BILL ANALYSIS �
SENATE TRANSPORTATION & HOUSING COMMITTEE BILL NO: AB 348
SENATOR MARK DESAULNIER, CHAIRMAN AUTHOR: BUCHANAN
VERSION: 4/27/11
Analysis by: Michelle Leinfelder
FISCAL:NO
Hearing date: July 5, 2011
SUBJECT:
Vasco Road: double fine zone
DESCRIPTION:
This bill allows, until January 1, 2017, the designation of a
Safety Enhancement-Double Fine Zone (DFZ) 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
DFZs are:
The segment is part of the state highway system.
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.
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 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
AB 348 (BUCHANAN) Page 2
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:
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.
Requires the local governing bodies, prior to
designating the DFZ, to do each of the following:
o Undertake a public awareness campaign to
inform the public of the DFZ, its location, purpose,
and consequences.
o Implement increased traffic safety
enhancements, enforcement, and other roadway safety
measures.
Requires the local authority to place the signage at the
DFZ beginning and end points.
Requires the counties jointly to conduct an evaluation
of the effectiveness of the DFZ and report the findings to
the Assembly Committee on Transportation and the Senate
Committee on Transportation and Housing 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
double fine zone.
Requires that only the base fine be doubled.
Specifies that the DFZ remains in effect until January
1, 2017.
COMMENTS:
1. Purpose . This bill reauthorizes the DFZ along Vasco Road in
Contra Costa and Alameda counties that was
originally created by SB 3 (Torlakson) in 2006. According to the
author, the DFZ will act as a tool to prevent unsafe driving
practices that, along with dangerous conditions, contribute to
a high collision rate. The counties of Contra Costa and Alameda
are in the process of making road improvements but lack the
AB 348 (BUCHANAN) Page 3
funds to complete all phases. This bill is needed because
the DFZ acts as a deterrent to unsafe driving practices that
contribute to the high accident rate.
2. Uncertain efficacy . 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 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.
3. Base fine only . This bill doubles only base fines for traffic
infractions. As an example, the base fine for speeding (up to
15 MPH over the posted speed limit) is $35. On top of a base
fine, a driver who is cited for a traffic violation (and does
not contest or is convicted) pays penalty assessments of $198.
Thus, a $35 speeding ticket is really a $233 total fine.
Increasing that by another $35 to $268 is very unlikely by
itself to influence driver behavior, but it would generate a
small amount of local revenue.
4. Reporting accident statistics and effectiveness . It remains
unclear what impact the original DFZ had on reducing
accidents on Vasco Road. SB 3 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
AB 348 (BUCHANAN) Page 4
2000-2009 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
2004-2008, increased in 2009, but for all years was
significantly higher than the statewide average. For head-on
collisions from 2007-2009, however, the average for Vasco Road
was 0.14 head-on collisions/mile/year was
lower than the statewide average of 0.15 head-on
collisions/mile/year.
For the purpose of evaluating the effectiveness of the DFZ
that this bill authorizes, and to ensure consistency with
the parameters Caltrans uses to evaluate DFZ efficacy, the
committee may wish to consider an amendment that would require
the counties of Contra Costa and Alameda to consult with
Caltrans when evaluating efficacy of the Vasco Road DFZ.
5. Sunset . Because this bill is reinstating the Vasco Road DFZ,
and thus, because data already exist for this DFZ, in
order to sooner understand the efficacy of the DFZ designation,
the committee may wish to consider amending the sunset date to
January 1, 2014.
Assembly Votes:
Floor: 71-0
Trans: 12-0
POSITIONS: (Communicated to the Committee before noon on
Wednesday, June 29,
2011)
SUPPORT: Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors
(Sponsor)
Alameda County Board of Supervisors
Alameda County Deputy Sheriffs' Association
American Federation of State, County and
Municipal Employees
California State Sheriffs' Association
City of Brentwood Mayor, Robert Taylor
City of Livermore
Contra Costa County Deputy Sheriffs Association
Contra Costa County Supervisor Mary Nejedly
Piepho
Contra Costa Transportation Authority
OPPOSED: None received.
AB 348 (BUCHANAN) Page 5