4. PROGRAM DESIGN
This section describes the design of the program, the specific neighborhoods selected for study in each city, and the countermeasures that were implemented in each neighborhood. The neighborhoods were selected by traffic engineering and police representatives in each city. Countermeasures were proposed and designed by members of a study working group consisting of project staff and local traffic engineering and police personnel. Selections of countermeasures to be implemented in the various neighborhoods were made by city representatives. All print countermeasures were distributed on a CD-ROM so that city representatives could select the items of interest and adapt them as desired for each neighborhood.4.1 Approach
The study involved the use of two cities and three neighborhoods within each. The goal was to implement a variety of countermeasures in three different environments – streets with pre-existing physical traffic calming; streets not scheduled for physical changes; and streets on which education and enforcement would be mounted along with roadway changes, such as speed humps, during the study period.
The adopted approach was not amenable to an experimental/comparison design because there would have been no reasonable way to select six comparison neighborhoods that were suitably matched with the selected experimental neighborhoods. In fact, as discussed below, the test areas were selected in part because they were unique or at least different from the norm with respect to interest in achieving speed reductions. Therefore, a longitudinal, pre/post study design was adopted. Baseline speed and knowledge/attitude measures were collected in each neighborhood before any countermeasures were started. One additional attitude/knowledge survey was conducted after countermeasure implementation. At least two additional post-initiation speed measurements were collected. On those test streets on which treatments were phased, up to two supplemental speed measurements were collected in order to assess the incremental effects of the added countermeasures.4.2 Study Neighborhoods
As indicated previously, three neighborhoods/streets were selected for study in each city. The rationale for selection was fourfold. First, the location had to meet the requirements of the study, i.e., a road or neighborhood with existing traffic calming, planned calming during the study period or no planned engineering treatments for the foreseeable future. Second, the location had to be of interest to the cooperating city either because of a history of complaints or because of known speeding violations and previous unsuccessful efforts to curtail them. Third, the neighborhood had to have an active association or one or more vocal residents who would agree to spearhead the countermeasure efforts. Fourth, the neighborhood had to have pedestrian activity that could potentially be made safer by a reduction in vehicle speeds. Pedestrian crash counts were not used in the selection of neighborhoods because the expected numbers in any given neighborhood are quite small.
The areas selected for study in Phoenix were:
The neighborhoods/roadways selected for study in Peoria were:
Thus, there were actually 10 road segments addressed by the study as shown by the maps in Appendix E2. Across these 10 road segments, all of the desired study conditions were present and replicated at least once:
The planning and preparation for the program began in early 2002 with the formation of a steering group and the development of materials as described below. A baseline set of evaluation measures was collected during October 2002. Countermeasure implementation commenced at the end of October. The planned active period for the countermeasures was three months. In actuality, the education and engineering efforts had no fixed end dates. The special enforcement program took place over a three-month period in Peoria . The enforcement effort in Phoenix was extended to six months because of the high local interest in the effort. The final evaluation measures were collected in February 2003. A detailed time phasing of the countermeasure implementation is presented below.4.4 Program Organization, Slogan, and Logo
The countermeasures used during this study were not discrete efforts by the project staff. Rather, they were part of a coherent campaign mounted by Phoenix and Peoria working together. The organization of the program and its developed identity were an important part of its operation.4.4.1 Program Organization
By design, the countermeasure program to be tested included a representation of all three E's – education, enforcement, and engineering. In both Phoenix and Peoria , both engineering and traffic safety education are within the purview of the cognizant traffic engineering agencies3. Enforcement responsibilities obviously rest within the police departments in both jurisdictions. A planning and steering committee was therefore established that included these four agencies as well as the Dunlap and Associates project staff. This group met approximately every six weeks from the outset through the end of the data collection period.
One of the first decisions made by the steering group was to develop a slogan and logo around which activities could coalesce. The group also agreed that a single unifying theme was desirable as opposed to separate identities for Phoenix and Peoria . The logic in this decision was that both cities share media, and many commuters to Phoenix live in Peoria . There was also a desire to have a single program identity going forward if the test project proved successful.4.4.2 Slogan and Logo
Heed the Speed was selected as the slogan for the speed reduction activities. The name had been used previously by the Phoenix Police Department for a small pilot program that used a variety of education and enforcement techniques to produce a reduction in speeds in one neighborhood of Phoenix . That program has continued at a reduce level of police involvement. Since the goals of the current effort were largely the same as those in this pilot program, the Phoenix Police Department suggested that the same name be employed, and the Peoria participants concurred.
A stylized version of a police officer writing a ticket was designed for the program logo. The slogan and logo appeared on most of the educational materials used in the study. They also appeared on street and lawn signs that were displayed throughout the duration of the program. The slogan and logo for the study are shown in Figure 1. The sign is black on white except that the emblem on the police officer's hat and the pad and pencil in the officer's hand are bright yellow.
4.4.3 Homeowner's Association Meetings
As discussed earlier, one of the selection criteria for the test neighborhoods was the existence of an active homeowner's association or at least a vocal and cooperative group of residents. Therefore, when possible, the program started in each neighborhood with a homeowner's association meeting. At these meetings, representatives from their cities apprised residents of the purpose of the program and the various planned activities. In addition, volunteers were solicited for some program activities (e.g., distributing education flyers, displaying lawn signs, and monitoring vehicle speeds).
Two of the Peoria meetings took place before the formal start of the program – the Desert Harbor/91 st Avenue meeting took place on September 4, 2002, and the Bell Park/84 th Avenue meeting took place on October 10, 2002. Therefore, these meetings may have slightly contaminated the baseline in these communities by unveiling program objectives and the impending enforcement and education activities before the initial speed measurements were collected. The effect, if any, is likely small. The 95 th Avenue meeting occurred on October 21, 2002 – the day the program started in Peoria . A further meeting was held on November 14, 2002, with the Spinnaker Cove subdivision of the Desert Harbor community.
In Phoenix , a combined meeting of the Moon Valley/Coral Gables and Sweetwater residents took place on October 22, 2002, the day the program officially started. There was no meeting with Clarendon residents since they had no homeowner's association.4.5 Education Materials
The project developed all of the education materials used in the test. The general approach was to discuss media forms and themes at the planning committee meeting. Once there was agreement on an approach, a draft was produced and reviewed at the next meeting. After including any desired changes, a final version was produced. In addition to initial print runs, all of the materials were supplied to each city in electronic form so that they could be customized as needed for specific audiences. Each of the major education items is discussed below.4.5.1 Street and Lawn Signs
Retroreflective metal street signs with the program slogan and logo were displayed at the entrance to each of the test roads in the neighborhoods under study. Measuring 24 x 12 inches, the signs were designed to meet the specifications for street signs in both cities and were produced by the City of Phoenix sign shop for both cities without cost to the project. They matched the width of a speed limit sign and were mounted below the first speed limit sign on the street. The program street sign is shown in Figure 2. As with the basic logo, the sign is black on white except that the emblem on the police officer's hat and the pad and pencil in the officer's hand are bright yellow.
Overall in Peoria , four signs were mounted on each road segment – two in each direction. In Phoenix , the longer road segments received four signs while the shorter got only two. Thus, four signs were mounted on Sweetwater Avenue and Coral Gables Drive , two on Clarendon and one on Moon Valley .
Lawn signs were designed for the program, and homeowners were encouraged to display them on their property. These signs were reproduced in black on a bright yellow background on both sides of a piece of 24 x 16 Coroplast™, a corrugated plastic material supported on the lawn by an H-shaped wire stake. The triangle with the pedestrians is a halftone of the yellow color, and the police officer's cap and pad are white. A place on the sign was reserved for the name of the applicable homeowner's association, as desired; however none of the neighborhoods chose to personalize the signs. The program lawn sign is shown in Figure 3. Initially, 600 signs were produced and distributed evenly between the two test cities. After the initial distribution and some attrition of signs on Halloween, an additional 400 signs were printed and split between the cities. The total cost for the signs and stakes for mounting them was less than $3,000.
Several flyers and other types of printed materials were produced for the program. A black and white copy of each is contained in Appendix C. The specific flyers that were reproduced typically in black on either white or on variously colored paper included:
In addition to the printed materials, five live copy radio spots on the dangers of speeding were prepared for distribution to local radio stations. These were short and suitable for use as either a public service announcement or as part of a station break/promo.
All print materials were reproduced on a CD-ROM and provided to local transportation representatives in both cities. Thus, the materials could be customized for individual neighborhoods as desired.
4.5.3 Earned Media
The existence of the program also generated its own education countermeasures. One was an article in the local newspaper describing the program. Another was a taped interview on the Phoenix Channel 11 television program called Leading Edge. In that program, local Phoenix transportation and police personnel described the many program components. Another was a news spot on Phoenix Channel 5 in which a reporter did a live story from 95 th Avenue in Peoria . Heed the Speed generated additional earned media through the Phoenix cable channel, city council sessions, caller-on-hold messages and a radio spot in Peoria . Valley-wide radio spots were sent out by the City of Phoenix . In addition, Peoria representatives developed a variety of print materials that were specific to its neighborhoods under study. These materials were mentioned quite frequently in the mail survey responses that were part of the evaluation (see Section 5).4.6 Enforcement Activities
In addition to being active participants in program planning and neighborhood meetings, police in each city assumed responsibility for the following activities:
It was agreed among the steering committee, Dunlap project representatives, and NHTSA sponsors that special enforcement activities were needed in addition to routine neighborhood patrols. In this context, special enforcement meant both increased patrols and more stringent criteria for making stops whether as a warning or to issue a citation. To accomplish the desired special enforcement activities, the project gave each jurisdiction a small subcontract to fund some police overtime. The funding covered only a portion of the total supervisory and patrol time that was involved in the heightened enforcement effort.
In Peoria , officers of the traffic squad implemented special enforcement for three months. Their strategy was to get the attention of the neighborhoods scheduled for subsequent engineering changes at the outset and then to focus on the remaining neighborhoods that were not receiving physical alterations.
Phoenix implemented a six-month enforcement campaign that focused on all three neighborhoods. Rather than “blitz” an area and then leave, the Phoenix police strategy involved rotating officers through all of the areas on a regular basis. In addition to the regular patrol, the Phoenix Police Department employed officers in radar speed unit training for many of the special patrols. Through this approach, they were able to support the program and provide valuable training experience to new officers in the proper procedures for traffic stops.
During the special enforcement time periods, virtually all vehicles that were traveling faster than the posted speed limit were subject to being stopped. The typical allowance of five to seven miles per hour over the limit was largely ignored as a criterion for making a stop. After the stop, the officer approached the vehicle, announced the violation, and performed a routine check on the driver's license. With regard to the speed violation, initially only drivers who were flagrantly disobeying the law or who were uncooperative or belligerent were ticketed. The remainder who were not ticketed received a verbal warning and the facsimile of a speeding ticket with the education material on its reverse side. Officers either discussed the literature with the driver or waited while the driver read it. As shown in Appendix C, the message for drivers pointed out the dangers and penalties of speeding. The idea was to make the violator think he or she was about to receive a citation and then make it clear that it was just a warning.
Also, for each stop, the officer filled out a motorist stop form, a copy of which is included in Appendix D. This form was designed to obtain information on the drivers who were speeding in the neighborhood. It provided data on the location of the stop, the proximity of the driver's address to the neighborhood, the driver's age and gender, whether or not the driver was wearing a safety belt, how often the driver traveled on the road, the number of people in the vehicle, the vehicle type and model year, and the outcome of the stop (that is, if the officer gave the driver a ticket and/or literature). Information obtained from this form is described in Section 5 of this final report.4.6.2 Neighborhood Speed Watches
Neighborhood speed watches are groups of citizen volunteers who use speed radar units provided by the police department to monitor speeds near their homes. Police train the volunteers on how to use the radar guns, what information to collect and how to collect the information. When speeders are clocked, they can report the license plate, speed, time and place of the observation to the police. Follow-up typically consists of a warning or educational letter to the registered owner of the vehicle.
The police departments in both Peoria and Phoenix acquired additional radar units and trained volunteers to use them to measure the speeds of vehicles at various points in their neighborhoods. Although there was much enthusiasm among the trainees, this obviously did not carry over into the actual use of the radars as the Phoenix Police received no citizen reports on the watches, and the Peoria Police received only a few.4.6.3 Deployment of Speed and Photo Speed Enforcement Trailers
A trailer or speed van that displayed a vehicle's speed as it passed was deployed in both cities. In Peoria , it was deployed on 17 different days during the three-month study period – six days in Bell Park , eight days on 95 th Avenue , and three days in Desert Harbor . In Phoenix the photo speed enforcement trailer was deployed in the Moon Valley/Coral Gables neighborhood approximately once per week during the first two months of the program. It was deployed at the 15 mph zone on Coral Gables at Moon Valley Elementary School . No speed data were collected during these deployments but photo enforcement was conducted. The Phoenix City Council only allows automated speed enforcement in school zones, which limited the use of this enforcement tool.4.7 Engineering and Roadway Treatments
The countermeasure program included two types of roadway treatments. The first were standard vertical treatments that were permanently affixed to the roadway. The second were surface treatments intended to create the illusion of an impediment or simulate an engineering treatment.4.7.1 Vertical Treatments
Two of the test road segments had vertical treatments added during the test. The north/south segment of Moon Valley Drive in Phoenix had two speed humps added early in 2003 prior to the final wave of speed measurements. Four speed tables were added to 84 th Avenue in Peoria prior to the third wave of measurements there in December 2002. These speed tables were combined with one of the innovative pavement markings as described below.
In addition to the vertical treatments on Moon Valley and 84 th Avenue , there were existing speed humps on Clarendon Avenue in Phoenix and on 85 th Lane in the Peoria Bell Park neighborhood.4.7.2 Visual Treatments
One of the countermeasure ideas initiated from the expert panel and more fully discussed during Phoenix/Peoria steering committee meetings consisted of innovative pavement markings that would not present an actual barrier to travel but would appear to be an impediment. During the process of defining specific countermeasures, two commercially available products were identified – Solidsheet 3-Dimensional Road Marking and Tyregrip™ surfacing.
Solidsheet 3-Dimensional Road Marking (“3-D marking”) is a product of Sekisui Jushi Corporation in Japan4. This patented material is a geometrically shaped, multi-colored thermoplastic flat sheet that creates an optical illusion of a three-dimensional object in the roadway. Retroreflective glass beads are incorporated into the sheets for increased nighttime visibility. The 3-D marking material has been used for a variety of road marking tasks such as crosswalks and edge lines. Previous research on the 3-D marking showed encouraging results (Organization for Traffic Safety, 2001).
The 3-D markings come in a variety of shapes and sizes. For this project's applications, the “ Large Mountain ” shapes were used as shown in Figure 4. The markings are installed by first applying a primer to the road surface. Then the sheets are placed on the ground in the predetermined pattern and heated with a torch until they adhere to the pavement.
In Peoria, 3-D markings were applied on 85 th Lane between two of the existing speed humps and at seven locations on 84 th Avenue – four on the four newly installed speed tables (see Figure 5) and three in the spaces between the new speed tables (see Figure 6). The material was also applied alone without vertical treatments at five locations on 95 th Avenue . In Phoenix , it was applied at three locations on Coral Gables Drive .
Tyregrip™ is a combination of a two-part resin binder with a drop-on aggregate5. Although primarily designed for skid resistance, the appearance of the material can be structured so that it resembles a speed table, crosswalk or neighborhood entry treatment. Tyregrip™ was not used in Peoria . In Phoenix , it was applied at five locations on Coral Gables Drive and six locations on Sweetwater Avenue . A Tyregrip™ installation on Coral Gables Drive in Phoenix is shown in Figure 7.
Figure 4. 3-D Markings on 85 th Lane in Peoria
Figure 7. Tyregrip™ Installation on Coral Gables Drive in Phoenix
4.8 Program Implementation Timeline
Table 1 summarizes the timeline of the implementation of program activities in each of the two cities. A more detailed description of the specific activities on each road segment within each neighborhood can be found later in the report in Table 59.