TECHNICAL REPORT STAND ARD TITLE PAGE 1. Report No. 2. Government Accession No. 3. Recipient's Catalog No. FHWA/TX-92/1232-5 4. Title and Subtitle 5. Report Date November 1991 A Review of Automated Enforcement 6. Performing Organization Code 7. Author(s) 8. Performing Organization Report No. Kay Fitzpatrick Research Report 1232-5 9. Performing Organization Name and Address 10. Work Unit No. Texas Transportation Institute The Texas A&M University System 11. Contract or Grant No. College Station, Texas 77843 Study No. 2-18-90/4-1232 12. Sponsoring Agency Name and Address 13. Type of Report and Period Covered Texas Department of Transportation . September 1989 Transportation Planning Division Intenm- November 1991 P.O. Box 5051 14. Sponsoring Agency Code Austin, Texas 77863 15. Supplementary Notes Research performed in cooperation with DOT, FHWA. Research Study Title: Urban Highway Operations Research and Implementation Program 16. Abstract Law enforcement is considered an important contributor for maintaining traffic safety. However, limited resources, such as staff and funds, constrain the efforts of police in traffic law enforcement. New technologies such as automated enforcement may offer a partial solution to this problem. Information on automated enforcement devices currently being used in the areas of speed enforcement, red-light traffic signal enforcement, and high-occupancy vehicle (HOV) lane enforcement is provided in the report through summaries and discussions of current technology, experiences in the use of automated enforcement devices, legal issues, and public acceptance of automated enforcement. Examples of experiences include the use of portable billboard speed displays in Richardson, Texas, and Glendale, Arizona, as well as the use of automated speed enforcement devices in Arlington, Texas; Galveston County and LaMarque, Texas; Paradise Valley, Arizona; Pasadena, California; and Peoria, Arizona. Automated HOV lane enforcement experiences from Virginia, California, and Seattle, Washington, and red-light enforcement in Pasadena, California, and New York City are also discussed. Legal issues associated with automated enforcement include photographing of the driver, mailing the citation to the owner of the photographed vehicle, and requiring the owner of the vehicle to identify the driver at the time of the offense. 17. Key Words 18. Distribution Statement automated enforcement, surveillance, No restrictions. This document is available photography, speed limit, red-light traffic to the public through the signal, high-occupancy vehicle lane National Technical Information Service 5285 Port Royal Road Springfield, Virginia 22161 19. Security Classif. (of this report) 20. Security Classif. (of this page) 21. No. of Pages 22. Price Unclassified Unclassified 72 Form DOT F 1700.7 (8-69) A REVIEW OF AUTOMATED ENFORCEMENT by Kay Fitzpatrick Assistant Research Engineer Research Report 1232-5 Research Study No. 2-18-90/4-1232 Urban Highway Operations Research and Implementation Program Texas Transportation Institute The Texas A&M University System College Station, Texas 77843 Prepared for the Texas Department of Transportation November 1991 METRIC (SI*) CONVERSION FACTORS APPROXIMATE CONVERSIONS TO SI UNITS APPROXIMATE CONVERSIONS TO SI UNITS S,mbol When You Know MuHlply lly To Find Symbol When You Know MultlplJ By To Find Syfftbol LENGTH .. ..... LENGTH mm ml Ill metres 0.039 Inches In In Inches 2.54 centimetres cm =-­ m metres 3.28 feet ft ft feet 0.3048 metres m = . .. m metres 1.09 yards yd yd yards 0.91'4 metres m =-­ - • = km kilometres 0.821 miles ml ml miles 1.81 kilometres km . AREA AREA .. mm' milllmetres squared 0.0016 square Inches ln2 square Inches 645.2 centimetres squared cm 1 m' metres squared 10.764 square feet ft1 2 2 square feet 0.0929 metres squared m' km kilometres squared 0.39 square mlles ml square yards 0.836 metres squared m• .. ha hectores (10 000 mi) 2.53 acres ac square miles 2.59 kilometres squared km' =- acres 0.395 hectares ha MASS (weight) g grams 0.0353 ounces oz kg kilograms 2.205 pounds lb MASS (weight) g--= :: Mg megagrams (1 000 kg) 1.103 short tons T oz ounces 28.35 grams g lb pounds 0.454 kilograms kg ... VOLUME T short tons (2000 lb) 0.907 megagrams Mg .. ml mlllllltres 0.034 fluld ounces fl oz .. l litres 0.264 gallons gal VOLUME m' metres cubed 35.315 cubic feet ft' =- m1 metres cubed 1.308 cubic yards yd' fl oz fluld ounces 29.57 mlllllltres ml = .. gal gallons 3.785 titres l ft' cubic feet 0.0328 metres cubed m• .. TEMPERATURE (exact) yd1 cOblc yards 0.0785 metres cubed m' =--= °C Celsius 9/5 (then Fahrenheit 1 = NOTE: Volumes greater than 1000 L shall be shown In m • temperature add 32) temperature .. ~ ~ 98.9 1 TEMPERATURE (exact) -4:'·.i I~f I f I .1~ •. I I l!O.i b/~·'I I • t~. i I I I 100 .. -~ -m o ~ ~ ~ "C 37 "C °F Fahrenheit 5/9 (after Celsius temperature subtracting 32) temperature These factors conform to the requirement of FHWA Order 5190.1A. • SI Is the symbol for the lntematlonal System of Measurements ABSTRACT Law enforcement is considered an important contributor for maintaining traffic safety. However, limited resources, such as staff and funds, constrain the efforts of police in traffic law enforcement. New technologies such as automated enforcement may offer a partial solution to this problem. Information on automated enforcement devices currently being used in the areas of speed enforcement, red-light traffic signal enforcement, and high-occupancy vehicle (HOV) lane enforcement is provided in the report through summaries and discussions of current technology, experiences in the use of automated enforcement devices, legal issues, and public acceptance of automated enforcement. Examples of experiences include the use of portable billboard speed displays in Richardson, Texas, and Glendale, Arizona, as well as the use of automated speed enforcement devices in Arlington, Texas; Galveston County and La.Marque, Texas; Paradise Valley, Arizona; Pasadena, California; and Peoria, Arizona. Automated HOV lane enforcement experiences from Virginia, California, and Seattle, Washington, and red-light enforcement in Pasadena, California, and New York City are also discussed. Legal issues associated with automated enforcement include photographing of the driver, mailing the citation to the owner of the photographed vehicle, and requiring the owner of the vehicle to identify the driver at the time of the offense. IMPLEMENTATION STATEMENT The information contained in this report should be useful to agencies considering the use of automated enforcement. The report provides information on speed limit enforcement, red­ light traffic signal enforcement, and high-occupancy vehicle lane enforcement. It contains a summary of the current technology and the experiences different agencies have had in using automated enforcement devices. The Legal Issues section provides an introduction to legal issues associated with the use of automated enforcement devices by providing information on existing and potential legal challenges to the use of these devices. The Public Acceptance section, as well as information from the Experiences section, provides insight into issues that an agency may want to consider prior to using automated enforcement. DISCLAIMER The contents of this report reflect the views of the author who is responsible for the facts and accuracy of the data presented herein. The contents do not necessarily reflect the official views or policies of the Texas Department of Transportation or the Federal Highway Administration. This report does not constitute a standard, specification, or regulation. This report is not intended for construction, bidding, or permit purposes. This report was prepared by Kay Fitzpatrick (PA 037330-E). vi TABLE OF CONTENTS Page 1 IN1'RODUCTION . 1 2 TECHNOWGY . 3 2.1 SPEED LIMIT ENFORCEMENT . 3 2.1.1 Down-The-Road Doppler Radar . 4 2. 1. 2 Cross-The-Road Doppler Radar . 7 2 .1. 3 Time/Distance Measuring Devices . 8 2.1.4 Testing of Devices . 8 2.2 RED-LIGHT TRAFFIC SIGNAL ENFORCEMENT . 8 2.3 HIGH-OCCUPANCY VEHICLE LANE ENFORCEMENT . 9 3 EXPERIENCES IN USING AUTOMATED ENFORCEMENT DEVICES . 11 3 .1 SPEED LIMIT ENFORCEMENT . 11 3.1.1 Portable Billboard Speed Display in Richardson, Texas . 11 3.1.2 Portable Billboard Speed Display in Glendale, Ariwna . 13 3.1.3 Evaluation of the Halo Effect in Speed Detection and Enforcement . 13 3.1.4 Orbis III Use in Arlington, Texas . 14 3.1.5 ASE Use in Galveston County and LaMarque, Texas . 14 3 .1. 6 ASE Use in Paradise Valley, Arizona . 16 3 .1. 7 ASE Use in Pasadena, California . 16 3.1.8 ASE Use in Peoria, Ariwna ............................ 17 3.1.9 Other Interest in Automated Speed Enforcement Devices . 18 3.1.10 Current Studies in Automated Speed Enforcement Devices . 18 3 .1.11 Drone Radar . 19 3.2 HIGH-OCCUPANCY VEHICLE LANE ENFORCEMENT ............. 20 3 .2.1 California . 20 3.2.2 Seattle, Washington ................................. 21 3.2.3 Virginia ......................................... 24 3.2.4 San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge Priority Lane Project ........... 25 3.2.5 Southeast Expressway (Boston) Concurrent-Flow HOV Lane ........ 26 vii TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued) Page 3.3 RED-LIGHT VIOLATIONS ENFORCEMENT ..................... 27 3. 3 .1 Pasadena, California . 27 3.3.2 New York City .................................... 27 3.3.3 Nottinghamshire County Council, United Kingdom .............. 28 3.3.4 Singapore ....................................... 28 4 LEGAL ISSUES . 29 4.1 COURT CASES .......................................