Click for next page ( 360


The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement



Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.

OCR for page 359
Appendix D Review of Automated Technologies for Speed Management and Enforcement William D. Glauz Midwest Research Institute Speeding (traveling faster than the posted speed limit) is apparently becoming more and more common throughout the world, particu- larly excessive speeding [exceeding the speed limit by 20 mph (32 km/h) or more]. Many countries have recognized this and have undertaken comprehensive programs to reduce speeding and the traf- fic crashes to which it contributes. Such programs are in existence in Victoria and New South Wales, Australia; British Columbia and Ontario, Canada; the Netherlands; Sweden; and perhaps others. In the United States, speed management and speed enforcement are the responsibilities of the states and communities, although the 359

OCR for page 359
MANAGING SPEED 360 federal government can pass legislation requiring the states to take cer- tain actions concerning speeding and traffic. Most recently, for exam- ple, the federal government canceled its mandatory maximum speed limit of 55 mph (89 km/h), allowing the states to set higher limits. Speeding, especially excessive speeding, is apparently becoming more common in the United States. On September 19, 1997, the newspaper USA TODAY reported the results of a study it performed on some 2.3 million speeding tickets from 11 states between 1991 and 1996. The study indicates that the percentage of tickets written for speeding over 80 mph (129 km/h) rose from 15 percent in 1991 to 25 percent in 1996. Of course, many speed limits increased during this interval. The study also reported on speeding levels as a function of the local speed limit. In 55-mph (89-km/h) zones, the percentage of tickets written for speeding in excess of 75 mph (121 km/h) rose from 21 to 27 percent during this interval, and the percentage exceeding 80 mph (129 km/h) in these zones rose from 7 to 9 per- cent. In 65-mph (105-km/h) zones the percentage exceeding 85 mph (137 km/h) rose from 8 to 10 percent. It is not stated whether the level of enforcement, as indicated by the total number of speeding tickets written, had changed during this period, or whether the changes observed were statistically significant, although on the basis of the sample sizes they undoubtedly were. Activities in other countries indicate that speeds and speed-related crashes can be reduced by a combination of speed management and speed enforcement programs. Speed management programs alone were ineffective due to the lack of concomitant enforcement, and speed enforcement programs alone were ineffective because they were too manpower intensive and thus costly. The use of automation has been shown to increase effectiveness, especially for enforcement. In this review the experiences of automated speed management technologies and programs around the world are examined. Then a brief overview of automated photo radar technologies is given, fol- lowed by a presentation of experiences with automated speed enforcement, mostly using photo radar. Finally, some of the political and legal issues associated with the use of photo radar are discussed, and thoughts on the most effective types of implementation of auto- mated speed management and speed enforcement are expressed.

OCR for page 359
361 Review of Automated Technologies for Speed Management and Enforcement EXPERIENCE WITH AUTOMATED SPEED MANAGEMENT Speed management may be defined as a process designed to control or affect vehicle speeds, both the average speeds and the dispersion of speeds. Automated speed management is a speed management process that uses automation in some form (usually electronics and other advanced technologies). Police enforcement (with or without automation) is not included in this discussion of speed management; police enforcement (with automation) is treated as a special topic later in this review. This section of the review is organized as follows. First, the earlier work in speed management is discussed, focusing on automated speed management. Two major types of automated speed manage- ment are identified: speed monitoring and warning systems, and vari- able speed limit systems. Following the review of the early work, more recent experiences of speed monitoring and warning systems and, on a country-by-country basis, of variable speed limit systems are examined. Finally, another type of automated speed management system, drone radar, is reviewed. Early Experience An early study of speed management systems was reported by Parker and Tsuchiyama (1985). They examined a broad spectrum of speed manage- ment concepts, ranging from static methods such as fixed maximum and minimum speed limit signs to the automated highways of the future. In between are a number of methods mentioned only to illustrate the scope of the options presented; they are not discussed further in this paper: Dummy police cars, Oversized speed limit signs, Painting or striping to create illusions of narrower roads or increasing speed, Speed bumps and rumble strips, Economic approaches (e.g., tolls increased if elapsed time is too short), Legislative approaches (e.g., prohibition of radar detectors), and

OCR for page 359
MANAGING SPEED 362 In-vehicle devices ranging from current cruise control systems to future speed-limit-sensing engine governors. Of all the methods examined, two are most relevant to this review-- speed monitoring and warning systems, and variable speed limits. Parker and Tsuchiyama (1985) state, "The purpose of speed warn- ing systems is to continuously monitor vehicle speeds and provide speed-related informational or warning messages to aid motorists in the selection of appropriate travel speeds." Two general types of sys- tems are distinguished--those providing group speed information and those providing overspeed or underspeed warnings. The group speed information systems display average vehicle speeds on the theory that motorists will then check their speedome- ters and adjust their speeds to more closely match the average. The warning systems provide individualized information to vehicles trav- eling too fast or too slow in the hope that the drivers will respond appropriately by either slowing down or speeding up. The researchers identified only two group speed information sys- tems existing at the time of their study, one in Calgary, Canada, and one on the "Maine Facility." Both displayed data that were updated frequently as real-time data were collected. Effectiveness data were available only from the Canadian facility. They found that whereas average speeds were reduced only 4 percent, the proportion of drivers traveling more than 10 mph (16 km/h) over the speed limit decreased 35 percent, speed violations were reduced 40 percent, and total crashes were reduced 57 percent. Moreover, public reaction was positive. A number of overspeed and underspeed warning systems were identified in the United States, Canada, and the United Kingdom. Evaluation data were limited. Some sites had no data; the others indicated only modest reductions in average speeds [2 to 4 mph (3 to 6 km/h)] but greater reductions in percentages of speeding vehicles (15 to 24 percent). Parker and Tsuchiyama (1985) state, "The concept of variable speed limits involves setting minimum and maximum speed limits based on real-time monitoring of prevailing traffic and roadway con- ditions and using dynamic information displays to inform motorists of the appropriate limits." They go on to state that no existing sys-

OCR for page 359
363 Review of Automated Technologies for Speed Management and Enforcement tems (at that time, 1984) fulfilled that concept, but they then exam- ine the five existing systems that came closest to doing so: New Jersey Turnpike Control System, United States; National Motorway Communication System, United Kingdom; Corridor Control System north of Marseilles, France; Motorway Control and Signaling System, the Netherlands; and Self-Sufficient Speed Control System, Germany. All five systems used speed and volume data. The English and Dutch systems used incident detection data along with speed and volume data. The German system used speed and volume data along with daylight (day/night) and rainfall (wet/dry). The English system required manual changing of the speed limits; the U.S. and French systems allowed manual override of the automated speed settings. The automated German system had many built-in backup features such as duplicate computers and message-lighting systems. Effectiveness data were very limited. The Germans believed that drivers perceived the displayed speed as a recommendation, not a limit; nevertheless they determined that the differences in speeds of consec- utive vehicles were decreased, as was the frequency of short headways, and there was a slight increase in the traffic flow rate. The British sys- tem produced larger speed reductions with lower speed restrictions, but the speed standard deviation remained constant at about one-seventh of the average speed. The U.S. system (the oldest of these five systems) was judged less sophisticated than the European systems in terms of backup capabilities and the ability to store historical data (which all the European systems had), which would be needed if enforcement were to accompany the use of variable speed limits. Additional technical details about these variable speed limit sys- tems are provided in a second report by Parker (1985). Speed Monitoring and Warning Systems Roqu and Roberts (1989) reported on experiments in Alabama, wherein an automated system collected data on traffic speeds a day at a time. After a day of collection, the percentage of vehicles exceeding

OCR for page 359
MANAGING SPEED 364 the speed limit was determined and displayed on variable message signs the next day. Both truthful and inaccurate results were dis- played, in accordance with an experimental design. The hope was that drivers would modify their speeds to provide better compliance than had been observed. No significant changes were observed. Casey and Lund (1993) examined the effectiveness of "mobile roadside speedometers" in reducing traffic speeds in California. The speedometer used an "undetectable" radar to measure speeds of indi- vidual vehicles, which the system displayed to the motorists. The sys- tem was deployed at five urban sites with speed limits from 30 to 45 mph (48 to 72 km/h) and at five school zones with speed limits of 25 mph (40 km/h). Significant but modest speed reductions were noted at three of the five urban sites while the system was in place, but the reductions disappeared the following week. Statistically significant speed reductions were found at all five school zone sites, with greater reductions at sites with higher prior average speeds. The researchers also examined the longer-term effectiveness of this system by cou- pling it with downstream enforcement. They found that adding downstream enforcement greatly increased the longevity of the sys- tem's effectiveness. Garber and Patel (1994) reported on a very thorough evaluation of the use of variable message signs designed to control driver speeds in work zones. They deployed the system at seven work zone sites in Virginia and collected extensive driver response data. The system determined individual vehicle speeds with radar and then, in accor- dance with the experimental design, either did nothing (baseline) or displayed one of four predetermined messages for high-speed drivers: Excessive Speed Slow Down, High Speed Slow Down, Reduce Speed in Work Zone, or You Are Speeding Slow Down. Data were collected by roadway sensors and by videotape and were analyzed in detail using formal statistical methods. Effectiveness was judged by the reduction in the percentage of speeders (typically about 50 percent before implementation of the speed warning system), the

OCR for page 359
365 Review of Automated Technologies for Speed Management and Enforcement percentage of vehicles speeding by 5 mph (8 km/h), the percentage of vehicles speeding by 10 mph (16 km/h) or more, average speeds, 85th percentile speeds, and speed variance. All of the warning messages were effective, although the last was the most effective and the sec- ond was second-most effective. Oei (1996), in a comprehensive report of experiences with auto- matic speed management in the Netherlands, discusses two types of installations, one to reduce speeds in school zones and one to reduce speeds on two-lane rural roads. For the school zones, three types of speed signs were used: a permanent 31-mph (50-km/h) sign, a 31- mph sign illuminated only during school hours, and a 31-mph sign that flashed only when an approaching vehicle was exceeding the speed limit. The latter was the most effective, reducing average speeds by 3 mph (5 km/h) and producing a theoretical reduction in crashes of 24 to 65 percent. The two-lane road installations covered stretches from 5 to 9 mi (8 to 15 km) in length and cost an average of U.S. $40,000. They consisted of static signs indicating the speed limits [minimum of 37 and maximum of 50 mph (60 and 80 km/h, respectively)], an automated, illuminated, switchable sign saying "60- 80" displayed for vehicles outside of these limits, and downstream automatic signs saying "You Are Speeding" (in Dutch) for vehicles still exceeding the speed limit. Evaluations indicated significant reductions in average speeds, 85th percentile speeds, percentages of speeders, and the standard deviation of speeds. Variable Speed Limit Systems In this section findings on the use of variable speed limit systems are presented alphabetically by country. Australia Coleman et al. (1996), in their report on speed management and enforcement technology in four countries, include a brief discussion of the use of automated speed management in Australia. At the time of their investigation (1995), although Australia had a major speed man- agement program in place, only one automated component was doc-

OCR for page 359
MANAGING SPEED 366 umented. A fog warning and speed advisory system was installed south of Sydney. The speed of a vehicle passing through a detector is displayed to the next vehicle as an advisory speed. A prototype of the system installed in 1993 notified motorists traveling more than 6 mph (10 km/h) over the speed limit. That system resulted in a 60 percent reduction in the number of speeders, but the effect was temporary; there was no reduction in speeding 1,000 ft (300 m) downstream. Finland Pilli-Sihvola and Taskula (1996) reported on a Finnish system to warn drivers of black ice and other hazards with a variable speed limit system. Installed on a section of roadway 9 mi (14 km) long, the system includes 36 variable speed limit signs. Sensors detect ice or snow, wet pavement, heavy rain, fog, and high winds. The speed limit is varied between 50, 62, and 75 mph (80, 100, and 120 km/h), depending on conditions. A 3-year evaluation was under way at the time of the report (1996). Germany Coleman et al. (1996) reported that Germany is a world leader in the application of advanced traffic management technology, with 70 traf- fic management facilities in operation on the autobahns at the time of the study (1995) and another 60 planned to be in operation by the end of 1997. These systems are located where hazardous conditions exist, especially hazardous environmental conditions. A typical sys- tem has variable speed limit signage that displays not only the cur- rent speed limit but also its reason. Reasons such as construction, fog, crash ahead, ice, and high winds are included. The researchers report a crash reduction of about 25 percent. The cost of these systems ranged from U.S. $0.6 million to $1.1 million per mile ($0.4 million to $0.7 million per kilometer). The Netherlands Wilkie (1997), in her review of variable speed limit systems, included a discussion of the Dutch speed management system installed in

OCR for page 359
367 Review of Automated Technologies for Speed Management and Enforcement 1992 on the A2 highway between Amsterdam and Utrecht, which was still in operation in 1997. The system covers a 12-mi (20-km) length of highway with three interchanges, with signs spaced at intervals of about 0.6 mi (1 km). The main reason for the installation was frequent congestion at one of the interchanges and resultant traf- fic backups. The normal speed limit is 75 mph (120 km/h), but lower limits of 56, 43, or 31 mph (90, 70, or 50 km/h) are displayed depending on sensed traffic conditions. The goal was not so much to reduce average speeds as to narrow speed dispersion. Evaluation found that the system was well received by motorists, speeds were effectively reduced in all lanes, the number and severity of shock waves were reduced, the percentage of small headways was reduced, the average headway increased, and the average roadway occupancy increased. More details on this system are provided by van den Hoogen and Smulders (1994). Coleman et al. (1996) report on a fog advisory system and on the more extensive Motorway Signaling System in the Netherlands. The fog advisory system reduces the speed limit from 62 mph (100 km/h) to 50 or 37 mph (80 or 60 km/h), depending on visibility. The sys- tem proved to be effective, reducing average speeds by 5 to 6 mph (8 to 10 km/h) (though the speeds remained higher than the displayed speed limit), reducing the standard deviation of speeds, and reducing the percentage of vehicles with very small headways. The Motor Signaling System, begun in 1981, in 1995 covered about 120 mi (200 km) of highways and is planned to cover 560 mi (900 km) by 2000. Displayed speed limits are reduced depending on traffic and weather conditions. Evaluations indicate a reduction of 50 percent in sec- ondary crashes (when speed limits are reduced because of a crash ahead) and a decrease of 5 to 15 percent in lost travel time. The sys- tem costs are U.S. $1.1 million to $1.6 million per mile ($0.7 million to $1.0 million per kilometer). United Kingdom Wilkie (1997) reported on British work on the "Controlled Motorway Pilot Scheme." The Department of Transport established this system on a 14-mi (23-km) section of M25 outside of London;

OCR for page 359
MANAGING SPEED 368 it was extended in 1995. The system was designed to minimize stop- and-go driving during heavy traffic (one-way peak volumes reach 10,000 vehicles per hour). The system senses volume and reduces the speed limit from 70 to 60 mph (113 to 97 km/h), then further to 50 mph (80 km/h), as volume thresholds are reached. The speed limits are displayed on changeable message signs spaced at 0.6-mi (1-km) intervals. (The speed limits can also be changed manually by the police.) The speed limits are enforced by photo radar. Formal evalu- ation is under way by the Transportation Research Laboratory, but preliminary results indicate that police are impressed by the system and the obedience of the drivers, compliance is about 98 percent, lane usage is more even, and average headways have increased. United States Wilkie (1997) included information on two early installations in the United States. One was on the John C. Lodge freeway in Detroit. It was installed in 1962 and dismantled sometime after 1967. The sys- tem was intended to display variable speed limits and lane-control information in response to congestion ahead. It was an advisory sys- tem, not an enforceable system. It consisted of 21 variable speed signs at 1,600-ft (500-m) intervals, 11 lane control locations at 2,600-ft (800-m) intervals, and 14 television camera locations at 1,300-ft (400-m) intervals. Evaluation found that aspects of the system, espe- cially the lane-control information, were confusing to drivers, and that the variable speed limits did not induce any changes in driver speeds. In 1986 the U.S. Federal Highway Administration contracted with Farradyne Systems, Inc., to develop a variable speed limit system (VSLS). The system is described in a report by Sumner and Andrews (1990). It appears that the VSLS was well designed and was intended to be flexible in its modes of operation and in the environmental con- ditions it could sense and act upon. It was estimated that future sys- tems could be built and installed for $30,000 per station, plus $20,000 for the central hardware. The system's software and hard- ware were tested in the field in Albuquerque and found to be operat- ing correctly. The system was then turned over to the state of New

OCR for page 359
369 Review of Automated Technologies for Speed Management and Enforcement Mexico for longer-term evaluation. Whether any further reports are available on the operation of this system is unknown. Some limited applications of VSLSs are under development as part of the Intelligent Transportation Systems program. For example, the Nevada Department of Transportation in conjunction with the U.S. Department of Transportation is developing a VSLS that reflects actual traffic speeds and weather conditions on a stretch of Interstate highway that is frequently subject to adverse weather. Deployment of the system will be accompanied by a monitoring effort to assess effects on driving speeds and crash experience. Drone Radar The use of drone (unattended, continuously operating) radar to con- trol driver speeds has been studied in the United States by several authors, including Pigman et al., whose early work was reported in 1989. Two of the most recent reports are those of Streff et al. (1995) and Freedman et al. (1994). Streff et al. (1995) installed drone radars in 1993 at two freeway sites and one construction zone in Michigan and compared their effectiveness with traditional police enforcement and with no enforcement. Speeds were measured at the drone location and upstream and downstream of the drone location. Overall effects of the drone radar were small [typically 1.5-mph (2.4-km/h) decrease with drone radar present] but statistically significant due to the very large sample sizes. The effects were about the same as those with police presence. Some reductions in the speeds of the highest-speed vehicles, especially trucks [reductions from 30 to 70 percent of trucks exceeding the speed limit by 10 mph (16 km/h) at some sites and times], were found. It was determined that about 5 percent of the cars had radar detectors and that between 19 percent (day) and 28 percent (night) of the trucks had radar detectors. Freedman et al. (1994) did a similar study in Missouri, comparing speeds of traffic with and without the presence of operational drone radar. Twelve sites were investigated, covering rural construction zones, rural and urban temporary work zones, and rural and urban locations with high crash rates. They also found only modest changes in average

OCR for page 359
MANAGING SPEED 380 operational, was well known for its intensity and the fact that it was in a fairly large community. It ran for 4 years until it ended in 1992 for several reasons (judicial and public support eroded, the equipment vendor went out of business, police manpower was reduced, and the cost of the program was excessive). At the present time the following U.S. communities are using ASE: Portland, Oregon; Scottsdale, Mesa, Tempe, and Paradise Valley, Arizona; National City and perhaps San Jose, California; and Fort Collins and Commerce City, Colorado (personal communica- tion, A. Tuton, 1997). (Canadian locations with current ASE pro- grams include British Columbia and Edmonton, Calgary, and Lethbridge, Alberta.) Boulder and Denver, Colorado, have issued RFPs to establish ASE programs. Generally, the U.S. programs did not receive as much evaluation as many of the foreign programs did. However, some data are presented by Blackburn and Gilbert (1995). In Paradise Valley (the longest run- ning of any U.S. ASE program) the annual number of crashes went from 460 in 1986, the year before the program was begun, to 224 in 1992, the last year data were available to the authors. In West Valley, Utah, the annual number of crashes fell from 2,130 to 1,710 after 2 years of ASE use. The police of National City, California, reported a 26 percent decline in crashes during the first 10 months of photo radar use. The Scottsdale ASE program was begun in 1996. American Traffic Systems (1997) reports that crashes declined from 181 to 120 during comparable 10-week periods before and after enforce- ment. Similarly, an 81 percent drop in speeding violations, from about 6.6 percent to about 1.2 percent as a percent of all vehicles, was reported in Commerce City, Colorado (American Traffic Systems 1997). Midwest Research Institute provided an evaluation of the ASE program in Riverside, California (Blackburn and Bauer 1995). Data were obtained from 13 test sites in the community by the police department. Unfortunately, broad generalizations are not possible because the amount of data collected varied greatly from site to site and at different times of the day; at some sites no data were obtained after the beginning of enforcement and at some sites there

OCR for page 359
381 Review of Automated Technologies for Speed Management and Enforcement were no before-enforcement data. Following are some of the findings: Average speeds were changed by an amount ranging from a decrease of 14 mph (23 km/h) (at a school zone) to an increase of 1.1 mph (1.8 km/h). The 85th percentile speed (calculated as the mean plus one stan- dard deviation) was reduced at all sites and times of day for which data are available by a maximum of 16.4 mph (26.4 km/h) (at the school zone) and a minimum of 0.2 mph (0.3 km/h). The percentage of vehicles exceeding the speed limits by various amounts was examined. For example, the percentage speeding by 11 mph (18 km/h) or more decreased in all but 1 of the 39 site/time combinations for which data were available. Again, the largest reduc- tion was at the school zone, where, in the a.m. peak, for example, the percentage dropped from 77.7 to 19.9. [At this 25-mph (40-km/h) speed zone, nearly everyone was speeding before the ASE program; some speeds of 70 to 80 mph (113 to 129 km/h) were recorded.] Reductions in crashes in Riverside were compared with those in a control city, Santa Ana. The monthly average of speed-related (by police report) fatal and injury crashes decreased by 5.3 in Riverside, while it increased by 2.4 in Santa Ana. The total number of speed- related crashes dropped by 14.2 per month in Riverside and increased by 1.1 per month in Santa Ana. The percentage reduction in speed-related fatal and injury crashes in Riverside was 14.7, whereas the comparable reduction in fatal and injury crashes judged not to be speed related was 18.1 per- cent. Similar results were obtained for total crashes. Finally, it is of interest to report the number of evaluations of photo radar systems in the United States that stopped short of issu- ing speeding citations. Pilot tests of ASE equipment are reported by Blackburn and Gilbert (1995) in the early 1980s by state police agen- cies in Washington, Michigan, and New Jersey. Lynn et al. (1992) report on feasibility studies conducted in Virginia and Maryland, with the intent of ultimately installing such systems on the Capital Beltway (which has not happened).

OCR for page 359
MANAGING SPEED 382 SUMMARY OF LEGAL AND POLITICAL ISSUES ASSOCIATED WITH ASE A short selection of some of the more commonly discussed legal and political issues is presented here, with brief discussions of each. Much of this material is taken from Blackburn and Gilbert (1995). Constitutional Issues Issues such as right to privacy and illegal search and seizure have been raised from time to time. Many state and Supreme Court deci- sions have consistently found that the use of photo radar does not violate rights under the Fourth Amendment. Admissibility of Photographic Evidence Some have argued that photographs taken by photo radar should not be allowed as evidence in a courtroom. This issue has been addressed by a number of state supreme courts and appellate courts, and it was found consistently that photographic evidence of this type, if it can be shown to be authentic and competent, is admissible. Scientific Reliability The issue here is whether the photo radar equipment can be shown to be scientifically valid and reliable. In some countries the equip- ment (not just a sample, but every single device) must be tested peri- odically by a government testing agency and certified to be accurate. In the United States a formal set of standards for such equipment is under development and should be available soon (personal commu- nication, A. Tuton, 1997). Frontal Versus Rear Photographs There was much debate on this issue 15 years ago, and some contin- ues. The argument is that a frontal photograph is required to provide some identification of the driver. Others argue that such photographs

OCR for page 359
383 Review of Automated Technologies for Speed Management and Enforcement have occasionally created unpleasant repercussions if a motorist was shown in a potentially embarrassing situation. If the owner of the vehicle can be made liable for the speeding infraction (see next issue), then frontal photographs would not be necessary since it would only be necessary to identify the vehicle. A related issue is that some states do not require front license plates, so a frontal photograph would not identify the vehicle. In other states that require front plates, the police find that a significant fraction of vehicles (10 to 20 percent) do not display such plates. Therefore, they set up their photo radar with two cameras and manually take a second photo of the rear of the vehicle if the front plate is missing. It is also possible for an automatic system to routinely take both front and rear photos of detected speeders. Owner Liability In most jurisdictions where photo radar is used, the legal system makes the driver, not the owner, liable for the violation. Exceptions include Australia, the Netherlands, and Paradise Valley, Arizona, where the owner is held responsible (vicarious liability). Otherwise, the police can mail the registered owner the ticket and the owner has the option of paying the fine, identifying the driver, coming to the police station to view the photograph (most jurisdictions do not mail the photos), or contesting the ticket and going to court. Laws in some countries require owners to follow these steps; in others such as Germany they are voluntary, but the majority of owners pay the fine. Penalties In some jurisdictions the fines for speeding when detected by photo radar are modest, and the violations are considered civil (not crimi- nal) offenses. As such, they are treated much like parking tickets; this approach makes it easier for the jurisdiction to hold the owner vicar- iously liable. In many European countries and in Australia, the fines can be stiff (hundreds of dollars). Moreover, points may be assessed against the driver's record. It is not uncommon for countries to impose license suspension for excessive speeding [19 mph (30 km/h) over the limit, for example].

OCR for page 359
MANAGING SPEED 384 Manned Versus Unmanned Operation It is possible for photo radar to be operated in a totally automatic, unmanned mode. In this mode, a large spool of film is placed in the camera, the system is placed in a roadside box or cabinet, power is supplied, and the system then operates by itself until an officer comes to retrieve the film. With this mode, many boxes are usually installed at the locations to be used for speed enforcement, the locations being evident to the motorists. However, there are far fewer photo radar units than boxes, so the photo radar units are rotated among the boxes. This mode can be effective because the motorists do not know which boxes are active. Experience indicates that vandalism can be expected, however. Alternatively, a manned operation requires an officer to be present with the equipment. Some jurisdictions require this, so the officer can vouch for the operation and that the photographed vehicles were witnessed by the officer. The equipment can either be set up along- side the road on a stand or tripod or, more commonly, mounted in the back of a police van, enabling rapid mobility. Public Opinion The demise of a photo radar program is often the result of adverse public opinion being brought to the attention of the community offi- cials (city council, mayor, etc.), causing them to cancel the program. This happens not only in the United States but also on occasion in foreign countries. There have been only two formal surveys of public opinion about photo radar in North America in recent years. A well-publicized sur- vey by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety was conducted in 1989, using random digit dialing in two communities with ongoing photo radar programs, Paradise Valley, Arizona, and Pasadena, California, and in the surrounding areas (Freedman et al. 1990). There was great awareness of the ongoing programs in both commu- nities and in the surrounding areas. In all, 58 percent either approved or strongly approved of the program, with the residents of Paradise Valley and Pasadena more likely to approve than those in the nearby

OCR for page 359
385 Review of Automated Technologies for Speed Management and Enforcement communities. (However, the majority of all subpopulations approved, after removing those who had no opinion.) The percentage of those interviewed who strongly disapproved ranged from 12 percent in the two communities with active enforcement to 15 and 20 percent, respectively, in the surrounding areas of the two communities. Reasons given by those who disapproved were that the wrong person may be ticketed, it gives police an unfair advantage, it violates rights to privacy, it does not give the driver a chance to explain, and it is not effective in reducing speeds. A later survey was conducted in British Columbia by Zuo and Cooper (1991). Surveys of randomly selected drivers in British Columbia during the period 1988 to 1990 were conducted about red light cameras. Roughly 500 to 600 driver responses were obtained in telephone interviews in each of the 3 years. In 1989 and 1990, ques- tions about photo radar were added. The positive response to photo radar increased from 71 percent in 1989 to 74 percent in 1990, which was not statistically significant. Drivers who were against photo radar tended to be young to middle-aged males with two or more moving violations in the past 3 years and who tend to respond more aggressively to frustrating traffic situations. In a parallel survey in 1990, drivers were presented with a hypo- thetical situation where they were speeding to "keep up with traffic" (Zuo and Cooper 1991). If they received a ticket from a policeman using conventional enforcement, 39 percent felt that the ticket was unfair, and 51 percent said that it would make them angry. If they received the ticket because of photo radar enforcement, 45 percent said that it would be unfair and 60 percent said that it would make them angry. The authors conclude that "there are obviously a number of drivers whose attitude towards the cameras simply reflects their attitude towards enforcement in general." DEPLOYMENT STRATEGIES FOR ASE Automated Speed Monitoring and Warning Systems Experience with these systems indicates that they can be effective at selective locations, such as in school zones and work zones. They

OCR for page 359
MANAGING SPEED 386 must react to the speeds of individual vehicles. They must display messages dynamically, by flashing or giving appropriate messages. They must be enforceable speeds, not advisory speeds, and they must be backed up by enforcement, at least occasionally. Variable Speed Limit Systems These systems can be effective when installed at locations where the public senses that they are believable. Locations where there is fre- quent fog or traffic backups are prime candidates. (At a cost on the order of $1 million per installation, they must be used selectively.) Dynamically displaying the reason for a reduced speed limit is rec- ommended. The displayed speeds must be appropriate to the condi- tions of the moment and enforceable. Actual enforcement must accompany the reduced speed limit, at least some of the time, and must be accompanied by publicity about both the variable speed limit and the presence of enforcement. Automated Speed Enforcement ASE and, in particular, photo radar can be effective in detecting and convicting drivers traveling at excessive speeds, provided that enabling legislation that is supported by the politicians and the courts is in force. It is critical that public support be gained before the leg- islation is implemented. The public must be convinced that there is a safety problem, that high speeds are a primary cause of the problem, and that enforcement is aimed at only a small minority of drivers (the focus population of automated enforcement travel at very high speeds). If the public becomes convinced that ASE is being used to generate revenue, the program is doomed to failure. ASE should be used where there is a perceived speeding problem. Candidates include school zones (during hours when students are likely to be about), work zones (when there is actually work going on or where the road geometrics have been temporarily and radically modified), and known high-crash locations. Especially appropriate are high-crash locations where traditional police enforcement is not feasible due to lack of adequate shoulders, high traffic volumes, and

OCR for page 359
387 Review of Automated Technologies for Speed Management and Enforcement so forth. The installations must be publicized and defended. Signage upstream or downstream of the actual installation is often used to allay driver complaints of police unfairness. It must be understood that the purpose of the enforcement is to reduce high speeds, not to "catch" speeders. The ASE equipment should be used, at least initially, with a fairly high threshold--say, 20 mph (32 km/h) over the limit. It has been found that there are enough drivers with such speeds to keep the equip- ment, the police, and the courts busy. As the public becomes more used to the equipment, it may be possible to reduce the threshold. If a state, a community, or the nation decides on a major program to reduce speeding in general and not just at selected locations as part of a greater program to reduce serious crashes, then a wider deploy- ment of ASE would be in order. Either a large number of boxes or cabinets could be installed to house ASE equipment on a rotating basis or mobile equipment housed in police vans could be used. The public must be convinced of the importance of the program and know that they cannot predict where the equipment might be located on a day-by-day or hour-by-hour basis. The types of roads where such equipment is deployed should be determined on the basis of speed surveys; the road class in itself is not particularly important. Modern ASE equipment can easily be deployed to survey two or three lanes of traffic in one direction, perhaps more. If the jurisdic- tion is serious about the program, convictions should be accompanied not only by fines but also by points, and consideration should be given to license suspension if the violation is serious enough. REFERENCES Ali, S. Y., O. Al-Saleh, and P. A. Koushki. 1997. Effectiveness of Automated Speed- Monitoring Cameras in Kuwait. In Transportation Research Record 1595, Transportation Research Board, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., pp. 2026. American Traffic Systems. 1997. http://www.traffic.com (Oct.). Andersson, G., and G. Nilsson. 1997. Speed Limits, Speeds and Safety. In Speed Management and Enforcement, Swedish National Road and Transport Research Institute, Linkping, Sweden, June. Blackburn, R. R., and K. M. Bauer. 1995. Field Tests of Automated Speed Enforcement Programs. Final report, NHTSA Contract DTNH22-90-C-07290, April.

OCR for page 359
MANAGING SPEED 388 Blackburn, R. R., and D. T. Gilbert. 1995. NCHRP Synthesis of Highway Practice 219: Photographic Enforcement of Traffic Laws. Transportation Research Board, National Research Council, Washington, D.C. Cameron, M. H., A. Cavallo, and A. Gilbert. 1992. Crash-Based Evaluation of the Speed Camera Program in Victoria 19901991; Phases I and II. Accident Research Centre, Monash University, Victoria, Australia, Dec. Casey, S. M., and A. K. Lund. 1993. The Effects of Mobile Roadside Speedometers on Traffic Speeds. Accident Analysis and Prevention, Vol. 25, No. 5, pp. 627634. Coleman, J. A., et al. 1996. FHWA Study Tour for Speed Management and Enforcement Technology. FHWA-PL-96-006. Federal Highway Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation, Feb. Elvik, R. 1997. Effects on Accidents of Automatic Speed Enforcement in Norway. In Transportation Research Record 1595, Transportation Research Board, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., pp. 1419. Fitzpatrick, K. 1991. A Review of Automated Enforcement. Report FHWA/TX- 92/1232-5. Austin, Tex., Nov. Freedman, M., A. F. Williams, and A. K. Lund. 1990. Public Opinion Regarding Photo Radar. In Transportation Research Record 1270, Transportation Research Board, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., pp. 5965. Freedman, M., N. Teed, and J. Migletz. 1994. Effect of Radar Drone Operation on Speeds at High Crash Risk Locations. In Transportation Research Record 1464, Transportation Research Board, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., pp. 6980. Garber, N. J., and S. T. Patel. 1994. Effectiveness of Changeable Message Signs on Controlling Vehicle Speeds in Work Zones. Report FHWA/VA-95-R4. Virginia Transportation Research Council, Sept. Glauz, W. D., and R. R. Blackburn. 1980. Technology for Use in "Automated" Speed Enforcement. Report DOT-HS-805454. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation, June. Lamm, R., and J. H. Kloeckner. 1984. Increase of Traffic Safety by Surveillance of Speed Limits with Automatic Radar Devices on a Dangerous Section of a German Autobahn: A Long-Term Investigation. In Transportation Research Record 974, Transportation Research Board, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., pp. 816. Lynn, C. W., W. S. Ferguson, and N. J. Garber. 1992. Feasibility of Photo-Radar for Traffic Speed Enforcement in Virginia. In Transportation Research Record 1375, Transportation Research Board, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., pp. 11-16. Nilsson, G. 1992. Frsk med Automatisk Hastighetsvervakning 19901992 (Trials with Automatic Speed Surveillance 1990-1992) (in Swedish with English sum- mary). Report VTI 378. Swedish Road and Traffic Research Institute, Linkping, Sweden. Oei, H.. 1996. Automatic Speed Management in the Netherlands. In Transportation Research Record 1560, Transportation Research Board, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., pp. 5764.

OCR for page 359
389 Review of Automated Technologies for Speed Management and Enforcement Ontario Ministry of Transportation. 1995. Photo Radar Safety Evaluation Preliminary 4-Month Speed Results. Report SRO-101/95, Jan. Parker, M. R., Jr., and K. H. Tsuchiyama. 1985. Methods for Reducing Large Speed Differences in Traffic Streams, Volume I--Inventory of Methods. Report FHWA/RD- 85/103. Federal Highway Administration, U.S. Department of Transpor- tation, Aug. Parker, M. R., Jr. 1985. Methods for Reducing Large Speed Differences in Traffic Streams, Volume II--Final Report. Report FHWA/RD-85/104. Federal Highway Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation, Aug. Pedersen, K. S., and J. C. McDavid. 1994. The Impact of Radar Cameras on Traffic Speed: A Quasi-Experimental Evaluation. The Canadian Journal of Program Evaluation, Vol. 9, No. 1, pp. 5168. Pedersen-Handrahan, K. 1991. An Evaluation of the Radar Camera on Traffic Speed. Proceedings of the Canadian Multidisciplinary Road Safety Conference VII, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada, June. Pigman, J. G., K. R. Agent, J. A. Deacon, and R. J. Kryscio. 1989. Evaluation of Unmanned Radar Installations. In Transportation Research Record 1244, Transpor- tation Research Board, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., pp. 716. Pilli-Sihvola, Y., and K. Taskula. 1996. Mustaa Jt and Finland's Weather- Controlled Road. In Traffic Technology International `96, UK & International Press, Surrey, United Kingdom, pp. 204206. Rogerson, P., S. Newstead, and M. Cameron. 1994. Evaluation of the Speed Camera Program in Victoria 19901991. Phase 3 and Phase 4. Report 54. Accident Research Centre, Monash University, Victoria, Australia, Feb. Roqu, G. M., and M. C. Roberts. 1989. A Replication of the Use of Public Posting in Traffic Speed Control. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, Vol. 22, No. 3, Fall. Sinclair, G. I. 1996. Information from the Victoria, Australia, Traffic Camera Office. 1996. http://yarra.vicnet.net.au/~tco/html/ (Oct.). Streff, F. M., L. P. Kostyniuk, and C. Christoff. 1995. Effects of Drone Radar and Police Enforcement on Travel Speeds: Test on a 65 MPH Freeway and 55 MPH Construction Zone. Report UMTRI-95-22. University of Michigan Transportation Research Institute, June. Sumner, R. L., and C. M. Andrews. 1990. Variable Speed Limit System. Report FHWA- RD-89-001. Federal Highway Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation, March. Swali, L. N. 1993. The Effect of Speed Cameras in West London. Proceedings of Seminar C, Traffic Management and Road Safety, PTRC Education and Research Services, Ltd., Vol. P365, University of Manchester, Sept. Van den Hoogen, E., and S. Smulders. 1994. Control by Variable Speed Signs: Results of the Dutch Experiment. Road Traffic Monitoring and Control, IEE Conference Publication 391, April, pp. 145149. Wilkie, J. K. 1997. Using Variable Speed Limit Signs To Mitigate Speed Differentials Upstream of Reduced Flow Locations. In Compendium of Graduate Student Papers on Advanced Surface Transportation Systems, Texas Transportation Institute Report SWUTC/97/72840-00003-2, Aug.

OCR for page 359
MANAGING SPEED 390 Winnett, M. A. 1994. A Review of Speed Camera Operations in the U.K. Proceedings of Seminar J of the 22nd European Transport Forum for Traffic Management and Road Safety, PTRC Education and Research Services, Ltd., Vol. P381, Sept. Zaal, D. 1994. Traffic Law Enforcement: A Review of the Literature. Report 53. Accident Research Centre, Monash University, Victoria, Australia, April. Zuo, Y., and P. J. Cooper. 1991. Public Reaction to Police Use of Automatic Cameras To Reduce Traffic Control Infractions and Driving Speeds in British Columbia. Proceedings of the Canadian Multidisciplinary Road Safety Conference VII, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada, June.