BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    Ó



                                                                      



           ------------------------------------------------------------ 
          |SENATE RULES COMMITTEE            |                   AB 348|
          |Office of Senate Floor Analyses   |                         |
          |1020 N Street, Suite 524          |                         |
          |(916) 651-1520         Fax: (916) |                         |
          |327-4478                          |                         |
           ------------------------------------------------------------ 
           
                                         
                                 THIRD READING


          Bill No:  AB 348
          Author:   Buchanan (D), et al.
          Amended:  7/7/11 in Senate
          Vote:     21

           
           SENATE TRANSPORTATION & HOUSING COMM.  :  6-3, 7/5/11
          AYES:  DeSaulnier, Kehoe, Lowenthal, Pavley, Rubio, 
            Simitian
          NOES:  Gaines, Harman, Huff
           
          SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE  :  Senate Rule 28.8
           
          ASSEMBLY FLOOR  :  71-0, 5/5/11 (Consent) - See last page for 
            vote


           SUBJECT  :    Vasco Road:  double fine zone

           SOURCE  :     Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors


           DIGEST  :    This bill allows, until January 1, 2017, the 
          designation of a Safety Enhancement-Double Fine Zone on a 
          segment of Vasco Road in Alameda and Contra Costa counties, 
          upon approval of resolutions by the boards of supervisors 
          in both counties. 

           ANALYSIS  :    Existing law establishes that the conditions 
          for designating Safety Enhancement-Double Fine Zones (DFZs) 
          are:
           
          1. The segment is part of the state highway system.
                                                           CONTINUED





                                                                AB 348
                                                                Page 
          2


          2. The segment has a rate of total collisions per mile per 
             year that is at least 1.5 times the statewide average 
             for similar roadway types during the most recent 
             three-year period for which data are available.

          3. The segment has a rate of head-on collisions per mile 
             per year that is at least 1.5 times the statewide 
             average for similar roadway types during the most recent 
             three-year period for which data are available.

          Additionally, existing law requires the Department of 
          Transportation (Caltrans), every two years, in consultation 
          with the Department of the California Highway Patrol (CHP), 
          to certify that a road segment meets the aforementioned 
          criteria.

          SB 3 (Torlakson), Chapter 179, Statutes of 2006, designated 
          a segment of Vasco Road between the Interstate 580 junction 
          in Alameda County and the Walnut Boulevard intersection in 
          Contra Costa County, upon approval of county resolutions, 
          as a DFZ until January 1, 2010.  The bill required 
          Caltrans, one year prior to the termination of the DFZ, to 
          evaluate the effectiveness of the DFZ to reduce traffic 
          accidents, injuries, and fatalities and to recommend to the 
          Legislature whether the DFZ should be reauthorized.
           
           This bill:

          1. Allows the counties of Contra Costa and Alameda to 
             designate the segment of county highway known as Vasco 
             Road, between the SR 580 junction in Alameda County and 
             the Walnut Boulevard intersection in Contra Costa 
             County, as a DFZ upon the approval of resolutions by 
             both counties' boards of supervisors.

          2. Requires the local governing bodies, prior to 
             designating the DFZ, to do each of the following:

             A.    Undertake a public awareness campaign to inform 
                the public of the DFZ, its location, purpose, and 
                consequences.

             B.    Implement increased traffic safety enhancements, 

                                                           CONTINUED





                                                                AB 348
                                                                Page 
          3

                enforcement, and other roadway safety measures.

          3. Requires the local authority to place the signage at the 
             DFZ beginning and end points.

          4. Requires the counties, in consultation with Caltrans, 
             jointly to conduct an evaluation of the effectiveness of 
             the DFZ and report the findings to the Assembly 
             Transportation Committee and the Senate Transportation 
             and Housing Committee one year prior to the termination 
             of the DFZ.  The report must include a recommendation on 
             whether the zone should be reauthorized by the 
             Legislature, as well as a comparative evaluation of the 
             volume and speed of traffic, the number and severity of 
             collisions, and the contributing factors that led to 
             collisions prior to and following the establishment of 
             the DFZ.

          5. Requires that only the base fine be doubled.

          6. Specifies that the DFZ remains in effect until January 
             1, 2017.

           Background  

          As part of an earlier DFZ program, statute required 
          Caltrans to report to the Legislature by January 1, 2003, 
          on the impact and effectiveness of DFZs, with a DFZ being 
          deemed successful if there was a "significant decrease in 
          the number of accidents, traffic injuries, and fatalities 
          in the project areas."   In its December 2002 report, 
          Caltrans explained that, while some reductions in the 
          number and severity of collisions did occur in some of the 
          DFZs, the reductions were not statistically significant.  
          Caltrans also noted that, a number of uncontrolled 
          variables, such as physical improvements to roadway 
          segments, changes in enforcement levels, and the initiation 
          of public awareness campaigns made it virtually impossible 
          to ascertain how much, if any, of the decrease in 
          collisions was attributable to the doubling of fines.  
          Caltrans, therefore, concluded that the benefits of 
          increased fines alone could not be proven.  Upon expiration 
          of various DFZ authorizations, legislators introduced 
          several bills to reinstate previously authorized DFZs.  The 

                                                           CONTINUED





                                                                AB 348
                                                                Page 
          4

          efforts were largely unsuccessful due to concerns that the 
          DFZs had not been proven to be effective and that they 
          could be misused as a tool to generate revenue.

           Reporting accident statistics and effectiveness  .  It 
          remains unclear what impact the original DFZ had on 
          reducing accidents on Vasco Road.  SB 3 (Torlakson), 
          Chapter 179, Statutes of 2006, charged Caltrans with the 
          responsibility to report on the impact of the original 
          designation but, because Vasco Road is a county road and 
          not a state highway, Caltrans did not complete the study. 
               
          In response to this bill, Caltrans used CHP data to 
          determine accident rates for Vasco Road.  Caltrans staff 
          analyzed collision and head-on collision rates on Vasco 
          Road from 2000-09 and compared those with rates from 
          conventional two and three lane roads on the state highway 
          system.  The analysis shows that the annual collision rate 
          declined from 2004-08, increased in 2009, but for all years 
          was significantly higher than the statewide average.  For 
          head-on collisions from 2007-09, however, the average for 
          Vasco Road was 0.14 head-on collisions per mile per year 
          was lower than the statewide average of 0.15 head-on 
          collisions per mile per year.

           FISCAL EFFECT  :    Appropriation:  No   Fiscal Com.:  No   
          Local:  No

           SUPPORT  :   (Verified  8/15/11)

          Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors (source)
          Alameda County Board of Supervisors
          Alameda County Deputy Sheriffs' Association
          Alameda Transportation Commission
          American Federation of State, County and Municipal 
          Employees
          California State Sheriffs' Association
          Cities of Brentwood, Livermore, and Oakley
          Contra Costa County Deputy Sheriffs Association
          Contra Costa Transportation Authority


           ASSEMBLY FLOOR  :  71-0, 5/5/11 (Consent)
          AYES:  Achadjian, Allen, Ammiano, Atkins, Beall, Bill 

                                                           CONTINUED





                                                                AB 348
                                                                Page 
          5

            Berryhill, Block, Blumenfield, Bonilla, Bradford, 
            Brownley, Buchanan, Butler, Charles Calderon, Campos, 
            Carter, Cedillo, Chesbro, Conway, Cook, Davis, Dickinson, 
            Donnelly, Eng, Feuer, Fletcher, Fong, Fuentes, Galgiani, 
            Gatto, Gordon, Grove, Hagman, Halderman, Harkey, Hayashi, 
            Roger Hernández, Hill, Huber, Hueso, Huffman, Jeffries, 
            Knight, Lara, Logue, Bonnie Lowenthal, Ma, Mendoza, 
            Miller, Mitchell, Monning, Morrell, Nestande, Norby, 
            Olsen, Pan, Perea, V. Manuel Pérez, Portantino, Silva, 
            Skinner, Smyth, Solorio, Swanson, Torres, Valadao, 
            Wagner, Wieckowski, Williams, Yamada, John A. Pérez
          NO VOTE RECORDED:  Alejo, Furutani, Garrick, Gorell, Hall, 
            Jones, Mansoor, Nielsen, Vacancy


          JJA:mw  8/15/11   Senate Floor Analyses 

                         SUPPORT/OPPOSITION:  SEE ABOVE

                                ****  END  ****
          
























                                                           CONTINUED