4 Marsh and Chorro Implement road diet on Marsh Street, reducing to two vehicle lanes. (This is scheduled for the 2022 Paving Project.) Adjust pedestrian lead intervals. Consider installing “hardened centerlines” on Chorro Street approaches. Evaluate installation of mast-arm signal poles with overhead luminaires for north and south approaches. 5 Monterey and Grand Convert EB left turn to protected signal phasing. 6 California and Monterey Implement measures to reduce bike conflicts with right-turning vehicles, such as addition of bike signal phases or installation of illuminated “yield to bike” signs. (Currently in design) In the long-term, (a) implement planned bikeway improvements along Pepper Street per Active Transportation Plan to provide alternate route for SB cyclists connecting from Railroad Safety Page 907 of 984 3 2018 & 2019 Traffic Safety Report March 2022 Trail and (b) explore potential to widen intersection for NB & SB dedicated right turn lanes and channelized bike lanes. 7 California and Palm Extend green bike lanes through intersection and install “right turn yield to bikes” warning signage. In the long-term, implement planned bikeway improvements along Pepper Street per Active Transportation Plan to provide alternate route for SB cyclists connecting from Railroad Safety Trail. 8 Marsh and Nipomo Consider measures to reduce vehicle speeds along Marsh Street, such as implementation of a three-to-two lane road diet (planned with 2022 Paving Project), extension of the existing 25 MPH business district speed zone west of Broad Street, and installation of speed feedback signage on Marsh to help slow EB vehicles approaching intersection. 9 Johnson and Laurel Install protected left signal phasing for NB Johnson left turn traffic. 10 Higuera and LOVR Implement flashing yellow arrow or protected- only left turn signal phasing for northbound left turn lane. 11 California and Hathway Relocate fire hydrant to alternate location and/or install high-visibility flex posts around hydrant to increase visibility. 12 LOVR and Descanso Install near-side signal head and/or high- visibility signal backplates to increase visibility of signal indicators. Pursue other measures to reduce speeds on LOVR, such as visually narrowing roadway with installation of protected bike lanes on LOVR, as planned by Froom Ranch development project. 13 Santa Rosa and Palm Install hi-visibility signal backplates 14 Higuera (Santa Rosa to Nipomo) Implement permanent road diet, reducing to two auto lanes. Consider measures to reduce auto speeds, such a re-timing traffic signal progression and extension of existing 25 MPH business district speed zone west of Broad Street. 15 LOVR (Froom Ranch to Calle Joaquin) Pursue measures to reduce speeds on LOVR, such as visually narrowing roadway with installation of protected bike lanes on LOVR, as planned by Froom Ranch development project, speed limit reductions and/or additional speed feedback signs Page 908 of 984 4 2018 & 2019 Traffic Safety Report March 2022 16 Madonna (US 101 to Dalidio) Install Speed Feedback signage for EB and WB traffic. 17 California and Foothill Consider measures to reduce vehicles speeds on Foothill Boulevard, such as installation of speed feedback signage, to help slow WB and EB vehicles approaching intersection. Consider striping changes as part of future paving project to narrow vehicle lanes and install protected bike lanes, as proposed in Active Transportation Plan. Complete railroad crossing safety enhancements (currently in design). 18 Johnson and Lizzie Evaluate feasibility of bikeway enhancements at this location as part of planned 2023 paving work on Johnson Avenue, including assessing feasibility of road diet (reducing from 2 to 1 auto lane in NB and/or SB directions) to provide width for buffered/protected bike lanes, green bike lane markings and installation of “left/right turn yield to bikes” signage. 19 Systematic Safety - Pedestrian Crossings Proactively install systematic pedestrian crossing improvements, such as Rapid Rectangular Flashing Beacons (RRFBs), median refuges and Pedestrian Hybrid Beacons at uncontrolled pedestrian crossings citywide, where warranted. Install ADA-compliant pedestrian signals with countdowns and lead pedestrian intervals at signalized intersections. 20 Systematic Safety - Bicycle Facilities Proactively install systematic bicycle safety improvements along bicycle facilities located on high-speed arterial streets, including measures such as warning signage, striping modifications, green bike lanes, bicycle signals and bike boxes, and quick-build protected bikeway separation where feasible and consistent with Active Transportation Plan. Introduction Background Since its inception in 2002, the annual Traffic Safety Report (TSR) provides an overview of the City of San Luis Obispo’s efforts to monitor and improve safety for all road users. Every year, the City prepares a TSR for the previous twelve-month period (a 24-month period for this report) with the following specific objectives:  Identify the intersections and street segments within the City associated with the highest collision rates, and thoroughly analyze collision patterns in Page 909 of 984 5 2018 & 2019 Traffic Safety Report March 2022 order to develop potential mitigation measures for the five highest locations that will reduce the potential for collisions—particularly those involving severe injuries and/or fatalities, and;  Identify the predominant pedestrian and bicycle collision types and high- collision locations, and thoroughly analyze collision data and police reports so as to determine potential mitigation measures for the five highest-rate collision locations that may reduce the potential for collisions, and;  Report on traffic enforcement efforts, traffic safety education activities, and evaluate the effectiveness of mitigation measures implemented in the previous twelve-month period. The locations mentioned in this report should not be interpreted as a list of dangerous or “least safe” intersections or streets within the City. The specific total of collisions for any location for any year is a function of various factors such as weather patterns, construction, traffic volumes, roadway conditions and driver habits. Many of these factors are often difficult to identify and are most often beyond the ability of the engineer to change or control. However, the City's mitigation program attempts to identify roadway elements that can be modified to make the transportation infrastructure more driver friendly, reduce driver confusion, promote bicycle and pedestrian safety and comfort, and limit impact severity. Vision Zero Vision Zero is a multi-national traffic safety initiative with a straightforward message: No loss of life is acceptable. At its core, Vision Zero seeks the elimination of deaths and serious injuries from our roadways. By focusing on not only reducing overall traffic collisions, but preventing severe collisions, particularly to vulnerable users such as pedestrians, bicyclists and people with disabilities, communities can achieve real live benefits and save lives. The City of San Luis Obispo formally adopted its Vision Zero policy in 2016 to eliminate traffic-related fatalities and serious injuries by 2030. Through the data- driven analysis performed in the annual TSR, regular collaboration between City Public Works and Police Departments to identify priorities for focused traffic safety enforcement and ongoing community education and outreach campaigns, the City continually strives to improve the safety and efficiency of transportation facilities for all modes and users. Page 910 of 984 6 2018 & 2019 Traffic Safety Report March 2022 Measuring Progress Progress towards improving traffic safety for all road users and reaching Vision Zero is measured in the TSR using the following metrics:  Total collisions, fatalities and serious injuries  Total pedestrian collisions, fatalities and serious injuries  Total bicycle collisions, fatalities and serious injuries The traffic safety data for these metrics is obtained from traffic collision reports provided by the San Luis Obispo Police Department. The TSR for a given calendar year will normally be prepared the following year after City collision statistics become available in April or May of the following year; this report, however, was delayed due to staffing shortages and COVID-19 impacts throughout 2020. The data analyzed in this TSR is for the combined 2018 and 2019 calendar years. Collision data is reviewed for each intersection and roadway segment within the City and entered into the traffic collision database. Auto, pedestrian and bicycle volumes are then utilized in conjunction with collision totals to calculate collision rates for all locations in the City. Considering the calculated collision rates, as well as collision severity, locations are ranked for each type of intersection and roadway segment within the City. The five highest-ranked collision locations for each category are analyzed in further detail and mitigation measures are presented, where feasible. Additional discussion regarding the technical analysis methodology applied in this TSR is provided in Appendix A. Page 911 of 984 7 2018 & 2019 Traffic Safety Report March 2022 How to Navigate this Report The remainder of the 2018-19 TSR is organized into the following sections:  Citywide Collision Trends – Page 8-13 How safe are San Luis Obispo’s streets? This section describes the state of traffic safety in the City, discussing trends in traffic collisions from 1999 to 2019.  Traffic Enforcement Measures – Page 14-17 14 This section describes traffic enforcement efforts of the City Police Department, discussing traffic citations, DUI arrests and hazardous driving trends.  Traffic Safety Education Campaigns and Community Partnerships– Page 18-1914 How are we making San Luis Obispo’s streets safer? This section describes the ongoing efforts to improve the safety of transportation facilities for all modes of travel within the City.  2018-19 High Collision Rate Locations & Recommendations – Page 32-5122 What have we learned about traffic safety in 2019? This section describes the high collision rate intersections and roadway segments for 2018-19 and presents potential mitigation recommendations for high-priority locations. Page 912 of 984 8 2018 & 2019 Traffic Safety Report March 2022 Citywide Collision Trends Injury Collision Trend Injury collisions are the most accurate representation of City collision trends because these types of collision are most consistently reported and investigated. In 2018, injury collisions reduced by 18% from 2017. In 2019, injury collisions reduced 15% from 2017. Fatal Collision Trend It’s difficult to identify a trend in fatal collisions because these types of collisions are typically sporadic, uncommon, and occur under unusual circumstances. There was one traffic-related fatality on City streets in 2018, which involved a single-vehicle collision with a fixed object adjacent to the roadway on South Higuera near Chumash Drive, allegedly related to a driver medical emergency. There were three (3) traffic-related fatalities in 2019, with all three involving pedestrians being hit by vehicles. Two of the collisions occurred when pedestrians crossed roadways in an unsafe manner mid-block outside of legal crosswalks, despite the availability of signalized crossings within one block—these incidents occurred on Higuera Street north of South Street and on Madonna Road between the Madonna Inn and El Mercado. The third collision occurred at the intersection of Calle Joaquin and Los Osos Valley Road, with the pedestrian crossing illegally against the “DO NOT WALK” signal phase. Following investigations, the drivers of the vehicles in these three collisions were found not to be at fault. Each of these collisions are tragic in nature and no deaths on City streets should be acceptable. Following detailed analysis and design review of each of these incidents, no specific engineering solutions appeared to 240 267 268 309 308 315 285 250 257 240 236 233 220 191 207 201 220 197 202 166 173 150 170 190 210 230 250 270 290 310 330 Injury CollisionsYear Page 913 of 984 9 2018 & 2019 Traffic Safety Report March 2022 be warranted at these individual locations; however, the general context of these incidents illustrates the need for a more wholistic, systemic review of how vehicle speeds and pedestrian needs are managed along the City’s higher -speed arterial corridors, where most pedestrian fatalities have historically occurred in our community. 2 2 1 1 0 4 3 2 0 0 0 3 1 2 0 1 1 1 1 1 3 0 1 2 3 4 5 Fatal CollisionsYear Fatal Collisions Page 914 of 984 10 2018 & 2019 Traffic Safety Report March 2022 Overall Collision Trend In 2018 there were 431 total reported collisions in the City—this is a 14% reduction from 2017, and 470 reported in 2019, a 6% reduction from 2017. 2018 saw the lowest collisions reported in the history of the City’s traffic safety program. It should be noted that the Overall Collision chart above does not represent all collisions that occur in the City—merely all reported collisions occurring on public streets for which a collision report is generated. Many collisions are either unreported by the involved parties, reported by the parties without an officer investigation, or there is no response to the collision by emergency services. Therefore, the actual total collisions may vary between years. A more accurate measure are the injury and fatal collision trends, as police always respond to collisions where the reporting party indicates there is an injury. 910 1023 1140 1256 1097 1207 1089 873 866 793 683 598 619 594 570 548 531 482 501 431 470 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 Total CollisionsYear Total Collisions Page 915 of 984 11 2018 & 2019 Traffic Safety Report March 2022 Pedestrian Collision Trend Pedestrian collisions have numbered between 18 and 31 since the beginning of the program, with the exception of unexplained spikes in 2000, 2002, 2004 and 2013. In 2018, the number of pedestrian collisions dropped to 21, and rose again to 28 in 2019. This is within the trend across past safety reporting periods. Bicycle Collision Trend Despite rising bicycle volumes, bicycle collisions have generally been on the decline in recent years. 2018 had a 18% increase in collisions over the 2017 report, but 2019 had the lowest reported bicycle collisions on record. Bicycle collision trends have shown a 47% decline from peak levels in 2009. 24 37 19 41 24 41 26 27 18 25 24 22 24 26 39 24 23 27 31 21 28 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 Pedestrian CollisionsYear 52 46 45 53 55 50 55 61 59 59 73 69 67 69 63 50 56 50 39 46 36 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 Bicycle CollisionsYear Page 916 of 984 12 2018 & 2019 Traffic Safety Report March 2022 Pedestrian and Bicycle Serious Injuries and Fatalities Over the past five years (2015-2019), 2,415 traffic collisions have been reported in the City—about 480 per year. Roughly 14% of these collisions involved a bicyclist or pedestrian, which is generally consistent with citywide bicycle & pedestrian mode share. However, as illustrated in the graphic below, 53% of the collisions resulting in severe injury or death involved a bicyclist or pedestrian. These trends indicate that bicyclists and pedestrians are overrepresented in collisions that resulted in severe and life-threatening injuries and there is continued need for mitigation strategies that target bicycle and pedestrian collisions. In 2018 and 2019, while the total collisions by mode were consistent with the five- year trend, the severe injury and fatal collisions by mode drastically demonstrate the overrepresentation of bicycle and pedestrian collisions. Taking a closer look at common collision types of bicycle and pedestrian collisions is critical in moving towards Vision Zero. Page 917 of 984 13 2018 & 2019 Traffic Safety Report March 2022 Human and Economic Impact Traffic collisions result in direct economic costs to those involved—wages and productivity losses, medical expenses and legal costs, and motor vehicle damages—but, this represents only a portion of total costs associated with collisions. Traffic collisions also have indirect impacts to the families of those involved, employers and society as a whole. A study by the NHTSA found that more than 75 percent of collision costs are born by society in the form of insurance premiums, taxes and congestion-related costs such as travel delay, excess fuel consumption and lost quality of life associated with deaths and injuries. Comprehensive costs include the economic cost components associated with traffic collisions, but also the indirect societal costs. Using cost estimates by crash severity published in the American Association of State Highway transportation Officials’ (AASHTO) Highway Safety Manual, adjusted to reflect 2018 and 2019 dollars, the comprehensive costs in 2018 were over $23 million and in 2019 over $32 million. Comprehensive collision costs for 2018 and 2019 by collision type are summarized in Table 1 below. Table 1: 2018-19 City of San Luis Obispo Comprehensive Collision Costs Collision Severity Number of Collisions Cost per Collision Cost 2018 2019 2018 2019 2018 2019 Fatal 1 3 $4,666,401 $4,751,887 $4,666,401 $14,255,660 Disabling Injury 20 14 $267,722 $272,627 $5,354,444 $3,816,774 Non-Incapacitating Injury 49 56 $98,342 $100,143 $4,818,751 $5,608,032 Possible Injury 96 100 $57,581 $58,636 $5,527,765 $5,863,573 Property Damage Only 265 297 $10,123 $10,308 $2,682,565 $3,061,574 Total 431 470 $23,049,926 $32,605,613 Source: Crash Cost Estimates based on AASHTO’s Highway Safety Manual, 2010. Costs adjusted to 2018 and 2019 dollars based on Consumer Price Index and Employment Cost Index per Highway Safety Manual guidance. Page 918 of 984 14 2018 & 2019 Traffic Safety Report March 2022 Traffic Enforcement Measures Traffic citations are one method used to promote compliance with the vehicle code and create a safer environment for road users. The vehicle code includes many sections for enforcement. Some vehicle code violations are more serious than others and are designated as “Hazardous Violations”. Vehicle Code Violations are tracked by the Department of Motor Vehicles, and hazardous violations are weighted by a point system. All hazardous vehicle code sections carry at least one point and some carry two points. The point system is used to assess the driving behavior of motorists and place restrictions on negligent drivers, which helps make roadways safer by removing drivers with hazardous driving behavior. The chart below depicts the total citations (hazardous and no n-hazardous) by the Police Department since 1999. Citation Trends As shown in the chart above, citation trends can fluctuate from year -to-year. These trends are not necessarily a direct reflection of overall driving behavior but can coincide with the resources and staffing levels of the Police Department. 5734674171146508480226633454358544887437594746864121619552934399552261626551500340902394200117912243255089678993417693120209828061474152415711407174023612936336925940 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 199920002001200220032004200520062007200820092010201120122013201420152016201720182019Total Citations Hazardous Citations Page 919 of 984 15 2018 & 2019 Traffic Safety Report March 2022 DUI Arrests Driving under the influence (DUI) violations have been a focal point of enforcement in an effort to reduce injury traffic collisions. Since 1999, the Police Department has averaged 353 DUI arrests each year. Of those arrests, about five to ten drivers each year were arrested for felony DUI after being involved in a collision that causing injury to someone involved. In 2018 the Police Department arrested 329 people for DUI. In 2019, there were 226 arrests. Just under half (40-42%) of the DUI arrests involved drivers who were between 18 and 25 years old and almost three-quarters (71-74%) were between the 18 and 35 years old. 4574803965024103043124123313392482132412563774453934013453292260 100 200 300 400 500 600 42% 32% 14% 12% 2018 DUI Arrests by Age 18-25 26-35 36-45 45 or over 40% 31% 16% 13% 2019 DUI Arrests by Age 18-25 26-35 36-45 45 or over Page 920 of 984 16 2018 & 2019 Traffic Safety Report March 2022 Citations by Vehicle Code Section The following chart depicts the distribution of vehicle code citations by type for 2018. The following chart depicts the distribution of vehicle code citations by type for 2019. Bicycle Violation (§21200-21212) 4% Right side of Roadway (§21650- 21664) 4% Turning & Signals (§22100-22113) 3%Failure to Yield (§21800-21809) 3% Pedestrian Violation (§21949-21971) 1% Distraction and Driving Offenses (§23100-23135) 34% Speed (§22348- 22413) 24% Stop Sign (§22450- 22456) 18% Traffic Control Devices (§21350- 21468) 9% Page 921 of 984 17 2018 & 2019 Traffic Safety Report March 2022 Note: Above chart excludes citations related to Driver’s License and Insurance violations. Bicycle Violation (§21200-21212) 2% Right side of Roadway (§21650-21664) 3% Turning & Signals (§22100-22113) 4%Failure to Yield (§21800-21809) 2% Pedestrian Violation (§21949-21971) 1% Distraction and Driving Offenses (§23100-23135) 37% Speed (§22348- 22413) 24% Stop Sign (§22450- 22456) 15% Traffic Control Devices (§21350- 21468) 12% Page 922 of 984 18 2018 & 2019 Traffic Safety Report March 2022 Traffic Safety Education Campaigns and Community Partnerships Between City-led efforts and activities led by local partners, such as Bike SLO County and SLOCOG/Rideshare, there were multitude of ongoing traffic safety education and outreach campaigns provided to the community of San Luis Obispo in 2018 and 2019. Key education and outreach activities are summarized below:  Partnership with the California Office of Traffic Safety A Selective Enforcement Grant funds a full-time DUI officer position. This officer is utilized specifically for DUI enforcement in an effort to further reduce the number of alcohol and drug related driving incidents.  Annual Bicycle Rodeo Bike SLO County and SLOCOG host a hands-on bicycle training class targeting youth teaching bicycle skills & operations.  Bike Month Activities and Promotion The City participates and encourages participation in Bike Month activities and hosts an annual bike breakfast in May.  Pop-Up Bike Education Events SLO Public Works and Police Department partner up with Bike SLO County and the County Public Health Department to have on -the-spot “pop-up” bike education events along high-volume bike corridors, such as the annual Bike Light Checkpoint and Light Give-a-Way.  Pedestrian Halloween Safety Campaign The City provides reflective Halloween bags with safety tips to local schools free of cost.  Impaired Driver Offender Classes City police officers attend and supplement DUI offender courses to provide a unique positive opportunity to discuss, face to face, the impacts of driving under the influence.  Ticket Diversion Program for Bicyclists Cal Poly University PD offers a diversion program for bicyclists that are ticketed for a traffic offense in SLO County. Page 923 of 984 19 2018 & 2019 Traffic Safety Report March 2022  Adult Bicycle Education Workshops Bike SLO County provides offers an adult bicycle class which includes an in-class room and on-street portion, focusing on the rules of the road.  Transit Driver Awareness Training City Transportation Staff annually leads a bicycle awareness training to contracted City transit drivers.  Every Fifteen Minutes Program The City participates in a multi department and agency event simulating the psychological effects of student fatalities as a result of traffic collisions.  Child Car Seat Instruction & Assistance The City provides child safety seat installation and inspection free of cost.  SLO PD Traffic Safety Presentations City police officers presented at the following organizations regarding traffic safety in 2018-19:  Safety and Law Lectures: Cuesta Junior College and Cal Poly University criminal justice programs  Coast Riders Motorcycle Club: Discussed motorcycle safety  Sheriff’s Day at the Ranch: Discussed bicycle and motorcycle safety  Cop’s and Kid’s Day: Discussed bicycle and motorcycle safety  National Walk to School Day: Discussed pedestrian safety with school children  National Bike to School Day: Discussed bicycle safety with school children Completed/Planned Safety Projects & Programs Transportation safety is and will continue to be a priority for the City. Each year the Public Works Department implements traffic safety improvements through a variety of programs and projects. These improvements are usually stand -alone projects but are often included in other City capital improvement program (CIP) projects or as part of individual land development projects. Page 924 of 984 20 2018 & 2019 Traffic Safety Report March 2022 Table 2 below identifies notable traffic safety improvements that were completed recently or planned for implementation in the near future. Page 925 of 984 21 2018 & 2019 Traffic Safety Report March 2022 Table 2: Completed or In Progress Transportation Safety Projects Location Project Description Traffic Signal Improvements Downtown Core Signal Timing* Completed implementation of Lead Pedestrian Intervals at several downtown intersections. Implementation to remaining signals citywide underway. Foothill & Broad* Install Flashing Yellow Left-Turn Arrows. Implementation required as part of private development at 790 Foothill Blvd., to be completed by spring 2022. Chorro & Higuera* Completed relocation of pedestrian signal heads at west crosswalk to adjacent signal poles to improve visibility of pedestrian indications for motorists and pedestrians. Industrial & Broad* Upgrade and add signal indicators for more visibility. Investigate the installation of officer assist red light enforcers. Installation in progress by City signal technicians, to be complete winter 2022. Santa Rosa & Mill* Upgrade and add signal indicators for more visibility. Investigate the installation of officer assist red light enforcers. Signal indicator upgrades complete. Broad & Marsh* Install mast arm signal poles at Broad Street approaches to increase visibility of signal heads. Partially complete--NB approach completed in 2021. Pole at SB approach requires reconstruction of corner, planned as part of proposed 2023-24 Downtown Beautification CIP Project. LOVR & Calle Joaquin* Converted NB and SB approaches to protected left turns only. Pedestrian & Bicycle Improvements Montalban Crosswalk at Santa Rosa* Paint crosswalk on Montalban at Santa Rosa. Completed in 2019. Tank Farm Crosswalk at Poinsettia Installed in-roadway pedestrian crossing signs and Rapid Rectangular Flashing Beacon (RRFB) system. California & Monterey* Install radar speed feedback signs, additional warning signs or other measures at NB & SB approaches. Currently under planning/design, with likely outcome to be installation of bike signal or illuminated yield to bike signs. S. Higuera & Suburban Installed “Right Turn Yield To bikes” warning sign Broad Street at Woodbridge Pedestrian Hybrid Beacon installation complete in in 2021. Foothill at Ferrini Pedestrian Hybrid Beacon installation complete in late 2019. Osos & Pismo* Implemented lead pedestrian intervals and “yield to pedestrian” warning signage. Grand & Loomis* Install “yield to bike” sign for NB left turn approach. Various Locations In-roadway pedestrian yield signs installed at 15 uncontrolled pedestrian crossings citywide. RRFB beacon systems planned or in progress at numerous uncontrolled pedestrian crossings in 2022, including at Johnson/Sydney, South/King, Marsh/Toro, Johnson/Higuera. Roadway Improvements California & Taft Roundabout* 90% design complete. Final design and right-of-way negotiation underway, with construction planned for 2023. Orcutt & Tank Farm Roundabout Construction in progress, with completion expected in spring of 2022. Page 926 of 984 22 2018 & 2019 Traffic Safety Report March 2022 Higuera at Bridge* Final design and right-of-way coordination with Caltrans underway, with plans to proceed to construction by end of 2022. Broad at High* Sight distance improvements implemented in 2021. Grand at Loomis* Red curb installation to improve sight distance complete. California: Foothill to Stafford* Parking restrictions implemented at driveways to improve sight distance at conflict points. Street Light Improvements North Broad Street Installed 3 new streetlights between Foothill and Mission. 1229 Fredericks Installed new streetlight (near Cal Poly) 395 Grand 16 Hathway 1386 Laurel 2068 Story Signing & Striping Improvements Mill at Osos* Refreshed SB stop bar and pavement legend to improve driver compliance at stop sign. Higuera & Vachell* Installed “Keep Clear” striping and signage. Intersection reconstruction to restrict left-turns planned in 2023 as part of Avila Ranch development. Johnson & Buchon* Installed high-visibility median markings and signage to improve visibility for drivers. Johnson & Toro Installed all-way stop signs Broad & Pismo* Restriped WB Pismo approach to better channelize bicycles and right-turn movements. Citywide Replaced approximately 100 traffic signs to meet retroreflectivity standards Several locations Reduced speed limits where feasible pursuant to policies in California Vehicle Code Recent on several streets, including upper Monterey Street, Tank Farm east of Broad Street, South Street, and Santa Barbara Street. *Project recommended in previous Traffic Safety Report Page 927 of 984 23 2018 & 2019 Traffic Safety Report March 2022 2018 & 2019 High Collision Rate Locations & Recommendations Where Collisions are Occurring Intersections are the most common location for all collisions. As shown in the figure below, 63% of 2018-19 collisions in the City occurred at intersections, with 53% of those occurring at signalized intersections. This finding highlights the importance of focusing traffic safety efforts on intersections. All of the traffic collision reported in 2018 and 2019 are shown on the maps in Error! Reference source not found.1 and 2. All pedestrian and bicycle collisions reported in 2018 and 2019 are shown on figures 3 and 4. Page 928 of 984 24 2018 & 2019 Traffic Safety Report March 2022 Figure 1: 2018 Citywide Collisions Page 929 of 984 25 2018 & 2019 Traffic Safety Report March 2022 Figure 2: 2019 Citywide Collisions Page 930 of 984 26 2018 & 2019 Traffic Safety Report March 2022 Figure 3: 2018 Citywide Pedestrian and Bike Collisions Page 931 of 984 27 2018 & 2019 Traffic Safety Report March 2022 Figure 4: 2019 Citywide Pedestrian and Bike Collisions Page 932 of 984 28 2018 & 2019 Traffic Safety Report March 2022 Most Common Collision Types and Factors As shown in the chart below, sideswipe, broadside and rear-end collisions were the most common type of collisions reported in 2018 and 2019, representing 74% of the total recorded incidents. As shown below, broadside and rear-end collisions were the most common type of injury collision reported in 2018 and 2019, representing 38% and 20% of total recorded injury collisions. While collisions involving vehicles with pedestrians represent only 5% of total collisions in 2018-19, they account for 13% of injury collisions. Collisions involving vehicles with pedestrians and bikes make nearly 55% of severe and fatal injury collisions. Thus, preventing these crash types offers the greatest potential for reducing the number of serious injury and fatal incidents. 26% 236 25% 222 23% 207 12% 107 5% 45 5% 44 2% 20 2% 14 0 50 100 150 200 250 Collisions By Type 38%, 129 20%, 69 13%, 43 10%, 35 7%, 24 6%, 21 3%, 11 1%, 5 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 Injury Collisions By Type X% = % of Total Collisions (Y) = Total Number of Collisions X% = % of Total Collisions Y = Total Number of Collisions Page 933 of 984 29 2018 & 2019 Traffic Safety Report March 2022 The most common factors attributed to recorded collisions in 2018 and 2019 are summarized in Table 3 below. Improper turning, Automobile Right of Way violations and speeding represent the most prevalent factors in overall collisions and injury collisions, accounting for over half the recorded collisions. Pedestrian Violation (i.e. pedestrian crossing illegally) is not ranked in the top 5 of All Collisions but represented 7% of the Severe Injury and Fatal Collisions. DUI continue to rank as a highly prevalent factor attributed to severe injury and fatal collisions. Table 3: Primary Collision Factors Factor Rank % All Collisions Improper turning 1 26% Unsafe Speed 2 17% Automobile Right of Way 3 14% Drive/Bike Under Infl Alcohol/Drug 4 9% Unsafe Starting or Backing 5 5% Injury Collisions Improper Turning 1 22% Automobile Right of Way 2 21% Unsafe Speed 3 18% Pedestrian Right of Way 4 7% Traffic Signs and Signals 5 6% Severe Injury & Fatal Collisions Automobile Right of Way 1 22% Drive/Bike Under Infl. Alcohol/Drug 2 14% Improper Turning 2 14% Pedestrian Right of Way 4 11% Unsafe Speed 4 11% Page 934 of 984 30 2018 & 2019 Traffic Safety Report March 2022 Pedestrian Common Collision Types and Factors As in previous reports, motorist left turning movements were the most frequent types of reported pedestrian collisions. The party at fault was about even between the driver or the pedestrian. Pedestrians failing to yield and crossing illegally made up the majority of pedestrian-at-fault collisions. Table 4: Pedestrian Collisions by Type Pedestrian Collision Type % Party at Fault % Motorist Left-Turn 32% Driver 52% Pedestrian Failed to Yield 16% Pedestrian 48% Pedestrian Violation (Jaywalking) 13% Scooter/Skateboarder in Roadway 13% Motorist Failed to Yield 13% Pedestrian Violation (Crossing Against Signal) 6% Motorist Right-Turn 6% Total 100% Systematic Planning for Pedestrian Safety For pedestrian collisions, this TSR further analyzed pedestrian vs. motorist crashes where the motorist was found to be at fault (motorist turning movements and failing to yield). For purposes of this specific analysis, the crash locations studied were limited to intersections, as the majority of collisions within the City occurred at an intersection. Detailed analysis indicated that pedestrians are more likely to be involved in a motor vehicle crash at signalized intersections that allow permissive left tu rns. Additionally, there is a direct correlation with surrounding land uses. Most pedestrian vs. motorist collisions happen within or near the downtown core or adjacent to neighborhood commercial areas. Figure 5 identifies intersections within the City that are signalized allowing permissive movements within a quarter mile radius of the downtown core or commercial shopping areas. In line with the City’s Vision Zero goals and to increase pedestrian safety within the City, these locations should be prioritized for systematic safety improvements. It is recommended that these intersections be considered and evaluated for additional measures to address this risk such as, but not limited to, modifying signal phasing from permissive to protected, increasing visibility and awareness of crossing pedestrians by adding signage or other striping improvements such as hi-visibility crosswalks, and adding lead pedestrian intervals. Page 935 of 984 31 2018 & 2019 Traffic Safety Report March 2022 In addition to implementing improvements at the above-described locations, it would also be prudent to focus systematic proactive countermeasures at uncontrolled marked crossings. An uncontrolled marked crossing is a location (either mid-block or at an intersection) where a crosswalk is marked but traffic is not controlled with either a stop sign or traffic signal. Per the Federal Highway Administration, uncontrolled pedestrian crossing locations correspond to higher pedestrian crash rates. The City of San Luis Obispo has 22 uncontrolled marked crossings. Approaching pedestrian safety systematically, improving these types of uncontrolled marked crossings will proactively increase safety at these crossings and increase the comfort of crossing pedestrians of all ages and abilities. Figure 6 identifies the locations of uncontrolled marked cross ings in the City. It is recommended that these crossings be considered and evaluated for additional measures to increase crosswalk visibility such as but not limited to in-street pedestrian crossing signs, rectangular rapid flashing beacons (RRFBs) or pedestrian hybrid beacons (PHB). In addition, all strategies to reduce vehicle speeds on high-volume/speed arterials corridors should be evaluated, where permitted within applicable engineering standards and California Vehicle Code provisions. If implemented, locations should be prioritized with consideration of collision history, vehicle speeds, number of crossing lanes and proximity to schools. Table 3 below lists the locations in recommended prioritization. Page 936 of 984 32 2018 & 2019 Traffic Safety Report March 2022 Table 5: Uncontrolled Pedestrian Crossing Locations Priority Location Pedestrian collisions 5 yr total Speed Limit Number of Crossing Lanes Designated School Crossing? 1 Tank Farm at Poinsettia Street* 1 45 4 No 2 Monterey at Buena Vista* 1 30 3 No 3 Higuera between Chorro and Morro 1 25 3 No 4 Marsh between Chorro and Morro 1 25 3 No 5 Monterey at Court Street* 1 25 2 No 6 Johnson Ave at Sydney* 0 35 4 Yes 7 Broad Street at Upham * 0 30 2 Yes 8 High Street at Hutton* 0 30 2 Yes 9 Marsh at Toro* 0 25 3 No 10 Higuera at Garden 0 25 3 No 11 Chorro at Mill* 0 25 2 Yes 12 Augusta Street at Sinsheimer Elementary* 0 25 2 Yes 13 Hutton Street at Sandercock* 0 25 2 Yes 14 Hutton Street at Branch* 0 25 2 Yes 15 Sandercock Street at Story* 0 25 2 Yes 16 Broad at Mill* 0 25 2 Yes 17 Galleon Way at Royal* 0 25 2 Yes 18 Balboa Street at Lakeview* 0 25 2 Yes 19 Bougainvillea Street 0 25 2 No 20 Osos at Pacific* 0 25 2 No 21 Monterey between Chorro and Morro* 0 25 2 No 22 Broad at Mission Plaza 0 25 2 No *Crossing enhancements, such as in-road pedestrian yield signs or RRFB beacons recently installed or planned for installation in 2022. Page 937 of 984 33 2018 & 2019 Traffic Safety Report March 2022 Figure 5: Citywide Uncontrolled Marked Pedestrian Crossings Page 938 of 984 34 2018 & 2019 Traffic Safety Report March 2022 Bicycle Common Collision Types and Factors The table below lists the bicycle collisions by type recorded in 2017, as well as the party at fault. Motorist right turn movements were the most common types of vehicle vs. bicycle collisions reported followed by motorist left turn movements. About 66% of reported vehicle vs. bicycle collisions were the fault of the motorist. Table 6: Bicycle Collisions by Type Bicycle Collision Type % Party at Fault Motorist Vs. Bicyclist % Motorist Right-Turn 26% Motorist Left-Turn 15% Cyclist Lost Control 10% Driver 66% Motorist Failed to Yield 8% Bicyclist 34% Wrong-Way Cyclist 8% Cyclist no Light 5% Motorist Failed to Drive at Safe Distance 5% Cyclist Failed to Stop 5% Cyclist Under the Influence 5% Cyclist Lane change 5% Motorist Under the Influence 3% Cyclist Failed to Yield 3% Motorist Overtaking or Sideswipe 3% Total 100% Systematic Planning for Bicycle Safety For bicycle collisions, this report looked at the top two most common bicycle vs. motorist crash types: Motorist Right-Turn and Motorist left-turn. For purposes of this analysis, the crash locations studied were limited to intersections and driveways, as the majority of bicycle collisions within the City occurred at an intersection or driveway. Motorist right-turn and left-turn collisions with bicyclists are more likely to occur at intersections and driveways with traditional “Class 2” bike lanes striped on the edge of the road with no on-street parking. For right turning motorist, this type of configuration requires drivers to merge into the bicycle lane prior to making a right- hand turn. What is often seen, rather, is the driver making a right -hand turn from the travel lane. For left turning motorists, through bicyclists against the curb may sometimes be “hidden” behind other vehicles. Figure 7 identifies segments within the City that have striped Class 2 bike lanes on the edge of the roadway with no on-street parking. In line with the City’s Vision Zero goals and the systematic analysis of bicycle collision trends in the City, may these locations may warrant proactive measures to reduce collision potential at intersections and driveways. Further, many of these corridors represent high speed/volume arterial streets and have been identified for installation of future Page 939 of 984 35 2018 & 2019 Traffic Safety Report March 2022 protected bicycle lanes in the City’s recently adopted Active Transportation Plan. To improve systematic safety for cyclists, it is recommended that the improvements identified in the City’s Active Transportation Plan be implemented as rapidly as feasible, and other segments shown in Figure 7 be considered and evaluated for additional measures to address this risk such as, but not limited to, signage, hi-visibility green paint in conflict zones, separate right-turn phase from bicycle conflicts, bike scramble, lead phases, buffered or protected bike lanes and identify intersection locations that could benefit from bike box or protected intersection applications. In addition, all strategies to reduce vehicle speeds on high-volume/speed arterials corridors should be evaluated, where permitted within applicable engineering standards and California Vehicle Code provisions. Page 940 of 984 36 2018 & 2019 Traffic Safety Report March 2022 High Collision Rate Locations – Pedestrians Rank Prev. Year Rank Intersection 2018-19 Ped Collision s 5 yr total PH Veh. Vol PH Ped Vol. PREV 1 1 SANTA ROSA & MONTEREY 1 7 2007 198 355 2 NR MARSH & OSOS 3 4 1057 209 101 3 3 BROAD & HIGUERA 2 6 913 661 41 4 NR MARSH & CHORRO 1 3 1049 529 30 N/A NR SANTA ROSA & MONTALBAN 1 4 3200 25 2612 N/A NR SANTA ROSA & OLIVE 1 4 3487 54 1291 N/A = Location under Caltrans jurisdiction. Listed for reference, but not included in City rankings NR = Not Ranked PH = Peak Hour PREV = Pedestrian Relative Exposure Value Page 941 of 984 37 2018 & 2019 Traffic Safety Report March 2022 Pedestrian Recommendations Rank Intersection 1 Santa Rosa & Monterey1 Pattern: Motorists turning left and failing to yield to pedestrians in crosswalk, particularly in the westbound direction. Recommendation: Install Flashing Left Yellow Arrows for EB & WB Traffic. Upgrade crosswalks to hi-vis style markings. Increase pedestrian lead interval. These improvements are planned for 2022. Consider feasibility of a future pedestrian scramble crossing at his location. Continue to monitor in the next safety report. 2 Marsh & Osos Pattern: No discernable pattern, however Marsh & Osos is a signalized intersection within a half-mile radius of downtown that allows permissive lefts on Marsh from Osos. Recommendation: Implement Road Diet on Marsh Street, reducing to two vehicle lanes. Upgrade crosswalks to hi-vis style crosswalk markings. Increase pedestrian lead intervals. These improvements are scheduled as part of the 2022 paving project. 3 Broad & Higuera2 Pattern: NB Broad Motorists turning left and failing to yield to pedestrians in crosswalk, particularly in the northbound direction. Recommendation: Implement permanent road diet on Higuera Street, reducing to two vehicle lanes. This scheduled as part of the 2022 paving project. Investigate installation of overhead signal mast arms for NB & SB Broad approaches with overhead streetlight luminaires. Install additional “yield to pedestrian” signage for northbound and southbound approaches and upgrade crosswalks to hi-vis style markings. Increase pedestrian lead intervals. Continue to monitor in the next safety report. 4 Marsh & Chorro Pattern: No discernable pattern, however Marsh & Chorro is a signalized intersection within a half-mile radius of downtown that allows permissive lefts on Marsh from Chorro. The signal will be upgraded with the redevelopment of an adjacent property, providing an opportunity for intersection improvements. Recommendation: Implement Road Diet on Marsh Street, reducing to two vehicle lanes. This is scheduled for the 2022 paving project. Adjust pedestrian lead intervals. Consider installing “hardened centerlines” on Chorro Street approaches. Evaluate installation of mast-arm signal poles with overhead luminaires for north and south approaches. 1. Santa Rosa and Monterey is also ranked as a High Collision Rate Location for Arterial/Arterial Locations 2. Broad and Higuera is also ranked as a High Collision Rate Location for Arterial/Arterial Location Page 942 of 984 38 2018 & 2019 Traffic Safety Report March 2022 Rank Caltrans Intersections NA Santa Rosa & Montalban Pattern: No discernable pattern. Recommendation: Hi-vis crosswalks installed after 2019. Continue to monitor and work collaboratively with Caltrans to implement additional measures, such as “left/right turn yield to pedestrians” warning signs and/or installation of bulbouts on side streets to shorted pedestrian crossing exposure. NA Santa Rosa & Olive Pattern: No discernable pattern. Recommendation: Continue to monitor and work collaboratively with Caltrans to implement proven pedestrian safety countermeasures, such as addition of hi-vis crosswalk markings, “left/right turn yield to pedestrians” warning signs, and lead pedestrian crossing intervals. Page 943 of 984 39 2018 & 2019 Traffic Safety Report March 2022 High Collision Rate Locations – Bicycles Rank Prev. Year Rank Intersection 2018-19 Bicycle Coll. 5 yr Total PH Veh. Vol PH Bike Vol BREV NR N/A SANTA ROSA & WALNUT 1 3 2,795 21 1,996 1 6 JOHNSON & LIZZIE 1 3 2,134 37 865 2 2 CALIFORNIA & MONTEREY 1 7 1,848 101 640 3 NR CALIFORNIA & PALM 4 5 900 60 375 N/A = Location under Caltrans jurisdiction. Listed for reference, but not included in City rankings NR = Not Ranked AWSC = All-way Stop-Control SSSC = Side-Street Stop-Control PH = Peak Hour REV = Relative Exposure Value Page 944 of 984 40 2018 & 2019 Traffic Safety Report March 2022 Bicycle Recommendations Rank Intersection Control 5 Yr. Collisions PH Veh. Vol PH Bike. Vol REV 1 JOHNSON & LIZZIE Signal 3 2,134 37 865 Pattern: No apparent pattern. Recommendation: Evaluate feasibility of bikeway enhancements at this location as part of planned 2023 paving work on Johnson Avenue, including assessing feasibility of road diet (reducing from 2 to 1 auto lane in NB and/or SB directions) to provide width for buffered/protected bike lanes, green bike lane markings and installation of “left/right turn yield to bikes” signage. Continue to monitor location in next safety report. 2 CALIFORNIA & MONTEREY Signal 7 1,848 101 640 Pattern: Right hook northbound and southbound bicycles with right turning vehicles. Recommendation: Green bike lane markings through intersection refreshed in 2019 for SB and NB bicycles. Further measures currently under design to reduce conflicts between turning vehicles and bicyclists, with potential solutions including addition of bike signal phases or installation of illuminated yield to bike signs. In the long-term, (a) implement planned bikeway improvements along Pepper Street per Active Transportation Plan to provide alternate route for SB cyclists connecting from Railroad Safety Trail terminus at Pepper Street south to Marsh Street, and (b) explore potential to widen intersection for NB & SB dedicated right turn lanes and channelized bike lanes, keeping through cyclists to the left of right-turning vehicles. 3 CALIFORNIA & PALM SSSC 5 900 60 375 Pattern: Right hook southbound bicycles with right turning vehicles. Recommendation: Extend green bike lanes through intersection and install “right turn yield to bikes” warning signage. In the long-term, implement planned bikeway improvements along Pepper Street per Active Transportation Plan to provide alternate route for SB cyclists connecting from Railroad Safety Trail terminus at Pepper Street south to Marsh Street. Rank Caltrans Intersections NA SANTA ROSA & WALNUT Pattern: No apparent pattern, however Santa Rosa and Walnut has striped Class 2 bike lanes on the edge of the roadway with no on-street parking. As discussed in previous analysis, these types of locations may need special attention to improve safety conditions for bicyclists. Recommendation: Continue to monitor and work collaboratively with Caltrans to implement proven bicycle safety countermeasures, such as addition lane width reductions to provide width for buffered/protected bike lanes, addition of green bike lane markings through intersection in NB and SB directions, and addition of “left/right turn yield to bicyclist” warning signs. Implement bicycle facility improvements along north Chorro and Broad Streets to provide alternate route for cyclists to bypass Santa Rosa Street (State Route 1 ). Page 945 of 984 41 2018 & 2019 Traffic Safety Report March 2022 High Collision Rate Locations – Arterial/Arterial Intersections 2018 Rank Prev. year Rank Intersection Control Collisions Volume Rate* 1 NR Higuera & Nipomo Signal 4 12,544 0.874 2 NR California & Foothill Signal 7 24,917 0.770 3 NR Marsh & Nipomo Signal 4 14,547 0.753 4 NR California & San Luis Drive AWSC 3 11,404 0.721 5 NR Marsh & Chorro Signal 3 13,042 0.630 6 NR Monterey & Johnson Signal 4 17,587 0.623 7 13 Higuera & South Signal 6 28,506 0.577 8 NR Santa Rosa & Higuera Signal 5 23,921 0.573 9 NR Broad & South / Santa Barbara Signal 8 38,422 0.570 10 NR Johnson & Marsh Signal 3 14,918 0.551 11 12 Los Osos Valley & Madonna Signal 7 39,550 0.485 12 10 California & Monterey Signal 3 22,161 0.371 13 NR Madonna & 101 N/B On/Off Ramp Signal 4 34,245 0.320 14 14 Madonna & 101 S/B On/Off Ramp Signal 3 32528 0.253 15 N/A Santa Rosa & Foothill Signal 3 53147 0.155 2019 Rank Prev. year Rank Intersection Control Collisions Volume Rate* 1 NR Higuera & Chorro Signal 6 9,783 1.680 2 NR Johnson & Laurel Signal 4 14,324 0.765 3 NR Monterey & Grand Signal 3 13,034 0.631 4 3 Marsh & Nipomo Signal 3 14,547 0.565 5 NR Higuera & Los Osos Valley Signal 5 25,795 0.531 6 NR Marsh & Osos Signal 3 16,405 0.501 7 NR Santa Rosa & Marsh Signal 3 17,367 0.473 8 6 Monterey & Johnson Signal 3 17,587 0.467 9 NR Santa Rosa & Monterey Signal 4 25,044 0.438 10 7 Higuera & South Signal 4 28,506 0.384 11 N/A Foothill & Santa Rosa Signal 7 53,147 0.361 12 NR Broad & Orcutt Signal 3 37,263 0.221 13 11 Los Osos Valley & Madonna Signal 3 39,550 0.208 14 NR Broad & Tank Farm Signal 3 46,175 0.178 NR = Not Ranked Rate = Collision frequency per million vehicles entering the intersection Page 946 of 984 42 2018 & 2019 Traffic Safety Report March 2022 Arterial/Arterial Intersections Recommendations Rank Intersection Control Collisions Volume Rate* 1 HIGUERA & CHORRO Signal 6 9,783 1.680 Pattern: Rear End Collisions on Chorro. Recommendation: Road diet implemented in 2020. Consider traffic signal corridor re-timing to reduce vehicle platoon speeds. Continue to monitor in next safety report. Where feasible, install near side signal heads and high-visibility signal back plates. In the long term, Install mast arm signal poles on NB & SB Chorro approaches and rebuild signal intersection. 2 HIGUERA & NIPOMO Signal 4 12,544 0.874 Pattern: Westbound Higuera traffic rear ending stopped vehicles. Recommendation: Implement permanent road diet, reducing to two auto lanes. Consider measures to reduce auto speeds on Higuera Street, including re-timing traffic signals for slower progression speeds, and extension of existing business speed zone to reduce posted speed limit on Higuera to 25 MPH west of Broad Street. Continue to monitor in next safety report. 3 CALIFORNIA & FOOTHILL Signal 6 24,917 0.770 Pattern: EB & WB Rear End Recommendation: Consider measures to reduce vehicles speeds on Foothill Boulevard, such as installation of speed feedback signage, and striping changes as part of future paving project to narrow vehicle lanes and install protected bike lanes, as proposed in Active Transportation Plan. Complete railroad crossing safety enhancements (currently in design). 4 JOHNSON & LAUREL Signal 4 14,324 0.765 Pattern: NB Broadside collisions. Recommendation: Implement protected left turn signal phasing for northbound Johnson left turns. 5 MARSH & NIPOMO Signal 4 (2018) 14,547 0.753 Pattern: Eastbound Rear End. Recommendation: Consider measures to reduce vehicle speeds along Marsh Street, such as implementation of a three-to-two lane road diet (planned with 2022 Paving Project), extension of the existing business district 25 MPH speed zone west of Broad Street, and installation of speed feedback signage on Marsh to help slow EB vehicles approaching intersection. 6 CALIFORNIA & SAN LUIS DRIVE AWSC 3 11,404 0.721 Pattern: Hit object with no pattern identified. Recommendation: Continue to monitor in next safety report. 7 MONTEREY & GRAND Signal 3 13,034 0.631 Page 947 of 984 43 2018 & 2019 Traffic Safety Report March 2022 Pattern: EB Broadside. Recommendation: Flashing yellow arrow signal phasing was implemented after 2015 TSR. Collision pattern resolved, but has since re-emerged. Implement protected left turn only phasing for EB left turns. 8 MARSH & CHORRO1 Signal 3 13,042 0.630 Pattern: Pedestrian collisions. Recommendation: See recommendations in pedestrian collision section. 9 MARSH & NIPOMO Signal 3 (2019) 14,547 0.565 Pattern: Eastbound Marsh traffic rear ending stopped vehicles. Recommendation: See above recommendation. 10 HIGUERA & LOS OSOS VALLEY Signal 5 25,795 0.531 Pattern: NB Broadside Collisions. Recommendation: Implement flashing yellow arrow or protected-only left turn signal phasing for northbound left turn lane. Monitor with planned improvements in future safety report. *Rate = Collision frequency per million vehicles entering the intersection. Note: Top 5 high-ranking collisions from 2018 and 2019 included in table of recommendations. 1. Marsh & Chorro is also ranked as a High Collision Rate Location for Pedestrian Locations Page 948 of 984 44 2018 & 2019 Traffic Safety Report March 2022 High Collision Rate Locations – Arterial/Collector Intersections 2018 Rank Prev Year Rank Intersection Control Collisions Volume Rate* 1 NR CALIFORNIA & HATHWAY SSSC 3 19344 0.425 2 NR SANTA ROSA & PALM Signal 3 21097 0.390 3 5 BROAD & INDUSTRIAL Signal 3 31735 0.259 2019 Rank Prev Year Rank Intersection Control Collisions Volume Rate* 1 NR SANTA ROSA & PISMO AWSC 4 9275 1.182 NR = Not Ranked SSSC = Side-Street Stop-Control Rate = Collision frequency per million vehicles entering the intersection Page 949 of 984 45 2018 & 2019 Traffic Safety Report March 2022 Arterial/Collector Intersections Recommendations Rank Intersection Control Collisions Volume Rate* 1 SANTA ROSA & PISMO AW SC 4 9275 1.182 Pattern: No Pattern. Recommendation: Continue to monitor in next safety report. 2 CALIFORNIA & HATHWAY Signal 3 9422 0.872 Pattern: Hit fire hydrant. Recommendation: Relocate fire hydrant to alternate location and/or install high-visibility flex posts around hydrant to increase visibility. 3 SANTA ROSA & PALM Signal 3 10,591 0.776 Pattern: SB vehicle red-light running violations. Recommendation: Install high-visibility signal backplates to increase visibility of signal indicators to drivers. 4 BROAD & INDUSTRIAL Signal 3 13,658 0.602 Pattern: No apparent pattern. Recommendation: Complete installation of nearside traffic signal head for SB Broad Street approach in (to be completed winter 2022) and consider installation of high-visibility signal backplates for added driver visibility. Continue to monitor in next safety report. 1. California and Mill is also ranked as a High Collision Rate Location for Bicycle Locations 2. Osos and Pismo is also ranked as a High Collision Rate Location for Pedestrian Locations Page 950 of 984 46 2018 & 2019 Traffic Safety Report March 2022 High Collision Rate Locations – Arterial/Local Intersections 2018 Rank Prev. Year Rank Intersection Control Collisions Volume Rate 1 NR CALIFORNIA & PALM TWSC 4 11038 0.993 2 4 LOS OSOS VALLEY & CALLE JOAQUIN Signal 9 37102 0.665 3 NR MONTEREY & BUENA VISTA TWSC 3 12577 0.654 4 11 SANTA ROSA & BOYSEN (Caltrans) TWSC 7 34143 0.562 5 NR LOS OSOS VALLEY & DESCANSO Signal 3 21096 0.390 6 10 HIGUERA & VACHELL TWSC 3 23180 0.355 7 NR SANTA ROSA & WALNUT (Caltrans) Signal 4 34414 0.318 8 NR SANTA ROSA & MURRAY (Caltrans) Signal 3 38336 0.214 9 NR LOS OSOS VALLEY & FROOM RANCH Signal 3 40314 0.204 10 12 SANTA ROSA & MONTALBAN (Caltrans) TWSC 3 40655 0.202 2019 Rank Prev. Year Rank Intersection Control Collisions Volume Rate 1 2 LOS OSOS VALLEY & CALLE JOAQUIN Signal 13 37102 0.960 3 NR TANK FARM & LONG TWSC 5 20253 0.676 2 NR CALIFORNIA & TAFT TWSC 4 16883 0.649 4 9 LOS OSOS VALLEY & FROOM RANCH Signal 7 40314 0.476 5 6 HIGUERA & VACHELL TWSC 4 23180 0.473 6 8 SANTA ROSA & MURRAY (Caltrans) Signal 5 38336 0.357 7 NR BROAD & AEROVISTA Signal 3 24051 0.342 8 4 SANTA ROSA & BOYSEN (Caltrans) TWSC 4 34143 0.321 9 7 SANTA ROSA & WALNUT (Caltrans) Signal 4 34414 0.318 10 NR SANTA ROSA & OLIVE (Caltrans) SSSC 3 53132 0.155 NR = Not Ranked SSSC = Side-Street Stop-Control Rate = Collision frequency per million vehicles entering the intersection Page 951 of 984 47 2018 & 2019 Traffic Safety Report March 2022 Arterial/Local Intersections Recommendations Rank Intersection Control Collisions Volume Rate* 1 CALIFORNIA & PALM 1 SSSC 4 11,038 0.993 Pattern: SB Right Hook vs. Bicycle Recommendation: See recommendations in Bicycle collision section. 2 LOS OSOS VALLEY & CALLE JOAQUIN Signal 13 (2019) 37102 0.960 Pattern: Broadside & Rear end collisions Recommendation: Signal phasing recently converted to protected only left turns for NB & SB approaches, and lead pedestrian interval added crossing LOVR. Also, Caltrans is to assume operation of traffic signal in winter 2022 and will coordinate signal with adjacent US 101 ramp intersections. Continue to monitor. 3 TANK FARM & LONG TWSC 5 20253 0.676 Pattern: Broadside Collisions Recommendation: Traffic Signal installed as part of adjacent development in 2020. Continue to monitor in next report. 4 LOS OSOS VALLEY & CALLE JOAQUIN SSSC 9 (2018) 37,102 0.665 Pattern: WB Broadside collisions. Recommendation: See recommendation above. 5 MONTEREY & BUENA VISTA SSSC 3 12,577 0.654 Pattern: LT vehicles hit island curb. Recommendation: Pedestrian warning signs and flashing beacon system installed in median island in 2020, which improves visibility of island. Continue to monitor in next safety report. 6 CALIFORNIA & TAFT TWSC 4 16883 0.649 Pattern: WB Rear End and SB Broadside. Recommendation: Reconstruct intersection as roundabout (planned for 2023). Continue to monitor after construction. 7 LOS OSOS VALLEY & FROOM RANCH Signal 7 40,313 0.476 Pattern: No discernable pattern. Recommendation: Intersection rebuilt as a protected intersection in 2021. Pursue other measures to reduce speeds on LOVR, such as visually narrowing roadway with installation of protected bike lanes on LOVR, as planned by Froom Ranch development project, speed limit reductions and/or additional speed feedback signs. Continue to monitor in next safety report. Page 952 of 984 48 2018 & 2019 Traffic Safety Report March 2022 8 HIGUERA & VACHELL TWSC 4 23,179 0.473 Pattern: Broadside collisions with LT movements to/from Vachell Recommendation: Intersection to be reconstructed by Avila Ranch development project to add center median on Higuera and allow right-in/right-out access only to/from Vachell. Continue to monitor collision pattern after modification. 9 LOS OSOS VALLEY & DESCANSO SSSC 3 21,096 0.390 Pattern: Rear End & Broadside due to high speeds on LOVR Recommendation: Install near-side signal head and/or high-visibility signal backplates to increase visibility of signal indicators. Pursue other measures to reduce speeds on LOVR, such as visually narrowing roadway with installation of protected bike lanes on LOVR, as planned by Froom Ranch development project, speed limit reductions and/or additional speed feedback signs . 1. California and Palm is also ranked as a High Collision Rate Location for Bicycle Locations Rank Caltrans Intersections NA SANTA ROSA & BOYSEN Pattern: Rear End & Broadside due to high speeds on Santa Rosa. Recommendation: Coordinate with Caltrans to evaluate potential measures to reduce auto speeds on Santa Rosa Street, such as auto lane reductions/narrowing, and installation ofspeed feedback signage for NB & SB traffic. Page 953 of 984 49 2018 & 2019 Traffic Safety Report March 2022 High Collision Rate Locations – Collector/Collector Intersections No Locations Ranked Under this Category High Collision Rate Locations – Collector/Local Intersections No Locations Ranked Under this Category High Collision Rate Locationa - Local/Local Intersections No Locations Ranked Under this Category Page 954 of 984 50 2018 & 2019 Traffic Safety Report March 2022 High Collision Rate Locations – Arterial Segments 2018-19 Arterial Segments Rank Prev. Rank Segment Collisions Ped- Bike Coll. Severe Inj. & Fatal Coll. Volume Seg. Length (mi.) Rate Location 1 4 Foothill 3 2 1 17,227 0.24 1.99 Santa Rosa to California 2 5 Los Osos Valley 10 2 3 30,988 0.53 1.67 Froom to Calle Joaquin 3 7 Madonna 5 1 2 26,690 0.34 1.51 Dalidio to Hwy 101 4 N/A Tank Farm 3 0 0 20,709 0.27 1.47 Broad to Santa Fe NR N/A Santa Rosa 3 0 0 37,000 0.51 0.44 Olive to Foothill 5 8 Broad 3 0 0 28,000 0.97 0.30 Orcutt to Tank Farm 2018-19 Arterial Segments Rank Prev. Rank Segment Collisions Ped- Bike Coll. Severe Inj. & Fatal Coll. Volume Seg. Length (mi.) Rate Location 1 4 Foothill 3 2 1 17,227 0.24 1.99 Santa Rosa to California 2 8 Los Osos Valley 10 2 3 30,988 0.53 1.67 Froom to Calle Joaquin 3 N/A Madonna 5 1 2 26,690 0.34 1.51 Dalidio to Hwy 101 4 N/A Tank Farm 3 0 0 20,709 0.27 1.47 Broad to Santa Fe NR N/A Santa Rosa 3 0 0 37,000 0.51 0.44 Olive to Foothill 5 N/A Broad 3 0 0 28,000 0.97 0.30 Orcutt to Tank Farm NR = Not Ranked N/A = Location under Caltrans jurisdiction. Listed for reference, but not included in City rankings Rate = Collision frequency per million vehicle-miles traveled along segment Page 955 of 984 51 2018 & 2019 Traffic Safety Report March 2022 Arterial Segments Recommendations 2018-19 Arterial Segment Recommendations Rank Segment Collisions Ped- Bike Coll. Severe Inj. & Fatal Coll. Volume Seg. Length (mi.) Rate Location 1 Foothill 3 2 1 17227 0.24 1.99 Santa Rosa to California Pattern: Eastbound rear end and other collisions due to traffic being stopped from California/Foothill signal. Recommendation: Complete Foothill / California Rail Crossing upgrades, planned for 2022-23. Investigate turn channelization as part of the project. Continue to monitor. 2 Los Osos Valley 10 2 3 30988 0.53 1.67 Froom to Calle Joaquin Pattern: Rear end collisions and driveway turning movements. Collisions are associated with unsafe speeds on Los Osos Valley Road. Recommendation: Install speed feedback signage for EB and WB LOVR, install high-visibility signal backplates at signalized intersections, evaluate feasibility of reducing posted speed limits on LOVR. 3 Madonna 5 1 2 26690 0.34 1.51 Dalidio to Hwy 101 Pattern: Rear end collisions and driveway turning movements. Collisions are associated with unsafe speeds on Madonna Road. Recommendation: Install speed feedback signage for EB and WB Madonna, evaluate feasibility of reducing posted speed limits on Madonna. Page 956 of 984 52 2018 & 2019 Traffic Safety Report March 2022 High Collision Rate Locations – Collector Segments No Locations Ranked Under this Category High Collision Rate Locations – Local Segments No Locations Ranked Under this Category Page 957 of 984 53 2018 & 2019 Traffic Safety Report March 2022 Figure 6: 2018-19 High Collision Intersection Locations Page 958 of 984 54 2018 & 2019 Traffic Safety Report March 2022 Figure 7: 2018-19 High Collision Rate Roadway Segments Page 959 of 984 APPENDIX A Collision Analysis Methodology Page 960 of 984 Study Methodology Collision Data Reported traffic collisions obtained by the City of San Luis Obispo Police Department are the basis used by the City Traffic Engineering group to evaluate traffic safety1. Collisions totals are obtained for each intersection and roadway segment within the City and entered into the City’s traffic collision database. Collisions occurring on private property or outside of the City Limits are not included in the dataset. Collision locations are then grouped by intersection type (i.e. arterial-arterial, arterial-collector, collector- collector, etc.) and street segment. For locations with at least three (3) total collisions in the past year or at least three (3) bicycle or pedestrian collisions in the previous five- year period, collision rates are calculated and collision diagrams are generated. Based on the collision patterns for the five highest ranked intersections and roadway segments, as ranked based on collision rate, mitigation measures are formulated where a collision pattern can be identified. Mitigation measures for these sub- categories will be implemented in as projects are designed and funding becomes available. Traffic Volumes Vehicle and pedestrian volumes play an important role in calculating collision rates for selected locations within the City. Vehicle volume counts were collected in 2014 as a basis to establish actual conditions in the field environment. Where volume counts were not available, volumes were estimated based on previous experience and engineering judgment. Collision Rate Calculations Collision rates were calculated using the following formulas: Intersections: Segments: RI = N X 1,000,000 RS = N X 1,000,000 V X 365 365 X V X L 1 It is important to note that the data contained within the Public Works Traffic Collision Database may vary from other sources of collision data such as the California - Statewide Integrated Traffic Records System (SWITRS) or the City’s Emergency Dispatch Records System. While SWITRS data is similarly derived from official police collision reports, many times the reports are coded incorrectly due to jurisdictional boundary issues and/or agency reporting inaccuracies. Likewise, City emergency dispatch may receive a call regarding a traffic collision but when the dispatched officer arrives, the vehicles have been moved on or there is no evidence of occurrence. Therefore, statistics derived from this data may be inaccurate for engineering purposes because no official proof or record exists of the actual collision type. Page 961 of 984 Where: RI = Intersection Collision Rate = Collision frequency per million vehicles entering the intersection. RS = Segment Collision Rate = Collision frequency per million vehicle miles traveled along the segment. N = Number of collisions (collision frequency) of the location. V = Average daily vehicular volume using the street segment or intersection. L = Length of street segment (in miles) being analyzed. For high-rate bicycle and pedestrian collision locations, collision rates were calculated as follows: Pedestrians: Bicycles: PREV = 5 X N X PHVV BEV = 5 X N X PHVV PHPV PHBV Where: PREV = Pedestrian relative exposure value. PREV = Bicycle relative exposure value. N = Number of collisions (5-year collision frequency) of the location. PHVV = Average peak hour vehicular volume. PHPV = Average peak hour pedestrian volume. PHBV = Average peak hour bicycle volume. The pedestrian and bicycle relative exposure value formula is derived from the traditional collision rate calculation, however it factors the volume of either the bicycle or pedestrian with that of vehicles at a given location. Page 962 of 984 RESOLUTION NO 10746 (2016 SERIES) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO, CALIFORNIA, ENDORSING THE GOAL OF VISION ZERO, FOR THE CITY TO STRIVE TO ACHIEVE ZERO TRAFFIC DEATHS AND SERIOUS INJURIES ON CITY STREETS BY 2030 WHEREAS, the life, safety and health of residents, employees and visitors to San Luis Obispo is one of the City Council's highest priorities; and WHEREAS, Vision Zero is a philosophy, adopted by many cities and states around the country, that no loss of life or serious injury on the transportation system is acceptable; and WHEREAS, the Circulation Element of the San Luis Obispo General Plan provides policy intent to provide a system of streets that are safe for all forms of transportation, while reducing dependence on single -occupant use of motor vehicles by supporting and promoting alternatives such as walking, bicycling and transit; and WHEREAS, The City of San Luis Obispo has been actively implementing safety projects and programs consistent with Vision Zero, however has not yet adopted the philosophy as policy; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows: SECTION 1. This City Council hereby adopts a Vision Zero goal of eliminating traffic deaths and serious injuries by 2030. SECTION 2. The City Council directs the Public Works, Fire and Police Departments to continue implementation of the City's Enforcement, Education, Traffic Safety, Traffic Operations, and Neighborhood Traffic Management programs as the mechanisms for achieving this goal. SECTION 3. These programs will be guided by innovative engineering solutions to improve road safety for all users, especially the most vulnerable; will measure and evaluate performance annually, and will include enforcement and education tactics to deter the most dangerous behaviors that cause public harm, especially along the corridors and locations where collisions are concentrated. Upon motion of Council Member Rivoire, seconded by Council Member Ashbaugh, and on the following roll call vote: AYES: Council Members Ashbaugh, Christianson and Rivoire, Vice Mayor Carpenter and Mayor Marx NOES: None ABSENT: None R 10746 Page 963 of 984 Resolution No. 10746 (2016 Series) Page 2 The foregoing resolution was adopted this 18`h day of October 2016. Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official seal of the City of San Luis Obispo, California, this 0-I+h- day of 0G66&r , -2 c [(o Carrie Gallagher City Clerk R 10746 Page 964 of 984 1/5/2016 Item 12 Presentation 1 2018 & 2019 TRAFFIC SAFETY REPORT Public Works and Police Department March 2022 1. Receive the 2018-2019 Traffic Safety Report and Operations and recommended traffic safety measures. 2. Modify the Traffic Safety Report/Vision Zero reporting process to improve focus and efficiency of the program to support the Vision Zero goal of eliminating severe injury and fatal collisions Recommendation 2 1 2 1/5/2016 Item 12 Presentation 2 1. Review Overall Collision Trends 2. Traffic Citation Trends 3. Proposed Transportation Safety Projects 4. Comprehensive Collision Costs 5. Traffic Safety Project Funding 6. Proposed refinements to Traffic Safety Program Presentation Schedule 3 910 1023 1140 1256 1097 1207 1089 873 866 793 683 598 619 594 570 548 531 482 501 431 470 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 Total CollisionsYear Total Collisions Safety Program Begins Overall Citywide Traffic Collision Trend 4 3 4 1/5/2016 Item 12 Presentation 3 Citywide Injury & Fatal Collision Trend 240 267 268 309 308 315 285 250 257 240 236 233 220 191 207 201 220 197 202 166 173 150 170 190 210 230 250 270 290 310 330 Injury Collisions2211043200031201111130 1 2 3 4 5 Fatal CollisionsFatal Collisions 5 Citywide Ped & Bike Collision Trend 24 37 19 41 24 41 26 27 18 25 24 22 24 26 39 24 23 27 31 21 28 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 Pedestrian  Collisions 52 46 45 53 55 50 55 61 59 59 73 69 67 69 63 50 56 50 39 46 36 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 Bicycle Collisions 6 5 6 1/5/2016 Item 12 Presentation 45734674171146508480226633454358544887437594746864121619552934399552261626551500340902394200117912243255089678993417693120209828061474152415711407174023612936336925940 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 199920002001200220032004200520062007200820092010201120122013201420152016201720182019Total Citations Hazardous Citations Citywide Traffic Citations 4574803965024103043124123313392482132412563774453934013453292260 100 200 300 400 500 600 DUI Arrests 7 BIKES & PEDS • 11% of total collisions • 53% of severe injury & fatal collisions Citywide Collision By Mode 8 7 8 1/5/2016 Item 12 Presentation 5 Primary Collision Factors Factor Rank % All Collisions Improper turning 1 26% Unsafe Speed 2 17% Automobile Right of Way 3 14% Drive/Bike Under Infl Alcohol/Drug 4 9% Unsafe Starting or Backing 5 5% Injury Collisions Improper Turning 1 22% Automobile Right of Way 2 21% Unsafe Speed 3 18% Pedestrian Right of Way 4 7% Traffic Signs and Signals 5 6% Severe Injury & Fatal Collisions Automobile Right of Way 1 22% Drive/Bike Under Infl. Alcohol/Drug 2 14% Improper Turning 2 14% Pedestrian Right of Way 4 11% Unsafe Speed 4 11% 9 • 67% @ Intersections • 27% Injury • 34% Property Damage • 33% @ Roadway segments • 11% Injury • 22% Property Damage Where Are Collisions Occurring in 2018? 10 9 10 1/5/2016 Item 12 Presentation 6 Where Are Collisions Occurring in 2019? • 60% @ Intersections • 23% Injury • 36% Property Damage • 40% @ Roadway segments • 13% Injury • 27% Property Damage 11 Recommended Projects 21 Locations 14 New Funded Projects 2 Systemic projects 3 CIP-funded projects 2 Unfunded Funded 12 11 12 1/5/2016 Item 12 Presentation 7 New Projects With Adequate Funding INTERSECTIONS Monterey & Grand California & Monterey California & Palm Marsh & Nipomo Johnson & Laurel Higuera & LOVR California & Hathway LOVR & Descanso Santa Rosa & Palm California & Foothill Johnson & Lizzie SEGMENTS Higuera (Santa Rosa to Nipomo) LOVR (Froom to 101) Madonna (Dalidio to 101) SYSTEMIC Ped crossings and ADA signal upgrades Bike enhancements per ATP 13 Projects Needing Additional Funding 1. Broad & Higuera Signal Reconstruction 2. Marsh & Chorro Signal Reconstruction 14 13 14 1/5/2016 Item 12 Presentation 8 Projects In Progress or Recently Completed Traffic Signal Modifications Broad & Marsh Broad & Industrial Santa Rosa & Monterey Pedestrian Crossing Improvements Monterey & Buena Vista Johnson & Sydney California & Foothill Roundabout Design & Construction California & Taft Tank Farm & Orcutt 15 2018-19 City of San Luis Obispo Comprehensive Collision Costs Collision Severity Number of Collisions Cost per Collision Cost 2018 2019 2018 2019 2018 2019 Fatal 1 3 $4,666,401 $4,751,887 $4,666,401 $14,255,660 Disabling Injury 20 14 $267,722 $272,627 $5,354,444 $3,816,774 Non-Incapacitating Injury 49 56 $98,342 $100,143 $4,818,751 $5,608,032 Possible Injury 96 100 $57,581 $58,636 $5,527,765 $5,863,573 Property Damage Only 265 297 $10,123 $10,308 $2,682,565 $3,061,574 Total 431 470 $23,049,926 $32,605,613 Source: Crash Cost Estimates based on AASHTO’s Highway Safety Manual, 2010. Costs adjusted to 2018 and 2019 dollars based on Consumer Price Index and Employment Cost Index per Highway Safety Manual guidance. 16 15 16 1/5/2016 Item 12 Presentation 9 Unfunded (potential future CIP requests) Broad & Higuera Intersection rebuild $600k Marsh & Chorro Intersection rebuild $600k Safety Projects Already in CIP Program Santa Rosa & Monterey Marsh & Osos California & Taft Roundabout Funding Traffic Safety Account: Traffic Safety Account Balance (91607)$481,946 Funds reserved for Other Capital Projects $163,438 Funds available for 16 Safety Projects $318,508 (Engineer Estimate) 17 Increasing Focus on 18 17 18 1/5/2016 Item 12 Presentation 10 Current TSR Process Proposed TSR Process 1 Reporting Cycle Comprehensive Annual Report • Comprehensive report every 5 years • Annual fact sheets with overall trends & project updates 2 Data Used 1yr of data / 3yr for Ped & Bike 5yr data for all analysis 3 High Collision Location Ranking Based on collision rate as a factor of volume Weighted ranking, giving more weight to injury and fatal collisions 4 Roadway Segments Exclude intersection collisions when studying road segments Include intersections, focus on corridor-wide factors. 5 Systemic Safety • Mostly reactive analysis of previous collisions • Limited systematic safety analysis • Greater focus on predictive analysis, focusing on design characteristics and street design, while still identifying corrective measures Proposed Refinements to TSR Procedures 19 Changes to Traffic Safety Report City staff would still immediately address significant safety concerns and issues that arise mid reporting cycle Pros: Reduced staff time for report generation Greater focus on delivery of safety projects Greater focus on systematic/preventative measures Greater focus on fatal & severe injury collisions Less "noise" from random year-to-year variations Cons: Less frequent reporting Difficult for "apples to apples" comparison of collision rates to previous reports 20 19 20 1/5/2016 Item 12 Presentation 11 1. Receive the 2018-2019 Traffic Safety Report and Operations and recommended traffic safety measures. 2. Modify the Traffic Safety Report/Vision Zero reporting process to improve focus and efficiency of the program to support the Vision Zero goal of eliminating severe injury and fatal collisions Recommendation 21 Monterey & Grand Monterey and Grand Convert EB left turn to protected signal phasing. 21 22 1/5/2016 Item 12 Presentation 12 Monterey & California California and Monterey Implement measures to reduce bike conflicts with right-turning vehicles, such as addition of bike signal phases or installation of illuminated “yield to bike” signs. (Currently in design)In the long-term, (a) implement planned bikeway improvements along Pepper Street per Active Transportation Plan to provide alternate route for SB cyclists connecting from Railroad Safety Trail and (b) explore potential to widen intersection for NB & SB dedicated right turn lanes and channelized bike lanes. California & Palm California and Palm Extend green bike lanes through intersection and install “right turn yield to bikes” warning signage. In the long-term, implement planned bikeway improvements along Pepper Street per Active Transportation Plan to provide alternate route for SB cyclists connecting from Railroad Safety Trail. 23 24 1/5/2016 Item 12 Presentation 13 Marsh & Nipomo Marsh and Nipomo Consider measures to reduce vehicle speeds along Marsh Street, such as implementation of a three-to-two lane road diet (planned with 2022 Paving Project), extension of the existing 25 MPH business district speed zone west of Broad Street, and installation of speed feedback signage on Marsh to help slow EB vehicles approaching intersection. Johnson & Laurel Johnson and Laurel Install protected left signal phasing for NB Johnson left turn traffic. 25 26 1/5/2016 Item 12 Presentation 14 Higuera & LOVR Higuera and LOVR Implement flashing yellow arrow or protected-only left turn signal phasing for northbound left turn lane. California & Hathway California and Hathway Relocate fire hydrant to alternate location and/or install high- visibility flex posts around hydrant to increase visibility. 27 28 1/5/2016 Item 12 Presentation 15 LOVR & Descanso LOVR and Descanso Install near-side signal head and/or high-visibility signal backplates to increase visibility of signal indicators. Pursue other measures to reduce speeds on LOVR, such as visually narrowing roadway with installation of protected bike lanes on LOVR, as planned by Froom Ranch development project. Santa Rosa & Palm Santa Rosa and Palm Install hi-visibility signal backplates 29 30 1/5/2016 Item 12 Presentation 16 California & Foothill California and Foothill Consider measures to reduce vehicles speeds on Foothill Boulevard, such as installation of speed feedback signage, to help slow WB and EB vehicles approaching intersection. Consider striping changes as part of future paving project to narrow vehicle lanes and install protected bike lanes, as proposed in Active Transportation Plan. Complete railroad crossing safety enhancements (currently in design). Johnson & Lizzie Johnson and Lizzie Evaluate feasibility of bikeway enhancements at this location as part of planned 2023 paving work on Johnson Avenue, including assessing feasibility of road diet (reducing from 2 to 1 auto lane in NB and/or SB directions) to provide width for buffered/protected bike lanes, green bike lane markings and installation of “left/right turn yield to bikes” signage. 31 32 1/5/2016 Item 12 Presentation 17 Madonna Segment Madonna (US 101 to Dalidio) Install Speed Feedback signage for EB and WB traffic. Higuera Segment Higuera (Santa Rosa to Nipomo) Implement permanent road diet, reducing to two auto lanes. Consider measures to reduce auto speeds, such a re-timing traffic signal progression and extension of existing 25 MPH business district speed zone west of Broad Street. 33 34 1/5/2016 Item 12 Presentation 18 LOVR Segment LOVR (Froom Ranch to Calle Joaquin) Pursue measures to reduce speeds on LOVR, such as visually narrowing roadway with installation of protected bike lanes on LOVR, as planned by Froom Ranch development project, speed limit reductions and/or additional speed feedback signs 35