Photo Radar: Demonstration Project Evaluation
Photo Radar: Demonstration Project Evaluation
Executive Summary
Cities of Beaverton and Portland, Oregon
January 1997
Cities of Beaverton and Portland, Oregon
January 1997
Introduction
Portland and Beaverton (the "Cities") received authority from the 1995 Oregon State Legislature to conduct a two-year test of photo radar. Photo radar is a speed enforcement tool operated by trained police officers in a marked police vehicle. When radar detects a speeding vehicle, a camera takes a photograph of the driver and license plate, and a reader board displays the vehicle's speed to the driver. A citation is then mailed to the registered owner of the vehicle.
Senate Bill 382 requires the Cities to present an evaluation of photo radar to the Oregon Department of Transportation for presentation to the 1997 Legislative Assembly. To respond to this request, the Cities examined photo radar's public acceptance, its impact on traffic safety, and its implementation procedures. The Cities' findings from the first nine months of operations are presented in this evaluation. The full demonstration project runs through December 31, 1997.
Background
Speeding is one of the most frequent complaints to city officials in Portland and Beaverton. In 1995, Portland residents alone lodged more than 700 speeding complaints with the Portland Bureau of Traffic Management and Police Traffic Division. Speeding in neighborhoods and school zones compromises the livability and safety of neighborhoods. It makes playing outdoors hazardous to children, it increases background noise due to vehicles, and it makes walking, bicycling, and driving dangerous for all.
Unfortunately, both Cities lack sufficient resources to adequately enforce speed laws. For example, in Portland at any one time, the city has only four to six officers on duty to provide traffic enforcement and investigate accidents on over 1,700 miles of streets. To encourage drivers to slow down, Portland and Beaverton supplemented traditional police enforcement with educational programs such as "speed watch," and engineering solutions such as speed bumps.
To further improve traffic safety and neighborhood livability, Portland neighborhood activists developed the Reclaiming Our Streets (ROS) Community Action Plan in 1993. One primary goal of the plan is to, "reduce traffic speeds and volumes on neighborhood streets to make them safer for pedestrians, bicyclists, and residents, with special regard for children." In the ROS Plan, residents identified photo radar as a possible solution to speeding in neighborhoods and school zones. The ROS Implementation Team, appointed by the City Council to follow up on the Community Action Plan, played the lead role in advocating for photo radar legislation.
Program Goals & Objectives
Consistent with the desires of its citizen supporters, the goal of the Cities' photo radar program is to slow speeding motorists in neighborhoods and school zones thereby diminishing the frequency and severity of collisions and contributing to neighborhood livability and safety. The expectation is that if the risk of being ticketed increases through the use of photo radar, motorists will slow down to avoid being ticketed.
The photo radar demonstration project, which began in January 1996, tests photo radar's effectiveness as a speed enforcement tool. The four main objectives of the demonstration project are to:
- Evaluate public acceptance of photo radar as a speed enforcement tool;
- Determine if photo radar effectively controls speed on residential streets and in school zones;
- Evaluate the administrative process, including citation issuance, delivery and adjudication. Assess the impact on police and court operations as well as the fiscal impact of the program; and,
- Suggest design or planning changes that might reduce traffic congestion on residential streets or use of such streets as thoroughfares. Appendix B of the Photo Radar Evaluation Report addresses this issue.
Portland and Beaverton strictly adhered to the requirements of the legislation. A project team representing government and residents created a unified set of policies and procedures, attached as Appendix D, that reinforce the project's legislative requirements. The Cities also took steps to make drivers aware that photo radar is one tool police use to enforce speed laws including an extensive public information campaign in December 1995 and January 1996.
Photo Radar Technology & Citation Processing
Photo radar consists of a narrow-beam, low-powered Doppler radar antenna aimed across the road, a high-speed traffic camera and flash unit, and a computer that records the date, time, speed and location of the violation. The system is mounted in a police vehicle that may move to any school zone or neighborhood with a speed-related problem. A reader board in the back window of the police unit displays the vehicle's speed to the driver.
The officer operating the equipment evaluates each location to determine the appropriate speed threshold at which to issue citations. In determining this threshold, officers consider posted speed, weather, time of day, and normal speed patterns. The camera photographs all vehicles exceeding this threshold. The officer does not operate photo radar for more than four hours a day in any one location.
The Cities lease the photo radar vehicles and equipment from a private vendor, who is also responsible for processing the film, identifying the registered owners from Driver and Motor Vehicle Services (DMV), and printing citations for signature by the officer who witnessed the violation. Citations are mailed within six business days of the violation and the citation recipient has 30 days to respond. Photographs are not mailed with the citation.
A person receiving a citation has three options: pay the fine, request and attend a court trial, or complete a certificate of innocence. The registered owner may submit a certificate of innocence with a copy of his or her driver's license only if he or she was not the driver at the time of the violation. Once the registered owner submits a certificate of innocence, the court dismisses the citation.
The Evaluation
PUBLIC ACCEPTANCE
Awareness and approval of photo radar increased in both Cities according to public opinion surveys conducted in September 1995 and again in September 1996.
See Table 1.
See Table 1.
| TABLE 1 Summary of Public Opinion Survey Results, Beaverton | |||
| Beaverton | Beaverton | Beaverton | |
| Sept 1995 | Sept 1996 | % change | |
| Awareness of photo radar as a police speed enforcement tool | 28% | 85% | +60% |
| Approval for photo radar use in school zones | 81% | 88% | +7% |
| Approval for photo radar use in neighborhoods | 68% | 78% | +10% |
| TABLE 1 Summary of Public Opinion Survey Results, Portland | |||
| Portland | Portland | Portland | |
| Sept 1995 | Sept 1996 | % change | |
| Awareness of photo radar as a police speed enforcement tool | 42% | 88% | +46% |
| Approval for photo radar use in school zones | 82% | 89% | +7% |
| Approval for photo radar use in neighborhoods | 69% | 74% | +5% |
Residents also expressed support for photo radar use in other areas not authorized under the current photo radar statute, including construction zones, business zones, and any city street. In addition, eighty percent of respondents in both Cities supported issuing citations to businesses. Business and public agencies do not register their cars as individual drivers and therefore under the photo radar statute only receive warning letters. Finally, 58 percent of the individuals calling the photo radar hotline-established to respond to residents' questions and concerns-expressed support for photo radar, 33 percent did not express support or opposition and only 9 percent expressed opposition to the program.
BEAVERTON TRAFFIC SAFETY STUDY
Beaverton conducted two traffic safety studies to determine the effectiveness of photo radar in reducing speeds. In the first study, engineers collected speed data on select streets in October 1995 before photo radar deployment, and compared it to speed data collected in February 1996 on the same streets some with and some without photo radar deployment. February results showed that:
- The percentage of vehicles exceeding 30 mph (more than five mph over the posted speed limit) declined by 28 percent on streets with photo radar and increased by 16 percent on the streets without photo radar; and,
- Average speeds decreased on the streets with photo radar by 1.6 percent and increased by 2.7 percent on the streets without photo radar.
In the second study conducted in April 1996, Beaverton engineers collected speed data on streets using photo radar and from the other streets using no photo radar on the same day. The engineers collected the speed data from the same streets one week later when photo radar was not deployed on any of the streets. The study results showed that photo radar reduced speeds in the first and second weeks:
- Thirty-nine percent fewer vehicles exceeded 30 mph on the streets with photo radar than on the streets without photo radar during week one. Forty-five percent fewer vehicles exceeded 30 mph on the streets with photo radar than on the streets without photo radar during week two.
- Average speeds on the streets with photo radar were 4.6 percent lower than on streets without photo radar in week one and 5.4 percent lower in week two.
PORTLAND TRAFFIC SAFETY STUDY
Portland's traffic safety study compared data collected from June to September on streets that received intensive photo radar enforcement with data collected on streets with no photo radar enforcement. The study showed:
- The percentage of vehicles exceeding the posted speed limit by more than 10 mph decreased by 27 percent on streets with photo radar and increased by 12 percent on the streets without photo radar; and,
- Average speeds dropped by 2.0 mph on the streets with photo radar and increased by 0.2 mph on the streets without photo radar.
- Portland's study also compared data collected from June to September on streets that received intensive photo radar enforcement with data collected on streets where photo radar deployment was discontinued as of June 1. The study showed:
- The percentage of vehicles exceeding the posted speed limit by more than 10 mph averaged 8.9 percent lower on streets with photo radar than on the streets where photo radar was discontinued; and,
- Eighty-fifth percentile speeds averaged 1.8 mph lower on streets with photo radar compared to streets where photo radar was discontinued.
Neither city was able to evaluate photo radar's effect on reducing collisions because collision statistics for the demonstration period are not yet available.
ADMINISTRATIVE PROCESS
The administrative process includes citation issuance, delivery, payment and adjudication, the impact on court and police processes, and fiscal impact.
Citation Issuance
Speeders are issued citations following a multi-step process that ensures that the violation photograph, the violation data, and the ownership information are as accurate as possible. If any of this evidence and information do not meet stringent quality control standards, citations are not issued. Approximately 50-55% of violations observed resulted in actual citations or warning letters during the demonstration period. Photo radar citations now account for 25 percent of the total moving violation citations issued by the Portland Police Bureau and 75 percent of the total moving violation citations issued by the Beaverton Police Department. However, the issue rate for Portland and Beaverton is lower than originally anticipated for a variety of reasons, some within the Cities control, and some outside their control. Tables 2 and 3 summarize the statistics for the first nine months of the photo radar program.
| TABLE 2 Summary of Violations and Citations, Beaverton | |||
| BEAVERTON | BEAVERTON | ||
| February–September 1996* | Number | Percent of Total Violations | |
| Hours of Operation | 1,055 | n/a | |
| Locations Visited | 150 | n/a | |
| Violations Witnessed | 12,461 | 100% | |
| Citations and Warning Letters Issued | 6,911 | 55% | |
| Citations Issued | 6,405 | 51% | |
| Warning Letters Issued | 506 | 4% | |
| Average Violations Per Hour | 13 | n/a | |
| Average Citations Per Hour | 7 | n/a | |
| TABLE 2 Summary of Violations and Citations, Portland | |||
| PORTLAND | PORTLAND | ||
| February–September 1996* | Number | Percent of Total Violations | |
| Hours of Operation | 1,022 | n/a | |
| Locations Visited | 250 | n/a | |
| Violations Witnessed | 19,385 | 100% | |
| Citations and Warning Letters Issued | 9,752 | 50% | |
| Citations Issued | 8,966 | 46% | |
| Warning Letters Issued | 786 | 4% | |
| Average Violations Per Hour | 22 | n/a | |
| Average Citations Per Hour | 11 | n/a | |
| TABLE 3 Non-issued Citations, Beaverton | |||
| BEAVERTON | BEAVERTON | ||
| Reason for Non-issue | Number | Percent of Total Violations | |
| Driver or license plate not identifiable from the photo* | 2,963 | 23.7% | |
| Citation could not be issued within 6 business days** | 1,213 | 9.7% | |
| Driver information from DMV does not match photo | 517 | 4.2% | |
| No DMV information | 374 | 3% | |
| Other*** | 483 | 3.9% | |
| Total | 5,550 | 44.5% | |
| TABLE 3 Non-issued Citations, Portland | |||
| PORTLAND | PORTLAND | ||
| Reason for Non-issue | Number | Percent of Total Violations | |
| Driver or license plate not identifiable from the photo* | 4,778 | 24.7% | |
| Citation could not be issued within 6 business days** | 1,756 | 9.1% | |
| Driver information from DMV does not match photo | 1,061 | 5.4% | |
| No DMV information | 940 | 4.8% | |
| Other*** | 1,098 | 5.7% | |
| Total | 9,633 | 49.7% | |
* The most common reasons are dark interior, windshield glare and obstructed license plate.
** The photo radar statute mandates that citations be delivered in 6 business days. Impediments to meeting this deadline include inability to obtain ownership information from DMV due to computer problems, availability of officers to sign citations, and any processing equipment malfunction.
*** These include film problems and test photos, operator error, and emergency vehicles.
Citation Delivery, Payment & Adjudication
Most people who received a citation paid it. Average payment was $71 in Beaverton and $66 in Portland. Registered owners who submitted a certificate of innocence correctly completed the form 98 percent of the time, though 13 percent did not include a copy of the front of their drivers' license. In addition, at least 9 percent of registered owners submitting certificates of innocence falsely represented themselves. Table 4 summarize the manner in which citations recipients resolved their citations.
| TABLE 4 Manner In Which Citation Recipients Resolved Their Citations | |||
| BEAVERTON | PORTLAND | ||
| Returned Mail | 4% | 2% | |
| Failure to Respond | 5% | 6% | |
| Court | 3% | 2% | |
| Certificate of Innocence | 14% | 16% | |
| Payment | 74% | 74% | |
Court Trials
Three percent of the citation recipients in Beaverton and 2 percent in Portland requested a court trial. The photographic evidence supported by police testimony has resulted in high conviction rates in the courtroom. No one has appealed a case and neither Cities' court has received a serious legal challenge to photo radar use.
Affect on Police and Court Operations
While photo radar gave police a flexible new tool, it also created new challenges, including scheduling conflicts, increased court time, and tedium. Photo radar also increased citation volume, data entry, and processing requirements on the courts. Both the police and the courts have successfully addressed these challenges.
Fiscal Impact
Fiscally, photo radar is presently not generating significant revenue for the Cities, though it does generate revenue for the state and county general funds. From February to September the City of Beaverton realized $61,929 in net revenue, not including court and police officer costs. The City of Portland has subsidized the Portland photo radar program with $58,000 through September 1996, not including police officer costs. The fact that Beaverton uses a municipal court and Portland uses a district court is the primary reason for this revenue difference.
Conclusions
Photo radar is a highly efficient speed enforcement tool
- Photo radar is a highly efficient speed enforcement tool.
The public strongly supports photo radar
- Public support for photo radar is high.
Photo radar helps reduce both average speeds and excessive speeding
- Police using photo radar reduce speeds in neighborhoods.
Photo radar expanded traffic enforcement
- Photo radar increases an officer's ability to issue citations.
Both Cities effectively developed and managed the administration of the photo radar program
- The Cities delivered the citations to the correct registered owner.
Recommendations
Overall Recommendations
- Continue to use photo radar in the Cities of Portland and Beaverton.
Public Acceptance Recommendations
- Continue to inform and educate the public about photo radar.
Traffic Safety Recommendations
- Allow photo radar on streets with more accidents.
Administrative Recommendations
- Allow the Cities to enforce a consequence against individuals who falsely represents themselves on the certificate of innocence.