MEETING DATE: DECEMBER 9, SUBJECT: Use Of Cameras To Enforce Transit Lanes RECOMMENDATIONS. It is recommended that the Commission:

Similar documents
TORONTO TRANSIT COMMISSION REPORT NO.

2.2 TRANSIT VISION 2040 FROM VISION TO ACTION. Emphasize transit priority solutions STRATEGIC DIRECTION

Traditional Public Transport Priority. Priority/Traffic Management? What is Integrated Public Transport Priority/Traffic management? Why? How?

Roadways. Roadways III.

TRANSIT SIGNAL PRIORITY The Toronto Experience

Civil Parking Enforcement of Bus Lane Contraventions. Yes. Yes

History and Legislation

2011 Transportation Tomorrow Survey. Data Presentation

2.0 LANE WIDTHS GUIDELINE

Report to Cabinet. 18 May 2016

Traffic Congestion Management and Traffic Signal Coordination

-Current Get On Board initiative: Existing LTC program to help make LTC accessible, informative, and encourage use of public transit

Integrated Corridor Approach to Urban Transport. O.P. Agarwal World Bank Presentation at CODATU XV Addis Ababa, 25 th October 2012

4 DISRUPTION MANAGEMENT PLAN HIGHWAY 7 RAPIDWAY CONSTRUCTION BETWEEN BAYVIEW AVENUE AND WARDEN AVENUE TOWNS OF MARKHAM AND RICHMOND HILL

2. Context. Existing framework. The context. The challenge. Transport Strategy

The I-85 Express Lanes Project NASCIO Recognition Award Nomination

Bicycle Traffic Control Signal - St. Clair Avenue West and Poplar Plains Road

Capital Beltway HOT Lanes - Frequently Asked Questions

MOBILITY WORKSHOP. Joint City Council and Transportation Commission May 5, 2014

Downtown Transportation Operations Study

Transportation Impacts: Toronto York Spadina Subway Extension

Mission-Geneva Transportation Study Community Workshop 2 July 8, 2006

TORONTO TRANSIT CITY LIGHT RAIL PLAN

Contents. Champaign-Urbana Mass Transit District Stop Placement Guidelines

Joseph Iacobucci. James Czarnecky, AICP

Bus and Transit Lane Review Update

Scope of the Transit Priority Project

Transportation Master Plan Advisory Task Force

ENFIELD TOWN THE REVISED DESIGN

Strategies for Maintaining & Renewing Innovative Street Projects. Elyse Parker, Director of Policy & Innovation, City of Toronto NACTO, LA, 2018

Harbord Street and Hoskin Avenue Bicycle Lane Upgrades

1. Operate along freeways, either in regular traffic lanes, in high-occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes, or along the shoulders.

Bus Rapid Transit For New York City Appendixes

BUS RAPID TRANSIT. A Canadian Perspective. McCormick Rankin International. John Bonsall P.Eng

Public Works and Infrastructure Committee. General Manager, Transportation Services

4 COMMUNITY SAFETY ZONES WALTER SCOTT PUBLIC SCHOOL AND ROSELAWN PUBLIC SCHOOL TOWN OF RICHMOND HILL

Operational Comparison of Transit Signal Priority Strategies

CITY CLERK. (City Council on October 2, 3 and 4, 2001, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

Bus Lanes Improving Travel Time or Reliability

Improving Mobility Without Building More Lanes

Technical Working Group November 15, 2017

Toronto and East York Community Council. Director, Transportation Services, Toronto and East York District

Designing Streets for Transit. Presentation to NACTO Designing Cities Kevin O Malley Managing Deputy Commissioner 10/24/2014

Utilization of the spare capacity of exclusive bus lanes based on a dynamic allocation strategy

Aurora Corridor to E Line

Purpose and Need. Chapter Introduction. 2.2 Project Purpose and Need Project Purpose Project Need

DUNDAS WEST-BLOOR Mobility Hub Profile

November 14, Dulles To DC Loop Public-Private Partnership Proposal. Executive Summary

Chapter 5. Complete Streets and Walkable Communities.

5 AUTOMATED SPEED ENFORCEMENT PROPOSAL

Richmond-Adelaide Cycle Tracks

Richmond Street and Adelaide Street Cycle Tracks

TORONTO TRANSIT COMMISSION REPORT NO.

Climate Change Action Plan: Transportation Sector Discussion Paper: Cycling

ROUTES 55 / 42 / 676 BUS RAPID TRANSIT LOCALLY PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE

Markham Sports, Entertainment and Cultural Centre Transportation Overview

INTRODUCTION DISCUSSION

David Jickling, Public Transportation Director Regional Transportation Commission, Washoe County

GETTING WHERE WE WANT TO BE

DON MILLS-EGLINTON Mobility Hub Profile

CITY OF SAINT JOHN TRAFFIC CALMING POLICY

Southwest Bus Rapid Transit (SW BRT) Functional Planning Study - Executive Summary January 19 LPT ATTACHMENT 2.

PURPOSE AND NEED SUMMARY 54% Corridor Need 1. Corridor Need 2. Corridor Need 3. Corridor Need 4. Corridor Need 5

Public Consultation Centre

10.0 CURB EXTENSIONS GUIDELINE

Arlington County 10-Year Transit Development Plan & Premium Transit Network Briefing. May 2016

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF CALEDON TRANSPORTATION NEEDS STUDY

3 TRAFFIC CONTROL SIGNAL TIMING AND SYNCHRONIZATION

Evaluation and Changes to Pedestrian Priority Phase Signal (Scramble Crossing) at Bay Street and Bloor Street

NORTH YORK CENTRE Mobility Hub Profile

Road Alterations - Wellington Street East, Church Street, and Front Street Intersection

1.221J/11.527J/ESD.201J TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS FALL 2003 FINAL EXAMINATION. 1. Open-book and open-notes, calculators are fine -- no laptops.

Comprehensive Measures to Reduce Traffic Accident Fatalities

Part-time Shoulder Use Guide

ECONOMY PEOPLE ENVIRONMENT

TORONTO TRANSIT COMMISSION REPORT NO.

CITY OF VAUGHAN EXTRACT FROM COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF OCTOBER 30, 2012

The Consultation has now ended.

UNIT V 1. What are the traffic management measures? [N/D-13] 2. What is Transportation System Management (TSM)? [N/D-14]

An evaluation of pedestrian countdown timers in the Sydney CBD

Traffic Control Signals Review 4325 McCowan Road

Arterial Transitway Corridors Study. Ave

4. Guided Bus Explained

Konstantin Glukhenkiy Economic Affairs Officer

Walking & Bicycling Questionnaire for Candidates

TORONTO VISION ZERO Improving Safety for Pedestrians and Cyclists Roger Browne, Manager Traffic Safety Unit October 11, 2018

Proposed Bridge Street East Bicycle Lanes Public Open House Thursday, April 27, 2017

November 2, Government takes on the challenge of improving traffic safety

No-car lanes in Tyneside results from modelling and stakeholder analysis

Appendix 12 Parking on footways and verges

Telegraph Avenue Complete Streets DRAFT Recommendations. Oakland Public Works Department September 11 and 13, 2014 Open Houses

Toll Collection and Violation Enforcement. August 9,

An Easier Commute. Learn how to use I-77 Express to save you time.

Community Task Force November 15, 2017

Active Transportation Infrastructure Investment A Business Case

Extracting Maximum Benefit from Parking Policy - 10 Years Experience in Perth, Australia. By Emmerson Richardson Sinclair Knight Merz

STATUS OF 2009 PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN (AS OF DECEMBER 2013)

Leaside Traffic Calming Plan Update. Community Meeting 2 November 22, :00 PM

DON MILLS-SHEPPARD Mobility Hub Profile

Transit Priority Program: Putting Buses First

Transcription:

MEETING DATE: DECEMBER 9, 2002 SUBJECT: Use Of Cameras To Enforce Transit Lanes RECOMMENDATIONS It is recommended that the Commission: 1. Receive this report for information, noting that; several major cities, such as Sydney, Singapore, and London, use cameras onboard buses and/or at roadside locations, as an effective tool in enforcing traffic regulations related to transit lanes; London takes transit priority seriously, and has established reserved bus lanes or queue-jump lanes in 800 locations, constituting 35 per cent of their "high-priority" arterial roads; these are enforced using cameras on buses, roadside cameras, traffic wardens, and parking control officers; by mid-2003, London will have over 1000 buses equipped with on-board cameras linked to an automatic vehicle locating system, and 50 roadside cameras; the cameras cost about C$25,000 for each bus and about $60,000 for each roadside installation, with considerable additional costs related to IT hardware and software, and required staffing; in Toronto, there are there are only four roads with transit-only lanes, totalling about 25 lane-kilometres and, given the high cost to install cameras on the requisite number of buses or streetcars, in addition to the necessary vehicle locating equipment, IT infrastructure, and staffing, enforcement cameras on transit vehicles cannot be justified; given Toronto s limited commitment to transit priority to date, roadside cameras at site-specific locations could be used to enforce reserved lanes, at much lower costs than on-board cameras; TTC staff will meet with City staff involved in the red-light camera initiative in order to assess the feasibility and costs of a demonstration project of transit lane enforcement using roadside cameras, and will report back prior to the 2004 budget submission; enforcement cameras on transit vehicles cannot be used for operator or passenger security because transit lane enforcement requires the camera to be aimed at activities in front of the transit vehicle, not inside; and 2. Forward this report to City of Toronto Works and Planning and Transportation Committees, City Transportation Services and Planning Departments, the Toronto Police

Services, the Gridlock Subcommittee of the Central Ontario Smart Growth Panel, and the Ontario Ministry of Transportation. FUNDING This report has no impact on the Commission s operating or capital budgets BACKGROUND At its meeting on May 14, 2001, the Commission requested TTC staff to report back, in consultation with City licensing staff, on the feasibility of installing cameras on streetcars for HOV enforcement, with such report to also include comment on the potential for these cameras to act as a safety device for operators. Dr. Gordon Chong Chair of Gridlock Subcommittee of the Central Ontario Smart Growth Panel has also contacted TTC staff to discuss the use of cameras on buses for enforcement purposes. This report responds to the Commission s and Dr. Chong s requests. DISCUSSION Traffic violations are a significant problem in Toronto and an obvious obstacle to providing fast, reliable transit service. In addition to the chronic problems of illegal parking, stopping, and turning, there is ongoing, illegal misuse of reserved transit lanes and High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) lanes by private low-occupancy vehicles. Unless the transit lanes have been physically separated from other traffic, as is the case, for example, with the streetcar right-of-way in the centre of Spadina Avenue, reserved lanes are relatively ineffective unless police enforcement is present. Unfortunately, to date, regular, dedicated police enforcement has been unattainable in Toronto. This being the case, motorists illegally use reserved transit lanes or HOV s and have a very low chance of being caught. During a two-week police enforcement blitz of the HOV lanes on Eglinton Avenue East, TTC bus drivers reported that motorists illegal use of the lanes had been reduced substantially. However, they reported that motorists were quick to return to their "normal" high levels of non-compliance once the blitz ended. There are several cities throughout the world where cameras are being used effectively to enforce transit lanes. Staff reviewed specific examples of camera-enforcement

technology in Sydney, Singapore, and London, England. London has the most-extensive use of cameras for transit lane enforcement. Enforcement Cameras in London, England London is taking significant measures and investing over C$500 million to improve surface transit operations. Measures include: a congestion pricing scheme in the central area of London transit signal priority stringent parking and stopping restrictions automatic vehicle locating and control systems to improve route management real-time passenger information systems to advise waiting customers of the arrival time of the next bus improvements to bus shelters, including better lighting, more frequent cleaning, and more seating changes to curbs to make it easier to board and alight from buses This comprehensive program is focussed on 70 heavily-used bus routes which operate on the "Mayor s Road Network", a 550-kilometre network of London s most important roads. To date, over 800 bus/queue jump lanes, totalling about 200 lane-kilometres, are in operation in London. Having made a clear commitment to ensuring that transit can operate effectively through a range of transit

priority measures, London uses camera enforcement extensively to ensure that the bus and queue-jump lanes are obeyed. In its initial stages, London used only static roadside cameras to enforce traffic regulations in areas where persistent stopping and parking in bus lanes had become a problem. The bus lane enforcement program, of which cameras are a significant part, has been continually expanded and, by March, 2003, 1045 buses in London will be equipped with on-board cameras, and 50 roadside cameras will be in operation. The on-board camera system requires roadside electronic beacons at the beginning and end of a transit lane. The beacons start the video camera as a bus enters a bus lane and stops the camera when the lane ends, to eliminate unnecessary footage. Each on-board camera has two lenses that have separate functions: one of the lenses records a close-up image clearly displaying the license plate number of the vehicle ahead, and the second lens records a wider view that shows the offence in the context of prevailing traffic conditions. The cameras record in continuous time-lapse mode to reduce the volume of data associated with standard video operation. A vehicle locating system automatically encodes the photos with the location and time of the offence. The system is expensive: the cameras alone cost $25,000 for each on-board assembly, and $60,000 for each roadside installation. At present, the video data from the buses is collected manually, and all video is reviewed by enforcement officers at a secure operations centre, using proprietary technology that allows fast-forwarding through segments where no contravention is likely to have been recorded. This is a very labour-intensive operation, as it requires the officer to view enough tape to ensure that a violation did occur and that there were no mitigating circumstances. When a valid contravention is identified, the registered owner of the vehicle is sent a $195 infraction notice. Early data on the camera enforcement program in London has shown a 92 percent decline in violations, leading to average travel time improvements for buses of as much as 46 percent. As with the red-light camera program in Toronto, the issuance of an infraction notice, by mail, to the registered owner of the vehicle, rather than the operator, required legislative amendments. Similar amendments to the Highway Traffic Act would be necessary to permit camera enforcement of transit lanes in Ontario. Potential for Camera Enforcement of Transit Lanes in Toronto While cameras can significantly increase the chances of a motorist being caught when illegally driving, stopping, or parking in a reserved lane, it is difficult to justify the high costs associated with on-board camera enforcement in Toronto. To date, Toronto has relatively limited priority for transit. In Toronto, there are only four roads with reserved transit lanes. There are curb bus lanes on various sections of Eglinton Avenue West from roughly Keele Street to Yonge Street,

on Eglinton Avenue East from Yonge Street to Laird Drive, and on Bay Street from north of Bloor Street to Wellington Avenue. There are also median streetcar lanes on King Street from Dufferin Street to John Street, and from Church Street to Parliament Street. These, in addition to some site-specific queue jump lanes, total 25 lane-kilometres. There are also 60 lane-kilometres of HOV lanes in Toronto, in which vehicles with at least three occupants are permitted to travel. However, camera enforcement of HOV lanes is not feasible because it is not possible to accurately identify the number of occupants in a vehicle due to reflections, tinted glass, an occupant s small size, and other objects obstructing the view of the vehicle s interior. Given the logistical difficulty of ensuring that specific buses or streetcars are assigned to a given route, a significant number of buses or streetcars would have to be equipped with cameras -- at $25,000 per vehicle -- to ensure that enough camera-equipped vehicles were on these four routes. As is the case in London, it would be preferable if the cameras were to operate only when the bus or streetcar is travelling in a reserved lane. A system would also have to be developed to ensure that the bus or streetcar s actual location was encoded on the video image. This interface would require appropriate software and an automatic vehicle locating and control (AVLC) system. It is uncertain whether the TTC s ageing Communications and Information System (C.I.S.) could be modified for use in this manner. Given the small number of transit-only lanes in Toronto, and the extensive investment necessary to implement an on-board camera enforcement program, cameras on buses or streetcars would not be a cost-effective investment. However, there is a need to improve transit operations in Toronto, and effective enforcement of transit lanes has been a longstanding problem in this city. London s use of cameras as an enforcement tool began with the use of roadside cameras at specific problem locations. This does not require as many camera installations as would an on-board camera system, nor does it require a bus/streetcar location system to interface with the video footage. It would be appropriate to evaluate the extent to which camera enforcement -- using only roadside cameras at specific problem locations -- could provide a cost-effective means of improving motorist compliance on existing reserved transit lanes. Staff will meet with the City staff who have been involved with the red light camera project in order to determine the feasibility and costs of an on-street demonstration project of roadside camera enforcement on transit lanes. Staff will report back in the Spring on the merits of including such a demonstration project in the 2004 budget submission. Potential for On-board Enforcement Cameras as a Safety Device for TTC Drivers Staff were requested to also report on the potential to use on-board enforcement cameras to record situations on the vehicle, as a safety or security aid for TTC drivers. Enforcement cameras, when installed on a bus or streetcar, must film situations in front of the transit vehicle. They cannot provide the dual function of filming situations within the bus or streetcar. A separate camera would be required for such purposes, similar to

those which are used in taxis; such cameras use much-simpler technology and are considerably less expensive. November 28, 2002 11-84-78 - - - - - - - - - - -