Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1/9/2003CITY OF DIAMOND BAR MINUTES OF THE TRAFFIC AND TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION JANUARY 9, 2003 CALL TO ORDER: Chairman Virginkar called the meeting to order at 7:12 p.m. in the South Coast Air Quality Management/Government Center Hearing Board Room, 21865 E. Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, California 91765. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Chairman Virginkar led the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL: Present: Chairman Virginkar, Vice Chairman Morris, and Commissioners Kashyap, Pincher and Torng. Also Present: David Liu, Public Works Director, Fred Alamolhoda, Senior Engineer; John Ilasin, Assistant Engineer; Sharon Gomez, Management Analyst, Debbie Gonzales, Administrative Assistant and Deputy Diane Dodd. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: II. A. Minutes of November 14, 2002. C/Torng moved, C/Pincher seconded, to approve the Minutes of the November 14, 2002 meeting as presented. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Kashyap, Pincher, Torng, VC/Morris, Chair/Virginkar NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None III. COMMISSION COMMENTS: C/Pincher commended Deputy Mark St. Amant on his article about stray animals and their effect on traffic in the Windmill. IV. PUBLIC COMMENTS: None Offered. V. CONSENT CALENDAR: None VI. ITEMS FROM STAFF A. Traffic Enforcement Update — Report by Deputy Dodd - Received and filed on the following items: 1. Citations: November 2002/December 2002 JANUARY 9, 2003 PAGE 2 T&T COMMISSION Deputy Dodd reported that citations increased significantly during October as a result of street sweeping violations. However, citations decreased as residents became more aware of the law. Because of numerous complaints about the morning drop off and afternoon pickup of students at Diamond Bar High School, the department increased surveillance of the area and issued forty-five citations. During the entire month of December, enforcement was increased during morning drop off and afternoon pickup for the entire City. Clearly, Lorbeer Middle School has the greatest problem. VC/Morris felt that the low number of citations issued at Pantera School was due to the excellent design of the school, parking, and drop off area. If all schools were so designed, citations would likely be much lower. Deputy Dodd agreed. C/Kashyap questioned why the number of parking citations at Lorbeer Middle School was so low. Deputy Dodd explained that most violations at Lorbeer Middle School have to do with people making right turns during restricted times and double-parking. Those are not parking violations, they are moving violations and hazardous citations are issued. C/Kashyap asked if the first page graph could be corrected to be more reflective of the statistics. Responding to C/Pincher, PWD/Lui stated that the no right turn sign was installed about two years ago. 2. Collisions: November 2002/December 2002 3. Radar Trailer Development 4. Results of Traffic Operations 5. Future Deployment of the Radar Trailer B. Redflex — Redlight Enforcement/Radar Enforcement — presentation by Dr. Aaron Rosenberg. Responding to C/Torng's request for regional data, Mr. Rosenberg explained that there are no speed programs in Southern California so he used Northern California data. The red-light data is for Southern California cities that have had programs in place for 18 months or longer. JANUARY 9, 2003 PAGE 3 T&T COMMISSION Chair/Virginkar asked why there was no data available on the Southern California cities shown in the slide presentation. Dr. Rosenberg explained that cities such as Southgate and Fountain Valley recently signed contracts for the red light system. It takes between 45 and 90 days for the system to go live and according to California Code, citizens are entitled to a 30 -day warning period. Data is not collected until the systems are operational for at least one year. The cities highlighted in blue are all Los Angeles County cities. In response to C/Kashyap, Dr. Rosenberg explained that his company just contracted for the red light system with Santa Ana and Upland in December, 2002 and they are not yet up and running. These cities are in the L. A. basin and not within Los Angeles County. Dr. Rosenberg addressed C/Pincher's question about this being a glorified speeding ticket by explaining the San Jose program. Because there was no state legislation in place regarding the photo radar system, San Jose, with the assistance of their city attorney, developed a local ordinance regarding speed photo radar. San Jose has been operating under their local ordinance since 1998. As of 4�" quarter last year, San Jose ordered four additional vans and developed a program called NASCOP (Neighborhood Automated Speed Compliance Program). The program is not affiliated with the police but is run as an adjunct to police, transportation, the courts and the city. NASCOP established parameters for ticketing in 25 and 30 -mph speed limit zones. If a school or neighborhood association wants a van placed in their school zone or residential neighborhoods, they must complete a petition requesting the van. If warranted by traffic engineers and police, that area then becomes part of the van placement schedule. Currently, San Jose rotates its vans on 120 different neighborhood streets. The deployments have been very successful at curbing behavior, especially in and around school zones. When an individual exceeds the posted speed limit, they receive a notice in the mail. It explains that on a certain date and time a vehicle registered to the party was traveling at a certain rate of speed in violation of the posted speed, committing a violation of the basic California Vehicle Code. The court issued citation allows the individual to request a violation file by filling out a portion of the citation. The citation is sent to NASCOP and in turn is submitted to the court system, the final authority. By completing the citation, the individual has admitted guilt. If the individual fails to complete and return the citation, NASCOP can submit the evidence to the court and ask the court to issue a citation. C/Kashyap asked what happens when individuals fail to complete and return the citations. Dr. Rosenberg reiterated that NASCOP turns the information over to the court system and requests a citation be issued based on the evidence. JANUARY 9, 2003 PAGE 4 T&T COMMISSION Dr. Rosenberg confirmed to ChairNirginkar that the citation is issued to the registered owner of the vehicle. C/Kashyap asked if the citation was a legally binding document to which Dr. Rosenberg responded that it is a legally binding document authorized through the ordinance. C/Pincher asked what kind of challenges the San Jose program has generated. Dr. Rosenberg responded that about three (3) percent of all citations mailed out are contested. When a citation is challenged, the law enforcement agency, police or sheriff, must review the evidence. The red light system provides four color images - one of the driver's face, one of the vehicle license plate, an image of the pre -violation and an actual image taken at the time the. violation is committed. The photographic evidence is uncontestable. The speed van provides two images — one of the car oncoming and one moving away. Dr. Rosenberg responded to C/Pincher that there had not been any challenges to the credibility of the program. In fact, the technology was challenged and upheld by the Courts. With respect to the Upland installation, the Council wanted to make certain that the City warranted the program prior to initiation. Through researching the matter, Upland found that the majority of their collisions occurred on CalTrans operated roads, specifically, Mountain Avenue. Several California cities are operating their programs in conjunction with CalTrans and Redflex is currently working on the same type of cooperative program for Upland. Responding to ChairNirginkar, Dr. Rosenberg explained that CalTrans does not have a standard, but Redflex developed the standards implemented in the cooperative venture. A state audit revealed that CalTrans offers the most dangerous roadways. Heretofore, CalTrans was not cooperating with vendors of red light enforcement systems. However, Redflex has now created groundbreaking installations at CalTrans intersections in Bakersfield and Ventura. Dr. Rosenberg went on to explain that this sophisticated system requires citizen approval. The California Vehicle Code requires that you have a public hearing. From that point on it depends on local politics. The public hearing is the first step in educating the public about this type of enforcement program. Although there was initially a certain amount of stigma associated with these programs they are now generally accepted. Redflex works with cities to provide very comprehensive public awareness campaigns. In Beaverton, Oregon, for example, there is about 90 percent public approval. Nationwide, there is about 70 percent public approval. JANUARY 9, 2003 PAGE 5 T&T COMMISSION Public approval is based on education. When people understand that this program is a safety program, there is widespread acceptance. Dr. Rosenberg responded to C/Kashyap that there has been some vandalism to equipment. The units are somewhat vandal -proof and bullet resistant. Even when the unit is shattered, the camera remains intact. The units are located between 10 and 12 feet high so they are difficult to reach. Dr. Rosenberg stated that Redflex created the system to be simple to use and as user-friendly as possible. Typically, one person runs the program, and one person acts as backup. Because it's Web enabled, some officers actually run the program from their home before they go into their department or station. When it comes to court education Redflex provides expert witnesses during the first six months of the installation. Redflex also provides court packages and in some cases, a computer for court use and easy viewing of the evidence. Dr. Rosenberg responded to C/Kashyap that Reflex is a web -based program with security protocols and encryption. The web -based program is easy to use and cost effective. C/Pincher asked about the November 14, 2002, Los Angeles Times article concerning the amount of money the vendor is paid for the system and how it impacts community acceptance. Dr. Rosenberg explained that every program in California is on a lease basis. It is a very cost -prohibitive program and there is not really any benefit to owning the program outright. The leased system is a turnkey system that includes hardware, software, construction, on-going maintenance operations, processing, court support, etc. Redflex collects a per -citation issuance fee or service fee. The article talked about a controversial case in the San Diego Superior Court that said the program was run illegally because the vendor was collecting a "contingency fee" because the vendor has a stake in the outcome of the citation. Redflex charges either percentage or flat amount. The vendor in the San Diego case was actually creating addition citations and being paid on a per -citation basis. Reflex collects on paid citations only. Even less controversial is the flat rate per month fee wherein the City pays the same lease amount each month regardless of the number of citations issued and/or paid. In response to C/Kashyap's question regarding how often the system is upgraded, Dr. Rosenberg explained that upgrades are generally done on an as -needed basis. For instance, systems have been in place since 1976 and when digital came into play about three years ago, Redflex began using that technology. During the past three years, Redflex has not upgraded the cameras but have included video technology to provide high resolution stills. The video camera was introduced about six months ago following testing. JANUARY 9, 2003 PAGE 6 T&T COMMISSION They are now in general use in cities. Redflex has a dedicated R&D department that works continuously to improve existing products and incorporate next generation hardware and software technology. Upgrades are included in the cost of the system. C/Kashyap asked how the cameras are energized to which Dr. Rosenberg responded that they use standard 110 voltage. Redflex is studying solar energy use and mobile red light, etc. Dr. Rosenberg explained to VC/Morris that there is no cost to the City except for the lease payment or percentage split, whichever system is selected. Before systems are installed, Redflex conducts video analysis to make certain that a system is warranted and cost-effective for the cities. Dr. Rosenberg provided an example of how the analysis is conducted and how conclusions regarding cost effectiveness are determined. Dr. Rosenberg indicated to VC/Morris that the City would have total discretion on where systems are placed and total oversight of the process. Typically, Redflex looks at the most congested directions of traffic — westbound and eastbound or southbound and northbound or some combination thereof based on peak hours. Responding to C/Pincher Dr. Rosenberg stated that video surveillance could be done prior to actual contract signing with a letter of intent or after the contract is signed. In some instances teams are deployed to study high collision intersections and conduct video analysis prior to the contract and with a non-binding letter of intent signed by the police chief or city manager. C/Kashyap said he believed the main function of this program should be to make safer intersections. He asked if Redflex had quantified the cost benefits due to the safe range detector, fewer accidents, etc. Dr. Rosenberg responded that Redflex had not. However, the police chief of Culver City presented significant data on the reduction in collisions as well as the use of personnel time to run the system. He favorably compared those statistics to the number of collisions and man-hours prior to installation of the system in order to justify the effectiveness of the program. The reduction in collisions and savings in personnel time was significant. Dr. Rosenberg indicated to C/Kashyap that he was not aware of any cost- saving breaks by insurance companies as a result of the program although he believed there were definite risk management benefits. Responding to C/Torng, Dr. Rosenberg explained that partnerships have been very good programs for Redflex. if at some point the City cannot afford it or cannot assume that risk, Redflex would renegotiate the terms. In addition, Redflex has incorporated a condition in their contract that states JANUARY 9, 2003 PAGE 7 T&T COMMISSION that upon annual review of the program, the City must at least recoup its lease payments. If the City does not recoup its lease payments, the program lease payments are renegotiated. The typical contract is a flat -rate five-year contract with two one-year renewals. The unfortunate part of removing the system is that cities return to post-mortem collision levels so Redflex does all it can do to cooperate with cities to keep the systems running at a break-even or profitable level. C/Kashyap asked if the renewal has to be in multiples of five years and Dr. Rosenberg responded no. Typically, programs are renewed each year. Some cities choose to bypass that renewal process and opt for two or three year automatic renewal periods. ChairNirginkar asked Dr. Rosenberg to comment on his competition. Dr. Rosenberg explained that unfortunately, this is a very cash heavy business and some of his competitors no longer enter into contracts. Some vendors ran out of money. His primary competitor is ACS. ACS (Affiliated Computer Systems) is a very large computer IT outsourcing system that supports WebCom. The company was a small division of Lockeed Martin that ACS acquired several years ago. Lockeed Martin was the program that got shut down in San Diego and three other cities. ACS uses wet film technology. They are trying to convert too because cities want digital technology. ACS is for partners in this venture. Digital technology is complex while wet film is simple technology. Redflex has more systems in place and running than all of its competitors combined. All new Redflex systems are digital and most of the wet film systems have been converted to digital. Redflex has been placing systems since 1983 and has a significant leg up on the competition when it comes to experience. Another competitor is Nestor. Nestor builds cameras and outsource the process which means that any time a portion of the program is outside of the vendor's control, the cities risk loss through the chain of evidence and chain of custody. Cities also run the risk of having to set up various service level agreements with them. The system requires a 15 -foot pole that is extended out over the intersection and the wet film system remains on at all times. Additionally, Nestor uses an encryption technology that lends itself to significant operational issues and increase in the cost of use. As a result, they have stopped bidding because their system is no longer cost effective and competitive. Dr. Rosenberg confirmed to ChairNirginkar that Redflex has been up and running with digital technology for about three years. Redflex was founded in Australia and is still an Australian based company. The oldest contract in North America and the U.S. dates back to 1986. California passed legislation in 1997 and Redflex has sold 40 programs since that time. JANUARY 9, 2003 PAGE S T&T COMMISSION Dr. Rosenberg confirmed to C/Kashyap that Redflex is a publicly traded company. He agreed to provide certified financials to the Commission and a range of stock prices. Dr. Rosenberg explained to Deputy Dodd that once the officer reviews the evidence and instructs the system to print the citation, that officer's work is basically completed unless the officer is required to appear in court. Deputy Dodd felt the courts would better receive the system if the department had prior agreement on use of the program and if the citations were printed on the department's forms. Dr. Rosenberg believed that Deputy Dodd's comments were valid and agreed that he would work with the department to produce its official citation. Dr. Rosenberg explained to PWD/Liu that the City of San Jose purchased the speed enforcement program units in 1997. They have complete authority of deployment scheduling. Their units are deployed only to the school zones and all deployment is on -demand. Diamond Bar may choose to deploy systems to school zones as well as to areas of concern such as Diamond Bar Boulevard. ChairNirginkar asked if the City's procurement and contracting process required a competitive bid process. PWD/Liu responded that a competitive bid process will be required. He further stated that the City's Municipal Code and Purchasing Ordinance also has provisions for sole source, but it requires a certain criteria such as "being in the public interest." Dr. Rosenberg agreed to provide the Commission with staff reports from cities that utilize the system. The documentation includes backup information and elements of sole source contracts in instances where there is no cost associated with the system. PWD/Liu said he placed this matter on the joint meeting agenda for discussion with the City Council. ChairNirginkar suggested the Commissioners might want to receive a presentation from another vendor in case different concerns and questions were raised. C/Pincher said she was very enamored with the Redflex system and believed it was something that could be very beneficial to the City. At the same time she felt the Commissioners had an obligation to at least JANUARY 9, 2003 PAGE 9 T&T COMMISSION investigate other systems in order to be better educated and prepared to make an informed recommendation to the City Council. RECESS: ChairNirginkar recessed the meeting at 9:25 P.M. RECONVENE: ChairNirginkar reconvened the meeting at 9:35 p.m. VII. OLD BUSINESS: None VIII. NEW BUSINESS: A. Traffic Concerns on Stirrup Drive at Great Bend Drive. MA/Gomez presented staff's report. Staff recommends that the Traffic and Transportation Commission concur with staff to consider a multi -way stop at the intersection of Stirrup Drive and Great Bend Drive. VC/Morris moved, C/Kashyap seconded, to concur with staff's recommendation to install a multi -way stop at the intersection of Stirrup Drive and Great Bend Drive. AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Kashyap, Pincher, Torng, VC/Morris, ChairNirginkar NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None IX. STATUS OF PREVIOUS ACTION ITEMS: PWD/Liu reported that at its December 17 meeting, the City Council approved a contract with Advantec Consulting Engineers for a citywide traffic signal timing plan, a four-month project. At its January 21, 2003 meeting, the City Council will consider changes to the City's street sweeping/parking regulation program, specifically in school zones, commercial and multi -family areas. X. ITEMS FROM COMMISSIONERS: C/Torng said he received a telephone call from a resident living on Leyland Drive. She told him that the multi -way stop installation at the intersection of Newbury Drive has not stopped the drag racing. She asked if a speed hump could be installed. C/Torng asked when the resident should start her petition for installation of the speed hump. DPW/Liu responded C/Torng that the Council placed a one-year moratorium on speed hump installation. The anniversary date is June 2003. Prior to further installation of speed humps, the Council has asked for a report regarding the long- term effectiveness of the current installations. ChairNirginkar suggested staff call for increased enforcement in that area. JANUARY 9, 2003 PAGE 10 T&T COMMISSION C/Kashyap believed that over the past two or three weeks there were accidents in the area of Cold Springs Lane and Diamond Bar Boulevard. During the traffic signal timing plan, perhaps the City could prioritize that area. PWD/Liu said he understood that this matter would be also considered for next year's Capital Improvement Project budget. C/Kashyap said he had received several calls requesting that something be done about this intersection. XI. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS: A. Cold Springs Lane/Diamond Bar Boulevard MA/Gomez reported that last week staff placed a sign in the median facing the westbound coming out of Cold Springs Lane onto Diamond Bar Boulevard. The sign stipulates to those vehicles that are turning right to go north on Diamond Bar Boulevard that they must yield to U-turn traffic. This is an effort to eliminate collisions involving vehicles that legally have the right to make a U-turn on a green light. B. Brea Canyon Road Parking Request MA/Gomez stated that the City has been approached numerous times by a resident is acting on behalf of the donut shop on Brea Canyon Road just north of Diamond Bar Boulevard. He stated that prior to the Brea Canyon Road streetscape improvement project, there was parking allowed on Brea Canyon Road. It was staff's understanding from records that "No Parking" has always been in place on the street. The resident further states that the donut shop has suffered from motorists and particularly contractors not being able to stop on Brea Canyon Road and go in to purchase food. He asked the signage be changed to allow for temporary parking on northbound Brea Canyon Road near the northerly section of the center. Staff will provide a report for the Commission at its next meeting. The resident was speaking on behalf of the donut shop owner who is from Southeast Asia not fluent in English. XII. SCHEDULE OF FUTURE CITY EVENTS — as agendized. PWD/Liu offered potential dates for a joint Traffic and Transportation Commission/City Council meeting: Monday, January 27; Monday, February 3, Monday, February 10; Wednesday, February 12; and Thursday, February 13 (the next Commission meeting). One Council member felt February 13 would be a good date to meet for a working dinner meeting prior to the regular meeting time. VC/Morris favored a pre -Commission meeting date of February 13 at 5:30 p.m. The Commissioners concurred. JANUARY 9, 2003 PAGE 11 T&T COMMISSION C/Torng invited everyone to attend the Diamond Bar Chinese American Chinese Lunar New Year Celebration on February 8 at the Diamond Bar High School from 9:30 a.m. to 12:30 p.m. ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business to come before the Traffic and Transportation Commission, Chairman Virginkar adjourned the meeting at 10:02 p.m. Respectfully, Db[Vid G. Liu, Secretary Attest: Chairman Arun Virginkar