USF Libraries
USF Digital Collections

Assessment of automated photo enforcement systems for Polk County signalized intersection safety improvement project


Material Information

Assessment of automated photo enforcement systems for Polk County signalized intersection safety improvement project
Physical Description:
1 v. : ill. ; 28 cm.
Burris, Mark Whitman, 1970-
Apparaju, Ramakrishna
University of South Florida -- Center for Urban Transportation Research
University of South Florida, Center for Urban Transportation Research
Place of Publication:
Tampa, Fla
Publication Date:


Subjects / Keywords:
Red light running -- Florida -- Polk County   ( lcsh )
Traffic violations -- Florida -- Polk County   ( lcsh )
Electronic traffic controls -- Florida -- Polk County   ( lcsh )
Law enforcement -- Automation -- Florida -- Polk County   ( lcsh )
local government publication   ( marcgt )
non-fiction   ( marcgt )


Additional Physical Form:
Also issued online.
Statement of Responsibility:
prepared by Mark Burris and Ramakrishna Apparaju.
General Note:
Prepared for the Polk County Community Traffic Safety Team.
General Note:
"Final report"--Cover.
General Note:
"September 25, 1998."

Record Information

Source Institution:
University of South Florida Library
Holding Location:
University of South Florida
Rights Management:
All applicable rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier:
aleph - 025499912
oclc - 664346710
usfldc doi - C01-00015
usfldc handle - c1.15
System ID:

This item is only available as the following downloads:

Full Text


Assessment of Automated Photo Enforcement Systems for Polk County Signalized Intersection Safety Improvement Project Final Report Prepared by Mark Burris Ramakrishna Apparaju Center for Urban Transportation Research College of Engineering-University of South Florida 4202 E. Fowler Avenue, CUT 100, Tampa, FL-33620 Ph: (813) 974-3120 Fu: (813) 974 5168 for the Polk County Community Traffic Safety Team September 25 1998


Executive Summary In November I 993, the Polk County Community Traffic Safety Team (PCCTST) began a project designed to test and evaluate various automated photo enforcement systems. These systems are designed to support the enforcement of traffic laws. This project is a demonstration project funded by the Federal Highway Administration and is an integral part of the overall Signalized Intersection Safety Improvement Program. I t was believed that the use of automated photo enforcement would decrease the frequency of vehic l es running red lights, thereby reducing the frequency and severity of traffic crashes at signalized intersections. The goals of this project were to: verify the feasibility and effectiveness of the automated photo enforcement technology in helping the enforcement of traffic laws; demonstrate the usefulness of technology to the Florida law makers; and showcase the automated enforcement technology. At the beginning of the project, three i ntersections were selected to have red light running photo enforcement cameras installed. Through an open request for proposal process American T raffic Systems, Inc. (A TS) and U.S. Public Technologies, Inc. (USPT) were contracted to install cameras at these intersections. These cameras were installed in early 1995 and were in various lev els of usage until April 1996. Later i n the project, A V AIR, Inc. volunteered to install their equipment at a fourth intersection. This equipment was installed in I 996 and operat i onal for a short period. In August 1998 CUTR was contracted to prepare the final report for this project. CUTR was not involved with the project prior to this time but with CUTR's experience in researching red light photo enforcement issues and the data found in the project files CUTR produced this final report. The red light camera technology proved to be accurate, safe, reliable, and cost-effective. The vendors involved in this demonstration project, A TS, USPTI, and A VIAR, all provided photo enforcement cameras that successfully recorded red light running violations on 35mm film. Problems did arise with keeping the volunteer staff (members of the PCCTST, law enforcement officers, and transportation officials) active in the project. Staff turnover was a particular problem that reduced the amount of data collected during this demonstration project However, good data was obtained, particularly at the location in Fort Meade which demonsu:ated the abilities of this technology. Estimating the effectiveness of photo enfor cement on red light running was hampered by the fact that only educationa!Jwaming letters could be mailed to violators. Although the success of the technology did not convince Florida legislators to allow the use of red light photo enforcement cameras, this demonstration project was examined and continues to be examined by many jurisdictions around the counu:y as they implement a red light photo enforcement program. The success of the technology in this demonstration project was combined w ith the Red Light Running Campaign (run by the PCCTST) in an intensive public awareness effort. The campaign included radio and TV announcements, billboards, bus bench backs posters, bumper stickers on a fleet of Wal-Mart trucks, kick off events and a statewide p ublic awareness and enfo rcement campaign entitled STOP! RED LIGHT RUNNING WEEK. This campaign was endorsed by the Governor and was so successful it was turned into an annual event. This effort has clearly raised the public consciousness with regards to the problem of red light running.


Table of Contents 1.0 Introduction .... . .. . .......... ........ .... ........... ................. ... ... .......................................... 1 1.1 R e d Light Rtmning Problems in Polk County, Florida . ..... .... ........ .. . .......... I 1.2 Red Light Running A National Perspective ............. . ..... ............ ................ 2 1.3 Technology ..... .......... ................... ................................................................ 4 1 .4 Key Issues and Problems ....... .... .... .... ....... .... ............ ............ .... ............ .... 4 2.0 Project Background ........................... .... . ...... . ................ ..................... .................. 6 3.0 Technology Description ... ......... .......... ........ ..... .......... ....... .... ......... ................... .... 9 4.0 Project Accomplishments ..... .... ....... .... . ... . .... ............................................. ........... 16 5.0 Project Difficulties ... .... ..................................... ....... ... . .... ..... .... ..... ... ...... .. ... ....... 20 6.0 The Red Ligh t Running Campaign Report .... . ............. ................ ........ .... ............. 23 7 0 Conclusions ... .......... . ......... ..... . ....... ................ ...... .................... ................ ........... ... 37 Bibliography ....... .... ..... ..... ..... .... ... ... .......... .... ................... .......... ...... . ...... .......... ... ... 40 Appendix ii


Li s t of Ta b l e s Tab l e I. Red Light R unning Crash Data in Florida (1986-1994)) . ............ . 3 Table 2. Project Milestones ......... ............ ....... . .......... ... .... 8 L i st o f F i gures F i gure I Percentage Reduction in Red Light Viola t ion Rates .............. .... 4 Figure 2 Red Light Camera (USPTI) in Lakeland ..................... .... . 9 Figure 3. Red Light Camera (A T S ) in F ort Mead e . . . . . . . . . . . . I 0 Figure4. Red Light Camera (USPTI) in L akeland .......................... 10 Figur e 5. Red Light Camera (A VIAR) in Bartow . ...... ... . ............... II Figure 6. Red Light Camera (A VIAR) in Bartow ...... ........ ................ II Figure 7 Connections to Loop Detector s (Lakeland) . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 Figure 8. Re d Light Camer a Housing (Lakeland) ............... ........ ... ... 12 Figure 9 Location of Red L ight Cameras at an Intersec t ion ......... .. ...... ... 13 Figure I 0. Photographs Taken by a Red Light Camera in California . . . . . . . 1 4 F i gure II. Photographs Taken by Aviar Cameras in Bartow ........... .... ... .. 14 Figure 12. Photographs Taken by Aviar Cameras in Bartow showing the Driver ..... 15 iii


1.0 Introduction 1.1 Red Light Running Problems in Polk County, Florida In November 1993 the Polk County Community Traffic Safety Team proposed to test and evaluate automated photo traffic enforcement technologies used to deter traffic violations. This proposal became a demonstration project and is an integra l part of the overall Signalized Intersection Safety Improvement Program Th e experience gained from this project was t o determine if automated photo enforcement decreases the frequency of vehicles running red l ights, thereby reducing the frequency and severity of traffic crashes at signalized intersections. This demonstration project, funded by Federa l Highway Administration (FHW A) is intended to photograph vehicles that run red lights at selected intersections by using red light photo enforcement cameras and evaluate human reactions to technology throughout the county. In Polk County in 1 992,21 percent of collisions at s i gnalized intersections were attributed to drivers disregarding traffic signals. The Polk County highway system consists of2,438 centerline miles of roadway with 343 signalized intersections. Many of these signals are located on high-speed rural routes with posted speed limits of 55 MPH Often times, it was observed that the actual speeds exceed posted speeds and s i gnificant numbers of these violators were found to be semi-tractor-trailer combinations (l]. The Polk County Community Traffic Safety Team (PCCTST) recognized that red light running was (and still is) a significant prob lem in Polk County. They p ro posed to conduct a Signalized Intersection Safety Imp rovement Project ro eva l uate the effectiv eness of various measures to discourage or prevent vehicles from running red lights. Various phases of the Signalized Intersection Safety Improvement Project are: Phase 1: increased enforcement of traffic regulations at signalized intersections 1 Proposal on the "Assessment of Automated Systems for Polk County Signalized Intersections Safety Improvement Project. Polk County Community Traffic Safety Team, November 1994.


Phase 2: the use and assessment of automated enforcement technologies Phas e 3 : increased public information and education Phase 4: review of state legislation authorizing the use of automated enforcement systems to issue citations to offenders The scope of this report is limited to Phase 2 and 3. Hence, th e sections 2 through 7 of this report describe the automated p hoto enforcement technologies and the public awareness campaign in Polk County. In August 1998, CUTR was contracted to prepare the final report for this project based on information i n the project files. CUTR s previous work in red light photo enforcement was summarized i n the 1998 report entitled "Inv estigation of Automated Photo Enforcement for Red Light Running." 1.2 Red Light Running, A National Perspective Deliberate running of red lights at intersections is a s i gnificant factor contributing to nearly one million motor vehicle crashes at traffic signals each year (2). Nationwi de, 22 percent of all urban crashes were due to the driver's disregard for the traffic control devices [3). In Florida alone, red light running caused more than 11,723 crashes, 126 deaths, and 15,863 injuries in 1997, r esulting in economic losses of about $388 million [4). Table 1 shows statistics on vehicles running red lights from 1 986 to 1 994 in Florida. In spite of a variety of countermeasures used to help solve this problem (adjusting timing of sig nals removing unwarranted traffic signals, and enforcement), this problem goes largely unchecked due to the inability of law enforcement to adequate ly or safely patrol hundreds or even thousands of intersections in an urban area. Traditional enforcement requires a law enforcement office r to observe the violation and then chase, stop, and cite the violator. This generally means chasing a driver through a red light, potentially endangering the officer, other motorists, and pedestrians. 2 Richard Retting et at, Evaluation of Red Light Camera Enforcement in Oxnard, California, Insurance Institute for Highway Safety. 3 Geral d Ensley Tallahassee Democrat, ln/98 ; and personal communication with George Ferris, former Chief-Polk County Community Traffic Safety Team. 4 O.partm

Table 1: Red Light Running Crash Data in Florida (1986-1994) 11,616 108 11,478 t ., ,.,,, 8,218 A recently-released Center for U rban Trans portation Research (CUTR) study (S) examined the i mpleme ntation of a new method, the use of red light photo enforcement cameras, to enforce traffic laws by automatically p hotogra phing vehicles whose drivers run red lights This method is being tested with success at several locations in states and c ities across the United States, including Ariz ona, Virginia Maryland, North Carolina, New York, Los Angeles, and San Francisco The results of various evaluation studies show significant reductions in red light violation rates as well as considerably improve d awareness of the problem Figure 1 shows the percentage of reductions in red light viola tio ns afte.r the implementation of automated photo enforcemen t 5 Investigation of Automated Photo Enforcement for Red Light Running, Project #300-84, Center for Urban Transportation Research, University of South Ftorida, 199&. 3


1.3 Techno lo gy The technology used m automat e d red light enforcement is fairly simp l e an d straightforward. Cameras mounted adjacent to the intersection, are connected to the traffic signal system and t o inductive loops buried in the pavement. When a driver enters the i n tersect ion after the light has turn e d red, the camera is activated. These high-speed, high-resolu tion cameras receive vehic l e l ocat ion infonnation from the l oops, and pictures (usually two} a r e taken of the vehicle and license plate. The date time of day, length of time after the light has turned red, and vehicle speed are impri n ted on the p h o t ographs, which the n can be used as l egal evidence to justify mailing citations to v i o l ators. Figure 1. Percentage Reduction in Red L i gbt Viol ation Rates 100 I 9 0 l c so o -7 0 i 1l 60 ,a: 50 go -40 c . li !Q. 30 : 2 0 : 1 0 0 San Franci.sGo 1 2 Ne"\1.' York 3 Alondra B h d 4 Victoria. Comptotl S lvd, LA Australia. 5 LA 6 Notes: 1. Red light Cameras Fact Sheet, Oepanmcm of Parkin g and iraffi c C ity and Counry of San Francisco: 2. Retting, Evaluation of Red Light C:arneta in Oxnard, C l i fomia. Insurance fnsritute f o r Highway Safety; 3 4 and 6 Bond M Yee c:t al., San Francis co Red Light camera Eofortement P rogram; S. Joseph Genovese, Oxnard's Experience with Run Red Photo E.nforcemen L 1.4 Key Issues and Probl e m s While there are several i s sues that must be resolved related to citatio ns (fining the vehicle driver vs. owner time J ags between the infraction and the ticket, e t c.}, the i nterest in red 4


light camera enforcement is growing rapidly among state a gencies and local governments. A number of key legislative, legal financial, and awareness issues also are being discovered and documented. For e>tample, in most jurisdictions it is necessary for an officer of the law to witness a traffic infraction before a ticket can be issued. Therefore t o i mplement photo enforcement projects, new laws are necessary. Passing such legis la t io n can be difficult because of several key issues including but not limited to concerns about privacy, liability (vehicle driver or owner), and use of camera images as evidence. Also in Florida, this law has been opposed by some legislators for fear it will be abused b y rural governments as a means of revenue generation. Consequently, attempts to pass l egis lati ve bills allowing photo enforcement in Florida during 1994, 1997, and 1998 legislative sessions have been unsuccessful Implementation of this enforcement requires coordination among a variety of groups, in cludi ng transportation agencies, law enforcement agencies, judicial agenc ies, and elected officials. These projects also require an understanding and acceptance by the public, which necessitates and conducting a community awareness campaign, which also requires coordination among a variety of state and local agencies. Significant public/private investments are necessary to implement this technology. They include acquiring red light cameras, installing new loops, and conducting public awareness carnpatgns. s


2.0 Proj ec t Background In November 1993, the PCCTST proposed to test and e valua te vario us automated p hoto enforcement systems that arc designed to s upport the enforcement of traffic laws. Tbis project is a demonstration project and is an integral part of the overall Signalized Intersection Safety I mprovement Program. It was believed that use of automated p ho to enforcement would decrease the freque ncy of vehic l es running re d lights, thereby reducing the frequency and severity of traffic crashes at s ignali zed intersections. The goals of this project were to: verify the feas i bility and effectiveness of the automated photo enfo rce men t technology i n helping the enforcement of traffic la ws, demonstrate the usefulness of technology to th e Florida lawmakers, and showcase the a ut omated enforcement techno l ogy. This demonstration projec t was managed by the PCCTST with the C i ty of Fort Meade acting as the fiscal agency for receipt and disbursement of project funds. PCCTST uses a comprehensive, multidisc i plinary, and multi-juri sdict i o nal approach to solving safety problems Polk County. Fort Meade Police Chief George Ferris served as PCCTST chairman and a lso as proj ec t director. Chief F erris was assisted by a variety of law e nforcement, traffic engineering, e duca t ion and pub lic works personnel who are members of the PCCTST Included in this group are personnel from the F l orida Department of Transport atio n, Florida H i ghway Patro l the Polk County Sheriff's Office, Municipal Police Departments, the Pol k County Traffic Operations Division, and experts from many other units of local government. Ms Elizabeth S h eetz, CTST Coordinator, of the Centra l Florida Regional Planning Council, served as the lead for the publi c informat i on and education campaign. Various work tasks of this demonstra ti on project inc luded iden tificat i on of a vail able automated phot o enforcement systems evaluatio n of effectiven ess of automa t ed photo enforcement systems, preparation of installation repo rt, and preparation of final report. 6


The demonstration project was federally funded with more than $1 52,500 of support from Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). PCCTST provided more than $23,000 as in-ki nd matc h to supplement the police enforcement. The demonstration project was originally ini tiated in June 1994 with a budget of $73,500 ($52,500 from FHW A, and $21,000 from PCCTST as i n-kind match). Another $47,500 ($45,00 from FHWA and $2,500 from PCCTST) was added lat er in August 1994. The County rented the c amera equipment from private vendors and contracted with them to install the cameras. Film development, processing, and violation processing were handled contractually. Three locations were selected by a committee that included the FHW A-designate d project director, the FOOT Traffic Operations, the PCCTST co-chairman, Polk County and Lakeland traffic engineering p ersonnel, and law enforcement supervisors from the Polk County Sheriffs office and the Lakeland Police Department. Requests for Proposals (RFPs) were prepared with assistance from FDOT. In August 1994, bids were formally awarded to American Traffic Systems, Inc (A TS) of Scottsdale, Arizona and U.S. Public Tec hnologies, Inc. (USPT), of San Diego, California, as they were the only manufacturers who submitted b ids. The locations (signalized intersections) and vendors selected include d: US 17/U S 98 in Fort MeadeATS US 27/County Road 17 in Haines City-ATS SR 37/Lemon St in Lakeland -USPT Though the locat ions selected (see Appendix B for la youts of intersections) may not necessarily have h igh crash rates, they were selected after considering several issues in cluding traffic patterns, type of in tersection safety, vandalism, geometric considerations, and traffic composition. Polk County is a large diverse county with different traffic patterns. Since this demonstration project was a countywide program, inters ections were carefully selected from different cities to increase awareness of the technology maximize the benefits of the project and determine bow well the technology functions under varying conditions and human reaction to the devices. 7


The Lakeland location is a busy commercial intersection, in the downtown, and with consistent traffic patterns and a high degree of red light running crash history. The intersection selected in Haines City, located on a multi-lane highway, is a suburban type lo cation, often used by tourists. The Fort Meade location is the only signalized intersection in the city and primarily serves rural traffic A VIAR, Inc. installed two cameras at a fourth loc ation in Bartow (the intersection of Wilson Avenue and Van Fleet Drive). A VIAR volunteered to install cameras at no charge The cameras at Fort Meade and Haines City were used on a rota tio n basis Since camera rental was expe nsive, only two cameras were r ented for these two intersections. Since each i n tersection required two cameras (6], only one intersection was functional at any time. The Fort Meade location was also equipped with an additional video camera to monitor the traffic on a continuous basis, which proved to be a very cost-effective method to review traffic accidents at the intersection. Various milestones of the demonstration project are shown in Table 2. Table 2. P roject Milestones ... ... : ;L . .''' .-, \ ";.... Projc:ct proposed j November 1993 Contract approved June 1994 Location and vendor selection conducted August 1994 Completion of installation work at Fort September 1 994 Meade and Lakeland intersections Start of camera operation in Fort Meade September 1994 Start of camera operation in L akeland February 1995 Completion of installation work at Jan 1995 Haines City intersection Start of camera operation at Haines City J une 1995 Conclusion of the. Project April 1996 Writing of Final Report September \998 6 Florida State Jaw indicates that for all personal vehicles, license plates should be rear of the vehicles and, for commercial vehicles. they should be on the front 8


3.0 Technology Description Various manufacturers are involved in the development of red light camera technology, a cross-section of these manufacturers show that, by and large, the technological aspects are very similar. Subsequently, in the absence of any proven data, it would be very difficult to recommend any one manufacturer of automated photo enforcement technology. One of the goals ofthedemqnstration project was to study and evaluate red light running technologies from various vendors Two vendorsATS and USPTI participated in the demonstration project initially, and a third manufacturer, AVIAR, Inc joined later. Thi s section describes red light camera technology, inclu ding its components; functionality, outputs, installation and maintenance issues, manufacturers, and the costs associated with the red light cameras. Red light cameras (see Figures 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6) are used to help communities enforce traffic laws Such cameras, installed and connected to traffic signal systems (loops and signal boxes, see Figure 7), photograph red light runners when they enter the intersection. These cameras are housed in strong casings to protect them from adverse weather conditions and vandalism (see Figure 8). Figure 2. Red Light Camera (USPTI) in Lakeland 9


Meade 10




Light Camtra H ousing (Lakela:nd) 12


These systems are equipped with mechan i cal handles to load and unload the film into the cameras. Cameras h ave to be installed a t multip le locations at each i ntersection, as shown in Figure 9 to photograph the violating vehicles. Fl orida statute on license plates require that li c ense pla tes should be placed on the back of the vehicles fo r personal vehicles while for commercial vehicles they should be on the front of the vehi c les. Due to this uniqueness of Florida law, two cameras are installed in each lane to re co rd all types of vehicles. .. ................... ........ . Ctmtra kin & ph(ICogtapbs oflict.asc p1ates LOOP' Photo"A'" h oto'"B* OpQoqiiOOII$ N fe : Pl-.o!o A"' is ukttt prio: lc> violMioo P ho:o "8" showSc \'Ci!iele U. lite i ntmrt bc n "io!atioa 0 0 0 .. . . .. .. . . . . ... . . .. .. .. ... OptiOQtl Cam era f iking photographs of dri.,.ers ((r'()C'Ihll pbotocr a pby) Figure 9. Location of Red Light Cameras at an Int ersection Red ligh t cameras generally take two pictures (see F igure I 0) of each v iol ati onthe first just as the vehicle enters the int ersec tio n and the seco nd when the vehicle i s in the m i ddle of th e intersection. On both photographs, vari ous violation d ata i nc l udi n g date, time and seconds into the red phase are imprinted. The camera is trigg ered an d the first p hot ograp h (Figure 10, phot o "A") is taken when the vehicle pas ses over the sensors at a s pecifie d e la psed t i me and at a certain spee d (depending upon the speed limits se t) after th e signal h as turned red. Another photograph shows (Figure l 0, pho t o "B") shows the offending 13


vehicle in the middle of the intersection. Figures II and 12 show the photographs taken by AVIAR cameras in Bartow. V&tlll:ll bo!Wod-.. liMon Rod Figure 10. Photographs taken by a Red Light Camera in California 1 4


One of the goals of the demonstration project was to inform and educate the drivers on the dangers of red light running. Since existing Florida laws does not permit the use of automated photo enforcement technologies for law enforcement purposes, the PCCTST sent educational le tters (See Appendix A for a sample educational letter) to offending drivers Such courtesy letters included general information on red light camera program, the impacts of red light running, and when and where the respective vehicle/driver ran the red light. However, no reactions were found from drivers who received such educational letters as they were not required to respond to the letters. 15


4.0 Project Accomplishments This demonstration project showcased red light running photo enforcement technology and identified is sues related to this type of project. Although this project was not intended to generate revenue, the PCCTST was successful in conv i ncing the vendors to install and m anage the systems at a reasonable cost. Public -privat e partnerships are vita l to the success of red li ght runni ng projects as these projects require a substantial capital investment but can produce a lar ge revenue stream. The kind of spirit and commitment showed by i n dividuals from these various agencies despite an y financial and personnel problems, for this demonstration project is commendable Autom ated photo enforcement techno logy has existed for decades and has been used throughout the world However i n the United States, red light running photo enforcement projects have on l y begun recently Some states like New York, California Arizona, and Virginia have fully operational red light camera systems while many other states are in the process of developing such projects. At the time this project began in 1994, limited informa tio n was available on many as pects of these U.S. projects particu l arly driver re actions to the technologies In order to determine the usefulness of red light running cameras i t is essential to conduct many evaluation tests to verify its effec tiveness and examine the p u blic responses. Such evaluation tes t s would help in fin e tuning various opera tions like violation recording film processing and developmen t As such, this demonstration project showcased the photo enforcement technology and its ab ility to aid law enforcement officials. This demonstration project also provided an opportunity fo r one (ATS) of the three vendors to showcase its technology for the first time. This project also uncovered some interesting obstacles for the techno logy and possibly more importantly, legal and jurisdictional problems. 1 6


Implementation of automated photo enforcement projects requires coordinated and cohesive efforts among various governmental agencies in the study area. The nature of these projects i.s such that they demand coordination among various agencies including county/city transportation authorities, law enforcemen t agencies including police judiciary, and elected officials. The Po lk County Community Traffic Safety Team (PCCTST) the lea d agency managing this project, ob tained the assistance from various other agencies such as Florida Department of Transportation, Florida Highway Patrol, and Polk County Traffic Operations Divis ion. An innovative featu r e of this demonstration project was the use of video cameras along with red light cameras to monitor the traffic. In Fort Meade, a video camera was instal led in the same housing along with the red light camera to monitor the traffic in the i ntersec tion, and arrangements were also made to view the tape live from the Fort Meade Police Department's office. This innovative technique was found to be very useful for reviewing any crashes so that crashes could be reconstructed This technique can be used to identify real causes of crashes and help in devising remedia l measures A number of measures includ ing per citation cost, actual reductions in red l i g h t violations, and reductions in crashes are used to evaluate red light nmning projects However this pilot project focused on the ability of the technology to function, and did no t attempt to distribute many educational le tters. Therefore to estimate a per educational letter cost based on the few letters mailed in this demonstration project would not be an accurate estimate of a per citation cost in a typical photo enforcement installation. The number of viola tions recorded increased significantly with the use of camera technology. Cameras at Fort Meade location recorded 5 violations/day on an average w hereas traditional police enfo rcement identified only 15-30 violations/year These results are significant noting the fact that cameras were installed in only two lanes (out of poss i ble 14 lanes) in Fort Meade The results were similar in Lakeland with cameras recording 15-20 violations/day. According to Chief Ferris, the results for Haines City 17


were also similar. The number of educational letters mailed ov e r the period of the demonstration project was counted. The data shown here refers to the violations recorded at Fort Meade and Lakeland locations. There were 450 and !92 educational letters mailed to violators in Fort Meade and Lakeland, respectively. Due to data limitations, the costs shown in this section are estimated based on the costs incurred in the demonstration project and from some general information provided by the law enforcement officers. The expenditure details of the demonstration project are as follows : [7] From July 1994 to June 1996, the total cost of the project was $127,996 From the details of the cost figures maintained by the project director, the expenses have been categorized into operating expenses and capital investments Capital expenditure including investment on installations, equipment films cables etc., was about $42 207 while the operating expenses which includes leasing the cameras, film loading and unloading, processing and development etc. were totaled $58 366. However as the details of expenses are not available for the entire period of the project, the breakup of total expenses into operating costs and capital investments described above are for the period between July 1994 to October 1995 only. Hence the remaining $27,423 may have been for capital or operational expenditures. It was found that by traditional enforcement, an officer is likely to spend I 0 minutes of his time on average to issue citations to offending vehicles, at a cost of about $3.00. However should the offender choose to dispute the citation and plead "not guilty" in the court of law, the costs will increase significantly. This process requires the presence of police officer's in the court and may cost of about $36.00 and in addition to the police officer's expenses, several other court-re l a t ed expenses would also incur Additionally, a police officer may have to wait a long time at an intersection to catc h an offender. 7 The infonnation included in this section (on costs. expenditures, number o f violations recorded, and educationalleners sent) i s mainly drawn from the quarterly repons sent by the PCCTST to FHWA. 18


Tho ugh automated enforcement involves significant initial investments, camera technology will be cost-effective over a longer period. However, in this project, cameras were leased from the vendors, adding significantly to the operating costs. Additionally educational lett ers were sent during only four months while costs are for a year. Traditional enforcement may appear to be inexpensive but it is almost impossible for the law enforcement officers to patrol hundreds of intersections in the urban areas. More over many states require the officers to see the same signal as seen by the offenders in order to issue citations, making this form of enforcement more difficult. It was also found that, red light cameras at Fort Meade location recorded a total of 669 violations during four months of camera operation. Again data is not available on the number of violations recorded at Lakeland Haines City, and Bartow locations. Keeping in line with the objective of displaying the benefits of this technology to the Florida legislature, so that they might enact a red light running photo enforcement law Polk County Community Traffic Safety Team (PCCTST) did approach the legislature during the demonstration project. Chief Ferris explained the project and made a video presentation on the benefits of the program. Efforts were made by PCCTST to disseminate information on the benefits, advantages, and usefulness of the red light running photo enforcement technology in helping law enforcement. At the request of some members of the legislature, PCCTST sent pictures of cameras, installations information brochures, and videos to both the Florid a House and Senate during the p roject. Apart from the County's efforts, vendors and an independent lobbyist (introduced by a vendor) were also involved in informing the legislature. A bill allowing red running photo enforcement law has not been passed (s ee Appendix A for a copy of the 1998 bill that failed to pass the Florida legislature). 19


5.0 Project Difficulti es This technology demonstration project did no t reveal any s ign ificant prob l ems with the core techno l ogy Systems su pplied and installed by a ll the three v en dors func t ioned well shov-

reflectorization} makes it difficult to accuratel y record each plate. Also, the unique Florida State law on licenses, with commercial vehicles having license plates in the front and personal vehicles in the rear also posed problems for cameras These problems were mostly overcome by making adjustments in loop installations, delay t imes, angles of cameras etc. However, difficulty in obtaining an accurate photograph of some tractor trailer license plates remains due to lack o f standardization in the location of license plates. The demonstration project involved effortS from several departments from Polk Co unty including engineering, education, and emergency operations Various tasks of photo enforcement projects require coordinated efforts from law enforcement, traffic, and municipal officials. S in ce this project was a demonstration project with a small budget it required voluntary service from these people Since every department has their own goals, object ives, and priorities, this makes it difficult t o consistently donate the services of employees on a voluntary basis over a long period of time Apart from several city/county departments, various law enforcement agenctes also vo lun teered their time. Keeping in mind the relatively small work force and significant work load and budgetary constraints in law enforcement departments, it was very difficult to provide volunteers One manufacturer, who volunteered to participate in the demonstration project, pulled out of the project when the local Jaw enforcement departments were Wlable to provide volunteers for film loading and unloading (al ong 'vith other reasons} This demonstratio n project experie nced difficulties due to frequent changes in supervisors and personnel. For example, in one location, the supervisor of traffic changed twice during the project, affecting the progress of the project. Additionally, Chief Ferris, who led the Community Traffic Safety Team and championed the project, foWld alternate employment before work begun this final report. 21


The type of film rolls used in the cameras affect e d film loading, unloading processing and deve l opment. In Lakeland, film processing and development were inexpensive and easily done by using a 36 exposure roll of film However, the use of suc h a small roll of film required frequent services of law enfo r cement officers for film unloading, processing, and loading On the other hand cameras installed at Fort Meade and Haines City locations contained 100 foot rolls of film that are capable of taking 600 p i ctures, bu t they require special processing equipment. 22


6.0 The Red Light Running Campaign Report Success of any red light photo enforcement project depends upon the public's understanding of the technology and their support for the program. An aggressive public infonnation and awareness campaign is critical to ensure driver compliance to traffic rules. The target audience consists of many communities including political decision makers, automobile associations, the general public, senior citizen groups and the media. As a part of the demonstration project, Polk County Community Traffic Safety T earn implemented several public information and education strategies. This section describes the public awareness campaign on red light running in detail. This section is taken directly from the Red Light Running Campaign-Revised Final Report Form written by Ms. Elizabeth Sheetz, of the Polk County Community Traffic Safety Team. Note that the pictures or statistics referenced in this report are not included in the appendix. 23


RED LIGHT RUNNING CAMPAIGN REVISED FINAL REPORT FORM CAMPAIGN SITE PQt.K CQWfX FLOR.IDA CAMPAIGN COORDINATOR: ELIZABETH SI!Bm (AFJER OCTOBER I. 1996) PHONE NUMBER: ( 941) 534-7130 DATE: AUGUST I. 1997 I. CAMPAIGN'I'IMELINE Please fill in the approximate dates of the following components of your Red Light Running campaign: A. Pre..campaign Assessment: B. Campaign Implementation: July through December 1996 PLUS state-wide pgiyitig threugh FloridLJ CTST Coalition (1997 and CONTINUING I II C. PostCampaign Evaluation: January -JulY 1m PLUS plans through Florida CTST C9alition for stifle-wide part!dpation in STOP! Red Light Runnjng Week Januardl-17,1998 D. GOALS AND OBJECTIVES A. As stated on page 2 1 in the RLR Strategic Planning Guide, the goal and objective of the RLR campaign wete as follows: Goal: Objective: To create a safer community by re-establishing respoct for traffic control devices, specifically the traffic signal. To decrease the incidence of red light running in the community by increasing awareness of the hazards associated with non-compliance of traffic signals Did your site bave additional goals and/or objectives that you stated in your strategic plan? If so, please descn'be. GOALS, OBJECTIVES & S'JRATEGIES (as listed in Site Strategic Plan submitted by Chief Geotge Ferris in Januaty,l996) The Polk County CTST plans a balanced campaign combining education and enfoteement. The CTST plans to survey the extent of the problem, implement effective public information and education strategies, and reinforce the educational efforts through a concentrated enfoteement blitz. The members of the Safety Team will attempt to foster grassroots educational efforts in 24


businesses, schools, and community organizations. The campaign wiU complement other traffic safety efforts of the CTST including the Automated Red Light Enforcement Program and El Proctector bilingual traffic safety program. B. To what extent were the goals and objectives of the campaign, as stated in your strategic plan, achieved? Our CTST achieved a balanced campaign between education and enforcement. We implemented and completed surveys through a focus group and pre & post telephone surveys. Our group was lucky because we had been involved in the Red Light CAMERA project this got us a lot of press (IV, radio, print) and word-of-mouth advertising! The combination ofall these efforts did create greater awareness (respect) of traffic control devices. Statistics compared for "crashes involving running red light as driver contributing cause" in Polk Co. for the last six months of 1995 versus 1996 showed: 127 for 1995 and 119 for 1996. Our enforcement campaign ran during this last six months of 1996. This shows a decrease in incidences of crashes due to RLR. We are continuing this campaign-the real test will be a five year comparison . m TARGET AUDIENCE A. The campaign materials provided by FHW A focused on licensed drivers are generally law abiding, but are either not aware of the dangers associated with running red lights or assign running lights a very low risk. Did your caznpaign emphasize any additional target audiences? If so, who were they and how were they chosen? A small handout was developed that stressed the "cQSts" of Red Light Running: ANNUAL COST T O FLORIDA MOTORISTS: $377 million in economic loss; 7,934 crashes, 12,738 personal injuries and 128 deaths. Our posters also emphasized risks/costs. Both of these were widely distributed during the campaign. Any presentations, radio interviews, newspapers articles we tried to incorporate this "serious" message. In general the campaign focused on licensed drivers -as per the information provided by FHW A. We did make the effort to stress the hazard of Red Light Running by contacting trucking companies with large fleets : i e Publix, Watkins, ComCar, etc. We felt we could raise awareness of the drivers of red light running problems, AND get the message out to the public i f --. these trucks displayed our bumper slickers. Almost all of the trucking companies have a "No Use" policy on bumper slickers HOWEVER, the contact with WaJMart paid off. Their safety director (Brookesville Distribution Center) felt this presented an opportuJUty to address an important safety message. He contacted corporate and got approval to participate in our campaign. We organized a Kick-Off event with press release, etc. No press came !I We DID Kick-Off and took pictures of bumper slickers being put on the back of the trailers. There were 800 trailers that got bumper stickers. These deliver goods all over the U.S. So we felt our Stop Red Light Running message went throughout the country as these trailers delivered and switched off to other locations. 25 , J


IV. ENGINEERING v. A. Descn"be bow you worked with your traffic engineer contact to ensure that the community red light running problem was not related to traffic signal hardware or timing, but rather a driver behavior issu e. Richard Gillenwater, FOOT District Safety Office and also a Steering Committee Member, handl e d the contacts with the county, and cities on the traffic signal hardware. Each of th ese people returned the fonns verifying the maintenance on the signals. B. Do you think that the process described above could run more smoothly? If yes, please desc ribe the changes you would make. These people were contacted early in the campaign. It did, however, take quite some time for the forms to be sent in One of the problems might have been the change in Campaign Coordinator about half-way into our campaign. . . : : PRE-AND POST-CAJIIPAIGN AssESS!ImU A. Describe the process used to gather pr ... campaign and pcist-campaign citation and crash data. B. c. Pre-campaign crash data was obtained from the Florida Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles office in Tallahassee by Richard Gillenwater. The attached report show figures for Polk County and the state for 1994 and 1995. The statistics are usually availabl e about six months into the next year The 1996 statistics were not available to us until October, 1997 . Through our CTST, citation data was gathered for the six months of our. official campaign period. All agencies did not provide data to us. Richard reported th ere was no data available on citations for comparison. A copy of reported citation is attached. Could this process have run more smoothly? If so, please explain bow The crash statistics are gathered at state level our campaign for the six months period was conducted in Polk County The state keeps crash data, not citation data. We did solicit interest and get support from some of the other counties when we reported updates of our campaign at the Florida CTST Coalition quarterly meetings. Some of the Teams showed support from the begiMing, conducting Red Light Running selective enforcement events in their own counties. Elizabeth Sheetz, (project director) who also serves as the Vice Chair of the Coalition, asked for their support of RLR as a continuing traffic safety issue. Describe the general fmdings from the pre-and post-campaign citation and crash data. Pre(1994-1995) and post.(1996) campaign crash data for Polk County showed: January-June July-December TOTALS .:2. 113 133 122 114 ill 119 227 260 241 26


D. Pre and post-campaign crash data statewide: January-June July -December TOTALS .!22.1 5,294 4.945 10,239 1995 5,310 4,835 10,145 5,412 5,230 10,649 The Polk County crash statistics for the last six month period of 1996 (campaign period) show 119 crashes; a decrease from the 1995 statistics which show 127 crashes. When evaluating the crashes for each year-the total for the 1996 year is 241 versus the total for 1995 of 260 (showing a decrease). In comparing the crashes by year state-wide: there was a decrease from 1994 to 1995-and then an increase from 1995 to 1996. Citation statistics are not kept by our Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles The statistics that were kept on citations were for Polk County only. Out of IS law enforcement agencies, seven agencies sent in reports with a total of 955 citations issued for the six month campaign period ofJuly-December 1996. Describe the process used to gather preand post-campaign information on community attitudes and awareness ( i .e., community assessment surveys). Could this process have run more smoothly? If so, please explain how. Community attitudes and awareness were gathered in two ways: telephone surveys (both Pre and Post-campaign) and focus group (pre-campaign). For the focus group, the decision was mad e to vary from the standard random selection of members. A committee selected (hand picked) a diverse group to be used for the focus group: i.e. an educator, an engineer, someone in traffic enforcement, etc. E. Describe the general fmdings from: I) Pre-campaign community assessment survey Polk County drivers are well aware of the driving behavior of their peers. The largest group (three-quarters ) say their fellow drivers have not stopped for red lights. Most define a red light" as entering an intersection on red-with.39% report seeing others run red lights a "few times a month." . . . About one third say they have run a red light once; about one fourth have admitted to running red lights more than once; while nearly two fifths say they have never run a red light. Of those admitting to nmning red lights, for nearly half, the reason given was because they couldn't stop in time. Nearly two-thirds do not recall seeing any advertising about safe driving in the last three months; with 15% reporting YES and 23% Not Sure. When three RLR ads were described to them the responses were: about 90% NO and about I 0% Not Sure. No One answered YES which was appropriate, since we had done no advertising at that time. 27 . . ..


. . 2) Post-campaign communicy assessment survey When re spondents were asked about "traffic violations you see other drivers committing" there was a significant change the Pre-survey showed 71% with the Post survey showing 46% which is fewer since the campaign began. When asked "how often the result;; were hard to understand, given the answers to the above question. In the everyday (from 1 8% to 23%) and few times a week (from 27% to 37% they increased; while the responses for few times a month (from 39% to 28%) and less than once a month (from 15% to 13%) did show slight decreases When asked about seeing RLR advertising in the last three months there was an increase in those people saying YES (from IS% to 24%); the Not Sure category decreasing from 23% to 19% When respondents were asked iftheythinkRLR Catmras are a good idea th ere was a large majoricy saying YES in both instances (pre76% and post 75%). When asked if they recalled seeing or hearing advertising about safe driving in the last three months the YES responses increased from 15% to 24%. Maybe this indication of increase d awareness was because of our RLR campaign! When specific RLR ads were described to the respondents in the pre-survey No One answered YES. When asked in the post-survey there were some YES's (3%, 12% and 3%). some of them indeed saw/heard our ads. A. Describe the recruitment of law enforcement agencies in your campaign. If you were not already a police agency or associated with one, how did you approach your communicy agencies? How successful was your method of involving them? If you are a police agency, how much support did you get from the rest of your organization? (Jff combined an.swer below} B. Descnlle the targeted RLR enforcement schedule used in the campaign (e.g., January through Man:h, June thro"gh August, etc.). (see combined qnsw1r below} C. In what other ways did law eaforcementagencies contribute t o the campaign (e . g., presentations at local businesses and schools, involvement in safety fairs, etc.)? CDmbined answtr to A, B, C The implementation for this campaign was through our County Community Traffic Safeiy Team. Members include: local city, councy and state agencies, private industries and citizens. Enforcement activities have been a major emphasis of the Traffic Safety Team since we began in 1993. There are 15 enforcement agencies in Polk Councy. The Sheriff' s Office is the largest, with the Lakeland Police Department as second largest We consider alliS agencies as members of the Team;since all of the agencies have at one time or another participated in Team activities. At a regular monthly meeting. there are usually 6-8 eaforcement agencies attending. Our recruitment for participating in the campa ign was don e through the Safety Team. We asked for each agency to stress Red Light Running violations during our six months campaign; to keep a record of these citations to be reported to the Campaign Coordinator. A form was developed to keep a record of each week during the month, with a monthly total. That form was l ater revised to be a record of citations by month. Forms were handed-out at meetings, and followed up with F AXs Out of the 15 agencies, statistics were returned from 7 agencies 28 .


We asked the Enforcement agencies to stress Red Light Runnini violations during the fust two weeks after the Kick-Off. During the six month period, we made suggestions to encourage participation. Several of the agencies conducted selective enforcement activities: i.e. selecting a task force of 4 or 6 officers and targeting one problem intersection for a two or four hour period; selecting a task and targeting several problem locatio ns; asking each enforcement officer to spend only 15 minutes of each shift dedicated to targeting red light running; etc. Enforcement agencies contributed to the campaign in many ways: presentations at businesses/schools, at safety fairs, etc. Through the CTST we encouraged everyone to "talk" Red Light Running Get the messag e out there !! Quote statistics everywbere, to anyone that would listen. We had a large supply of promotional items. These items were used at booth displays for Red Light Running Awareness. These items were also distributed to all our agencies to use as part of their regular public awareness events. Anytime a display was used from the Traffic Safety Team, Red Light Running materials were also included; i.e. posters, pencils, . stickers, handout-cards, and key tags were the items most often used .. -,r VD. MEDIA ... A What methods were used to obtain media cooperation in providing time .or space for campaign materials (e.g., involving the media in a community coalition)? MEDIA for J(ick:Off Event For the Kick-Off full media contactstelevision, radio, newspapers, etc. We selected a priority problem intersection for Red Light Running in Lakeland (easily accessible to all media). We obtained permission from the City of Lakeland to use the empty lot at one of tbe comers of this intersection. FOOT District One, participated by providing a presentation trailer. This trailer actually belongs to FDOT District Seven (Tampa) Our Safety Team members from FOOT made the request for the trailer. Workers were sent to bring tbe trailer to Lakeland; workers were provided to the set-up and tear-down (about two hours for each). A FAX was sent to each of the media, with a Press &lease on the Kick-Off event and a Fact Sheet about this public awareness campaign. Press Release folders were available to all attending the Kick-Off. A large Red Light Running display t able was put up at the Kick-Off site. Polk County has no loca l TV. We are located halfway between two large media areasTampa and Orlando. It i s very difficult to "puU" any television to events. Out Kick-Offwas covered by Channel28, Tampa. He encountered a large traffic "pilo>up" on his way back to Tampa, and his coverage of our event was bumped I GENERAL MEDIA COVERAGE Television was cooperative with us on tbe PSAs Elizabeth Sheetz, Coordinator, fJtSt contacted the television stations by phone, explaining the campaign and the availability of our videos. She explained why this traffic safety issue was important and asked for tbeir support in running the PSAs. They all responded that they would have to view the video to see if it was appropriate for their use. She assured them of the top quality of the production. She also encouraged them to use them as long as possible, or to put them in rotation at a later date since the message is not dated material. There were 1 OQ copies made of the video-anticipating tbat other CTST's in the 29


state would like use the lapeS. Members of the Team reported seeing the PSA's running during the holidays (December 1996 -January 1997) A hand written note with genenl information packets and videos sent to 5 lV stations. Elizabeth made contacts by phone to local radio stations and to newspapers. S e veral of the radio people agreed to use the audio tapes in their rotations. The newspapers were hesitant on using the print PSAs. They explained how PSA space was, etc. They said they would consider using them Information and audio tapes were delivered by the coordinator to three local stations. A formal leller general information packet, and camera ready art of PSA' s were sent to 4 newspapers that publish either daily and/or local weekly newspapers in addition to local shopper publications (copies enclosed): We received no responses from print and were notable to document any use ofPSA's by any of them. Part of the campaign was bUJboards. There were 100 covers ordered; planning on the campaign going state wide. Lamar Ontdoor was contacted in Lakeland . They have always donated PSA space for traffic safety issues. For the Kick-Offthey posted-9 billboards throughout the countyone could be seen from the Kick-off location. They agreed to take 10 more covers in the Fall. Since the information is not dated, they agreed to post them :where and when space is available . B. How well did these methods work, as judged by the nature and amount of media placements obtained? How might the methods used be improved? (see combined answer below) C. How was the timing of the media materials distribution arranged? How were the decisions regarding the timing of the distribution made? To what extent was the timing coordinated with otherorganizations or agencies? (see combined answer below) D. How was the placement and use of materials in the media monitored? How do you feel about the quality and completeness of the monitoring? Combined answer to B, C, D Videos were distributed to 4 lV stations in the Tampa Bay viewing area: Channel 8 (NBC) Channel 13 (FOX/CNN), Channels 44 and 32 (both independents). The video was also distributed to Channel 6 in Orlando. A FAX was sent to each of these stations" requesting information (usage, estimated in-kind dollar contribution) Channel 8 was the only station to respond. However, we /mow the PSA 's shown on at least three of the statwns from reports of CTST members that saw them shown. We also know the audio PSA's or radio scripts were used by at least three radio stations; although WLKF was the only station that responded to the FAX. Elizabeth Sheetz did a Talk Radio Show at WLKF that was devoted .. exclusively to Red Light Running (copy enclosed). We know the billboards were posted by 3-4 outdoor companies with Eller and Lamar (Lakeland) the only ones that sent information. There were no responses from the print media. The bus bench back PSA's were produced from the additional funds requested to extend our campaign. The artwork was adapted for the unusual size of bench backs. The art was sent to the Jaycees. They had the bench backs produced. Once they were ready they decided on locationsthen installation. (List of locations endosed.) They were not available to the public during our fonnal campaign. They have just been installed in the last 4-6 weeks. Once these backs are installed; the average time they are in place is 24-30 months. Tom Keller, Jaycees, said the estimated exposure per day, per location is 30,000. Eight of the bench backs are in Polk County, the other seven are located. in other cities/counties. 30


. . : : We were pleased wi1h the coverage we got on PSA's. We feel we got above average coverage from television stations and outdoor advertising companies. If thete had been a full-time (or a part-time) coordinator solely dedicated to RLR we might have been able to obtain more media participation. There could have been more petSOnal visits scheduled. Sometimes that helps with their decision to participate. We had coverage from TV, radio, and billboards dwing the "formal" campaign period -July through December, 1996. Since we had preand post-surveys, we made sure the public had the opportunity to be exposed to our message. E. Was referral information (an address .or phone numbet) included in some or all of the m edia materials? If so, how many inquiries were received? How were the inquiries followed up? A Fact Sheet was distributed wi1h all media information-the Fact Sheet has the Coordintor's name and phone number listed at the bottom of the sheet. There were only a few inquiries -they were all addressed with return calls. This same Fact Sheet has been widely distributed: i.e. Florida Coalition members at more than six of the quarterly meetings; at Safety Management System Steering Committee meetings; various displays, meetings, presentations, etc. There were more inquiries from "word of mouth" referrals than any other source. The display presentation board from Lifesavers 15 netted some inquiries. F. To what extent were m edia efforts supplemented with your locally produced videos, speakers bureau, exhibits, etc ? Exhibits/displays were widely used during this campaign. Since ChiefFenis, Ft. Meade PD, had been involved in his RLR Automated Enforcement Project for several years our CTST had been using RLR information for displays on a regular basis. Elizabeth Sheetz is the coordinator for the Polk Co. CTST, as well as, the CTST's in Hardee and Highlands Counties. As we began our public awareness campaign in Polk Co. Elizabeth reported monthly to both Hardee and Highlands Counties about the progress of the RLR campaign. She also incorporated the RLR campaign literature and promotional items into various events that were held in these other two counties i.e. Elder Fair, County Fairs, School Health Days, Festival of Trees, etc. JU,R information and materials were used for presentations or included in other traffic presentations: i.e. FOOT State Finance & Accounting Meeting, FOOT District One Traffic Operations SafetY Meeting, Florida FDOT Executive Committee Workshop, Driver Education cJasses, etc. If fl()t previously submitted. attach sample promotionalmiJJerials and copies of all published PSA.s and other relevtm! newspaper or magazine articles, including video and audio tapes of broadcast coverage. VIll. CAMPAIGNMATERIALS A. Of the JU,R suggested campaign materials (other than PSAs), which ones and in which quantities did you use? The materials we used were developed from suggestions in the Strategic Guide (buttons, bumper stickers, mugs, key tags): some were developed from samples from other RLR sites (pencil, 31 .


handout sheet, posters, etc.): pthm we developed ourselves (static cling win dow sticken;, notebooks/portfolios, etc. A complete list follows: Key Tags soft plastic, /rtiffic light shape Re-order from additional funds Pencils white w/red imprint Re-order from additional funds Pens Mussw h ite w/red log o Buttons/pins Static Cling Window Stickers Labels/sti c kers Bwnper Stickers Cards, handou t Posters Notebooks/portfolios Billboard posters BU$Bench Backs : .. .. : : . Ouantin: Cost 5,000 $2,71 9 5,000 2,650 5,000 477 1 0,000 915 500 241 720 936 1,000 215 5,000 566 5,000 194 10,000 820 10,000 293 500 !53 100 300 100 3,900 ::,; 15 1,275 B. If you produced any additional materials, please descn'be and indicate quantities ordered. See above infonnation. See above liststatic cling window stickers and notebooks. C What methods were used to distribute your campaign materials? Do you feel these methods might be improved, or that others might have worked better? I f so please explain. Distribution was mainly through The Community Traffic Safety T eams. In Polk County item s were distributed at regular monthly meetings. Many of the items were distributed at display and special events. We also had the added advantage of Traffic Safety Teams located thto u ghout the state and the fact that those T eams have a Florida Coali t ion. AU of this made it easier t o disseminat e infonnation about the campaign state-wide. 32


IX. SPECIAL EVENTS A. Please list the type of special events which you coordinated or planned to promote your RLR campaign. The Kick-off was a major event with about 50 in attendance . We had excellent support from the community for that event. Another specilll event was a display presentation at Lifesavers 15. The display was in bulletin board form and was available for all Lifesav ers 15 participants during the entire time set aside for exhibits Elizabeth showed the entire involvement ofRLR by showing RLR Camera installation pictures, as well as, showing pictures from the Kick-off Event, the Wa!Mart bumper sticker promotion, billboards, etc. She also included samples of promotional items, videos, audio tapes, etc. (see attachments). Elizabeth also addressed the state-wide S.A. D.D. Convention in Orlando the RLR campaign information was included in her presentation. Another important event will be the STOP! RED LIGHT RUNNING WEEK to be held state wide JanU41Y 11-17, 1998. lbe Gtwunor has signed a proclmnation for this event which will be supported bv the FWrlda C7:SX Qlal@m, (see sample press package) B. Do you feel the events were successful? Would you add or delete any of the events if you were to implement the campaign again? The Kick-off event was successful. We feel all the involvement bas been successfulexhibits, displays, talk radio, presentationsthe public bas been very receptive tn this topic. X. TOTAL CAMPAIGN EXPENSES (MVI.SED BUDGET): Coordinator(s) salary: $ 7,000 Campaign Materials 20,000 .. : .... Surveys and Focus Group 11,380 Campaign Kickoff 198 Travel, Training & Registration 887 Phone 19 Postage 100 Miscellaneous (special materials) 41 TOTAL $40,000 33 <


XL COMMUNITVINVOLVEMENT A. List in-kind donated items and monetary contributions, as well as other governmental grants (federal, state and local) that augmented your campaign (Attached list includes only the responsesmembers observed other PSA's but companies did not document) The major category of in-kind donations was from the media through PSA' s. (list attached) The total reported from those media people that did respond to request # I and # 2 for an estimate was about $46,800. Some of the stations do not track PSA's (stating it is just an additional expense for them). We know the PSA's were used on at least three radio stations and at least three TV stations; however we received a dollar amounl from only one radio and one TV station. BUT, this amount does exceed the amount of our grant I We did not track all the donated time from CTST members and it would be impossible to estimate that amount since this was such a comprebensive campaign AND is still continuing. We felt we bad a commitment from FDOT District 1 for $5,000 from their PI & E (402 funded) grant; but there were some changes in their budget that amount was not spent to produce materials for our campaign. B. What efforts, if any, were made to enlist the support of-community organizations that do not normally deal with safety matters? What results were produced by these efforts? (see below) C : What kinds of cooperation, if any, was sought from businesses (e.g sponsoring ads or events, or providing campaign materials to employees or customers)? What kinds and amounts of cooperation were obtained? (see below) D. T o what extent was the campaign coordinated with similar activities of other agencies? How was the coordination arranged? What problems or benefits, if any, were experienced? Combined answer to B, C, D-The Polk County CTST bas been a dynamic organiration since March 1993. We established an Action Plan with specific goals and objectives. We have a wide variety of involvement in our community. We were able to enlist support/involvement from med i a they usually deal with traffic from the tragic results. Our campaign gave them the opportunity 10 be involved in the "before" aspect; perhaps preventing some of their "after" coverage. Campaign materials were primarily distributed through members of the CTST wbicli is mostly agencies. Materials were given 10 individuals, businesses, etc. upon request; i e to a high school requesting information on traffic safety. ComCar Industries put the RLR ads in their newsletter. Agencies frequently called 10 request RLR materials to incorporate into their events; i.e. Safety Days, Safety Fairs, Fairs, etc. XU. SUMMARY COMMENTS A. What were the highlights of your campaign? If any elements were particularly successful, what were they and why do you think they were so effective? As Project Director, I think the highlight (for now) will be STOP! RED UGHT RUNNING WEEK in January 1998 It represents the bringing together of 35 CTST s throughout the state. Each of these 35 CTST's is unique in its composition of memberships-we represent a wide range of interests. The Florida CTST Coalition recognized RLR as an important traffic issue 34


B. . c . . : . . . .. . ... . . . They wholeheartedly support this campaign. They are talking about making a RLR Week an Annual Event. Wbeo traffic safety campaigns are conducted they traditionally include: Booze, Belts, and Speed. We are considering permanently adding Red Light Running gs a fourth topic/! What wete the pitfalls of the campaign, if any? How did you handleloveteome these? Pethaps it would be assuming that everyone would have the same enthusiasm for this project that we (the steering committee) had. A way to overcome-getting a few facts that go to the heart of this traffic safety issue and constant l y presenting them to others. The public has been exposed to traffic safety campaigns that stress: booze, belts; and DUI. They did not realize RLR is a BIG a problem. Let's add RLR as a fourth major traffic issue!! If you were to impletoeot the RLR campaign again, what would you do differently? My suggestion as current Campaign Coordinator would be to do the grant with a full time .. . . or a part-time coordinator that is dedicated solely to this campaign. We started with all the time . . being dooated. This is always a difficult situation, since everyone has many other tasks with their jobs. I believe a person dedicated to this campaign-coordinating aU the details then asking for othetS to donate time, resources, etc. when necessary would have worked best. D. Please describe your expectations regarding the likelihood that a local effort regarding red light running will continue after the support from FHW A ends. We are already ctJntinuing with the RLR effort. The Florida CTST Coalition quickly decided to support this important traffic safety issue. Several of the members of the Coalition are interested in pursuing the legislation to allow electronic surveillance so Red Light Cameras could be used in this state About half of the 35 CTSTs in the state supported this project by distributing RLR items and information in their areas. The Coalition is supporting a selective enforcement STOP! Red Light Rllnning Week, January 11-17, 1998. A lot of people have been made aware of this continuing problem-and bow serious it is as traffic safety issue A RLR packet was distributed aJ the Florida CTST Coalition quartetly meeting held in Polk Co. on October 14; 1996 (sample enclosed). There wete 60 people in. attendance. The packet contained historical information: copy of the Proclamation from the Governor, letter from Rodney Slater, map of RLR awards sites, Fact Sheet for Polk Co, carnpaign. It also contained information and samples to promote STOP! RED UGHf RUNNING .WEEK: sample proclamation that could be adopted for local use, sample press releases; Florida CTST Coalition Fact Sheet, activity sheet (to report activity), and copy of the radio PSA scripts. This same packet was distributed at the Safety Management System Steering Committee quarterly meeting held in Tallahassee on October 24, 1997. This presented another opportunity to contact people at the state level, as well as, CTST members that did not attend the Coalition meeting Elizabeth stressed the importance of returning statistics so we can do an aftet press release CoaliJion members hltYe already suggested we pkm this RLR acdvily in January every year/ 35


E. Do you expect tbat the coalition or coordinating committee formed to deal with red light running will continue to operate with regard to other highway safety problems? Since the campaign has been coordinated through our Community Traffic Safety Team -our involvement with traffic safety issues is on going. We plan to keep red light running as a major, ongoing traffic issue. We are constantly training and updating as a Team to address and participate in other campaigns: i.e. Child Passenger Safety Week, National School Bus Safety Week, 3D Month, etc. We plan to schedule regular selective eofotcement activities for RLR. F. Please include any anecdotal evidence concerning the effects of the campaign (e.g? comments by police, comments from automobile insurance agents or claims representatives, letters to the editor of a local newspaper or volunteered comments from any one about seeing campaign materials or noticing a dec line in instances of people running red lights). There are lots of things in this category. When 1 talk to media-for example: we have a new local 24 hour TV news station called Bay News 9. I went to Pinellas County to meet with the Traffic and Transportation Reporter. She had never beard of the CTST's educating her on tbattopic was the first task. Then I started reviewing some of the traffic safety issues, talking about WHAT we do, etc. When you review the statistics on RLR, it seems to get their attention. When 1 did the Talk Radio Show, the moderator seemed as though he got a real appreciation of RLR as a traffic safety issue. The important thing is-we seem to have people tall

7.0 Co n c ht sio n s The goals of this project were 10: verify the feasibility and effectiveness of the au10mated photo enforcement technology in helping the enforcement of traffic laws; demonstrate the usefulness of technology to Florida law makers; and showcase the auiOmated enforcement technology. Part of the first goal, to determine if auiOmated photo enforcement of red light running was feasible from a technological standpoint, was accomplished. The vendors involved in this demonstration project, ATS, USPTI, and A VIAR, all provided phoiO enforcement eanteras that successfully recorded red light running violations on 35mm film. Technical difficulties arose in at one inrersection as the local authorities would not allow the camera vendor to install the camera in the standard location. This made the license plate images more difficult to read. Additionally, some tractor-trailer license plates were difficult to capture since they are mounted on the front of the vehicle and mounted in different locations on the vehicles. Only a few technological problems bad to be overcome in the field. Often with new technological applications such as this, field calibrations and alterations are required to make the product perform as expected. Meeting this goal bad the ancillary benefit of convincing other states and local agencies to pursue this technology for use in their jurisdictions A video camera was housed in one of the photo enforcement camera housings. This camera proved to be very beneficial for accident reconstruction at that intersection. The second part of th e first goal, estimating the effectiveness of photo enforcem ent on red light running, was h ampered by the fact that only educational/warning letters could be mailed to violators. Florida law requires that a law enforcement officer witness the infraction, therefore limiting the effectiveness of red light enforcement cameras. From 3 7


the data obtained b y the cameras, it was telatively easy to see the extent of the problem ill the rural area of Fort Meade Over a period of four months during this project, the red light camera ill Fort Meade caught 669 violators, and 450 educational letters wete sent. Very little inform ation is available on the impact of the photo enforcement at these in t ersec tions, and since violators were only sen t educational letters their response would not be the same as if they received a ticket in the mail. The seco nd goal, demonstra ting the usefulne ss of the technology to Florida lawmak ers, met with limited success Project participants, primarily Chief Ferris, were called before the F l orida legis lature and various committees to report o n this project and photo enforcement technology However the ultimate goal of getting a law passed allowing the use of red light nmning photo enforcement, was never accomplished. The final goal, showcasing the technology, was accomplish ed. Chief Ferri s, along with project l eaders from other FHW A sponsored demonstration projec ts, presented their findings to audiences aroun d the country. Additionally, many state and local officials conta c ted p rojec t team members to obtain information on this project. This has helped convince many states ( i ncluding California, Vir g inia, Maryland, Arizona, North Carolin a, Minnesota, New York, Kansas Illinois, Colo rado, and Washington, D C) to impl ement laws allowing the use of red light runnin g photo enfo rcement. Despite the success of the teChnology itself, there were some difficulties faced by the project. These difficulties stemmed mainly from the fact that the project was staffed and run by volunteers. As is the case with most vo lunteer efforts if the person is fully loaded with work from their regular job the volunteer effort may be sacrificed. A lso, some individuals were very interested in the pr oject, ev en championed the project, and were willing to volunteer their efforts towards making this project a success. However, these people may change jobs and be removed from th e project, as happened several times with thi s project. Their replacement s may not h ave any background ill the projec t area and may be very busy learnin.g their new job and not have any spare time to take on volunteer efforts. Like with any long-term volunteer effort these problems hampered this project. 38


Overall, participants involved with this project consider it a successful demonstration project, particularly in determining the ability of the technology to accurately, safely and cost effectively, capture red light runners on film. Due, in part, to this successful showcasing of the technology many states already have successful red light photo enforcement in place saving lives and reducing accidents. The success of the demonstration project encouraged the Florida Community Traffic Safety Team Coalition to conduct a public awareness campaign "STOP! RED LIGH T RUNNING". This campaign was endorsed by the Governor, and statewide enforcement was heightened during this week in January 1998. Due to the success of this campaign, the event will now be held annual l y. 39


Bibliography Burris, Mark and Appaxaju, Ramakrishna. "Investigation of photo enforcement for red light running," Project #300-84, Center for Urban Transportation Research, University of South Florida, May 1998. "Cameras doesn't lie about city drivers," Sun Current, Bloomington, MiMesota, 2/3/98. "Crackdown on red light runners," Tamp a Tribune, 2112/96. Genovese, Joseph. "Oxnard's Experience with Run Red Photo E nforcement." Hir, David. "Boulder may test radar, red light technology," The Boulder County Business Report, November 199 7. "Law enforcers to put the brakes on red light runners Ft. Pierce Tribune 1 /111 98. "Let cameras watch intersections, catch drivers who run red lights," Ft Pierce Tribune, 1 /26/98. "Management of the Photo Citation Program for the City of Char lo tte," Request For Proposal (RFP #98.060 -0312), The Charlotte Department of Transportation, Charlotte, North Carolina, February 1998. "Management of the Photo Citation Program for the City of Charlotte," Request For Proposal (RFP #98.021-10-23), The Charlotte Department of Transportation, Charlotte North Carolina, September 1997. "Modular Traffic Surveillance System from MultaStar," Traffic Technology International, April/May 1996. Lalani, Nazir and Fitzpatrick, Kay "Results of Survey on Proposed Position Sta tement for Automated Enforcement," ITE, 1997. "Photographic Traffic Law Enforcement," Legal Research Digest, National Cooperative Highway Research Prograrn, Number 36, December 1996. "P ho tographic Enforcement of Traffic Laws," A Synthesis of Highway Practice, NCHRP Synthesis 219, Transportation Research Board, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 1995. "Police plan to put the brakes on those who run red lights," Tallahassee Democrat, 1/7/98. 40


Raine George. "Cal ifornia Stat e turns its electronic gaze to those who run red lights," Tallahassee Democrat. "Red Light Camera Systems," Institute of Transportation Engineers Seminar Proceedings, Monterey, CA, Marc h 1998. "Red Light Camera Enforcement Project," Proposed Scope of Work for Task 2.06, Dade County Metropolitan Planning Organization, 1997-98 "Red Light Running Planning Campaign Institute of Transportation Engineers Red Light Camera Systems Seminar Proceedings, Monterey, CA, March 1998. "Red light Cameras Fact Sheet," Department of Parking and Traffic, Traffic Engineering Divisio n City and County of San Francisco, July 1997. "Reining in Red Light Runners-Readers propose tough penalties for traffic scofflaws," San Francisco Chronicle, 1127/97 "Red Eye 77 Digital Red Light Camera System, User Manual D river Safety System L td. "Red light runners may get picture-Cameras at i nterse ctions will dole out $50 citations," The Charlotte Observer, Jf/11198 "Red lights, action, cameras: city may go that route n e xt," Philadelphia Online, http://www3 phi llvnews.cornfpackages.lhel)onwheels, December 1997. Retting, Richard et al., "Evaluation of Red Light Camera Enforcement in Oxnard, California," Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, March 1998. Retting, Richard. "Statement Before the Mary lan d House of Delegates Aggressive Driving Conference on Aggressive Driving and Red Light Running," Insurance Institut e for Highway Safety, May I 997. Rening, Richard et al., "Influence of Traffic Signal Timing on Red Light Running and Potential Vehicle Conflicts at Urban Intersections," Transportation Research Board, 1997. Retting, Richard et al., "Red Light Running and Sensible Countermeasures: Summary of Research Findings," Insurance Institute for Highway Safety April 1996. Roger, Ray. "Cameras may catch red light runners," The Orlando Sentinel, 1/31196. Yee, Bond and Fle ck, Jack. "San Francisco Red Light Camera Enforcement Program." 41


Appendix Appendix A A Samp le Educational Letter Red Light Running Camera Bill from Florida Appendix B Intersectio n Layouts AppendixC Information from Red light Camera Vendors


Appendix A A Sample Educational Letter & Red Light Running Camera Bill from Florida


RT MEADE 15 N.W. First Street, Fort Meade, FL 33841 Phone: (941) 285-8191 Fax: (941) 285-6495 April 21, 1996 Dear Sir or Madam, GEORGE M. FERRIS Chief of Police In October of 1994 a traffic safety program began in certain areas of Polk County as a result of efforts by the Polk County Community Traffic Safety Program. This project includes the installation of cameras for the monitoring of traffic signals in certain areas within Polk County. On July 27, 1995 at 6:43 p.m. your vehicle, lisence tag number was photographed violating the traffic signal located at the interse ction of U.S. 17 & 98 in Fort Meade. The driver is not identifiable by the photo The potential for a serious crash is always present when the driver of a vehicle fails to stop for a red light. This Jetter is sent to you as a courtesy to remind you to drive defensively and to ahere to all traffic laws. There is no need for you to respond to this letter, but if you wish to discuss this matter contact the Administrative Services Offices at (941 )285-8191 ext. 333. Frame# 39 Sincerely, George M Ferris CHIEF OF POLICE Carolyn A Thomas Administrative Services Secretary AN INTERNATIONALLY ACCREDITED LAW ENF'ORCEMENT AGENCY CLAYTON J. HALL MEMORIAL AWARD RECIPIENT FOR EXCELLENCE IN TRAFFIC SAFETY


S 2046:Traffic Control/ Automated Monitor Florida Legislature On-Line Sunshine Bill By H undreds Amendments Staff Analysis/Bill Research S 2046: Traffic Control/Automated Monitor S 2 046 GENERAL BILL by Forman (Similar CS/H 1479 ) Vote History Page I of2 Citations Traffic Contr o l /Automated t-ionitor; defines term "traffic-infraction detector"; authorizes county or municipality t o enact ordinance that prov ides for u s e of detector to enforce traffic laws that require driver of vehicle to stop when facing steady red traffic signal; requires p ublic notice prior to use of said d etector; requires tax collector to w ithhol d issuin9 license plate or revalidation sticker if person's name appears on list of outstanding fines, e tc. Ame nds Ch. 316, 320.03. EFFECTIVE DATE: Upon becom i n g law 03/03/98 SENATE F iled 03/18/98 SENATE Introduced, referred t o Tr ansportation; Community Affairs; Nays and Means -SJ 00193 03/26/98 SENATE On Commi t tee agenda-Transportation, 03/31/ 98, 1:30pm, Room-3 0 1 C --Temporarily postponed 04/02/98 SENATE O n Committee agenda--Transportation, 04/07/98, 1 0 :00 am, Room-30 1 C --Temporarily postponed 05/01/98 SENATE D ied i n Committee on Transportation --------------------------------------------------------------------BILL TEXT: (Top) sb2046(View As: HTHL _;.;.:; ANENDMENTS: (Top) NO l\l'!ENDME:NTS AVA ILABLE --------------------------------------------------------------------STAFF ANALYSI S/BILL RESEARCH:( T o p) NO STAFF ANALYSIS/BILL RESEARCH AVAILABL E ----------------------------------------------------------------------VOTE HISTORY: (Top ) NO VOTE DATA AVAILABLE --------------------------------------------------------------------STATUTE CITATIONS: (Top) 0316.1911 -----------------------------------------------------------------------http: // sion/1998 /senate/billslbillin folhtrnlls b2046.htrnl 9117198


S 2046:Traffic ControVAutomated Monitor Page2of2 CONSTITUTION CITATIONS: NO CONSTITUTION CI TATIONS FOUND FOR BIL L Back to tile Bill By Hundreds Page :;.;.;:.; :..: : :.:"'<:: http :l/ww w .leg.s tate fl.uslsession/1998 /se natelbillslbillinfolhtrnVsb2046.html 9/17/98


Senate Bill 2046 Se nate Bill 2 0 46 CODING: Words slfiell@tl are deletions ; words underlined are additions. 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 1 7 1 8 1 2 3 < 5 6 7 8 9 19 2 0 21 22 23 Florida S enate -1998 By Forman 32-1347A-98 A bill to be entitled An act relating to traffic control; amendln9 s. 316.003, F.S.; defininq the term detector; amending s. 3l6. 00S C.S.; authorizing county or municipality to enact an ordinance that provides for the use of a trattie-infraction detector to enforce traff i c laws that require the dri ve r o f a vehicle to stop when facing a steady red traffic signal ; providing for authorization o f a traffic-intretion detector officer; r equiri.nq the Department of Transportation to develop standards for traffic-infraction detector officers; public notice prior to the use o! a providing for fines; =equirin g a person be required to a driver i mprovement course follow ing a secon d violation o f the ordinance; providing that a n emerge ncy med ical trnsportation vehicle is exempt from t he ordinance; providing for a portion of proceeds of the fines iaposQd under the ordinance to be deposited S B 2 0 4 6 http ://www. leg state.fl.uslsession/1998 / senat elbillslbill t extlhtmllbillt ext/sb2046.html Page I of 14 9 111198


Senate BiiJ 2046 24 2 5 26 27 2B 29 30 3 1 into the Highway Safety Operating Trust tund of the Department of Highway Safet y and Motor Vehicles; provid i ng for the remainder of the proceeds to b e used to fund positions fo r l a w e nforcement officers and correctiona l officers; ame ndin g s 3 1 6 0745, F.S.; requir i n g tha t a traffic-infraction detector meet requirements established by t h e Departme n t of Highway Safet y 1 CODING: 'ilords Hr:.e ... er: are deletions; words underlined are additions. 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 0 7 8 9 11 1 2 1 3 15 16 1 7 Florida Senate -1998 32-1347A-9B and Motor Vehi cles; providing for testing s uch detectors; c r eating s. 316.1971, F.S.; pro viding procedu r e s for impos ing a fine for SB 2046 v i o lations o f an ordinance that provides for the use of a traffici nfract i o n detector ; providing a procedure under w h ich the operator o f a vehicl e may that the vehicle was i n the care, custody, or contro l o f another person at the time of the v iolation; providing for the violation to be contested; providin9 tha t a n i mage produced by a traffic-infract ion detector i s prima facie evidence that the violation occurred; amending s. 32 0 .03. r.s.; requiri ng t h e tax c olle ctor to Ni thhold i ssuing a l icense p late or revalidation s ticker if a person' s name appears on a list o f f ines; requ iring that a county o r m unicipal i t y h np://www.leg.stat e.fl .us /sessio n/1998 / senatelbillslbilltextlhtmVbilltextlsb2046.html Page 2 o f 14 9/17/98


Senate Bill 2046 1 8 19 20 21 22 23 that operates a traffic-infraction d etector to the Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles; providing for a summar y of such reports to be submitted to the GOI'ernor and the L e9islature; providing an effective date. 24 Be It Enacted by the Legislature of the Seate of Florida: 25 26 section 1. subsection (82) is added to section 27 F lori.da Statutes, to read: 28 3 1 6.003 Detinitions.--The f ollowin g words and phrases, 29 w hen used in this chapter, shall have the meanings 3 0 respectivel y ascribed t o t hem i n this section, except A"he-re 31 the context otherwise requires: 2 COOING: Yiords .::V'z.e t eP. are deletions; words u nderlined are additions. Florida Senate 1 998 32 1347A-98 SB 2046 l (82) TRAFFI C-INFRACTION DETECTOR. -A device that uses 2 a vehicle sensor installed to in conjunction with a 3 traffic control signal and a camera synchronized to 4 automatica l l y record two o r more sequanead photographs, 5 microphotographs, imaqes, or other recorded images 6 of a motor vahicle at the time i t fails to stop when facing a 7 steady red traffic-control signal. 8 Section 2 Subsection (7 ) is added to section 316.JOB, 9 florida Statutes, to read: 1 0 316. 0 0 8 Powers of local authorities.--ll (7) (a} A county or municipality must enact an http://www.leg.state.fl.uslsession/1998/senate/billslbilltextlbtml/bil l text/sb2046.html Page 3 of14 9117198


Senate Bi112046 12 ordinance that provides for the use of a traffic-infraction 13 detector to enforce s. 316.075{3), requires that the 14 driver of a vehicle stop the vehicle when facing a s teady red 15 traffic -control signal on the streets and highways under the 16 jurisdiction of the or municipality. The ordinance may 17 authorize the countv or municioality to contract with a 18 private orovider to i mplement this A county or 19 m unicipality that operates a traffic-infraction detector may, 2 0 by ordinance, authorize a traffic-infraction detector officer 2 1 to issue a uniform traffic citation for violations of s. 22 316.075(3) and t o enforce the paymen t of c itations for 23 violations of s. 316.075(3). The Department of Highway Safety 24 and Moto r Vehicles shall develop training and qualification 2 5 standards for detector officers. The 26 traffic-infraction detector officer must successfull y meet the 27 traini ng and q ualifications standards for traffic-infraction 2 8 detector officers established by the Department o f 29 Thi s subsection does not authorize a 30 traffic-infractio n detector officer to carrv a firearm o r 31 other weaeon and does not authorize such an officer to make 3 CODING: li1ords are deletions; lfJOrds underlined are additions. Florida Senate 1999 32-1347A-9S SB 204 6 1 arrests. The ordinance must require that a siqn be posted to 2 provide motorists with notification that a traffic-infraction 3 detector is i n use. Such signage must conform to the standards and requirements adopted b y the Department of Transportation 5 under s. The ordinance must a lso require that the bttp:l/www.l eg.state.fl us/session/1998/senatelbillslbilltextlhtmllbilltext/sb2046. h tml Page4 ofl4 9/17/98


Senate Bill2046 6 county or municipality make a public announcement and conduct 7 a public awareness campaign of the prooosed use of 8 traffic-infraction detectors at least 30 days before S commenc ing the enforcement program. In addition, the ordinance 10 must establish a schedule of fines to be assessed against the 11 registered owner of a motor vehicle whose vehicle fails to 12 stop when faci ng a steady red traffic-control signal, as 13 determined through the use of a traffi c i n fraction detector 14 any such fine imposed by ordinance may not exceed 15 $52. NOt\ any other law, an additional surcharoe, 16 fee, or cost may not be added to the civil penalty authorized 17 i n this section. 18 (b} The ordinance m ust reauire that on the second 19 violation that results in a ticket being issued the same 20 person tdthin 1 2 months, that person shal l i n addition to 2 1 being fined, be required to attend a driver i mprovement course 22 that is approved and certified by the Departmen t of Highway 23 Safety and t-1otor Ve hicles as being effective in crash 24 and v i olation rates under s 318 .1451{5). A person mav not be 2 5 required to attend driver improvement school more once 26 during anv 12 -month period. 27 (c} responding to an eme rgency call, an emergency 28 medical transportation vehi c l e i s from any ordinance 2 9 enacted under this s ubsection. 30 {d) Twenty percent of all net oroceeds collected by a 31 county or municipality as a resul t of use of a 4 CODING: .:_:::::. e :c:.r are deletions; ...... ords underlined are additions. Florida Senate -1998 32-1347A-98 SB 2046 http://www l /sen atelbill slbilltext!htmVbilltext/sb2046. h tml PageS of 14 9117/98


Senate Bill 2046 1 traffic-infraction detector must be deposited into the HighHay 2 Operating Trust Fund of the Department of Highway 3 Safet y and Motor vehicles t o be used for the p urposes for 4 which moneys in the trust fund may be including 5 hiring additional personnel for the F lorida Highway Patrol and 6 enhancing salaries of the F lorida Highway Patrol. The county 7 or municipality may use uo to 5 0 percent o f the rema ining a proceeds collected to create additional positions for l aw 9 enfor cemen t o fficers provide salary enhancements for law 10 enforcement o fficers charged with crime prevention, create 11 additional positions for correctional officers, and erovide 12 salary enhancements for correctional officers charged with the 13 custody of 1 4 Section 3 Subsection (6} of section 316 0745 Florida lS Statutes, is amended t o r ead: 16 3 16.0145 Uniform s ignal s and devices.--17 {6) ( a ) Any system of traffic contr o l devices lB control led and operated from a remote location by electronic 19 computers or similar devices eha:.:. meet a l l requirements 20 f o r the uniform s yste m :he::::. such !. 21 system affects cyste.. 9 a-ffcet the movement o traffic on state 2 2 roads.!.. the design of the system &!".a:.:. be revie wed and 2 3 appr ov e d by the Department of Transportat ion. 24 (b} Any traffic-infraction detector deployed on the 25 streets and highways of the state must meet requirement s 26 established by the Depa rtment of Highway Safet y and l-1otor 27 Vehieles and must b e tested according to procedures a n d at 28 regular prescribed by the department. 2 9 Section 4. Section 316 1 911, F lorida Statutes, is 30 c reated to read: 31 http:ffv;ww.leg. state fl.usfsessionf!998fsenate/billslbi llt e xtlhtml/b illtextfsb2046.html Page 6 ofl 4 9f!7198


Senate Bill 2046 5 COOING: 'Nords ;::z::.e::c .r. are deletions; words underlined are additions. 1 Florida Senate -1998 32-1347A-9 8 316.1911 Penalties for traffic c ontrol signal 2 v i o lations detected by traffic-infraction detector; 3 orocedures.--(1 ) {a) A or municipality must adopt an SB 204 6 5 ordinance tha t provides f o r the use o f a traffic-infraction 6 detector i n order to impose a fine o n the registered oNner of 7 a motor vehicle for a violation of an ordinance enacted under 8 s 3 16.008(7) The fine shall be imposed in the same manner 9 and is subject to the same limitations as provided for parking 10 violations under s. 316.1967. Chapter 318 and s. 322. 27 do not ll apply t o a violation of an ordinance enact e d under s. 12 316.008{1). Such violation i s not a c onvi c tion of the 13 oeerator, may not b e made part o f the drivinq record of the 14 and not be used for ourposes of setting motor 1 5 vehicle insurance rat e s Points may not be assessed based on 1 6 such a violation 17 ( b ) T h e procedur e s set forth ins. 316.1967(2)-( 5) 18 apply to a viola tion o f an o rdinance enacted under s 1 9 3 16.008(7), except that the ticket must contain the name and 2 0 address of the p erson alleged to be liab l e a s t h e 21 owner or o Perator of the motor vehicl e involved i n the 22 violation, the registration number of the vehicle, t h e 23 locat i on o f where the viol a tion occurred t he date and time of 24 the and inf ormation that identifies the device that 2 5 recorded the violation. 1he ticket must be by http : flwww leg.s t a t e.fl us / session/1998 /s ena t elbillslbillte x tlbtmllbilltexV s b2046.html Page 7 ofl4 9117/98


Senate Bill 2046 26 depositing it in first-class mail within 30 d:ays after the 21 alleged v iolation. addressed to the registerad owner of t h e 28 motor vehicle on file with the Department o f Highway Safety 29 and Motor Vehicles. The ticket must advise t h e registered 30 owner of the motor vehicle responsibl e for the violation of 31 the amoun t of the fine, t he date by which the fine must be 6 CODING: Words ...::.: :.:..::::cr. are deletions; words underlined a::-e additions. Florida Senate -1998 32-1347A-9S SB 2046 1 paid, and the procedure for the violation alleged 2 i n the ticket. The ticket must contai n a warning that failure 3 to contest the violation in the manner and time orovided is 10 deemed an admission of liability and that a default may be 5 entered thereon. The violation shal l be processed by the 6 county or that has jurisdiction over the street 7 or highNay 1t1here the violation occurred or by any entity 8 authorized by the county or municioality to prepare and mail 9 the ticket. { 2 ) The registered owner of the motor vehicle involved 1 1 in a violation is responsible and liable for payment of 1 2 fine assessed u nder this unless the owner can 1 3 establish that the motor vehicl e was. a t the t ime of the 1 4 violation, in the care. c u s tody, or control o f another person. 15 I n order t o establish such facts, the registered owner must, 16 within 20 days after receipt of of the alleged 17 violation, furnish t o the county or municipality, as 1 9 appropriate. an affidavit that sets forth: 1 9 (a} The name, address, and, if known, the driver's hnp://v.ww.leg.state.fl.uslsession/1998/senatelbillslbilltext/htmllbilltext/sb2046.html Page 8 of14 9/17/98


Senate Bill 2046 20 license number of the o erson who leased, rented, o r otherwise 2 1 had care, custody, or control of the motor vehicle at the time 22 o f the alleged violation; or 23 {b) T hat the vehicle was stolen, t.:ith a copy of the 24 eolice report attached w h ich i ndicates that the vehicle was 2 5 stolen a t the time of the alleged violation 26 27 U pon r eceipt of an affidavit, t h e person designated as having 28 had care, custody, or control of the mot o r vehicle at the time 29 of the violation may be issued a citation. The affidavit is 30 admissi b l e in a proceeding pursuant to t h i s section for the 3 1 1 CODING: Words ?-'!ri .;,:

Senate Bi112046 14 enforce collection of any penalt y not paid toJith i n the t ime 15 bv the court. 16 ( 4) A certificate sworn to or affirmed by a person 17 authorized under s. 316.008(1) who i s employed by or under 18 contract with the county or municipality t .. here the violation 19 occurred, or a facsimile thereof which is based upon 20 inspection of photographs or other recorded images produce d by 2 1 a traffic-infraction detector, i s prima facie evidence o f the 22 facts contained in the certiticate. A photograph or other 23 recorded image evidencing such a violation must b e availabl e 24 for inspection i n any proceeding to adjudicate liability for a 25 violation of an ordinance enacted under s. 3 16.008 ( 7}. 26 { 5) In any county or municipality in which tickets are 27 issued as provided i n this section, the names of Eersons who 28 have one or more outstandi n g violations may be included o n the 29 l ist authorized under s 3 16.1967(6) 30 (6} The uniform traffic citation prepared b y the 31 department unde r s. 316 650 may not be issued for any s coomG: words o,.,:;:c..;ic

Senate Bill 2046 8 referred to ins. s. 316.1967(6) or s. 9 316.1971(5} a license plate or revalidation sticker may not 1 0 be issued until that person's name no longer appears on the 11 list or until the person presents a receipt from t h e clerk 12 showing that the outstan d ing f i nes c-..:.tstar.ct:' r .; have been paid. 1 3 The tax collector and the c lerk of the court are each entitled 1 4 to recei ve monthly, as costs f o r im p lementing and 1 5 administ ering this subsection, 10 percent o f the civil 16 penalties and f ines recovered from such persons. I f the tax 1 1 collector has private tag agents, s uch tag agents are entitl e d 1 8 to receive a pro rat a share o f t he amo u n t paid t o the tax 19 col lector, based upon the percentage o f license p lates and 20 revalidation stickers issued by the tag agent compa red to the 21 total issued within t he county. The authority of any privat e 22 agent to issue license plates shall b e revoked* after notice 23 a n d a hearing as provided i n chapter 12 0, if he or she issues 24 any license plate o r revalidation sticker contrary to the 2 5 provisions of this subsection. This section applies onl y to 26 the annual renenal in the owne r s b irth month of a motor 27 vehicle reqistration and does not apply to the transfer of a 2 8 registration of a motor vehicle sold by a motor vehicle dealer 29 licensed under this c hapter, except for the transfer of 30 registrations "'hich i s inclusive of the annual This 31 9 CODING: lilords Y:-r ::.:eft are deletions; words uncierlined are additions. Florida Senate -1998 32-1347A-98 SB 2046 1 section does not affect theissuance of the title t o a motor hnp://www.leg.state.fl.uslsession/1998 / senatelbillslbilltextlhtmllbilltext/sb2046 b tml Page 11 of 14 9/17/98


Senate Bill2046 2 vehicle, not>lithstanding s 3 19.23{7) ( b ) 3 Section 6. F rom t h e funds received from fines imposed 4 under section 3 1 6 008(7), Florida S tatutes, each countv or 5 municipality that operates a traffic-infraction detector shal l 6 submit an annual report to the Deoartment o f Highway Safety 7 and Motor V ehicles by 3 0 days after the anniversary of the 8 effective date of thi s act, which details the results o f using 9 the detector and the procedures for 1 0 enf orcement. From f unds received fro m fines imposed under 1 1 section 3 16.0 08{7), Florida Statutes, the Department of 12 H i g hway Saf e t y and Notor Vehicles shall contract with t-h e 13 tlorida Transoortat ion Commission or the Center for Urban 1 4 Transportation Research to orovide a summary report to t h e 1 5 President o f the Senate, the Speaker of the House of 16 Representatives, and the Gove r nor regarding the use and 17 o p eration of traffic-infraction detectors u nder s e c t ion 18 Flor i d a S tatutes. T h e report must include a 19 revie\.; o f the information submitted to the department by the 20 counties and municipalities and must describe the enhancement 21 o f the department's traffic safety and enforcement proorams as 22 a result of the funds generated u n der section 3 16.008{1), 23 Florida S tatutes. 24 25 law. 2 6 27 2S 2 9 30 3 1 Section 7. This act shall take effect upon becom ing a 10 CODING: W ords t':::!:.a:::r. are deletions; 'dOrds underli n e d are additions. http://www.leg.state.fl.usfsession/1998/senatelbillslbilltextlhtmllbil l textfsb2046 html Page 12 of 14 9117198


Senate Bill 2046 l 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 11 12 1 3 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Senate 1998 32-1347A98 SENATE: SUMllARY SB 2046 Authorizes a county or municipa lity to adopt an ordinance t o allow the use of traffic-infraction detectors that make recorded images of motor vehicles that fail t o stop at a red light. Requ ires that the Departmen t o f Transportation develop training and standards for traffic-infraction detector officers. Requires that signs be posted to provide notice that such a detector is in use. Prov i des that the maximum fine that may be imposed under an ordinance is $52. Provides procedures for a county or municipality in issuing tickets and collecting fines. Requires the counties and municipalities that operat e a traffic-infractio n detector to annually report to the Departmen t ofl Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles. Req uires that a summary report be provided t o t h e Governor and the Legislature. (See bill for details.) http://www.leg.state!billtext/sb2046 html Page 13 of 14 9/17/98


Senate Bill2046 29 30 31 11 CODING: ,:t:::...:. : :c:. are deletions; words underlined are additions. hp:// Page 14 of 14 9/17/98


AppendixB Intersection Layouts


-----. .... BUILOIHG ---------'" .,. ho...[oV\-\Y"'\ Lo.. \C. e \.CA.."'. o\.. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I " FU>JUDA. OEPA.Itnlll'tt ot -.. . ----. -. 20' 8UU.OJNG ]'-..;.__ Ex (ST INC l /1; CA81. TO NEW YORl AY. "' I I I BUlLOING '---------I I R I'll ::;:::o:o> Rtw==--. """"":-------HQ EX IS TINC COHTAOI.I.EA. WSURMS ANO SIGNAL HEADS TO REI.IAIN. LOCATION NO. T ... S.R. 37 tS. FLORIOA AVE. I I LEUON ST. PLAN SHEET


I \\ \\ cnr I \\ I \\ \\ \ I FOn MEADE J.ONTIOV NO. 2. Sf?. 35fU.S.rTJ/S.R.70DIU.S. ''HI) BROt\DWAY AVE../S.R. 70D(U 5. XN.E: I" to' 18'AnMI'Jit .,. .. rttttfl:,_


Appendix C Information from Red Light Camera Vendors


Wlltn the Rtd Light Clmsra sysl8m is iMUJftd 24holl' Tral!lc 1ntlirsectinn The Re4 Ligh t Camera, an Automated Traffic Intersection Enforcemen t System f rom U .S. Public Technologies Inc. ( U S PT), produces photographi c evidence of vehicles Illegally r u n n ing re411ghts. The Red light Camera combines a com put e r with a h igh-speed industrial camera and subsurface detection loops to provide around-the-clock intersection enforcement. In use arou n d the world (Eurnpe. Asia and the U S .). the Red Light Camera has proven to b e extremely e ffective in preventin g accidents and redu c ing the number o f traffic i n t ersection violations. In Jackson. Michi g an, v iolation s at i n t e rsections monitored by USPT Red ligh t Cameras have b y 67%. And in Compt on, Calif orni a violations have been reduced by 84% at intersections. 1M Red Ug!Jt Camera System The Red Ligh t Camera system consists of two parts. At its core is the i nteg r ated portable Enforcement Unit that can b e moved easily from one intersection to another. This portable unit consists of a computer. highspeed camera, !lash digaal loop signal p rocessor and an optional memory card system. The fixed part.of the system, dedicated 1o a single Intersection


has w iring and d e t ection loops installed in t h e roadway, and a bullet-resistant cabinet (which houses the portabl e Enforcement Untt) m o unte. d o n a hinged pole. Approximately 80% of the system's cost i s i n the portabl e Enforcement Untt, which can be effectively rotated among a s many as ten traHic intersections. In addition t o b e ing cost-effective, this type of installation serves as an effective deterrent because potential v iolators a r e u nabl e t o tell the difference between a n a ctive and an inactive" syste m and a r e unwilling to take the c h a nce o f being ctte d Haw the Red Ught Camera Wari!J Activation of the Red Light Camer a occu r s only w h e n a vehi cle i s d etectod e nter i n g the int e rsection after t h e traffic s ig nat has t urned red. The syste m remains dormant a t a ll o ther times unless the optional component allowing the system t o record g reen-tight speeding violations i s installed. two photographs sn taken-lim, rrhan tht flllht yeJJow plnu o/tlJt sigtnl prtUding tbe


. . T raftic Services Group 10455 Sorrento Road Suhe 101 San [);ego CA 92121 619.558.8718 800.38l0053 Fax: 619.SSS.SS17 .. : : (' . .. . . . < . ... Ot$9r4U.S. 1RAXGl.IAAOk1 U.S.I'\::b1: @3!) U.S. f'll.:6c Inc. I$"" tl)tt!l kit GA.TSO ll$l'Sc


American Traffic Systems (ATS) I&: indvslry with Jf.c odvon.c.4 Rt NXIIighf $)'Sftm. The com11o is housed itt o peJtr.OMnl ot c!ongerovs inMrS6clions. Show rhol driver bt.hovior ond v i ofotion ponems ore c!:nost immerliolely modified the S)1ftm is insJoNed. To maximize elficienq c nrJ 16ve.roge cost ol on ovJomoted trQ/fi<; fN'Ifotceme-11 system. cameros con be rolot ed from sil'e Jo lwJ becoweATS splems ore inregroied ond (ulfy con M exd!onged ATS such os ra ifroocl croi119 011d highwoy wFcl'y sys.'cms. ONE CAMERA MONITORS MULTIPLE TRAFfiC LANES Rl200 cd.-enced eledronks end superior ccmero imoging options o!low for mon.itoring of fou r or more lol'ie$ oi froffi

rAAFflC DATA LOGG I N G SYS TtM Rt-200 t 30 ckryl wilh o bodup TM s p lem o4o mot bt powered by 12 Vol t batteries oc $Oi o r PRE 5CHIDULED OPIRATING MODESA loto1 cf 28 i ndividual se" l otll (phot o monllor, v i dto lope. Ros h off) con be scl!edv led per wHk. ptcwiding tlfk:ltnl dtployii\Ord I'I'IOMgtmtn.! lor indi v iduollocctions. INUGRAT!D VIDE O MONITORING AND RECORDING SYSTtM 11.200 0\ 1-.gro .. d sy:sttem-. fieab.Jtirlg 24-M Oftd ttmot. ioleoeclioA .,..;oon.g.IJ "'"'*""" llllod Rt200...! ........ bo IIMd 10 rcflic COI'Idiiiom. i o co&s;o. occur.s. .. lle CV'I bt recoad 01'1 > .. ei'Son O(_O*)M _.._ vtH"lE CIASSIFICAhON AND LENGTH DISh NcnON ltl 200"""''olely clos.sifoe ond di$lingui,;hu veh:Ciet cor$,, moiorcydn. < fhty pon oYer the orroy. Oe$igned to provid't on occurote meo:sur e of vehlde ltngtn, !hit feoh.rte obo con for but lone enlorcemenl ond troKic tngln Nrlng Rl/>\0!1 ACCISS COMMUNI C 4TION SYSTEM R.t-200 it lftt cnty red light lhot con be occtutd by t e l e phone line, cdul or comnwl!.icolio", wire, or so!d!ile li11k. New optrOI'illf poro.'l'l-'tr$ con be onclv;ololioo o.'MI oH;c 4do clo-.looclecl ..-ly. oooo c o n bo...

(Jil m ) tt IOOOTre Mcom flblomtOI .... S pttcl film T ypt tol .... film Aclo< ... .... Sgd ltiCIIor llMlllhd """"" .JO' C 60 C O n&oord 8o!ltfy 3 0 l>oyl yPont.l, ll'fO'lOQ. Of V10 Rtll'rh C.omw nioo!'.on $ y 'ltm AMIIliCAN TRAFFIC SYSTEMS 0111111. Moking Solely Hoppen. ,. .....


Perma n e n t Came r a R e cord i ng Sys t ems for Speed and/or Red -Ligh t Permanent camera recording system s for speed, s peed a n d r e d -tigh t or dedi cated red-ti g h t a r e successful i n reducing road traffic acci dents o n a permanen t basis a t the exact location of occurrence. The system can easi ly be mowd from o n e to another permanen t hou s ing. Wit h o u r patented piezo electric T s ub-su rface profiles s peed law enforcement can be undertaken vtith proven r e l iabi l ity on br idges, i n tunn e ls, o n c urves a n d corners and in dense road traffr c situatio ns, thus mal

xml version 1.0 encoding UTF-8 standalone no
record xmlns http:www.loc.govMARC21slim xmlns:xsi http:www.w3.org2001XMLSchema-instance xsi:schemaLocation http:www.loc.govstandardsmarcxmlschemaMARC21slim.xsd
leader cam 2200301Ia 4500
controlfield tag 001 025499912
005 20110909163248.0
008 100917s1998 flua l000 0 eng d
datafield ind1 8 ind2 024
subfield code a C01-00015
b .B87 1998
1 100
Burris, Mark Whitman,
0 245
Assessment of automated photo enforcement systems for Polk County signalized intersection safety improvement project /
prepared by Mark Burris and Ramakrishna Apparaju.
[Tampa, Fla. :
University of South Florida, Center for Urban Transportation Research,
1 v. :
ill. ;
28 cm.
Prepared for the Polk County Community Traffic Safety Team.
"Final report"--Cover.
"September 25, 1998."
Also issued online.
Red light running
z Florida
Polk County.
Traffic violations
Polk County.
Electronic traffic controls
Polk County.
Law enforcement
Polk County
x Automation.
Apparaju, Ramakrishna.
2 710
University of South Florida.
Center for Urban Transportation Research.
t Center for Urban Transportation Research Publications [USF].
4 856