HomeMy WebLinkAbout07-21-2022 ATC Agenda PacketCity of San Luis Obispo, Agenda, Planning Commission
Agenda
ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE
July 21, 2022
6:00 p.m. REGULAR MEETING Council Hearing Room
990 Palm Street
San Luis Obispo CA
The City has returned to in-person meetings. Virtual participation will not be
supported. For those in attendance, masks are strongly recommended.
PUBLIC COMMENT:
Public Comment during the meeting:
If you would like to provide public comment during the meeting you must attend in person.
Public Comment prior to the meeting can be submitted in the following ways:
• Mail or Email Public Comment
Received by 3pm on the day of meeting - Can be submitted via email to
advisorybodies@slocity.org or U.S. Mail to City Clerk at: 990 Palm St., San Luis
Obispo, CA 93401.
Emails sent after 3pm on the day of meeting – Can be submitted via email to
advisorybodies@slocity.org and will be archived/distributed to members of the
committee the day after the meeting. Emails will not be read aloud at the meeting.
• Verbal Public Comment
Received by 3pm on the day of the meeting - Call (805) 781-7164; state and spell
your name, the agenda item number you are calling about and leave your comment.
The verbal comments must be limited to 3 minutes. All voicemails will be forwarded
to committee members and saved as Agenda Correspondence. Voicemails will not be
played during the meeting.
During the meeting – You must attend the meeting in person
All comments submitted will be placed into the administrative record of the meeting.
If you have questions, contact the office of the City Clerk at cityclerk@slocity.org or (805) 781-
7100.
MISSION: The purpose of the Active Transportation Committee (ATC) is to provide oversight
and policy direction on matters related to bicycle and pedestrian transportation in San Luis Obispo
Active Transportation Committee Agenda July 21, 2022 Page 2
and its relationship to bicycling and walking outside the City.
CALL TO ORDER: Chair Russell Mills
ROLL CALL: Committee Members Lea Brooks (vice chair), Jill Caggiano, Francine Levin,
Russell Mills (chair), Kimmie Nguyen, Jonathan Roberts, Nathan Stong
OATH OF OFFICE: Jill Caggiano
PUBLIC COMMENT: At this time, people may address the Committee about items not on the
agenda. Persons wishing to speak should come forward and state their name and address.
Comments are limited to three minutes per person. Items raised at this time are generally referred
to staff and, if action by the Committee is necessary, may be scheduled for a future meeting.
CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES
1. Minutes of the Regular Meeting on May 19, 2022
PRESENTATION ITEMS
2. 2018 & 2019 TRAFFIC SAFETY REPORT
(WHEELER – 80 MINUTES)
See staff report in the agenda packet.
COMMENT AND DISCUSSION
3. Committee Member Updates (5 minutes)
4. Staff Updates (20 minutes)
a. South Higuera Complete Streets Project Grant Application
b. Federal Safe Streets for All Grant
c. Parklet and Sidewalk Dining Ordinance
d. Goal Setting for FY 2023-25 Financial Plan
e. Agenda Forecast
ADJOURNMENT
The next Regular Meeting of the Active Transportation Committee is scheduled for
Thursday, September 15, 2022, at 6:00 p.m.
Active Transportation Committee Agenda July 21, 2022 Page 3
ATTACHMENTS
1. DRAFT Minutes of the May 19, 2022 Regular Meeting
The City of San Luis Obispo wishes to make all of its public meetings accessible to the
public. Upon request, this agenda will be made available in appropriate alternative formats to
persons with disabilities. Any person with a disability who requires a modification or
accommodation in order to participate in a meeting should direct such request to the City Clerk’s
Office at (805) 781-7100 at least 48 hours before the meeting, if possible. Telecommunications
Device for the Deaf (805) 781-7107.
Agenda related writings and documents are available online or for public inspection at the Public
Works Department, 919 Palm Street, SLO. Meeting audio recordings can be found at the following
web address:
https://opengov.slocity.org/WebLink/Browse.aspx?id=60965&dbid=0&repo=CityClerk
Minutes – Active Transportation Committee Meeting of May 19, 2022 Page 1
Minutes - DRAFT
ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE
Thursday, May 19, 2022 1
Regular Meeting of the Active Transportation Committee 2
3
CALL TO ORDER 4
5
A Regular Meeting of the San Luis Obispo Active Transportation Committee was called to order 6
on Thursday, May 19, 2022 at 6:00 p.m., in the Council Hearing Room located at 990 Palm Street, 7
San Luis Obispo, California, by Chair Mills. 8
9
ROLL CALL 10
11
Present: Committee Members Lea Brooks, Timothy Jouet, Francine Levin, Russell Mills 12
(chair), Kimmie Nguyen, Jonathan Roberts, and Nathan Stong 13
14
Absent: None 15
16
Staff: Active Transportation Manager Adam Fukushima, and Recording Secretary Lareina 17
Gamboa 18
19
OATH OF OFFICE: Lea Brooks, Francine Levin, Kimmie Nguyen 20
21
PUBLIC COMMENT ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA 22
Myron Amerine 23
24
--End of Public Comment-- 25
26
APPROVAL OF MINUTES 27
28
1. Review Minutes of the Active Transportation Committee Meeting of March 17, 2022: 29
ACTION: UPON MOTION BY COMMITTEE MEMBER JOUET, SECONDED BY 30
COMMITTEE MEMBER STONG, CARRIED 7-0, to approve the Minutes of the Active 31
Transportation Committee Meeting of March 17, 2022, as presented. 32
33
Public Comment 34
None. 35
36
--End of Public Comment-- 37
38
BUSINESS ITEMS 39
40
2. Officer Elections 41
The committee voted on Chair and Vice Chair positions. 42
43
DRAFT Minutes – Active Transportation Committee Meeting of May 19, 2022 Page 2
Public Comment 44
None. 45
46
--End of Public Comment-- 47
48
ACTION: UPON MOTION BY COMMITTEE MEMBER BROOKS, SECONDED BY 49
COMMITTEE MEMBER STONG, CARRIED 7-0, to appoint Russell Mills as chair. 50
51
ACTION: UPON MOTION BY COMMITTEE MEMBER ROBERTS, SECONDED BY 52
COMMITTEE MEMBER NGUYEN, CARRIED 7-0, to appoint Lea Brooks as vice-chair. 53
54
3. Permanent Parklet Program 55
Active Transportation Manager Fukushima provided a PowerPoint presentation and 56
responded to Committee inquiries. 57
58
Public Comment 59
Myron Amerine 60
61
--End of Public Comment-- 62
63
ACTION: UPON MOTION BY COMMITTEE MEMBER BROOKS, SECONDED BY 64
COMMITTEE MEMBER NGUYEN, CARRIED 7-0, to recommend that staff, when 65
moving forward with the permanent parklet program, take into consideration the following 66
comments made by the committee: 67
● Bike parking should be consistently configured as bike corrals, visible and 68
accessible from the street, using Peak-style rack. Parklet-associated bike parking 69
should be in addition to normally required bike parking, not as a replacement for 70
such parking. Adequate clearance is needed between a bike corral and the curb stop 71
placed in an adjacent parking space. 72
73
● Reflective material should be applied to planters or other objects placed in the one-74
foot clear zone adjacent to traffic and bike lanes. 75
76
● Special attention will be necessary for parklets near intersections and pedestrian 77
ramps, to ensure adequate sight-lines for pedestrians crossing the street and to 78
provide adequate space for bicyclists merging into traffic and transitioning from 79
walking to riding, and vice versa. The distances specified in the draft plan (fifteen 80
and ten feet, respectively) seem barely adequate. 81
82
● A vertical clearance of 7’ should be maintained at all times for all objects placed in 83
pedestrian areas (would include bike corrals). 84
85
● A minimum width of pedestrian travel, contiguous with the pedestrian pathways on 86
each side of property (e.g., p. 14), should be maintained at all times. 87
88
● Regular and periodic inspection and enforcement will be necessary to prevent 89
DRAFT Minutes – Active Transportation Committee Meeting of May 19, 2022 Page 3
business and patrons from encroaching into required clearance areas. 90
91
COMMENT AND DISCUSSION 92
93
4. Committee Member Updates 94
5. Staff Updates 95
a. South Higuera Complete Streets Project Grant Application 96
b. 1101 Monterey Street Development Sidewalk Widening 97
c. Agenda Forecast 98
99
ADJOURNMENT 100
101
The meeting was adjourned at 7:53 p.m. The next Regular Active Transportation Committee 102
meeting is scheduled for Thursday, July 21, 2022 at 6:00 p.m., in the City Council Hearing Room, 103
990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California. 104
105
106
APPROVED BY THE ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE: XX/XX/2022 107
108
109
City of San Luis Obispo, Agenda, Planning Commission
Active Transportation Committee
AGENDA REPORT ITEM 2
DATE: July 21, 2022
FROM: Bryan Wheeler, Transportation Planner / Engineer
Adam Fukushima, Active Transportation Manager
SUBJECT: 2018 & 2019 Traffic Safety Report
Recommendation:
Receive a report on the 2018 & 2019 Traffic Safety Report and provide comment as it relates to
bicycle and pedestrian transportation.
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 and is a tool assessing the City’s progress in achieving Vision
Zero, a goal to reduce and eliminate sever injuries and deaths on our streets. The latest edition of
the Annual Traffic Safety Report (TSR) includes the years 2018 and 2019 and was received by the
City Council on March 15, 2022. See the TSR in Attachment A. The TSR is now coming to the
Active Transportation Committee to provide an update on the Program and to receive any input
the Committee would like to provide as it pertains to active transportation.
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 community. 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,
Active Transportation Committee Agenda Item 2, July 21, 2022 Page 2
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
analysis 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 strategies 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 is conducted of each location.
Discussion
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 as shown in the
following graphs .
Active Transportation Committee Agenda Item 2, July 21, 2022 Page 3
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 (as defined in the California Vehicle Code),
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.
Active Transportation Committee Agenda Item 2, July 21, 2022 Page 4
The tables below summarize the high-ranking locations for bicycle and pedestrian improvements
identified in the 2018-19 TSR.
Active Transportation Committee Agenda Item 2, July 21, 2022 Page 5
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 total fatal collisions, an average of 2.7 per year. Of these eight fatal collisions, five
involved pedestrians and two involved bicyclists hit by vehicles.
Active Transportation Committee Agenda Item 2, July 21, 2022 Page 6
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, including 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 about routine traffic violations.
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 –Upcoming Refinements to TSR Procedures
While the City’s Traffic Safety Program and corresponding Annual TSR have proven effective at
reducing overall collisions 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 high and receive focused analysis due to a
random spike in minor collisions, while another intersection may never reach a high rank if
Active Transportation Committee Agenda Item 2, July 21, 2022 Page 7
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.
For these reasons, staff will be making 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 and fatal collisions. The changes include the
following:
1. Reporting Cycle: Transitioning from a comprehensive report every two years to a
comprehensive report every five years but with fact sheets published annually
showing overall trends and status of safety project implementation
2. Method for Ranking High Collision Locations: Transitioning from ranking based
on total collision rate (# of collisions per vehicle volume served) to a weighted
ranking factor system, applying more weight to locations with injuries and
fatalities
3. Systematic Safety Analysis: Transitioning from a mostly reactive analysis of
previous collision trends to more focus on systematic safety analysis, identifying
common factors and street design characteristics related to injury and fatal
collisions as well as a greater emphasis on proactive strategies such as corridor-
wide street design measures to reduce vehicle speeds and conflicts with
vulnerable users
Active Transportation Plan
The TSR has a direct relationship to the priority actions listed under the Safety Goal of the
Active Transportation Plan (See Attachment B). This includes on-going priorities such as
continuing the Vision Zero policies and safety programs of the City (the TSR implements this
priority action). It includes implementation of the City’s streetlight installation program as well
as using innovative designs to lower traffic speeds and public outreach activities on safety. In
addition, in the fall of 2022, the City will begin the community engagement process for the
upcoming FY 2023-25 Financial Plan. As part of that effort, staff will provide an update on the
monitoring and evaluation of the Active Transportation Plan performance measures (including
the safety benchmark) and present it to the ATC for input.
Questions the Committee May Want to Consider for Discussion
In order to help facilitate discussion and input on this item, the committee may want to consider
the following questions:
1. Does the committee have any questions about the methodology of the TSR especially
regarding how the top ranked locations for bicycle and pedestrian improvements were
identified?
2. Does the committee have any questions or input on the mitigations to the top ranked
collision locations?
Active Transportation Committee Agenda Item 2, July 21, 2022 Page 8
3. Of the top locations identified for bicycle and pedestrian improvements, are there ones
the committee would like to highlight so that staff can look for additional opportunities
for focused improvement?
4. Are there any questions or comments about the relationship of the TSR and its
relationship to the Safety Goal of the Active Transportation Plan?
The committee may have other questions or comments they may wish to present to staff.
Recommendation:
Receive a report on the 2018 & 2019 Traffic Safety Report and provide comment as it relates to
bicycle and pedestrian transportation.
Attachments
A – 2018 & 2019 Traffic Safety Report
B - Excerpt from the Active Transportation Plan
Public Works and Police Department
March 2022
City of San Luis Obispo
2018 & 2019 TRAFFIC
SAFETY REPORT
Item 2, Attach A, Page 1 of 60
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 ........................ 23
WHERE COLLISIONS ARE OCCURRING ........................................................................................... 23
HIGH COLLISION RATE LOCATIONS – PEDESTRIANS ....................................................................... 36
PEDESTRIAN RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................................................ 37
HIGH COLLISION RATE LOCATIONS – BICYCLES ............................................................................. 39
BICYCLE RECOMMENDATIONS ....................................................................................................... 40
HIGH COLLISION RATE LOCATIONS – ARTERIAL/ARTERIAL INTERSECTIONS ..................................... 41
ARTERIAL/ARTERIAL INTERSECTIONS RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................................. 42
HIGH COLLISION RATE LOCATIONS – ARTERIAL/COLLECTOR INTERSECTIONS ................................. 44
ARTERIAL/COLLECTOR INTERSECTIONS RECOMMENDATIONS ......................................................... 45
HIGH COLLISION RATE LOCATIONS – ARTERIAL/LOCAL INTERSECTIONS .......................................... 46
ARTERIAL/LOCAL INTERSECTIONS RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................. 47
HIGH COLLISION RATE LOCATIONS – COLLECTOR/COLLECTOR INTERSECTIONS .............................. 49
HIGH COLLISION RATE LOCATIONS – COLLECTOR/LOCAL INTERSECTIONS ...................................... 49
LOCAL/LOCAL INTERSECTIONS ...................................................................................................... 49
HIGH COLLISION RATE LOCATIONS – ARTERIAL SEGMENTS............................................................ 50
ARTERIAL SEGMENTS RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................................... 51
HIGH COLLISION RATE LOCATIONS – COLLECTOR SEGMENTS ........................................................ 52
HIGH COLLISION RATE LOCATIONS – LOCAL SEGMENTS ................................................................ 52
Cover Photo: Joe Johnston, SLO Tribune, 2018
Item 2, Attach A, Page 2 of 60
APPENDIX A – COLLISION ANALYSIS METHODOLOGY
List of Figures
Figure 1: 2018 Citywide Collisions ...................................................................... 24
Figure 2: 2019 Citywide Collisions ...................................................................... 25
Figure 3: 2018 Citywide Pedestrian and Bike Collisions ..................................... 26
Figure 4: 2019 Citywide Pedestrian and Bike Collisions ..................................... 27
Figure 5: Citywide Uncontrolled Marked Pedestrian Crossings .......................... 33
Figure 6: 2018-19 High Collision Intersection Locations ..................................... 53
Figure 7: 2018-19 High Collision Rate Roadway Segments ............................... 54
Item 2, Attach A, Page 3 of 60
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. While 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
Item 2, Attach A, Page 4 of 60
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
Item 2, Attach A, Page 5 of 60
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
Item 2, Attach A, Page 6 of 60
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
Item 2, Attach A, Page 7 of 60
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.
Item 2, Attach A, Page 8 of 60
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.
Item 2, Attach A, Page 9 of 60
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 32-5123
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.
Item 2, Attach A, Page 10 of 60
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
Item 2, Attach A, Page 11 of 60
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 30
1
2
3
4
5
Fatal CollisionsYear
Fatal Collisions
Item 2, Attach A, Page 12 of 60
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
Item 2, Attach A, Page 13 of 60
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
Item 2, Attach A, Page 14 of 60
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.
Item 2, Attach A, Page 15 of 60
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.
Item 2, Attach A, Page 16 of 60
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.
5734674171146508480226633454358544887437594746864121619552934399552261626551500340902394200117912243255089678993417693120209828061474152415711407174023612936336925940
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
8000
199920002001200220032004200520062007200820092010201120122013201420152016201720182019Total Citations Hazardous Citations
Item 2, Attach A, Page 17 of 60
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
Item 2, Attach A, Page 18 of 60
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%
Item 2, Attach A, Page 19 of 60
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%
Item 2, Attach A, Page 20 of 60
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.
Item 2, Attach A, Page 21 of 60
• 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.
Item 2, Attach A, Page 22 of 60
Table 2 below identifies notable traffic safety improvements that were completed
recently or planned for implementation in the near future.
Item 2, Attach A, Page 23 of 60
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.
Item 2, Attach A, Page 24 of 60
Location Project Description
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
Item 2, Attach A, Page 25 of 60
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.
Item 2, Attach A, Page 26 of 60
Figure 1: 2018 Citywide Collisions
Item 2, Attach A, Page 27 of 60
Figure 2: 2019 Citywide Collisions
Item 2, Attach A, Page 28 of 60
Figure 3: 2018 Citywide Pedestrian and Bike Collisions
Item 2, Attach A, Page 29 of 60
Figure 4: 2019 Citywide Pedestrian and Bike Collisions
Item 2, Attach A, Page 30 of 60
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
Item 2, Attach A, Page 31 of 60
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%
Item 2, Attach A, Page 32 of 60
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 turns.
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.
Item 2, Attach A, Page 33 of 60
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 crossings 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.
Item 2, Attach A, Page 34 of 60
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.
Item 2, Attach A, Page 35 of 60
Figure 5: Citywide Uncontrolled Marked Pedestrian Crossings
Item 2, Attach A, Page 36 of 60
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
Item 2, Attach A, Page 37 of 60
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.
Item 2, Attach A, Page 38 of 60
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
Item 2, Attach A, Page 39 of 60
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
Item 2, Attach A, Page 40 of 60
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.
Item 2, Attach A, Page 41 of 60
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
Item 2, Attach A, Page 42 of 60
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).
Item 2, Attach A, Page 43 of 60
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
Item 2, Attach A, Page 44 of 60
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
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
Item 2, Attach A, Page 45 of 60
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
Item 2, Attach A, Page 46 of 60
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
Item 2, Attach A, Page 47 of 60
Arterial/Collector Intersections Recommendations
Rank Intersection Control Collisions Volume Rate*
1 SANTA ROSA & PISMO AWSC 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
Item 2, Attach A, Page 48 of 60
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
Item 2, Attach A, Page 49 of 60
Arterial/Local Intersections Recommendations
Rank Intersection Control Collisions Volume Rate*
1 CALIFORNIA & PALM1 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.
8 HIGUERA & VACHELL TWSC 4 23,179 0.473
Item 2, Attach A, Page 50 of 60
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.
Item 2, Attach A, Page 51 of 60
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
Item 2, Attach A, Page 52 of 60
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
Item 2, Attach A, Page 53 of 60
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.
Item 2, Attach A, Page 54 of 60
High Collision Rate Locations – Collector Segments
No Locations Ranked Under this Category
High Collision Rate Locations – Local Segments
No Locations Ranked Under this Category
Item 2, Attach A, Page 55 of 60
Figure 6: 2018-19 High Collision Intersection Locations
Item 2, Attach A, Page 56 of 60
Figure 7: 2018-19 High Collision Rate Roadway Segments
Item 2, Attach A, Page 57 of 60
APPENDIX A
Collision Analysis Methodology
Item 2, Attach A, Page 58 of 60
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 safety 1.
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.
Item 2, Attach A, Page 59 of 60
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.
Item 2, Attach A, Page 60 of 60
Goal 2: SafetyActive transportation is safe.Even in the absence of actual collision history, just the perception of an unsafe or stressful journey is often enough justification for many San Luis Obispo residents to travel by car, even for short trips. The City’s Active Transportation Plan identifies globally-proven policies, programs, and physical improvements to make active transportation modes safer and more viable for all community members.Priority Actions2.1 Vision Zero. Continue implementation of the City’s Vision Zero policies and traffic safety programs to develop a transportation system that will reduce, and ultimately eliminate, fatal and severe injury crashes within the City of San Luis Obispo.2.2 Streetlights. Continue the implementation of the City’s new streetlight installation program, prioritizing new lighting installations at locations with higher pedestrian and bicycle activity or where known safety concerns exist.2.3 Use Innovative Designs. Apply bicycling and pedestrian design policies and guidance as presented in this Plan, as well as applicable state and federal design guidelines, innovative guidance from organizations such as the National Association of City Transportation Officials (NACTO) and Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE), and the Dutch CROW Manual.2.4 Look for Opportunities to Reduce Traffic Speeds. 2.4a - Support design strategies that encourage traffic speedsof 20 mph on residential and local streets and 15-20 mphalong neighborhood greenways and within school zones.Explore development of a city ordinance to authorize postingspeed limits as low as 15 mph in designated school zonesconsistent with California Vehicle Code procedures.2.4b - Within the legal framework of the California Vehicle Code,apply best practices for setting posted speed limits on collectorand arterial streets that improve safety for all users, using guidelinessuch as Caltrans’ California Manual for Setting Speed Limits, andNACTO’s City Limits: Setting Safe Speed Limits on Urban Streets.Apply strategies and innovative best practices to reduce speedson arterial and collector streets where collision patterns exist.2.5 Safe Routes to School. Develop a focused Safe Routes to School Improvement Plan for all K-12 schools in San Luis Obispo to reduce safety and mobility barriers to walking and biking to school.2.6. Construction Zones. Improve enforcement of City’s traffic control requirements around construction zones to minimize impacts to pedestrian and bicycle accessibility and safety during construction activities.Other Important Actions2.7 Safety Education. Continue funding safety education programs that encourage safe behaviors for all roadway users.2.8 Community Health Partnerships. Partner with community health groups to address safety concerns as expressed by citizen input related to walking and biking.VISION & GOALS25 Item 2, Attach B, Page 1 of 1