HomeMy WebLinkAbout02-06-2018 Item 11 Annual Traffic Safety Report Meeting Date: 2/6/2018
FROM: Daryl Grigsby, Public Works Director
Deanna Cantrell, Police Chief
Prepared By: Jake Hudson, Transportation Manager
Matt Crisp, Transportation Planner/Engineer
SUBJECT: 2016 TRAFFIC SAFETY REPORT
RECOMMENDATION
Receive the 2016 Traffic Safety Report and approve the recommended traffic safety measures.
DISCUSSION
Background
The Public Works and Police Departments are pleased to present the 1 6th edition of the City of
San Luis Obispo Traffic Safety Report (TSR). The annual TSR began in 2001 and documents the
activities and performance of the City’s Traffic Safety Program, identifies high collision
locations within the City and recommends mitigation improvements to address safety issues
where appropriate. Now in its 16th year, the program has demonstrated continued effectiveness
and lasting outcomes. Despite increases in traffic volumes in many areas, total collisions in 2016
were the lowest since the program began, down approximately 9% from the previous year and
down 58% since the program inception. More importantly, total injury collisions decreased 10%
from the prior year and are down 36% since the program began. There were 4 more pedestrian
collisions in 2016 compared to 2015, a 17% increase. Bicycle collisions have declined by 32%
from peak levels in 2009 and declined by 11% from 2015 totals.
2016 Traffic Safety Report Overview
The TSR reviews all intersections and street segments in the City for calendar year 2016 and
identifies patterns and collisions rates. This information enables st aff to prioritize work efforts
and inform policy makers and the community. Based on these patterns, recommendations are
made for the highest collision locations of each intersection and street segment by classification.
Staff develops specific actions and improvements at each location, or, recommends continued
monitoring if no prevalent pattern can be identified. The reason this information is presented for
the prior year is due primarily to late reporting by individuals involved in traffic collisions,
complex incidents that require extended investigation periods, and the amount of staff time
required analyze the data and prepare recommendations.
The TSR identifies patterns for the highest -rate collision locations of 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 strategies to address safety issues. For example, all ar terial segments
are compared to each other to establish the highest rate locations and thereby establish the
Packet Pg. 217
11
priority order for mitigation or safety improvements. In order 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.
There were 10 total high-ranking locations in the 2016 TSR where safety improvement projects
are identified. These locations are listed in Table 1 below:
Table 1 Safety Improvement Projects – All Recommended Projects
No. Location Project
1 Marsh & Nipomo Re-orient traffic signal heads. Monitor for future
consideration of mast arms and overhead signal indications
2 Higuera & Nipomo Re-orient traffic signal heads. Monitor for future
consideration of mast arms and overhead signal indications
3 Foothill & Broad Intersection is under consideration for reconfiguration as
part of the adjacent development. Ensure design
addresses collision pattern.
4 Broad & Industrial Collision pattern attributed to driver inattention and
negligence. Conduct focused enforcement.
5 Marsh & Toro Install advanced “STOP AHEAD” signing and striping
6 Higuera & Bridge Widen Higuera and install two-way-left-turn-lane, project
is currently underway funded through State grants.
7 Higuera & Vachell Paint “KEEP CLEAR” in intersection. Future improvements
include turn restrictions in conjunction with the Avila
Ranch development and the Buckley Road extension
8 Santa Rosa & Mantalban Coordinate with Caltrans to install marked crosswalks
across Montalban on each side of Santa Rosa and/or
pedestrian signing
9 Santa Rosa & Mill Collision pattern attributed to driver inattention and
negligence. Conduct focused enforcement
10 Foothill (Santa Rosa to California) Coordinate with The SLO Student Living (apartment
complex) to relocate or modify entry monument sign
Packet Pg. 218
11
There are currently numerous projects that have either been completed or are underway. Of the
recommended projects from this report one is underway. These locations are listed in Table 2
below:
Table 2: Previous Safety Improvement Projects – Underway or Completed
No. Location Project Status
1 Santa Rosa & Walnut Green Bike Lanes Refreshed in fall of 2016
2 Santa Rosa & Olive Green Bike Lanes Refreshed in fall of 2016
3 Monterey & Santa
Rosa
Install Flashing Yellow Arrows Completed in fall of 2016
4 California & Monterey Green Bike Lanes Refreshed in fall of 2016
5 Monterey & Osos Reconstruct Traffic Signal To be completed in March
2018
6 Marsh & Garden Reconfigure Garden Street between
Marsh and Higuera
Temporarily modified to
ultimate configuration. Final
improvements to be
completed as part of
development project
7 Higuera (Bridge to Elks) Widen Higuera and install two-way-left-
turn-lane
Coordinating with Caltrans to
obtain R/W. Design complete
8 Higuera & Broad Leading Pedestrian Crossing Interval Complete
9 Chorro & Monterey Leading Pedestrian Crossing Interval Complete
10 Marsh & Chorro Leading Pedestrian Crossing Interval Complete
11 California & US 101 NB
Ramps
Upgrade warning signs Complete
12 Foothill & Chorro Upgrade 8” to 12” signal indications Complete
13 Grand & Loomis Install bulb-outs Pending funding
14 Chorro & Peach Upgrade ADA ramps and relocate utility
pole
Design underway
15 Foothill & Broad Upgrade traffic signal indications Complete
16 Laurel & Southwood Implement lane reduction, or
“complete street” revisions along
Laurel Lane between Johnson and
Orcutt
Currently in public outreach
phase. To be implemented in
summer 2018
17 California & Taft Construct Roundabout Design Underway
Packet Pg. 219
11
Table 3: Safety Improvement Projects – New Projects Feasible Under Current Safety
Funding Allocation
No. Location Project
1 Marsh & Nipomo Upgrade traffic signal to include mast arms
2 Foothill & Broad Intersection is under consideration for reconfiguration as part
of the adjacent development. Ensure design addresses
collision pattern
3 Broad & Industrial Upgrade and add signal indicators. Investigate the installation
of officer assist red light enforcers
4 Marsh & Toro Install advanced “STOP AHEAD” signing and striping
5 Higuera & Vachell Paint “KEEP CLEAR” in intersection
6 Santa Rosa & Mantalban Coordinate with Caltrans and Paint crosswalks across
Montalban on each side of Santa Rosa
7 Santa Rosa & Mill Upgrade and add signal indicators. Investigate the installation
of officer assist red light enforcers
8 Foothill (Santa Rosa to
California)
Coordinate with The SLO Student Living to move sign
Vision Zero
As part of the 2015 Traffic Safety Report the City adopted a Vision Zero policy. Vision Zero is
the philosophy that loss of life is not an acceptable price to pay for mobility and that regardless
of who is at fault in traffic collisions, public agencies should take a systematic approach to
improving safety and achieving a transportation system with zero fatalities or serious injuries.
This new philosophy of shifting the focus from the roadway user to the roadway design resulted
in Sweden and other European countries practicing Vision Zero to reduce their traffic fatalities
by 50% or more.
The City has had tremendous success with its current traffic safety program and practices, traffic
collisions have been reduced by 58% as a result of these efforts. The annual traffic safety
program is the City’s primary mechanism for implementation of its Vision Zero policy. On page
15 of the 2016 Traffic Safety Report there is a list of Traffic Safety Education C ampaigns that
the City also participates in annually.
CONCURRENCES
The Police & Fire Departments have reviewed the 2016 TSR and concurs with its findings.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
This report is exempt of CEQA
Packet Pg. 220
11
FISCAL IMPACT
The estimated cost of new pro ject is $85,000. Staff is recommending that these projects be
funded through the City’s Traffic Safety Budget which has a current balance of $87,500, leaving
a balance of $2,500.
ALTERNATIVES
1. The Council may choose to focus traffic safety improvements on other non-collision
priority areas. Staff does not recommend this as the project identified in this report will
yield a much higher public health and safety benefit over locations that are not
experiencing high collision rates.
Attachments:
a - 2016 TSR
Packet Pg. 221
11
Public Works and Police Department
September 2016
2016 Annual Traffic Safety Report
Packet Pg. 222
11
ii2016 Traffic Safety Report
September 2016
Table of Contents
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................................................................................................. 1
INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................. 2
BACKGROUND ................................................................................................................................ 2
MOVING TOWARDS VISION ZERO .................................................................................................... 2
MEASURING PROGRESS ................................................................................................................. 3
HOW TO NAVIGATE THIS REPORT .................................................................................................... 4
CITYWIDE COLLISION TRENDS ................................................................................................... 5
INJURY COLLISION TREND .............................................................................................................. 5
FATAL COLLISION TREND ............................................................................................................... 5
OVERALL COLLISION TREND ........................................................................................................... 6
PEDESTRIAN COLLISION TREND ...................................................................................................... 7
BICYCLE COLLISION TREND ............................................................................................................ 7
PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE SERIOUS INJURIES AND FATALITIES ........................................................ 8
HUMAN AND ECONOMIC IMPACT ...................................................................................................... 8
TRAFFIC ENFORCEMENT MEASURES ..................................................................................... 10
CITATION TRENDS ........................................................................................................................ 10
DUI ARRESTS .............................................................................................................................. 11
CITATIONS BY VEHICLE CODE SECTION 2016 ................................................................................ 12
ONGOING ACTIVITIES TO MAKE OUR STREETS SAFER ....................................................... 13
COMPLETED/PLANNED SAFETY PROJECTS & PROGRAMS .............................................................. 13
TRAFFIC SAFETY EDUCATION CAMPAIGNS ..................................................................................... 14
PERCEPTION OF TRANSPORTATION SAFETY – UTILIZING PUBLIC INPUT ........................................... 15
2015 HIGH COLLISION RATE LOCATIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS .................................... 17
WHERE COLLISIONS ARE OCCURRING ........................................................................................... 17
MOST COMMON COLLISION TYPES AND FACTORS .......................................................................... 21
HIGH COLLISION RATE LOCATIONS – PEDESTRIANS ....................................................................... 24
PEDESTRIAN LOCATION RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................................ 25
HIGH COLLISION RATE LOCATIONS – BICYCLES ............................................................................. 26
BICYCLE LOCATION RECOMMENDATIONS ....................................................................................... 27
HIGH COLLISION RATE LOCATIONS – ARTERIAL/ARTERIAL INTERSECTIONS ..................................... 28
ARTERIAL/ARTERIAL INTERSECTIONS RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................................. 29
HIGH COLLISION RATE LOCATIONS – ARTERIAL/COLLECTOR INTERSECTIONS ................................. 30
ARTERIAL/COLLECTOR INTERSECTIONS RECOMMENDATIONS ......................................................... 30
HIGH COLLISION RATE LOCATIONS – ARTERIAL/LOCAL INTERSECTIONS .......................................... 31
ARTERIAL/LOCAL INTERSECTIONS RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................. 32
HIGH COLLISION RATE LOCATIONS – COLLECTOR/COLLECTOR INTERSECTIONS .............................. 33
COLLECTOR/COLLECTOR INTERSECTIONS RECOMMENDATIONS ..................................................... 33
HIGH COLLISION RATE LOCATIONS – COLLECTOR/LOCAL INTERSECTIONS ...................................... 34
COLLECTOR/LOCAL INTERSECTIONS RECOMMENDATIONS .............................................................. 34
LOCAL/LOCAL INTERSECTIONS ...................................................................................................... 35
HIGH COLLISION RATE LOCATIONS – ARTERIAL SEGMENTS ............................................................ 36
ARTERIAL SEGMENTS RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................................... 37
HIGH COLLISION RATE LOCATIONS – COLLECTOR SEGMENTS ........................................................ 38
COLLECTOR SEGMENTS RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................................ 38
Packet Pg. 223
11
iii2016 Traffic Safety Report
September 2016
APPENDIX A – COLLISION ANALYSIS METHODOLOGY
APPENDIX B – 2015 HIGH COLLISION LOCATIONS - STATUS UPDATE
APPENDIX C – 2016 COLLISION DIAGRAMS
List of Figures
Figure 1: 2016 Citywide Traffic Collisions ........................................................... 19
Figure 2: 2016 Citywide Pedestrian Collisions .................................................... 20
Figure 3: 2016 Citywide Bicycle Collisions .......................................................... 21
Figure 4: 2016 High Collision Intersection Locations .......................................... 39
Figure 5: 2016 High Collision Rate Roadway Segments .................................... 40
Packet Pg. 224
11
12016 Traffic Safety Report
September 2016
Executive Summary
The Public Works & Police Departments are pleased to present the 16th cycle of
the City’s annual traffic safety program. 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 that may reduce
collision rates and improve safety within the City. This program has had
continued success with a 62% reduction in citywide
collisions since the program began, despite increasing
traffic volumes.
This safety program has demonstrated continued
success and again in 2016, total collisions are again
the lowest on record, down by 9% from 2015. While
reducing the overall collision rate continues to be a
priority, over time the safety program has continued to
increase 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 policies
change with regard to collision response.
There was one fatality on City Right of Way in 2016, however, not on a City
Street. A pedestrian was struck in the sidewalk crossing the railroad tracks on
Foothill Boulevard near California. Injury collisions decreased by 10% from the
previous year and by 36% from 2002 when the safety program began. Severe
injury collisions increased by 186% from 2015, with a 54% increase since 2002.
There were more severe collisions this year than any other year since the
program began. It is unclear why there was a spike in 2016 but Staff will continue
to monitor and determine if 2016 was an anomaly in the next Safety Report.
The program also includes thorough evaluations of bicycle and pedestrian safety,
as these road users are more vulnerable to serious injury or death from collisions
with motor vehicles. Bicycle collision trends have shown an 11% decline from the
previous year and a 32% decline from peak levels in 2009. Except for a
significant peak in 2013, annual pedestrian collisions have been relatively static
since 2008. Although 2016 saw a 17% increase that number only represented 4
additional pedestrian collisions.
The following report displays trends in collision history, traffic citations, and traffic
safety measures and identifies high-collision rate locations in 2016. As in
previous Traffic Safety Reports, staff reviewed all high-collision rate intersections
and street segments and has recommended mitigation measures to increase
safety at the top five locations in each category.
In 2009, the City of San Luis Obispo
received the International Public
Agency Achievement award from the
Institute of Traffic Engineers (ITE) for
this program. This award is one of the
highest recognitions a public agency
can receive for its traffic engineering
practices.
Packet Pg. 225
11
22016 Traffic Safety Report
September 2016
Our goal is that the combination of data-driven analysis, appropriate mitigation,
and consistent and focused education and enforcement will continue to reduce
traffic collisions and improve the safety of our streets for all users.
Packet Pg. 226
11
32016 Traffic Safety Report
September 2016
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 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
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 so
as to make the transportation infrastructure more driver friendly, reduce driver
confusion, promote bicycle and pedestrian
safety and comfort, and limit impact severity.
Moving Towards Vision Zero
Vision Zero is a multi-national traffic safety
initiative, first initiated in Sweden, 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. Since 1997, Sweden and other
European countries practicing Vision Zero
Packet Pg. 227
11
42016 Traffic Safety Report
September 2016
have been able to reduce their traffic fatalities by almost 50%.
In recent years, Vision Zero has gained steam throughout the United States, with
cities such as San Francisco, New York, Portland and Los Angeles adopting
Vision Zero Policies and action plans. According to the National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration (NHTSA), motor vehicle traffic crashes are the number one
leading cause of death for people ages 13 through 25 and result in over 30,000
deaths per year in the United States alone. 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.
While the City of San Luis Obispo has not adopted a formal Vision Zero policy,
the City has demonstrated a long-standing commitment towards eliminating
traffic-related fatalities and serious injuries. Through (a) the data-driven analysis
performed in the annual TSR, (b) regular collaboration between City Public
Works and Police Departments to identify priorities for focused traffic safety
enforcement, and (c) ongoing community education and outreach campaigns, the
City is continually striving to improve the safety and efficiency of transportation
facilities for all modes and users.
Measuring Progress
Progress towards improving traffic safety for all road users 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 year
will normally be prepared after City collision statistics become available in April or
May of the following year; thus, the data analyzed in this TSR is for the 2016
calendar year. Collision data is reviewed for each intersection and roadway
segment within the City and entered into the City Public Works Department’s
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.
Packet Pg. 228
11
52016 Traffic Safety Report
September 2016
Additional discussion regarding the technical analysis methodology applied in
this TSR is provided in the Appendix.
How to Navigate this Report
The remainder of the 2016 TSR is organized into the following sections:
Citywide Collision Trends – Page 6
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 2016.
Traffic Enforcement Measures – Page 11
This section describes traffic enforcement efforts of the City Police
Department, discussing traffic citations, DUI arrests and hazardous driving
trends.
Ongoing Activities to Make our Streets Safer – Page 14
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.
2016 High Collision Rate Locations & Recommendations – Page 18
What have we learned about traffic safety in 2016? This section describes
the high collision rate intersections and roadway segments for 2016, and
presents potential mitigation recommendations for high-priority locations.
Packet Pg. 229
11
62016 Traffic Safety Report
September 2016
Citywide Collision Trends
Injury collisions are the most accurate representation of City collision trends
because these types of collision are most consistently reported and investigated.
In 2015, injury collisions decreased by 10% from 2015. Injury collisions are also
36% lower than 2002 when the safety program began.
Injury Collision Trend
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 fatal collision within the City in 2016. A pedestrian was struck in
the sidewalk while crossing the railroad tracks on Foothill Boulevard near
California. Further, fatal and severe injury collisions decreased by 12% from
2014, with a 43% reduction since 2002.
240
267 268
309 308 315
285
250 257
240 236 233
220
191
207 201
220
197
150
170
190
210
230
250
270
290
310
330
Injury CollisionsYear
Injury Collisions
22
110
4
3
2
0 0 0
3
1
2
0 111
0
1
2
3
4
5
Fatal CollisionsYear
Fatal Collisions
Packet Pg. 230
11
72016 Traffic Safety Report
September 2016
Overall Collision Trend
In 2016 there were 482 total reported collisions in the City—the lowest total on
record, down 9% from 2015 and down 62% from the introduction of the 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 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
400
500
600
700
800
900
1000
1100
1200
1300
Total CollisionsYear
Packet Pg. 231
11
82016 Traffic Safety Report
September 2016
Pedestrian Collision Trend
Despite rising pedestrian volumes, pedestrian collisions have remained relatively
static since 2008, with the exception of an unexplained spike in 2013. In 2016,
the number of pedestrian collisions rose slightly but have returned to that of the
recent trend.
Bicycle Collision Trend
Despite rising bicycle volumes, bicycle collisions have generally been on the
decline in recent years. Bicycle collision trends have shown a 32% decline from
peak levels in 2009. In 2016, bicycle collision totals returned to the 2014 total
which represented an 11% decrease from 2015.
24
37
19
41
24
41
26 27
18
25 24 22 24 26
39
24 23
27
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
30
35
40
45
50
55
60
65
70
75
80
Bicycle CollisionsYear
Packet Pg. 232
11
92016 Traffic Safety Report
September 2016
Pedestrian and Bicycle Serious Injuries and Fatalities
Over the past five years (2012-2016), 2,725 traffic collisions have been reported
in the City—about 545 per year. Roughly 16% of these collisions involved a
bicyclist or pedestrian. However, as illustrated in the graphic below, 46% 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.
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
2016 dollars, the comprehensive costs associated with the 531 citywide traffic
collisions occurring in 2016 were calculated to be more than $25 million.
Comprehensive collision costs for 2016 by collision type are summarized in
Table 1 below.
Packet Pg. 233
11
102016 Traffic Safety Report
September 2016
Table 1: 2016 City of San Luis Obispo Comprehensive Collision Costs
Collision Severity Number of
Collisions
Cost per
Collision Cost
Fatal 1 $5,669,881 $5,669,881
Disabling Injury 20 $300,591 $6,011,820
Non-Incapacitating Injury 138 $109,811 $15,153,918
Possible Injury 38 $61,904 $2,352,352
Property Damage Only 286 $10,012 $2,863,432
Total 483 $32,051,403
Source: Crash Cost Estimates based on AASHTO’s Highway Safety Manual, 2010. Costs adjusted to
2016 dollars based on Consumer Price Index and Employment Cost Index per Highway Safety
Manual guidance.
Packet Pg. 234
11
112016 Traffic Safety Report
September 2016
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 non-
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.
2394200117912243255089678993417693120209828061474152415711407174023615734674171146508480226633454358544887437594746864124619552934399552261620
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
8000
CitationsYear
Hazardous Citations Total Citations
Packet Pg. 235
11
122016 Traffic Safety Report
September 2016
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 362 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 2016 the Police Department
arrested 401 people for DUI. Half (50%) of the DUI arrests involved drivers who
were between 18 and 25 years old and over three-quarters (80%) were between
the 18 and 35 years old.
50%
30%
9%
11%
2016 DUI Arrests by Age
18-25
26-35
36-45
Over 46457480396502410304312412331339248213241256377445 393401100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
500
550
DUI ArrestsYear
Packet Pg. 236
11
132016 Traffic Safety Report
September 2016
Citations by Vehicle Code Section 2015
The following chart depicts the distribution of vehicle code citations by type for
2016.
Insurance related
(§16000‐17714)
19%
Distraction and
Driving Offenses
(§23100‐23135)
18%
Speed (§22348‐
22413)
19%
Stop Sign
(§22450‐
22456)…
Driver's License
related (§12500‐
15325)
11%
Traffic Control Devices
(§21350‐21468)
9%
Bicycle Violation
(§21200‐21212)
4%
Right side of Roadway
(§21650‐21664)
3%
Turning & Signals
(§22100‐22113)
2%
Failure to Yield
(§21800‐21809)
2%
Pedestrian Violation
(§21949‐21971)
2%
Packet Pg. 237
11
142016 Traffic Safety Report
September 2016
Ongoing Activities to Make Our Streets Safer
Completed/Planned Safety Projects & Programs
Transportation safety has always been a priority for the City. Each year the
Public Works Department implements traffic safety improvement through a
variety of programs and projects. These improvements are usually stand-alone
projects, but are often included in other City CIP projects or as part of individual
land development projects. Table 2 below identifies notable traffic safety
improvements that were completed recently or planned for implementation in the
near future.
Table 2: Completed or Planned Transportation Safety Projects
Location Project Description
Traffic Signal Improvements
Marsh & Santa Rosa
Monterey & Grand
Monterey & Santa Rosa
Install Flashing Yellow Left-Turn Arrows.
Implementation planned for fall of 2016.
Monterey & Santa Rosa Implemented Advanced Pedestrian Phasing.
Foothill & Broad
Santa Rosa & Mill
California & Mill
Upgraded signal indications from 8” to 12”.
Monterey & Osos Construction to be completed in February 2018.
Citywide Updated traffic signal timings to provide sufficient bicycle
clearance intervals.
Pedestrian & Bicycle Improvements
Highland & Ferrini Install bike slot through median to allow left-turn movements
for bicyclists. To be completed summer 2016.
Higuera & Marsh Lighted Crosswalks Replace downtown lighted crosswalks on Higuera and
Marsh Streets. To be completed fall of 2016.
Santa Rosa Green Bike Lanes* Installed green bike lanes on Santa Rosa Street between
Montalbon and Walnut Streets.
Broad & Orcutt Installed green bike lane extension through intersection.
Roadway Improvements
Higuera Street, 500-700 Block Reconfigured on-street parking stalls that do not conform to
current City Standards.
Median at South & Parker Constructed permanent median along South Street at
Parker Street, replacing the temporary median installed in
2014. Completed in spring of 2016.
Broad & Upham Crosswalk Upgrade uncontrolled crossing at Broad & Upham with
enhanced flashers (rapid rectangular flashing beacons) and
pavement markings.
Signing & Striping Improvements
Morro & Pacific Two-way stop-control orientation reconfigured.
Broad & Orcutt Striping on NB approach improved.
Chorro & Peach Lane reconfigurations to Chorro Street implemented
between Mill and Walnut.
Packet Pg. 238
11
152016 Traffic Safety Report
September 2016
Location Project Description
Highland Drive Centerline striping added as part of 2016 roadway
resurfacing project.
Sight Distance Improvements
Cerro Romauldo & Ferrini Installed parking restriction.
Cerro Romauldo & La Canada Installed parking restriction.
Cerro Romauldo & Santa Lucia Installed parking restriction.
Other Projects/Programs
Fixilini NTM Construction Construct permanent traffic diverter at Fixilini Street & Iris
Street intersection. Completed in spring 2016.
South Chorro NTM Test Project Install temporary neighborhood traffic circles at Chorro &
Islay, Chorro & Church and Chorro & High. Completed in
winter of 2016.
*Project recommended in previous Traffic Safety Report
Traffic Safety Education Campaigns
Between City-led efforts and activities led by local partners, such as Bike SLO
County and SLOCOG/Rideshare, there are a multitude of ongoing traffic safety
education and outreach campaigns provided to the community of San Luis
Obispo each year. 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.
Bicycle Rodeo
The City hosts a hands-on bicycle training class targeting youth teaching
bicycle skills & operations.
Pedestrian Halloween Safety Campaign
The City provides reflective Halloween bags with safety tips to local
schools free of cost.
Impaired Driver Offender Classes
City 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.
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.
Packet Pg. 239
11
162016 Traffic Safety Report
September 2016
Child Car Seat Instruction & Assistance
The City provides child safety seat installation and inspection free of cost.
Channel 20 Public Safety Announcements
Bicycle Safety Posters
City of SLO Partnerships:
Bike SLO County
Safety Education Courses
Elementary School Safety Assemblies
Safety Brown Bag Lunch at Participating Businesses
SLOCOG/SLO Rideshare
Safe Routes to School Program
Perception of Transportation Safety – Utilizing Public Input
While the Traffic Safety Program has proven to be a useful tool for identifying
citywide collision trends and prioritizing locations for safety improvement projects,
the process relies on collisions to
occur and be recorded by the City
Police Department. An inherent
limitation with this process is that
locations that may have perceived
safety or comfort issues for road users
are not identified by City staff unless
actual incidents are shown in the
collision data. For locations such as a
crossing where drivers fail to yield to
pedestrians, or a traffic signal where
bicyclists are not given sufficient
green time to comfortably pass
through the intersection, these issues
may not be highlighted unless
residents submit a specific complaint
or an actual collision occurs.
To improve the ability of City staff to appropriately consider locations where the
transportation safety or comfort concerns are perceived by the public, the City
Public Works Department is in the process of developing an interactive public
input map where users can pinpoint locations and provide comments describing
safety concerns that they have observed. The New York City Department of
As part of their Vision Zero program, the NYCDOT uses an online
transportation safety public input map to allow citizens to identify
problem locations in the city.
Packet Pg. 240
11
172016 Traffic Safety Report
September 2016
Transportation developed a similar tool as part of their Vision Zero program to
solicit public input on various safety concerns throughout the city. Ultimately, this
perception map would be utilized by the City of San Luis Obispo to complement
the existing Traffic Safety Program to develop a more holistic understanding of
the transportation safety and mobility needs off all our road users.
Packet Pg. 241
11
182016 Traffic Safety Report
September 2016
2016 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 2016 collisions in the City occurred at intersections, with
70% 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 2016 are shown on the map in Figure 1. All
pedestrian and bicycle collisions reported in 2015 are shown on the maps in
Figure 2 and Figure 3, respectively.
High-collision intersections are shown in Figure 4, while high-collision roadway
segments are shown in Figure 5.
Packet Pg. 242
11
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
Tank Farm Rd
B
r
o
a
d
S
t
J
o
h
n
s
o
n
A
v
e
Madonna RdS Higuera StFoothill Blvd
S
a
n
t
a
R
o
s
a
S
t
C
a
l
i
f
o
r
n
i
a
B
l
v
d
Monterey StS Higuera StChorro StL
o
s
O
s
o
s
V
a
l
l
e
y
R
d Laurel LnC
h
o
r
r
o
S
t
Ramona Dr
South St
O
r
c
u
t
t
R
d
FIGURE 12016 CITYWIDE COLLISIONS
2016 Traffic Safety Report
O
Severe Injury Collision
1 Collision
2 - 3 Collisions
4 - 6 Collisions
7 - 10 Collisions
Legend
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
Fatal Collision!(
Packet Pg. 243
11
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
Tank Farm Rd
B
r
o
a
d
S
t
J
o
h
n
s
o
n
A
v
e
Madonna RdS Higuera StFoothill Blvd
S
a
n
t
a
R
o
s
a
S
t
C
a
l
i
f
o
r
n
i
a
B
l
v
d
Monterey StS Higuera StChorro StL
o
s
O
s
o
s
V
a
l
l
e
y
R
d Laurel LnRamona Dr
South St
O
r
c
u
t
t
R
d
B
r
o
o
k
p
i
n
e
Tank Farm Rd
PradoHigueraMarsh B
r
o
a
d
C
h
o
r
r
o
O
s
o
s
M
o
r
r
oPeach
FIGURE 22016 CITYWIDE PEDESTRIAN COLLISIONS
2016 Traffic Safety Report
O
Severe Injury Collision
1 Collision
2 - 3 Collisions
4 - 6 Collisions
7 - 10 Collisions
Legend
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
Fatal Collision!(
Packet Pg. 244
11
!(
!(
!(
!(
Tank Farm Rd
B
r
o
a
d
S
t
J
o
h
n
s
o
n
A
v
e
Madonna RdS Higuera StFoothill Blvd
S
a
n
t
a
R
o
s
a
C
a
l
i
f
o
r
n
i
a
B
l
v
d
Monterey StS Higuera StChorro StL
o
s
O
s
o
s
V
a
l
l
e
y
R
d Laurel LnC
h
o
r
r
o
S
t
Ramona Dr
South St
Or
c
u
t
t
R
dGrand AveHigueraMarshB
r
o
a
d
S
t
O
s
o
s
C
h
o
r
r
o
Orcutt
Prado
FIGURE 32016 CITYWIDE BICYCLE COLLISIONS
2016 Traffic Safety Report
O
Severe Injury Collision
1 Collision
2 - 3 Collisions
4 - 6 Collisions
7 - 10 Collisions
Legend
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
Fatal Collision!(
Packet Pg. 245
11
222016 Traffic Safety Report
September 2016
Most Common Collision Types and Factors
As shown in the figure below, broadside and rear-end collisions were by far the
most common type of collisions reported in 2016, representing 34% and 30%,
respectively, of the total recorded incidents.
As shown below, broadside and rear-end collisions were also the most common
type of injury collision reported in 2016, representing 32% and 33% of total
recorded injury collisions. While collisions involving a vehicles with pedestrians
represent only 6% of total collisions in 2016, they account for 13% of injury
collisions and collisions involving both pedestrians and bikes make nearly 33% of
severe injury collisions. Thus, mitigating these crash types offers the greatest
potential for reducing the number of serious injury and fatal incidents.
24%
(118)
30%
(143)
20%
(94)12%
(23)6%
(29)
5%
(27)2%
(10)1%
(7)
0%
10%
20%
30%
Broadside Rear End Sideswipe Hit Object Vehicle/
Pedestrian
Head-On Other Overturned
Type of Collision
Collisions by Type
(482 Total)
X% = % of Total Collisions
(Y) = Total Number of
Collisions
32%
(63)
33%
(65)
9%
(18)
5%
(9)13%
(26)
3%
(5)2%
(4)
3%
(6)
0%
10%
20%
30%
Broadside Rear End Sideswipe Hit Object Vehicle/
Bicycle
Vehicle/
Pedestrian
Head-On Other
Type of Collision
Injury Collisions by Type
(196 Total)
Packet Pg. 246
11
232016 Traffic Safety Report
September 2016
The most common factors attributed to recorded collisions in 2016 are
summarized in Table 3 below. Improper turning movements and speeding
represent the most prevalent factors in overall collisions and injury collisions. DUI
collisions represented 10% of all reported collisions, but DUI along with Unsafe
speed ranks as the most prevalent factor attributed to severe injury and fatal
collisions.
Table 3: Primary Collision Factors
Factor Rank %
All Collisions
Improper Turning 1 23%
Unsafe Speed 2 20%
Unsafe Starting or Backing 3 12%
Traffic Signal/Sign Violation 4 10%
DUI 5 9%
Injury Collisions
Improper Turning 1 21%
Unsafe Speed 2 19%
Automobile Right-of-Way Violation 3 11%
Traffic Signal/Sign Violation 4 10%
DUI 5 6%
Severe Injury & Fatal Collisions
Unsafe Speed 1 25%
DUI 2 25%
Improper Turning 3 13%
Unsafe Lane Change 4 13%
Other 5 13%
The table below lists the pedestrian collisions by type recorded in 2016, as well
as the party at fault. As shown in the table, motorist failure to yield during various
movements were the most frequent types of reported pedestrian collisions. The
large majority (90%) of pedestrian collisions were the result of motorist fault.
Table 4: Pedestrian Collisions by Type
Pedestrian Collision Type No.%Party at Fault %
Cyclist on Sidewalk 1 5% Driver 90%
Motorist Failed to yield 16 80% Pedestrian 5%
Motorist Failed to Stop 1 5% Cyclist 5%
Motorist Backing 1 5%
Motorist Improper Turn 1 5%
Total 20 100%
Packet Pg. 247
11
242016 Traffic Safety Report
September 2016
The table below lists the bicycle collisions by type recorded in 2016, as well as
the party at fault. Cyclists losing control/hitting fixed objects and failing to yield
the right of way to the motorists, and motorist right-turn movements were the
most common types of bicycle collisions reported. About 60% of reported bicycle
collisions were the fault of the bicyclist.
Table 5: Bicycle Collisions by Type
Bicycle Collision Type No. % Party at Fault %
Cyclist Lost Control 11 22% Driver 40%
Cyclist Failed to Yield 6 16% Bicyclist 60%
Motorist Right-Turn 8 12%
Motorist Failed to Yield 5 12%
Motorist Left-Turn 2 10%
Cyclist Lane Change 1 6%
Cyclist Under the Influence 6 4%
Wrong-Way Cyclist 2 4%
Motorist Overtaking or Sideswipe 3 2%
Cyclist on Sidewalk 4 2%
Motorist Starting or Backing 1 2%
Cyclist no Light 1
Total 50 100%
Packet Pg. 248
11
252016 Traffic Safety Report
September 2016
High Collision Rate Locations – Pedestrians
Rank
Prev.
Year
Rank
Intersection Control 5 Yr.
Collisions
PH
Veh.
Vol
PH
Ped.
Vol
REV
1 NR Santa Rosa & Montalban SSSC 3 3,347 25 2,008
2 1 Santa Rosa & Walnut Signal 4 2,741 29 1,890
3 2 Santa Rosa & Olive Signal 4 3,436 39 1,762
4 3 Foothill & Santa Rosa Signal 4 4,126 106 778
5 5 Santa Rosa & Monterey Signal 5 2,166 227 239
6 NR Foothill & Carpenter SSSC 3 905 100 136
7 NR Broad & Higuera Signal 6 1,158 242 40
8 8 Marsh & Chorro Signal 3 1,507 988 26
9 NR Higuera & Chorro Signal 3 1,315 1,680 12
NR = Not Ranked
SSSC = Side Street Stop-Control
PH = Peak Hour
REV = Relative Exposure Value
Packet Pg. 249
11
262016 Traffic Safety Report
September 2016
Pedestrian Location Recommendations
Rank Intersection Control 5 Yr.
Collisions
PH
Veh.
Vol
PH
Ped.
Vol
REV
1 Santa Rosa & Montalban SSSC 3 3,347 25 2,008
Pattern: Turning traffic failing to yield to pedestrians.
Recommendation: Paint crosswalks across Montalban on both sides of Santa Rosa to more
clearly define the crosswalk and where vehicles should stop and wait.
2 Santa Rosa & Walnut Signal 4 2,741 29 1,890
Pattern: Turning traffic not yielding to pedestrians and unsafe pedestrian crossings.
Recommendation: Intersection under State jurisdiction. Forward to Caltrans for study and
continue to monitor in 2017.
3 Santa Rosa & Olive Signal 4 3,436 39 1,762
Pattern: Turning traffic failing to yield to pedestrians.
Recommendation: Intersection under State jurisdiction. Forward to Caltrans for study and
continue to monitor in 2017.
4 Foothill & Santa Rosa Signal 4 4,126 106 778
Pattern: Turning traffic failing to yield to pedestrians.
Recommendation: Intersection under State jurisdiction. Forward to Caltrans for study and
continue to monitor in 2017.
5 Santa Rosa & Monterey Signal 5 2,166 227 239
Pattern: Turning traffic failing to yield to pedestrians.
Recommendation: Yield to Pedestrian signs installed in April of 2011. Advanced Pedestrian
Phasing implemented in spring of 2016. Flashing Yellow Arrows were installed in late 2016.
No pedestrian collisions occurred after the installation of the Flashing Yellow Arrows.
Continue to monitor and report it 2017 Traffic Safety Report.
Packet Pg. 250
11
272016 Traffic Safety Report
September 2016
High Collision Rate Locations – Bicycles
Rank
Prev.
Year
Rank
Intersection Control 5 Yr.
Collisions
PH
Veh.
Vol
PH
Bike.
Vol
REV
1 2 Santa Rosa & Olive Signal 4 3,436 19 3,617
2 8 California & Monterey Signal 7 1,902 38 1,752
3 7 Foothill & Santa Rosa Signal 5 4,126 70 1,474
4 NR Broad & South Signal 3 3,350 41 1,226
5 4 California & 101 N/B Ramps SSSC 4 1,528 27 1,132
6 3 California & Taft SSSC 4 1,680 35 960
7 NR Grand & Mill SSSC 3 576 9 960
8 NR Madonna & Oceanaire Signal 3 2,292 36 955
9 11 Broad & Leff SSSC 3 1,017 16 953
10 9 California & Palm SSSC 4 957 30 638
11 10 California & Foothill Signal 3 2,041 145 211
NR = Not Ranked
AWSC = All-way Stop-Control
SSSC = Side-Street Stop-Control
PH = Peak Hour
REV = Relative Exposure Value
Packet Pg. 251
11
282016 Traffic Safety Report
September 2016
Bicycle Location Recommendations
Rank Intersection Control 5 Yr.
Collisions
PH
Veh.
Vol
PH
Bike.
Vol
REV
1 Santa Rosa & Olive Signal 4 3,436 19 3,617
Pattern: Vehicles travelling NB on Santa Rosa turning right are causing "right hook" collisions.
Recommendation: Green bike lane extensions through intersections installed along Santa
Rosa from Walnut to Montalban in August of 2015 and reinstalled in July 2016. Only collisions
in 2016 were due to red light violations. Continue to monitor in 2017.
2 California & Monterey Signal 7 1,902 38 1,752
Pattern: NB vehicle vs. NB bicyclist right-hook collisions.
Recommendation: Green bike lanes were reinstalled and only collisions in 2016 were red light
violations.
3 Foothill & Santa Rosa Signal 5 4,126 70 1,474
Pattern: No discernible pattern.
Recommendation: Intersection under State jurisdiction. Forward to Caltrans for study and
continue to monitor in 2017.
4 Broad & South Signal 3 3,350 41 1,226
Pattern: No discernible pattern
Recommendation: Continue to monitor in 2017.
5 California & 101 N/B Ramps SSSC 4 1,528 27 1,132
Pattern: Cyclists vs. NB motorists turning left onto HWY 101 ramp and/or coming from HWY
101 ramps.
Recommendation: Green bike lanes were installed and there were no collisions in 2016.
Continue to monitor.
Packet Pg. 252
11
292016 Traffic Safety Report
September 2016
High Collision Rate Locations – Arterial/Arterial Intersections
Rank
Prev.
year
Rank
Intersection Control Collisions Volume Rate*
1 NR Broad & Higuera Signal 4 12,349 0.887
2 5 Higuera & Chorro Signal 4 12,801 0.856
3 NR Marsh & Nipomo Signal 4 13,884 0.789
4 NR Higuera & Nipomo Signal 3 12,454 0.660
5 1 Santa Rosa & Monterey Signal 6 25,936 0.634
6 7 Higuera & Madonna Signal 7 31,323 0.612
7 3 Marsh & Broad Signal 3 18,300 0.449
8 10 Marsh & Osos Signal 3 18,516 0.444
9 NR Monterey & Johnson Signal 3 19,224 0.428
10 8 Foothill & Santa Rosa Signal 7 50,862 0.377
11 4 California & Monterey Signal 3 22,172 0.371
12 13 Los Osos Valley & Madonna Signal 5 38,267 0.358
13 NR Higuera & Los Osos Valley Signal 3 24,333 0.338
14 NR Broad & South Signal 4 36,846 0.297
15 NR
Los Osos Valley & 101 S/B On/Off
Ramp Signal 3 35,036 0.235
16 11 Madonna & 101 N/B On/Off Ramp Signal 3 35,450 0.232
NR = Not Ranked
Rate = Collision frequency per million vehicles entering the intersection
Packet Pg. 253
11
302016 Traffic Safety Report
September 2016
Arterial/Arterial Intersections Recommendations
Rank Intersection Control Collisions Volume Rate
1 BROAD & HIGUERA Signal 4 12,349 0.887
Pattern: Pedestrian being hit be turning vehicles.
Recommendation: A pedestrian lead time was implemented at this intersection. Pedestrian
collisions that in 2016 occurred before a pedestrian lead time had been implemented. Staff will
continue to monitor.
2 HIGUERA & CHORRO Signal 4 12,801 0.856
Pattern: No discernable pattern.
Recommendation: Continue to monitor in 2017.
3 MARSH & NIPOMO Signal 4 13,884 0.789
Pattern: Red light violations.
Recommendation: Upgrade traffic signal to include mast arms for each approach.
4 HIGUERA & NIPOMO Signal 3 12,454 0.660
Pattern: Red light violations.
Recommendation: Upgrade traffic signal to include mast arms for each approach.
5 SANTA ROSA & MONTEREY Signal 6 25,936 0.634
Pattern: Pedestrians being hit by turning vehicles.
Recommendation: A pedestrian lead time was implemented at this intersection. One pedestrian
collision occurred after the pedestrian lead time was implemented. Staff will continue to monitor.
Packet Pg. 254
11
312016 Traffic Safety Report
September 2016
High Collision Rate Locations – Arterial/Collector Intersections
Rank
Prev.
Year
Rank
Intersection Control Collisions Volume Rate
1 12 Higuera & High Signal 4 15,737 0.696
2 5 Foothill & Broad Signal 5 20,607 0.665
3 15 Madonna & Oceanaire Signal 4 26,049 0.421
4 4 Broad & industrial Signal 5 32,749 0.418
5 30 Santa Rosa & Mill Signal 3 22,165 0.371
NR = Not Ranked
SSSC = Side-Street Stop-Control
Rate = Collision frequency per million vehicles entering the intersection
Arterial/Collector Intersections Recommendations
Rank Intersection Control Collisions Volume Rate
1 Higuera & High Signal 4 15,737 0.696
Pattern: No discernible pattern.
Recommendation: Continue to monitor in 2017.
2 Foothill & Broad Signal 5 20,607 0.665
Pattern: Vehicles exiting Blackhorse driveway and failing to yield the right of way at signalized
intersection.
Recommendation: Evaluate signal and driveway modifications with adjacent development.
3 Madonna & Oceanaire Signal 4 26,049 0.421
Pattern: No discernible pattern.
Recommendation: Continue to monitor in 2017.
4 Broad & industrial Signal 5 32,749 0.418
Pattern: Rear end at red lights.
Recommendation: Upgrade and add signal indicators for more visibility. Investigate the installation of
officer assist red light enforcers. Continue to monitor.
5 Santa Rosa & Mill Signal 3 22,165 0.371
Pattern: Red light violations
Recommendation: Upgrade and add signal indicators for more visibility. Investigate the installation of
officer assist red light enforcers. Continue to monitor.
Packet Pg. 255
11
322016 Traffic Safety Report
September 2016
High Collision Rate Locations – Arterial/Local Intersections
Rank
Prev.
Year
Rank
Intersection Control Collisions Volume Rate
1 NR Marsh & Toro TWSC 3 7305 1.125
2 NR Higuera & Morro Signal 4 10164 1.078
3 NR Higuera & Bridge SSSC 4 17134 0.640
4 9 Higuera & Vachell SSSC 5 25347 0.540
5 8 Los Osos Valley & Calle Joaquin Signal 4 34085 0.322
6 NR Santa Rosa & Montalban SSSC 4 34338 0.319
7 NR Madonna & El Mercado Signal 3 28769 0.286
8 NR Broad & Sweeney TWSC 3 30358 0.271
9 10 Los Osos Valley & Froom Ranch Signal 3 37272 0.221
10 2 Santa Rosa & Olive Signal 3 40678 0.202
NR = Not Ranked
SSSC = Side-Street Stop-Control
Rate = Collision frequency per million vehicles entering the intersection
Packet Pg. 256
11
332016 Traffic Safety Report
September 2016
Arterial/Local Intersections Recommendations
Rank Intersection Control Collisions Volume Rate
1 Marsh & Toro TWSC 3 7305 1.125
Pattern: Stop sign violations from Toro.
Recommendation: Install advanced "STOP AHEAD" signing and striping. Targeted
enforcement and continue to monitor.
2 Higuera & Morro Signal 4 10164 1.078
Pattern: Drivers hitting vehicles while trying to parallel park.
Recommendation: Existing parking stalls currently meet City standard. No historical pattern -
continue to monitor.
3 Higuera & Bridge SSSC 4 17134 0.640
Pattern: Drivers being hit while crossing Higuera by vehicles that are "hidden" by traffic
stopped for signal.
Recommendation: Currently working with Caltans to widen Higuera between Bridge and Elks
Lane to install a two-way-left-turn-lane.
4 Higuera & Vachell SSSC 5 25347 0.540
Pattern: Drivers being hit while crossing Higuera by vehicles that are "hidden" by traffic
stopped for signal.
Recommendation: Paint "KEEP CLEAR" in intersection to increase visibility. Avila Ranch
development includes improvements at this intersection to restrict access to right in/right out
only.
5 Los Osos Valley & Calle Joaquin Signal 4 34085 0.322
Pattern: Red light violations and failure to yield right of way while making left turn into Calle
Joaquin.
Recommendation: Targeted enforcement and continue to monitor.
Packet Pg. 257
11
342016 Traffic Safety Report
September 2016
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
Local/Local Intersections
No Locations Ranked Under this Category
Packet Pg. 258
11
352016 Traffic Safety Report
September 2016
High Collision Rate Locations – Arterial Segments
Rank Prev.
Rank Segment Collisions
Ped-
Bike
Coll.
Vol.
Seg.
Length
(mi.)
Rate Location
1 5 Higuera 4 0 9,275 0.39 3.01 Nipomo to Marsh
2 NR Monterey 3 0 12,441 0.28 2.39 California to Grand
3 2 California 3 1 17,509 0.28 1.66 Foothill to Hathway
4 NR Foothill 3 0 17,227 0.30 1.61 SantaRosa to California
5 8 Los Osos Valley 10 1 30,988 0.59 1.50 Froom to Calle Joaquin
6 NR Madonna 6 1 16,772 0.50 1.96 SB Hwy 101 to Higuera
7 NR Marsh 3 0 10,994 0.52 1.44 Hwy 101 to Broa
8 NR Broad 3 0 22,944 0.39 0.92 Tank Farm to Fuller
9 NR Higuera 5 1 16,384 0.98 0.85 Madonna to Margarita
NR = Not Ranked
Rate = Collision frequency per million vehicle-miles traveled along segment
Packet Pg. 259
11
362016 Traffic Safety Report
September 2016
Arterial Segments Recommendations
Rank Segment Collisions Volume
Seg.
Length
(mi.)
Rate Location
1 Higuera 4 9,275 0.39 3.01 Nipomo to Marsh
Pattern: No discernable pattern.
Recommendation: Continue to monitor in 2017.
2 Monterey 3 12,441 0.28 2.39 California to Grand
Pattern: No discernable pattern.
Recommendation: Continue to monitor in 2017.
3 California 3 17,509 0.28 1.66 Foothill to Hathway
Pattern: No discernable pattern.
Recommendation: Continue to monitor in 2017.
4 Foothill 3 17,227 0.30 1.61 SantaRosa to California
PatternVehicles coming from 1050 Foothill (The SLO Student Living) driveway causing collisions on
Foothill.
Recommendation: Coordinate with The SLO Student Living facility to move their sign to the other side of
the driveway to improve sight distance of westbound traffic. Continue to monitor in 2017.
5 Los Osos Valley 10 30,988 .59 1.5 Froom to Calle Joaquin
Pattern: Collisions result of general traffic congestion including rear ends, merging violations, and cars
attempting to exit private driveways.
Recommendation: Several factors should begin to alleviate some of this congestion. The interchange
widening has already decreased congestion along this corridor. Recent striping changes should slow
traffic and provide more clear lane assignments. The Prado interchange in the City Master Plan will also
alleviate congestion in the long term. Continue to monitor in 2017.
Packet Pg. 260
11
372016 Traffic Safety Report
September 2016
High Collision Rate Locations – Collector Segments
There were no High Collision Rate Locations for Collectors
Packet Pg. 261
11
!(
!(
!(!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
Tank Farm Rd
B
r
o
a
d
S
t
J
o
h
n
s
o
n
A
v
e
Madonna Rd
Foothill Blvd
S
a
n
t
a
R
o
s
a
S
t
C
a
l
i
f
o
r
n
i
a
B
l
v
d
Monterey StS Higuera StChorro StLo
s
O
s
o
s
V
a
l
l
e
y
R
d
Laurel LnOr
c
u
t
t
R
d
South St
£¤101
High St
OceanaireHiguera StMarsh StO
s
o
s
S
tMill StMontalbanBroad StGrand AvePalm StC
h
o
r
r
o
Industrial
OliveSanta
Ro
sa
VachellS Higuera StBridge
M
o
r
r
o
B
r
o
a
d
N
i
p
o
m
o
Walnut
Calle Joaquin5
4
1
3
2
1
5
4
3
2
5
4
3
2
1
5
4
3
2
1
5
4 3
21
FIGURE 42016 HIGH COLLISION INTERSECTION LOCATIONS
2016 Traffic Safety Report
O
Note: Only top five ranked locations shown for each intersection type.
!(Arterial/Arterial Intersection
!(Arterial/Collector Intersection
!(Arterial/Local Intersection
!(Collector/Collector Intersection (0 in 2016)
Collector/Local Intersection (0 in 2016)
!(Pedestrian Collision Intersection
!(Bicycle Collision Intersection
Legend
Intersection Ranking#
!(
Packet Pg. 262
11
!(
!(
!(!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
Tank Farm Rd
B
r
o
a
d
S
t
J
o
h
n
s
o
n
A
v
e
Madonna Rd
Foothill Blvd
S
a
n
t
a
R
o
s
a
S
t
C
a
l
i
f
o
r
n
i
a
B
l
v
d
Monterey StS Higuera StChorro StLo
s
O
s
o
s
V
a
l
l
e
y
R
d
Laurel LnOr
c
u
t
t
R
d
South St
£¤101
High St
OceanaireHiguera StMarsh StO
s
o
s
S
tMill StMontalbanBroad StGrand AvePalm StC
h
o
r
r
o
Industrial
OliveSanta
Ro
sa
VachellS Higuera StBridge
M
o
r
r
o
B
r
o
a
d
N
i
p
o
m
o
Walnut
Calle Joaquin5
4
1
3
2
1
5
4
3
2
5
4
3
2
1
5
4
3
2
1
5
4 3
21
FIGURE 42016 HIGH COLLISION INTERSECTION LOCATIONS
2016 Traffic Safety Report
O
Note: Only top five ranked locations shown for each intersection type.
!(Arterial/Arterial Intersection
!(Arterial/Collector Intersection
!(Arterial/Local Intersection
!(Collector/Collector Intersection (0 in 2016)
Collector/Local Intersection (0 in 2016)
!(Pedestrian Collision Intersection
!(Bicycle Collision Intersection
Legend
Intersection Ranking#
!(
Packet Pg. 263
11
Tank Farm Rd
B
r
o
a
d
S
t
J
o
h
n
s
o
n
A
v
e
Madonna RdS Higuera StFoothill Blvd
S
a
n
t
a
R
o
s
a
S
t
Ca
l
i
f
o
r
n
i
a
B
l
v
d
Monterey StS Higuera StChorro StL
o
s
O
s
o
s
V
a
l
l
e
y
R
d Laurel LnC
h
o
r
r
o
S
t
Margarita
Br
o
a
d
S
tHigueraMarsh
FIGURE 52016 HIGH COLLISION RATE ROADWAY SEGMENTS
2016 Traffic Safety Report
O Legend
Roadway Segment Collisions
High Collision Rate Arterial Segments(> 0.85 collisions per million vehicle miles traveled)
!(
High Collision Rate Arterial Segments (Top 5 Ranked)(> 1.5 collisions per million vehicle miles traveled)
Packet Pg. 264
11
APPENDIX A
Collision Analysis Methodology
Packet Pg. 265
11
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.
Packet Pg. 266
11
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.
Packet Pg. 267
11
APPENDIX B
2016 Collision Diagrams
Packet Pg. 268
11
Pedestrian Intersections
Packet Pg. 269
11
SANTA ROSA & FOOTHILL
2012 - 2016
5 Crashes Pedestrian Intersection
[121121049][130205031][141206081][150623044]
[160624030]
(0) crashes could not be placed in this schematic
Straight
Stopped
Unknown
Backing
Overtaking
Sideswipe
Parked
Erratic
Out of control
Right turn
Left turn
U-turn
Pedestrian
Bicycle
Injury
Fatality
Nighttime
DUI
Fixed objects:
General Pole
Signal Curb
Tree Animal
3rd vehicle
Extra data
Pd' Programming, Inc. 1/17/2018
Crash Magic Online
Packet Pg. 270
11
SANTA ROSA & MONTALBAN (1)
2012 - 2016
3 Crashes Pedestrian Intersection
[160322044]
[160523034][160705078](0) crashes could not be placed in this schematic
Straight
Stopped
Unknown
Backing
Overtaking
Sideswipe
Parked
Erratic
Out of control
Right turn
Left turn
U-turn
Pedestrian
Bicycle
Injury
Fatality
Nighttime
DUI
Fixed objects:
General Pole
Signal Curb
Tree Animal
3rd vehicle
Extra data
Pd' Programming, Inc. 1/17/2018
Crash Magic Online
Packet Pg. 271
11
SANTA ROSA & MONTEREY (1)
2012 - 2016
5 Crashes Pedestrian Intersection
[120119061]
[130208016]
[150503059]
[160119018]
[160323058]
(0) crashes could not be placed in this schematic
Straight
Stopped
Unknown
Backing
Overtaking
Sideswipe
Parked
Erratic
Out of control
Right turn
Left turn
U-turn
Pedestrian
Bicycle
Injury
Fatality
Nighttime
DUI
Fixed objects:
General Pole
Signal Curb
Tree Animal
3rd vehicle
Extra data
Pd' Programming, Inc. 1/17/2018
Crash Magic Online
Packet Pg. 272
11
SANTA ROSA & OLIVE
2012 - 2016
4 Crashes Pedestrian Intersection
[130913058]
[140320027]
[151023057]
[151211082]
(0) crashes could not be placed in this schematic
Straight
Stopped
Unknown
Backing
Overtaking
Sideswipe
Parked
Erratic
Out of control
Right turn
Left turn
U-turn
Pedestrian
Bicycle
Injury
Fatality
Nighttime
DUI
Fixed objects:
General Pole
Signal Curb
Tree Animal
3rd vehicle
Extra data
Pd' Programming, Inc. 1/17/2018
Crash Magic Online
Packet Pg. 273
11
SANTA ROSA & WALNUT
2012 - 2016
4 Crashes Pedestrian Intersection
[121213009]
[140312026]
[141209011][150714029](0) crashes could not be placed in this schematic
Straight
Stopped
Unknown
Backing
Overtaking
Sideswipe
Parked
Erratic
Out of control
Right turn
Left turn
U-turn
Pedestrian
Bicycle
Injury
Fatality
Nighttime
DUI
Fixed objects:
General Pole
Signal Curb
Tree Animal
3rd vehicle
Extra data
Pd' Programming, Inc. 1/17/2018
Crash Magic Online
Packet Pg. 274
11
Bicycle Intersections
Packet Pg. 275
11
BROAD & SOUTH
2012 - 2016
2 Crashes Bicyclist at Intersection
[140707059][161230027](0) crashes could not be placed in this schematic
Straight
Stopped
Unknown
Backing
Overtaking
Sideswipe
Parked
Erratic
Out of control
Right turn
Left turn
U-turn
Pedestrian
Bicycle
Injury
Fatality
Nighttime
DUI
Fixed objects:
General Pole
Signal Curb
Tree Animal
3rd vehicle
Extra data
Pd' Programming, Inc. 1/17/2018
Crash Magic Online
Packet Pg. 276
11
CALIFORNIA & 101 N/B ON/OFF RAMP
2012 - 2016
5 Crashes Bicyclist at Intersection
[130124051][140710018][141107025][150121040][151012016](0) crashes could not be placed in this schematic
Straight
Stopped
Unknown
Backing
Overtaking
Sideswipe
Parked
Erratic
Out of control
Right turn
Left turn
U-turn
Pedestrian
Bicycle
Injury
Fatality
Nighttime
DUI
Fixed objects:
General Pole
Signal Curb
Tree Animal
3rd vehicle
Extra data
Pd' Programming, Inc. 1/17/2018
Crash Magic Online
Packet Pg. 277
11
CALIFORNIA & MONTEREY
2012 - 2016
7 Crashes Bicyclist at Intersection
[130528068][130911013][140117049][150205021][151015057][160329016][160413081](0) crashes could not be placed in this schematic
Straight
Stopped
Unknown
Backing
Overtaking
Sideswipe
Parked
Erratic
Out of control
Right turn
Left turn
U-turn
Pedestrian
Bicycle
Injury
Fatality
Nighttime
DUI
Fixed objects:
General Pole
Signal Curb
Tree Animal
3rd vehicle
Extra data
Pd' Programming, Inc. 1/17/2018
Crash Magic Online
Packet Pg. 278
11
SANTA ROSA & FOOTHILL
2012 - 2016
7 Crashes Bicyclist at Intersection
[121213062][130921069]
[140411033][140902061][150129089][150613067][151130051]
(0) crashes could not be placed in this schematic
Straight
Stopped
Unknown
Backing
Overtaking
Sideswipe
Parked
Erratic
Out of control
Right turn
Left turn
U-turn
Pedestrian
Bicycle
Injury
Fatality
Nighttime
DUI
Fixed objects:
General Pole
Signal Curb
Tree Animal
3rd vehicle
Extra data
Pd' Programming, Inc. 1/17/2018
Crash Magic Online
Packet Pg. 279
11
SANTA ROSA & OLIVE
2012 - 2016
5 Crashes Bicyclist at Intersection
[120814056][120925012][130705043][130924026][151013031](0) crashes could not be placed in this schematic
Straight
Stopped
Unknown
Backing
Overtaking
Sideswipe
Parked
Erratic
Out of control
Right turn
Left turn
U-turn
Pedestrian
Bicycle
Injury
Fatality
Nighttime
DUI
Fixed objects:
General Pole
Signal Curb
Tree Animal
3rd vehicle
Extra data
Pd' Programming, Inc. 1/17/2018
Crash Magic Online
Packet Pg. 280
11
Arterial/Arterial Intersections
Packet Pg. 281
11
BROAD & HIGUERA
2016
4 Crashes Within 75 ft from Intersection
[160131031][160309009][160607050][160713090]
(0) crashes could not be placed in this schematic
Straight
Stopped
Unknown
Backing
Overtaking
Sideswipe
Parked
Erratic
Out of control
Right turn
Left turn
U-turn
Pedestrian
Bicycle
Injury
Fatality
Nighttime
DUI
Fixed objects:
General Pole
Signal Curb
Tree Animal
3rd vehicle
Extra data
Pd' Programming, Inc. 1/19/2018
Crash Magic Online
Packet Pg. 282
11
CHORRO & HIGUERA
2016
4 Crashes Within 75 ft from Intersection
[160120009]
[160505061]
[160806018]
[160808039]
(0) crashes could not be placed in this schematic
Straight
Stopped
Unknown
Backing
Overtaking
Sideswipe
Parked
Erratic
Out of control
Right turn
Left turn
U-turn
Pedestrian
Bicycle
Injury
Fatality
Nighttime
DUI
Fixed objects:
General Pole
Signal Curb
Tree Animal
3rd vehicle
Extra data
Pd' Programming, Inc. 1/19/2018
Crash Magic Online
Packet Pg. 283
11
MARSH & NIPOMO
2016
4 Crashes Within 75 ft from Intersection
[160106055]
[160319058]
[160920011][161228043](0) crashes could not be placed in this schematic
Straight
Stopped
Unknown
Backing
Overtaking
Sideswipe
Parked
Erratic
Out of control
Right turn
Left turn
U-turn
Pedestrian
Bicycle
Injury
Fatality
Nighttime
DUI
Fixed objects:
General Pole
Signal Curb
Tree Animal
3rd vehicle
Extra data
Pd' Programming, Inc. 1/19/2018
Crash Magic Online
Packet Pg. 284
11
HIGUERA & NIPOMO
2016
3 Crashes Within 75 ft from Intersection
[160130043][160216038]
[160502050]
(0) crashes could not be placed in this schematic
Straight
Stopped
Unknown
Backing
Overtaking
Sideswipe
Parked
Erratic
Out of control
Right turn
Left turn
U-turn
Pedestrian
Bicycle
Injury
Fatality
Nighttime
DUI
Fixed objects:
General Pole
Signal Curb
Tree Animal
3rd vehicle
Extra data
Pd' Programming, Inc. 1/19/2018
Crash Magic Online
Packet Pg. 285
11
Santa Rosa & Monterey
2016
6 Crashes Within 75 ft from Intersection
[160119018]
[160207013]
[160323058]
[160430078][160524042][160906021](0) crashes could not be placed in this schematic
Straight
Stopped
Unknown
Backing
Overtaking
Sideswipe
Parked
Erratic
Out of control
Right turn
Left turn
U-turn
Pedestrian
Bicycle
Injury
Fatality
Nighttime
DUI
Fixed objects:
General Pole
Signal Curb
Tree Animal
3rd vehicle
Extra data
Pd' Programming, Inc. 1/19/2018
Crash Magic Online
Packet Pg. 286
11
Arterial/Collector Intersections
Packet Pg. 287
11
HIGUERA & HIGH
2016
4 Crashes Within 75 ft from Intersection
[160129099][160216067][160504052][160823056](0) crashes could not be placed in this schematic
Straight
Stopped
Unknown
Backing
Overtaking
Sideswipe
Parked
Erratic
Out of control
Right turn
Left turn
U-turn
Pedestrian
Bicycle
Injury
Fatality
Nighttime
DUI
Fixed objects:
General Pole
Signal Curb
Tree Animal
3rd vehicle
Extra data
Pd' Programming, Inc. 1/19/2018
Crash Magic Online
Packet Pg. 288
11
FOOTHILL & BROAD
2016
5 Crashes Within 75 ft from Intersection
[160227095]
[160314071]
[160522052]
[161013031]
[161103029]
(0) crashes could not be placed in this schematic
Straight
Stopped
Unknown
Backing
Overtaking
Sideswipe
Parked
Erratic
Out of control
Right turn
Left turn
U-turn
Pedestrian
Bicycle
Injury
Fatality
Nighttime
DUI
Fixed objects:
General Pole
Signal Curb
Tree Animal
3rd vehicle
Extra data
Pd' Programming, Inc. 1/19/2018
Crash Magic Online
Packet Pg. 289
11
MADONNA & OCEANAIRE
2016
4 Crashes Within 75 ft from Intersection
[160123019][160417020][160420079]
[161213087]
(0) crashes could not be placed in this schematic
Straight
Stopped
Unknown
Backing
Overtaking
Sideswipe
Parked
Erratic
Out of control
Right turn
Left turn
U-turn
Pedestrian
Bicycle
Injury
Fatality
Nighttime
DUI
Fixed objects:
General Pole
Signal Curb
Tree Animal
3rd vehicle
Extra data
Pd' Programming, Inc. 1/19/2018
Crash Magic Online
Packet Pg. 290
11
BROAD & INDUSTRIAL
2016
5 Crashes Within 75 ft from Intersection
[160138032][160305047][160711068][160727062][160819048](0) crashes could not be placed in this schematic
Straight
Stopped
Unknown
Backing
Overtaking
Sideswipe
Parked
Erratic
Out of control
Right turn
Left turn
U-turn
Pedestrian
Bicycle
Injury
Fatality
Nighttime
DUI
Fixed objects:
General Pole
Signal Curb
Tree Animal
3rd vehicle
Extra data
Pd' Programming, Inc. 1/19/2018
Crash Magic Online
Packet Pg. 291
11
SANTA ROSA & MILL
2016
3 Crashes Within 75 ft from Intersection
[160106021][160203033][161103090](0) crashes could not be placed in this schematic
Straight
Stopped
Unknown
Backing
Overtaking
Sideswipe
Parked
Erratic
Out of control
Right turn
Left turn
U-turn
Pedestrian
Bicycle
Injury
Fatality
Nighttime
DUI
Fixed objects:
General Pole
Signal Curb
Tree Animal
3rd vehicle
Extra data
Pd' Programming, Inc. 1/19/2018
Crash Magic Online
Packet Pg. 292
11
Arterial/Local Intersections
Packet Pg. 293
11
MARSH & TORO
2016
3 Crashes Within 75 ft from Intersection
[160227078]
[160827054]
[160906068]
(0) crashes could not be placed in this schematic
Straight
Stopped
Unknown
Backing
Overtaking
Sideswipe
Parked
Erratic
Out of control
Right turn
Left turn
U-turn
Pedestrian
Bicycle
Injury
Fatality
Nighttime
DUI
Fixed objects:
General Pole
Signal Curb
Tree Animal
3rd vehicle
Extra data
Pd' Programming, Inc. 1/19/2018
Crash Magic Online
Packet Pg. 294
11
HIGUERA & MORRO
2016
4 Crashes Within 75 ft from Intersection
[160327033][160509043][160916034][160917046]
(0) crashes could not be placed in this schematic
Straight
Stopped
Unknown
Backing
Overtaking
Sideswipe
Parked
Erratic
Out of control
Right turn
Left turn
U-turn
Pedestrian
Bicycle
Injury
Fatality
Nighttime
DUI
Fixed objects:
General Pole
Signal Curb
Tree Animal
3rd vehicle
Extra data
Pd' Programming, Inc. 1/19/2018
Crash Magic Online
Packet Pg. 295
11
HIGUERA & BRIDGE
2016
4 Crashes Within 75 ft from Intersection
[160303066][160303071][160422056][161208016](0) crashes could not be placed in this schematic
Straight
Stopped
Unknown
Backing
Overtaking
Sideswipe
Parked
Erratic
Out of control
Right turn
Left turn
U-turn
Pedestrian
Bicycle
Injury
Fatality
Nighttime
DUI
Fixed objects:
General Pole
Signal Curb
Tree Animal
3rd vehicle
Extra data
Pd' Programming, Inc. 1/19/2018
Crash Magic Online
Packet Pg. 296
11
HIGUERA & VACHELL
2016
5 Crashes Within 75 ft from Intersection
[160201056]
[160209060]
[160712011][160724043][160921028](0) crashes could not be placed in this schematic
Straight
Stopped
Unknown
Backing
Overtaking
Sideswipe
Parked
Erratic
Out of control
Right turn
Left turn
U-turn
Pedestrian
Bicycle
Injury
Fatality
Nighttime
DUI
Fixed objects:
General Pole
Signal Curb
Tree Animal
3rd vehicle
Extra data
Pd' Programming, Inc. 1/19/2018
Crash Magic Online
Packet Pg. 297
11
LOS OSOS VALLEY & CALLE JOAQUIN
2016
4 Crashes Within 75 ft from Intersection
[160116021]
[160921051]
[161023046]
[161027072]
(0) crashes could not be placed in this schematic
Straight
Stopped
Unknown
Backing
Overtaking
Sideswipe
Parked
Erratic
Out of control
Right turn
Left turn
U-turn
Pedestrian
Bicycle
Injury
Fatality
Nighttime
DUI
Fixed objects:
General Pole
Signal Curb
Tree Animal
3rd vehicle
Extra data
Pd' Programming, Inc. 1/19/2018
Crash Magic Online
Packet Pg. 298
11
2016 ANNUAL TRAFFIC SAFETY REPORTPublic Works and Police DepartmentOctober 2016102-06-2018 Item 11 - Staff Presentation
2910102311401256109712071089873866793683598619594570548531482400500600700800900100011001200130002-06-2018 Item 11 - Staff Presentation
3CITYWIDE INJURY & FATAL COLLISION TRENDS23325726429530130327223924923322822521017920019221217671041471213118788101279821150170190210230250270290310330Severe Inj. & FatalitiesNon-Severe Injuries22110432000312011101234502-06-2018 Item 11 - Staff Presentation
42437194124412627182524222426392423271015202530354045524645535550556159 5973696769635056503035404550556065707502-06-2018 Item 11 - Staff Presentation
5CITYWIDE PED & BIKE COLLISION TRENDSBIKES & PEDS• 16% of total collisions• 46% of severe injury & fatal collisions02-06-2018 Item 11 - Staff Presentation
6PRIMARY COLLISION FACTORSFactorRank%All CollisionsUnsafe Speed126%Improper Turning220%Unsafe Starting or Backing311%DUI410%Traffic Signal/Sign Violation59%02-06-2018 Item 11 - Staff Presentation
7CITYWIDE TRAFFIC CITATIONS457480396502410304312412331339248213241256377445393401100150200250300350400450500550239420011791224325508967899341769312020982806147415241571140717402361573467417114650848022663345435854488743759474686412461955293439955226162010002000300040005000600070008000YearHazardous CitationsTotal Citations02-06-2018 Item 11 - Staff Presentation
8WHERE ARE COLLISIONS OCCURRING?Santa Rosa/Hwy 1 (Caltrans)• 10% all collisions5 year totals • Top 3 intersections for Peds• 2 of top 3 intersections for Bikes02-06-2018 Item 11 - Staff Presentation
9WHERE ARE COLLISIONS OCCURRING?02-06-2018 Item 11 - Staff Presentation
2016 New Project Locations1. Traffic Signal ModificationHiguera & NipomoMarsh & Nipomo2. Signing and stripingMarsh & ToroHiguera & VachellSanta Rosa & Montalban3. Intersection reconfigurationsFoothill & Apartment DriveFoothill & Broad02-06-2018 Item 11 - Staff Presentation
Vision Zero• No traffic-related loss of life or serious injury is acceptable• State of the practice policy• Data-driven analysis, focused engineering, education, enforcement, outreach1102-06-2018 Item 11 - Staff Presentation
RECOMMENDATION1. Receive the 2016 Traffic Safety Report and approve the recommended traffic safety measures.02-06-2018 Item 11 - Staff Presentation