20220503_D2_ResoNo2022 1383_LRSP — Laguna Niguel City Council, May 3, 2022

CITY OF LAGUNA NIGUEL
CITy CouncIL AGENDA ITEM
1989
To: Honorable Mayor and Council Members
FROM: Jacki Scott, Director of Public Works/City Engineer DATE: May 3, 2022
SUBJECT: Adoption of Resolution No. 2022-1383, Approving the City of Laguna Niguel Local Roadway Safety Plan

RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt Resolution No. 2022-1383, approving the City of Laguna Niguel Local Roadway Safety Plan.

BACKGROUND
The Fixing America's Surface Transportation Act (FAST) was signed into law on December 4, 2015. Under FAST, the Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) is a federal-aid program for the purpose of achieving a significant reduction in fatalities and serious injuries on all public roads. California's HSIP focuses on infrastructure projects with signalization, geometric, or operational countermeasures. Local HSIP projects must be identified on the basis of crash experience, crash potential, crash rate, or other data- supported means. Starting in 2022 with the HSIP Cycle 11 call for projects, a Local Roadway Safety Plan (LRSP) will be required for an agency to be eligible to apply for federal HSIP funds.

The City of Laguna Niguel is committed to providing a vibrant quality of life for all residents, businesses, and visitors in a safe, beautiful, and involved community. The City of Laguna Niguel LRSP supports that commitment to preserve quality of life through enhancing public safety on the City's roadway network. The purpose of the LRSP is to provide a proactive approach to addressing safety needs for motorists, bicyclists, and pedestrians on the City's roadways. Development of the LRSP was funded by the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans).

As part of an ongoing effort to identify and implement roadway safety improvements, the intent of an LRSP document is to:
• Evaluate and develop recommendations for focused improvements to address local highway safety needs;
• Maintain eligibility for future HSIP grant funding opportunities;

Page 2 ends

• Evaluate crash history affecting all transportation modes Identify crash types and locations; and
• Develop a Working Group with stakeholders representing multiple disciplines LRSPs have been proven to reduce fatalities on local roads in states that have implemented them, and implementation of this LRSP will improve transportation safety for the City's residents and visitors.

The City of Laguna Niguel has demonstrated a history of promoting safety and improving the transportation network aligned with the City's Strategic Plan and the RSP Vision.

Existing efforts have included traffic safety studies at multiple locations citywide, grant funding pursuits, education programs for youth and seniors, and infrastructure improvements, such as installation of traffic signal pre-emption for emergency vehicles, audible pedestrian signals (APS), buffered bike lanes, high-visibility crosswalks, raised medians, speed feedback signs, and traffic calming measures to slow down traffic.

Approval of the City of Laguna Niguel Local Roadway Safety Plan (Attachment "A") supports City Council Goal 1 (Public Safety), Goal 4 (Infrastructure and Technology), and Goal 6 (Communication and Community Outreach) of the City's adopted Strategic Plan.

The approved report and resolution will be submitted to Caltrans District 12 (Orange County) Division of Local Assistance in accordance with the RSP implementation guidelines.

ANALYSIS
Development of the LRSP
As part of this LRSP, a collision history database was developed using data from the Statewide Integrated Traffic Records System (SWITRS) and Office of Traffic Safety (OTS) rankings. The collision history was then analyzed to identify the primary causes and concerns for traffic collisions within the City's roadway network. The analysis found that overall, there were 1,340 police-reported crashes between January 1, 2015 and December 31, 2019 within the City of Laguna Niguel's transportation network. Of these, 61 resulted in fatalities or severe injuries (KSI crashes), which represent 5% of all crashes.

The study network (City street system) experiences an average of 268 crashes and 2 to 3 fatalities per year. The most common type of violation for KSI crashes was Driving Under the Influence which represent 25% of KSI crashes, followed by Automobile Right of Way, representing 20% of KSI crashes.

The LRSP study project created a Stakeholder Working Group (SWG) consisting of multi- disciplinary decision makers and partners who have played a key role in development of the LRSP. The SWG has furthered the development process by helping to plan, implement, and evaluate methods to achieve the LRSP's Vision, Mission, and Goals.

SWG participants were selected for their influence over the 4 "E"s (Engineering, Enforcement, Education, and Emergency Services) of transportation safety and ability to

Page 3 ends

coordinate specialized services for the City of Laguna Niguel within their respective agencies. SWG representatives customized the LRSP non-infrastructure recommendation, timelines, and responsibilities according to staff and resource availability. The SWG included representatives from City of Laguna Niguel Community Development and Public Works Departments, the Orange County Sheriff's Department, Orange County Fire Authority, Capistrano Unified School District, the Orange County Transportation Authority, the Orange County Health Care Agency, and Falck/Care Ambulance. Stakeholders will convene annually, at the request of the City of Laguna Niguel, to confirm the safety goals and direction of the LRSP, which is intended to be a living document.

A total of four SWG meetings occurred on June 10, July 13, August 18, and September 15, 2021 to review crash data, define the LRSP's Vision, Mission, and Goals, and organize non-infrastructure (NI) programs to address the emphasis areas. The SWG collaborated to define lead and support agencies, resources, communication methods, and implementation timelines for each NI program. Involvement and continued participation by the SWG members are documented through letters of support included in the LRSP.

Infrastructure improvements were identified for consideration at roadways and intersections with a documented history of crashes. The City of Laguna Niguel will determine appropriate placement of identified improvements for future grant funding pursuits, such as the HSIP. The related but separate Caltrans published Systemic Safety Analysis Report Guidelines suggests "applicants (agencies) can choose to focus on their top 5 to 20 intersections responsible for fatalities and severe injuries occurring on their roadway network." The LRSP identifies nine intersections and six roadways to prioritize for improvements. Including the nine intersections and six roadway segments in the initial year analysis allows staff to focus on the greatest identified need as a first priority. Future updates to the LRSP can add additional intersections or street segments based upon crash data trends.

Traffic and Transportation Commission Review of the LRSP The Draft LRSP was presented at the Special Traffic and Transportation Commission Meeting on December 8, 2021. The full staff report from the Special Traffic and Transportation Commission Meeting can be found in Attachment "B". ". Comments received focused upon clarifying recent efforts and documenting the statewide published crash rankings, recommendations for public education, and confirming the report will be a living document that can evolve based on locally determined priorities.

The Traffic and Transportation Commission recommended that the City Council approve the LRSP amended to incorporate the comments received at the Special Traffic and Transportation Commission Meeting on December 8, 2021. Meeting minutes are provided as Attachment "C". Responses to the comments received at the meeting are included as Attachment "D".

Page 4 ends

Public Review of the LRSP
The Draft LRSP was posted to the City's website for review by community members for three weeks between March 7, 2022 and March 25, 2022. The City made six social media posts about the Dratt RSP, reaching over 2,900 viewers. Comments received during the public review period were on the following topics:
• Coordination with local schools;
• Safety for bicyclists;
• Concerns related to electric powered bicycles (e-bikes); • Enhanced separation between motorists and cyclists, and • Pedestrian access to the Laguna Niguel Regional Park.

E-bike commenters were contacted for the April 27, 2022 Traffic and Transportation Commission Meeting to participate in the e-bike discussion. Each of the residents submitting a comment was contacted by City staff to further discuss and respond to their requests.

The Laguna Niguel Chamber of Commerce reviewed the Draft LRSP and provided their letter of support (Attachment "E").

Supporting Efforts
To continue supporting the ongoing development of the LRSP, the City is pursuing opportunities to secure grant funding for an Active Transportation Plan that will update plans for bikeways within the City, evaluate opportunities for pedestrian-focused improvements, and identify additional non-infrastructure efforts such as education to improve the safety of people walking and cycling. Additionally, the City is planning a safety audit in the vicinity of Niguel Hills Middle School. The safety audit and future Active Transportation Plan will benefit youth and other travelers throughout the community.

Staff has pursued numerous grant opportunities to fund traffic safety projects:
• In 2020, staff submitted a HSIP grant application for the installation of a traffic signal at Rancho Niguel Road and La Gracia/Rancho Azul. This grant was not awarded in 2020 due to reduced funding during the pandemic, however, any future applications to HSIP for other traffic safety improvements will require the adoption of the proposed LRSP.
• In 2021, staff submitted two Measure M2 Traffic Signal Synchronization Program grant applications for Crown Valley Parkway and Moulton Parkway/Golden Lantern, both of which will be recommended for funding at the next Orange County Transportation Authority board meeting. These grants will be awarded at a future Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) Board meeting. • In 2022, staff submitted an application for the Clean California Local Grant Program to request grant funding for the landscaped raised medians on Aliso Creek Road, Cabot Road, and La Paz Road. This grant was not awarded since the City is not classified as a disadvantaged community. Staff is continuing to seek other grant opportunities to fund this project.

Page 5 ends

Staff will continue to pursue grants, including a potential Safe Routes to School grant to improve bicycle and pedestrian safety at Niguel Hills Middle School.

Ongoing efforts by staff to improve traffic safety around the city include an update of the City's Traffic Manual which is a collection of City traffic standards, policies, and procedures; completion of speed surveys and school zone studies; traffic safety enhancements around the proposed Laguna Niguel City Center; and installation of high visibility crosswalks, video detection, and bike lane improvements near schools.

Adoption of the LRSP will continue to prioritize traffic and transportation safety around the City, as well as allow the City to remain eligible to apply for future HSIP grants. The guidelines and recommendations will provide staff with a framework for continuing to implement traffic safety and crash reduction initiatives; therefore, it is recommended the City Council adopt Resolution No. 2022-1383, approving the City of Laguna Niguel Local Roadway Safety Plan.

Environmental Review
Implementation of CEQA), Article 18 (Statutory Exemptions), Section 15262 (Feasibility and Planning Studies).

ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED
The City Council may decide not to approve the LRSP. This alternative is not recommended because an LRSP document is a requirement for public agencies to be eligible to apply for future HSIP funding.

FISCAL REVIEW
There is no fiscal impact in approving the LRSP. The cost to implement recommendations in the LRSP will depend upon the initiative, such as availability of grant funding, and whether the recommendation is an infrastructure or non-infrastructure project. The recommendations would be budgeted in future fiscal years for City Council consideration

LEGAL REVIEW
The City Attorney's Office has reviewed Resolution No. 2022-1383 and this staff report and has approved both documents as to form.

CONCLUSION
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt Resolution No. 2022-1383, approving the City of Laguna Niguel Local Roadway Safety Plan.

Page 6 ends

Jamara S Setousicau Reveri L. Emis
Tamara S. Letourneau Kevin G. Ennis
City Manage City Attorney
Public Works Director/City Engineer *y Engineering Services Manager Attachments:

A. Resolution No. 2022-1383 and Final Local Roadway Safety Plan B. Traffic and Transportation Commission Staff Report, December 8, 2021 . Traffic and Transportation Commission Meeting Minutes, December 8, 202' ). Comments and Responses Received at the December 8, 2021 Traffic an Transportation Commission Meeting
E. Laguna Niguel Chamber of Commerce Letter of Support

ATTACHMENT A
Resolution No. 2022-1383, and Final Local Roadway
Safety Plan
RESOLUTION NO. 2022-1383

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL

OF THE CITY OF LAGUNA NIGUEL, CALIFORNIA,

APPROVING THE CITY OF LAGUNA NIGUEL LOCAL ROADWAY SAFETY PLAN WHEREAS, a Local Roadway Safety Plan (LRSP) identifies, analyzes, and prioritizes roadway safety improvements;
WHEREAS, preparing an LRSP provides an opportunity to address roadway safety needs in the City of Laguna Niguel (City) based on the analyses of historical collision data, the recommendations of the Stakeholder Working Group, and public input; WHEREAS, starting in 2022, a LRSP will be required for the City to be eligible to apply for Highway Safety Improvement Program funds;
WHEREAS, the City received a grant from the State of California in the amount of $54,000 to develop a LRSP;
WHEREAS, the City contracted with Mark Thomas & Company, Inc. to prepare the City of Laguna Niguel LRSP, which is attached as Exhibit "A"; WHEREAS, the City's LRSP includes an implementation plan for roadway safety improvements and strategies; and,
WHEREAS, the City's LRSP supports the City's commitment to preserve quality of life for all residents, businesses, and visitors through enhancing public safety on the City's roadway network.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Laguna Niguel, that the City of Laguna Niguel Local Roadway Safety Plan, attached hereto as Exhibit "A", is hereby approved.

PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 3rd day of May, 2022.

Elaine Gennawey, Mayor
ATTEST:

Thy M. Merritt
Deputy City Clerk
Exhibit "A" - City of Laguna Niguel Local Roadway Safety Plan EXHIBIT "A"
La Paz
2022 LOCAL ROADWAY

SAFETY PLAN

PREPARED
FOR
Final Report City of
1989
May 2022 Laguna Niguel

MARK THOMAS

LA MARK
• = THOMAS

CITY OF LAGUNA NIGUEL

LOCAL ROADWAY SAFETY PLAN
Acknowledgements
The 2022 Laguna Niguel Local Roadway Safety Plan was funded through a grant provided by the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans). The City of Laguna Niguel, in collaboration with multidisciplinary partner agencies and stakeholders, collaborated to develop a plan that increased roadway safety for people traveling within the city's roadway network. The study was managed by Jacki Scott, PE, TE and Kathy Nguyen, PE, TE of the City's Department of Public Works, in coordination with a Stakeholder Working Group (SWG). A consulting team led by Mark Thomas assisted the City of Laguna Niguel and the SWG in preparing the plan.

Project Partners Orange County Fire Authority
City of Laguna Niguel Michael Contreras
Jacki Scott Jason Lopez
Kathy Nguyen Orange County Health Care Agency
Edgar Abrenica Maria Minaglia
Jonathan Orduna Orange County Transportation Authority
John Morgan Warren Whitaker
Phil Robinson Orange County Sheriff's Department
Capistrano Unified School District Isaac Flores
Mike Beekman Joe Bucaro
Jay McNamara
Falck/Care Ambulance Consultant Team
Carolynn Carraway Mark Thomas
Shane Ryan Paul Martin
Matt Spencer Jae Riddle
Ed Noriega

CAPISTRANO
health

CARE AGEI OCTA MARK THOMAS
LRSP 10F51

LA MARK
THOMAS
Table of Contents
Introduction...

Executive Summary
Study Parameters 5
LRSP Development Process.

Stakeholder Working Group
Vision, Mission, and Goals... 6
Community Engagement .7
Existing Safety Efforts...

Traffic Safety Studies. 8
HSIP Grant Funding Pursuits. ..10
Paseo de Colinas Safety Barrier.... ...10
Bicycle Lane Improvements. ....10
High Visibility Crosswalk ..10
Audible Pedestrian Signals.. ...10
Speed Feedback Signs.. ....11
Traffic Signal Pre-Emption and Traffic Signal Synchronization... ...12 Development Review.. ....12
Youth & Senior Education Efforts. ..13
Citywide Collision Data ....14
Data Collection. 14
Statewide Integrated Traffic Records System... ... 14
Office of Traffic Safety Collision Data.. 14
Police Traffic Patrol Identified Improvement Locations ...15 Crash Analysis Results. ..16
Crash Data Charts. .16
Crash Data Maps.. .17
Crash Tree Diagrams... ..18
High Injury Network Analysis .. 20
Emphasis Area Strategies. ...21
Emphasis Area 1: Speed Management. ...21
Emphasis Area 2: Reduce Impaired Driving...... .23
Emphasis Area 3: Reduce Distracted Driving.... ..25
Emphasis Area 4: Eliminate High-Crash Locations ..27
Emphasis Area 5: Improve Safety at Intersections and Around Schools .. 29 LRSP 2 OF 51

LA MARK
THOMAS
Emphasis Area 6: Increase Active Transportation Road User Safety.. ..31 Emphasis Area 7: Increase Safe Driving in Older Adults and Teens.. .33 Recommended Infrastructure Improvements.... . 35
Speed Management Treatments... 35
High-Crash Locations/Intersection Treatments.. 36
Treatments Near Schools and for Active Transportation Users.... ....38 Treatments to Support Emergency Vehicle Services. .40
Focus Intersections and Roadways... 42
Non-Infrastructure (NI) Program Implementation.... 43
Infrastructure Project Implementation.... ...45
Next Steps.. ....48
Appendix A: Letters of Support .... 51
LRSP 3 OF 51
MARK
• • THOMAS
Introduction
Executive Summary
The City of Laguna Niguel is committed to providing a vibrant quality of life for all residents, businesses, and visitors in a safe, beautiful, and involved community. The Laguna Niguel Local Roadway Safety Plan (LRSP) supports that commitment to preserve quality of life by enhancing public safety on the City's roadway network. The purpose of this LRSP is to provide a proactive approach to addressing safety needs for motorists, bicyclists, and pedestrians on City of Laguna Niguel managed roadways. This LRSP is a living document which will be reviewed and updated accordingly during annual stakeholder meetings.

Development of the LRSP was funded by the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans).

In an effort to identify and implement roadway safety improvements, the intent of this LRSP is to:

1. Evaluate and plan for focused improvements on local highway safety needs

2. Maintain eligibility for future Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) grant funding opportunities

3. Evaluate crash history affecting all transportation modes

4. Identify crash types and locations

5. Develop recommendations for improvements

6. Develop a Working Group with stakeholders representing multiple disciplines LRSPs have been proven to reduce fatalities on local roads in states that have implemented them; hence, implementation of this LRSP will improve transportation safety for the City's residents and visitors.

As part of this LRSP, a collision database was developed to identify locations with a history of collisions.

The analysis found that 1,340 police-reported crashes occurred on the City of Laguna Niguel transportation network between January 1, 2015 and December 31, 2019. Of these, 61 resulted in fatalities or severe injuries (KSI crashes), which represent 5% of all crashes. The study network experiences an average of 268 crashes and 2 to 3 fatalities per year. The most common type of violation for KSI crashes was driving under the influence (DUI), which represents 25% of KSI crashes, followed by automobile right of way, representing 20% of KSI crashes. This LRSP identified collision hotspot locations to be prioritized for project submission to HSIP infrastructure funding, which include:

Intersections
• Cabot Road/Crown Valley • Alicia Parkway/Bike Crossing Parkway (south of Aliso Creek Road)
Moulton Parkway-Golden Alicia Parkway/Niguel Road
:

Lantern/Crown Valley Parkway Greenfield Drive/Crown Valley • Alicia Parkway/Crown Valley Parkway
Parkway • La Gracia-Rancho Azul/Rancho
Alicia Parkway/Aliso Creek Road Niguel Road
' Laguna Niguel: 2050 - Pursuit of Happiness Strategic Plan LRSP 4 OF 51
L MARK
THOMAS
Roadways
• Paseo de Colinas • Golden Lantern
• Crown Valley Parkway • Alicia Parkway
• Moulton Parkway Aliso Creek Road between Alicia
• Camino del Avion Parkway and La Paz Road
Additionally, non-infrastructure strategies have been identified in conjunction with key stakeholders and timeframes for implementation.

Study Parameters
This LRSP evaluates collision history and provides countermeasures for local, collector, and arterial roadways within the City of Laguna Niguel. The collision database is a compilation of collisions on City managed roadways between January 1, 2015 and December 31, 2019. The primary source of the collision database was the Statewide Integrated Traffic Records System (SWITRS), consisting of police-reported collisions throughout the State of California.

LRSP Development Process
This LRSP project kicked off in April 2021 with a meeting between the City of Laguna Niguel Public Works Department staff, Orange County Sheriff's Department representatives, and consultants. The team discussed the City's goals for the project, confirmed an outreach and engagement schedule, developed a Stakeholder Working Group invitee list, and reviewed initial crash analysis data on the City's roadway network.

Stakeholder Working Group
The project created a Stakeholder Working Group (SWG) consisting of multi-disciplinary decision-makers and partners who have played a key role in development of the LRSP. The SWG has furthered the development process by helping to plan, implement, and evaluate methods to achieve the RSP's Vision, Mission, and Goals.

SWG organizations were selected for their influence over the 4 E's of transportation safety and ability to coordinate specialized services for the City of Laguna Niguel within their respective organizations. SWG representatives customized the LRSP non-infrastructure recommendation, timelines, and responsibilities according to staff and resource availability. Stakeholders will convene annually, at the request of the City of Laguna Niguel, to confirm the safety goals and direction of the LRSP.

LRSP 5 OF 51

LA MARK
• • THOMAS
Stakeholder Membership included representatives from the following organizations:

City of Laguna Niguel
Capistrano Unified School District
Falck/Care Ambulance
Orange County Fire Authority
Jrange County Healthcare Agency
Orange County Transportation Authority
Orange County Sheriff's Department
Vision, Mission, and Goals
The LRSP's Vision, Mission, and Goals were developed through a collaborative process between City representatives and SWG members. The resulting feedback between City staff and SWG members identified the following:

Vision
The City of Laguna Niguel is dedicated to a roadway network that provides safe travel throughout the city.

Mission
Promote safety and invest resources to reduce traffic hazards.

Goals

1. Create a culture of safe travel behaviors

2. Educate the community about safe travel practices

3. Reduce severe and fatal crashes

4. Maintain a safe, thoughtful, and well-managed roadway network

5. Collaborate with multidisciplinary partners

6. Implement proven cost-effective treatments
LRSP 6 OF 51

LA MARK
I • THOMAS
Community Engagement
Development of the LRSP has included public input during the following key events:

1. Traffic and Transportation Commission: Following development of the draft RSP with the SWG, the report was presented at the Laguna Niguel Traffic and Transportation Commission on December 8, 2021. Comments received focused upon clarifying recent efforts and documenting the statewide published crash rankings, recommendations for education to community groups, and confirming the report is a living document that can evolve based on locally determined priorities.

2. Public Comment: A Public Review Draft LRSP was posted to the City website for review by community members for approximately four weeks between March and April 2022. Comments received were supportive of coordination with local schools, safety for bicyclists, concerns related to electric powered bicycles, enhancing separation between motorists and cyclists, and pedestrian access to Laguna Niguel Regional Park.

3. City Council: Presentation of the Draft Final LRSP is planned in Spring 2022 for comments and adoption. The City Council and public will be provided an opportunity to comment on the item and engage in the discussion of the key actions.

Figure 1 City Website Screenshot Showing Posting of Public Review Draft in March 2022 City of
Laguna Niguel Catifornia 6200•
City Hall Services What's New Economic Development How Do I_? Programs
Projects
Chappamosa lock
Hans MaygrounfRegiscement Capital Improvement Program La Paz Road - Lane Closure to Plate Park & Marine this Chapparosa Park Playground Replacement ISrk 1-5 South County Improvements Project
Link tenage
Hality Me
La Plata Park & Marina Hills Park Curb Number Painting Program Linkteease Lin lepror
Improvements Pooch Park Drainage & Wayfinding Signs Local Roadway Safety Plan marovements
Rackto Tup Ta Ra Rosed Cole Closure
15 South Conly
Cab tonsies Manding
Local Rundway Solely Phan
4 trash conga tunine
LRSP 7 OF 51
I MARK
• THOMAS
Existing Safety Efforts
The City of Laguna Niguel has demonstrated a history of promoting safety and improving the transportation network aligned with the City's Strategic Plan and the LRSP vision. Existing efforts have included traffic safety studies at multiple locations citywide, education programs for youth and seniors, and infrastructure improvements, such as installation of traffic signal pre-emption, audible pedestrian signals (APS), buffered bike lanes, raised medians, speed feedback signs, and traffic calming measures.

Traffic Safety Studies
Traffic Safety Studies are an initiative to evaluate roadway concerns and identify solutions. City staff has performed data collection, field observations, and analyses to address traffic concerns at multiple locations citywide:

Charter School Circulation; April 2020: The City evaluated parking and traffic conditions in the neighborhoods surrounding Community Roots Academy (CRA) and Orange County Academy of Sciences and Arts (OCASA) charter school campuses. The surrounding neighborhood is impacted by pick-up and drop-off parking and traffic, teacher and staff overflow parking, and blocked driveways and streets. Existing conditions were examined through an outreach workshop, field observations, and average daily traffic (ADT) volumes to provide recommendations for improving traffic conditions. Recommendations in the Charter School Circulation Study include installation of all-way stop signs at the school exit driveway, school-staffed enforcement of pick-up and drop-off locations, and application of red curb paint where motorists block driveways.

Intersection Traffic Studies: The City conducted traffic operations and safety evaluations at Alicia Parkway and Crown Valley Parkway intersection (March 2020), Aliso Niguel and Moulton Parkway intersection (March 2020), and Westgreen Drive and Club House Drive (September 2020). The studies were conducted using traffic volume data, collision data, and field reviews. Existing conditions were analyzed to provide recommendations for improved traffic safety at these intersections.

Pacific Island Drive; July 2020: The City conducted an evaluation of Pacific Island Drive between Casalero Drive and Alicia Parkway Drive based on resident feedback concerning motorist speeds and visibility along the corridor. The Pacific Island Drive evaluation provided a summary and analysis of existing conditions, collision data, field observations, and recommendations for future improvements.

Recommendations included high visibility pedestrian warning signs, enlarged speed limit signs, and bicycle lane buffers.

Clubhouse Stop Signs; June 2021: The City received requests to install stop signs at the intersections of Club House Drive Via Lindosa and Club House Drive/Calle Barbosa. A stop sign analysis evaluated existing conditions at both intersections to determine the necessity of installing new stop signs.

Based on guidance from the City's Traffic Manual and the California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CA MUTCD), the study determined that limited visibility and vehicle speeds on Club House Drive justified installation of stop signs on both Via Lindosa and Calle Barbosa at the intersection with Club House Drive.

LRSP 8 OF 51

LA MARK
• THOMAS
Rancho Niguel Road & Rancho Azul Corridor Operations and Safety Study; August 2020: An operations and safety study was conducted for the Rancho Niguel Road corridor due to concerns from community members regarding motorist speeds, traffic safety, and signal control at intersections. Traffic signal warrant analyses were completed for the unsignalized intersections of Rancho Niguel Road/Rancho De Linda, Rancho Niguel Road/La Garcia, and Rancho Niguel Road/Rancho Azul. The study concluded that the Rancho Niguel/La Gracia intersection satisfied the signal warrants, and recommended installation of new signs and roadway striping modifications.

Costco Heather Ridge Circulation and Signal Warrant Analysis; July 2021: A signal warrant analysis was completed for Heather Ridge/Costco driveway intersection. The analysis included review of average daily traffic (ADT), collision data, and field observations. Results of the study indicate multiple treatment types are applicable at the intersection to improve traffic flow, including a traffic signal, signage, and a designated left turn pocket. The City of Laguna Niguel and Costco are continuing to coordinate on the study's results and next steps for improved traffic operations.

Figure 2 Rancho Niguel Road & Rancho Azul Corridor Operations and Safety Study Excerpt

NTS PADILTA LA MUSERA

MOULTO PALMS

RANCHO NIGUEL RD

GRACIA RANCHO RANCHO NIGUEL
CENTER
LIDg

RANCHO NIGUEL RD
LEGEND
• SOSED FITDADX SON SPCED
5t00 SCA DO NO
DESTINO SION BLOCK 25
• STREET DAT 35
S" SOMITO NIRSECTION R3-7(87 410-7 03-3
R5-5
LRSP 9 OF 51
LAMARK
THOMAS
HSIP Grant Funding Pursuits
In late 2020, the City of Laguna Niguel submitted an HSIP grant application to improve Rancho Niguel Road corridor, including a traffic signal at La Gracia-Rancho Azul and roadway lane striping modifications.

Paseo de Colinas Safety Barrier
In 2020, the City of Laguna Niguel installed a concrete safety barrier to address history of crashes concentrated at the site location. The barrier reduces severity of crashes near the crossing of the creek and railroad tracks. This is an example of data-driven engineering treatments applied to address a common, specific type of vehicle crash.

Bicycle Lane Improvements
The City has tested the installation of buffers between motor vehicle travel lanes and LANA
existing on-street bike lanes on Alicia Parkway in 2020 and Crown Valley Parkway in 2019. The use of buffered bike lanes has enhanced the separation between cyclists and motorists along these roadways and, in specific areas, has utilized 11-feet wide travel lanes. The initial demonstration projects have been implemented without documented motorist concerns, achieving an improved condition for both motorists and cyclists.

High Visibility Crosswalk
The City implemented a pilot program in 2020 applying "continental" crosswalks, proven to increase effectiveness in visibility of people crossing the street. This treatment was implemented at Alicia Parkway and Aliso Creek Road, a high-use location by youth, bicyclists, and pedestrians. This treatment raised crosswalk visibility, provided for a safer street crossing, and has been well-received by the community.

Audible Pedestrian Signals
Accessible Pedestrian Signals (APS) are pedestrian push buttons that communicate when it is safe to cross the street in a non-visual manner, benefitting safety for the visually impaired community when crossing roadways at traffic signals. The City has implemented APS equipment at approximately 20 signalized intersections, most recently in 2021, with plans to install at another 15 locations.

LRSP 10 OF 51

LA MARK
THOMAS
Speed Feedback Signs
Speed feedback signs (SFS) have been installed by the City, most recently in 2021, to reduce speeding behavior through improved driver awareness of actual speed versus posted speed limits. Locations where SFS have been installed or planned for installation include:

Rancho Niguel Road Figure 3 Existing and Planned Speed Feedback Signs Facing Eastbound Traffic, West of
Rancho de Linda. Speed Feedback Signs
Existing or Planned
Facing Westbound Traffic, at Rancho de Speed Feedback Signs Laguna Hith Linda.

Pacific Island Drive
MissTor
Facing Northbound traffic, North of
Starview Lane.

Facing Southbound traffic, North of
Starview Lane.

Golden Lantern
Facing Northbound traffic, at Dunes.

Aliso Creek Road
Facing Eastbound traffic, East of Niguel
Laguna Niguel
Heights Boulevard.

Facing Southbound traffic, North of
Skate Park Way.

Crown Valley Parkway
Facing Southbound Traffic, at Glenrock.

Capistranc
Existing SFS have proven to provide speed
reduction benefits. Permanent or
temporary SFS will continue to be
implemented in areas with high numbers of
speed related crashes.

Dana Point
LRSP 11 OF 51
LAMARK
• THOMAS
Traffic Signal Pre-Emption and Traffic Signal Synchronization Traffic signal pre-emption systems provide remote communication between the traffic signal and an approaching emergency response vehicle, allowing the response vehicle control over the signal phasing. The use of pre-emption equipment is estimated to reduce emergency vehicle response times by up to 25%. The City has proactively installed traffic signal pre-emption at all City-managed traffic signals.

The Regional Traffic Signal Synchronization Program (RTSSP) and Traffic Light Synchronization Program (TLSP) are initiatives by the Orange County Transportation Authority to coordinate signals along 750 miles of roadway within Orange County. The two programs reduce congestion, idling at the intersection, and increase vehicle capacity along a corridor by synchronizing signals to turn green before vehicles arrive at the intersection. The following list identifies projects completed by the City of Laguna Niguel to synchronize corridors and the year in which new signal timing was implemented or is planned for implementation:
• TLSP Projects
• Pacific Park / Oso Parkway (TLSP Pilot project along with Euclid) 2008 • 1st Alicia (Crown Valley to Olympiad) 2009
• RTSSP Projects
• Ist Moulton/Golden Lantern (Camino Del Avion to SR55) 2010 • Crown Valley (PCH to Antonio) 2013; (Operations and Maintenance) 2016 • La Paz Road (Crown Valley to Felipe) 2014; (Operations and Maintenance) 2017 • 2nd Moulton/Golden Lantern (Camino Del Avion to Lake Forest) 2017; (Operations and Maintenance) 2020
• Alicia (Crown Valley to Rustic Oak) 2019; Operations and Maintenance) 2022 • Aliso Creek Road (Moulton to El Toro) 2022
Development Review
The City of Laguna Niguel has an established process to review land development applications. Review considers the effect on traffic operations and potential traffic impacts consistent with policies identified in the City's General Plan. Additionally, City staff work with applicants to determine how the project site plan provides multi-modal access for people arriving to the project site via various modes such as driving, walking, cycling, or from transit. Collectively, the review process evaluates potential impacts to the transportation network, site access, and internal traffic operations to ensure a well developed project is built consistent with the City's vision for a high quality community.

LRSP 12 OF 51
AMARK
• • THOMAS
Youth & Senior Education Efforts
City staff have annually coordinated with Capistrano Figure 4 City prepared School Zone Brochure Unified School District (CUSD) staff and local school
Relevant
principals to evaluate traffic operations at local Traffic Laws California Vehicle
schools and identify efforts to improve circulation and Code (CVC) bowy anato Dryin
Regulations
safety for youth and parents traveling to/from school.

In 2021, the City created updated Safe Routes to
Schools maps and traffic safety brochures for
distribution to school audiences. Additionally, City
staff have made presentations to youth discussing the
role of City government to manage the
transportation network and provide safety guidance.

The City of Laguna Niguel Sea Country Senior Center
has held various in-person and online Driver's
Education Courses, including a California Department
of Motor Vehicles (DMV) written test preparation course, Drivers Safety Course hosted by the American Association of Retired Persons (AARP), presentation by the California Highway Patrol (CHP), and an online guide by the DMV. These courses are available to senior drivers throughout the City of Laguna Niguel.

Figure 5 Laguna Niguel Senior Resource Guide - Figure 6 Suggested Walking and Bicycling Routes - Laguna Transportation - Cover Page Niguel Elementary School

CITY OF LAGUNA NIGUEL
SENIOR

RESOURCE
GUIDE
15-minute walk. 10-minute
The City of Laguna Niguel
encourages parents end
students to use this mes ti
Crosang Guard explore mhone for towe
TRANSPORTATION Sgnized briersaction betendone ard achest Parents are responsible for
All Viny Stophtersector chooung the most
Ser Counny Senior & Communry Center
24602 Also Crock Rd. | LagenaNine CA |92077 Maried Crosmet on their knowledos o On Siret Ban Lane conditions on the different.
routes and the experience
Somed Poure to Sone lovel of their thudd

LAGUNA NIGUEL ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
Suggested Walking & Bicycling Routes
LRSP 13 OF 51

LA MARK
• THOMAS
Citywide Collision Data
Data Collection
This LRSP was developed using a data-driven approach toward identifying locations and behaviors contributing to collisions on the City's roadway network. Resources utilized include the Statewide Integrated Traffic Records System, Office of Traffic Safety Collision Data, and direct input from the Orange County Sheriff's Department.

Statewide Integrated Traffic Records System
A collision database was comprised of local police-reported crashes as published by the Statewide Integrated Traffic Records System (SWITRS) between January 1, 2015, and December 31, 2019. SWITRS database collisions without geocoordinates were located within the City using the Transportation Injury Mapping System? (TIMS) matching Case ID. During screening, few crash incidents needed subsequent identification of geocoordinates based on identified primary road, secondary road, distance from intersection, and direction from intersection. If desired, future updates to the LRSP can supplement the statewide published crash data through review of injury data provided by the local ambulance provider.

A records evaluation provided a descriptive analysis of crash data at the citywide level and crash density maps for primary collision factors, crash types, roadway crashes, intersection crashes, and total crashes.

The collision data forms the basis for identifying crash-based countermeasures for implementation at focus corridors and intersections, as well as emphasis area recommendations.

Office of Traffic Safety Collision Data
Additional information on citywide collisions is provided by the California Office of Traffic Safety (OTS).

OTS develops annual collision rankings for all California cities and counties.

OTS rankings from 2018, the latest year available, indicate that Laguna Niguel ranks 99t out of 102 similarly sized jurisdictions (with a larger number indicating positive comparative results). The positive outcome of the statewide OTS rankings indicate the crash history within the City of Laguna Niguel is low when compared to cities of similar size.
2 TIMS is an online application by SafeTREC that geocodes and assigns coordinates to SWITRS collision data, excluding property damage only collisions.

LRSP 14 OF 51

LA MARK
THOMAS
Figure 7 Office of Traffic Safety 2018 Crash Rankings for the City of Laguna Niguel Agency Year county Group Population (Avg) DVNT
Laguna Niguel 2018 ORANGE COUNTY 65363 1051228

TYPE OF CRASH VICTIMS KILLED & INJURED OTS RANKING
Total Fatal and Injury 233 96/102
Alcohol Involved 19 94/102
Had Been Drinking Driver <21 1 62/102
Had Been Drinking Driver 21 - 34 100/102
Motorcycles 10 90/102
Pedestrians 5 102/102
Pedestrians < 15 92/102
Pedestrians 65+ 1 84/102
Bicydists 87/102
Bicyclists <15 2 39/102
Composite 79 99/102

TYPE OF CRASH FATAL & INJURY CRASHES OTS RANKING
Speed Related 30 97/102
Nighttime (9:00pm - 2;59am) 17 96/102
Hit and Run 98/102
TYPE OF ARRESTS ARRESTS OTS RANKING*
DUI Arrests 109 32/102
Police Traffic Patrol Identified Improvement Locations
Orange County Sheriff's Department (OCSD) traffic patrol staff provided input based on observations at the following locations for potential improvement:

LA MARK
• THOMAS
Crash Analysis Results
Crash Data Charts
Crash data charts provide Figure 8 Five-Year Collision Trendline Figure 9 Five-Year Severity Trendlines graphic illustrations of
crash types and primary Total Crashes by Year Collisions by Year and Severity collision factors and
60%
informed decisions the 300
LSRP's developing 50%
emphasis areas. The 40%
dataset indicates crashes annual Sheer lot Crashes
268
244*
in Laguna Niguel occur at
250 254
an average of 268 total 10%
240
collisions and 2 to 3 fatal
2015 2016 2017 2018 2019
or severe injury collisions 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019
Property • Complaint - Visible Injury Severe Injury a - Falal • Annual Crashes → Average Crashes Damage Only of Pain
(KSI) per year.

Figure 10 Total and KSI Collision Types Figure 11 Total and KSI Primary Collision Factors Type of Collision Primary Collision Factors
• KSI Crashes "ll All Crashes •KSI Crashes ill Al Crashes 31% 30%
26% Share of Crashes 25%
18% 19% 20%
20%
15% 14%
15%
14% 13%
11% 102.
10%
5%
0% 1%
Rea-End Broadside Hit Object Sideswipe Other Head-Cn Pedestrian Overturned Not Stated Improper DUI Auto Right Traffic Stanab All Others Turning Speed of Way and Signs
LRSP 16 OF 51

LA MARK
• THOMAS
Crash Data Maps
Collisions were mapped using Geographic Information Systems (GIS) software to Figure 14 Heatmap of All Citywide Collisions illustrate the distribution of collisions within the dataset. Heatmaps were generated from the crash data to illustrate the density of collisions citywide and filtered for roadways or All Collisions High oscurrences
intersections. nguns Hits
Low occurences
Figure 12 Heatmap of All Roadway Collisions Figure 13 Heatmap of All Intersection Collisions Roadway Collisions Intersection Collisions
Hop occurrentes
Lom occieteres
Laguna Niguel
Laguna Niguel Laguna Niguet
LRSP 17 OF 51
A MARK
• THOMAS
Crash Tree Diagrams
Crash tree diagrams illustrate Figure 15 Crash Tree Diagram of Collisions Involving a Pedestrian, Bicyclist, or Motorcyclist possible outcomes of events by
CRASH TREE DIAGRAM City of Laguna Niguel Crashes
fol tre bossibe aths along PEDESTRIAN, BICYCLE, MOTORCYCLE COLLISIONS All: 1,340
KSI: 61 (4.6%)
diagrams illustrate probability
of varying crash types as
B ke/Red invot as Crashes Vehicle-only Crashes Motorcycle-involved Grashes defined by mode, location, Is 8616.49 All: 1,204 (89.9%) AH: 50 (3.7%) KS:18 (2953) KSI: 25(41.0%) KS: 18 (29.5%)
crash type, and primary
collision factor. Crash tree
Pedestrian Crashes Bicycle Crashes Intersection Roadway diagrams provide a detailed
All: 41(3.1%) All: 45(3.3%) All: 42 (3.1%) All: 8 (0.6%) perspective regarding travel KSI: 11(18.0%) KSI: 7 (11.5%) KSI: 16(26.2%) KSI: 2 (3.3%) behaviors throughout the
network. Pedestrian Action Driver Fault Bicyclist Fault Broadside Overturned Crossing in Crosswalk ot Intersection: 21 (KSI: 5) All: 11(0.8%) All: 23 (1.7%) All: 19 (1.4%) All: 14 (1.0%) The crash trees include total In Road, Including Shoulder: 10 (KSI:3) KSI: 1(1.6%) KSI: 3 (4.9%) KSI: 10 (16.4%) KSI: 4(6.6%) Crossing Not In Crosswalk: 5 (KSl: 1)
crashes as well as fatal and Not In Road: 3 (KSl: 2)
Not Stated: 2 At Fault Movement At-Fault Movement
serious injury crashes; however, Hit Object
Making Right Turn: 4 Proceeding Straight: 13 (KS:) Sideswipe Making Left Turn: 3 Other Unsofe Turning: 4 (KS: D All: 7 (0.5%) the major cause of the crash KSI: 2 (3.3%) All: 6 (0.4%) Proceeding Straight: 2 Traveling Wrong Way: 3 (KSt: 1) KSI: 2(3.3%) Entering Traffic: 1 (KSI: 1) Making Right Turn: 1
and manner of crash are Cther: 1 Making Left Turn: 1
Entering Traffic: 2
reported only for total crashes. Rear-End Other
All: 3 (0.2%) All: 1(0.1%)
In the City, the fatal and serious KSI: 0 (0.0%) KSI: 0(0.0%) injury crashes had similar major
causes and manners of crash as
the total crashes.

LRSP 18 OF 51

LA MARK
E = THOMAS
Figure 16 Crash Tree Diagram of All Collisions Involving Motor Vehicles Only CRASH TREE DIAGRAM Top three Primary Collision Pectors Shown City of Laguna Niguel Crashes Top five Driver Actions shown VEHICLE COLLISIONS All: 1,340 PC's and Actions reported os 'Other", or not stated not shown KSI: 61 (4.6%)
Bike/Ped-involved Crashes Vehicle only Grashes Motorcycle-involved Crashes All: 86(6.4%) All: 120-189.919 All: 50 (3.7%)
KSI: 18 (29.5%) (SI: 951-11.010 KSI: 18(29.5%)
Roadway Crashes Intersection Crashes
AlE 139(9 913) All: 1,071 (79.9%)
KS16(980) KSI: 19(31.1%)
Rear-End Broadside Hit Object Sideswipe Head-On Overturned Not Stated All: 321 (24.0%) All: 246 (19.7%) All: 241 (18.0%) All: 155 (11.6%) All: 52 (3.9%) All: 6(0.4%) All: 26 (1.9%) All: 6 (0.4%) KSI: 6 (9.8%) KSI: 8 (13.1%) KSI: 5(8.2%) KSI: 1(1.6%) KSI: 3 (4.9%) KSI: 1 (1.6%) KSI: 0 (0.0%) KSI: 0 (0.0%) Primary Collision Factors Primary Collision Factors Primary Collision Factors Primary Collision Factors Primary Collision Factors Primary Collision Factors Primary Collision Factors Primary Collision Factors Unsafe Speed: 169 Traffic Signals and Signs: 112 Improper Turning: 117 Improper Turning: 38 Automobile Right of Way: 17 Unsafe Speed: 4 Unsafe Starting or Backing: 12 Automobile Right of Way: 3 Driving Under the Influence 54 Automobile Right of Way: 80 Driving Under the Influence: 78 Unsafe Lane Change 26 Traffi: Signals and Signs. 14 Improper Turning: 2 Other Than Drivec 3 Unsafe Starting or Backing: 40 Improper Turning: 21 Unsafe Speed: 19 Driving Under the Influence: 19 Driving Under the Influence: 7 Other Improper Turning: 2 At-fault Driver Action At-Fault Driver Action At-fault Driver Action At-fault Driver Action At-fault Driver Action At-fault Driver Action Preceding Collision Preceding Collision Preceding Collision Preceding Collision Preceding Collision Preceding Collision Proceeding Straight: 203 Proceeding Straight: 112 Other Unsafe Turning: 101 Changing Lanes: 28 Proceeding Straight: 18 Backing: 13 Other Unsafe Turning: 12 Making Left Tum: 66 Proceeding Straight: 42 Olher Unsafe Turning, 24 Making Left Turn: 16 Slowing/Stopping: 10 Entering Traffic: 10 Making Right Turn: 24 Proceeding Straight: 24 Making Right Turn: 5 Stopped: 8 Maling Right Turn: 8 Making Left Turn: 22 Making Left Turn: 13 Other Unsafe Turning: 3 Changing Lanes: 6 Making U-Turn: 7 Ran Off Road: 5 Making Right Tum: 9 Hit Object Rear-End Broadside Sideswipe Head On Other Not Stated All: 50 (3,7%) All: 27(2.0%) All: 23 (1.7%) All: 17(1.3%) All: 5 (0.4%) All: 10 (0.7%) All: 1(0.1%) KS: 4(6.6%) KSI: 0(0.0%) <SI: 0 (0.0%) KSI: 1(1.6%) KSI: 101.6%) KSI: 0 (0.0%) KSI: 0 (0.0%) Primary Collision Factors Primary Collision Factors Primary Collision Factors Primary Collision Factors Primary Collision Factors Primary Collision Factors Primery Collision Factors Improper Tuming: 24 Unsafe Speed: 18 Automoble Right of Way: 16 Driving Under the Influence: 6 Automobile Right of Way: 2 Unsafe Starting or Becking: 7 Other Than Driver: 1 Onving Under the Influence: 17 Driving Under the Influence: 3 Improper Turning: 4" Improper Turning: 5 Improper Tuming: 2 Other Than Driver: 2 Unsafe Speed: 7 Folowing Too Closely: 1 Unsafe Speed: 1 Unsafe Lane Change: 2 Driving Under the Influence: 1 Improper Turing: 1 At-fault Driver Action At-fault Driver Action At-Fault Driver Action At-fault Driver Action At-fault Driver Action At-fault Driver Action Preceding Collision Preceding Collision Preceding Collision Preceding Collision Preceding Collision Preceding Collision Other Unsafe Turning: 32 Proceeding Streight: 19 Making Left Turn: 10 Other Unsefe Turning: 7 Making Left Turn: 2 Backing 7 Proceeding Straight: 13 Slowing/Stopping: 2 Entering Traffic: 6 Proceeding Straicht 3 Other Unsafe Turning: 2 Other Unsafe Turning: 1 Backing: 1 Making Right Turn: 1 Making Right Turn: 2 Changing Lanes: 2 Proceeding Straght: 1 Making Left Turn: 1 Moling U-Turn: 1| Making U-Tum: 2 Making U-Turn: 1 Other Unsafe Turning: 1 Changing Lanes: 1 Passing Other Vehicle: 1 LRSP 19 OF 51

LA MARK
• • THOMAS
High Injury Network Analysis Figure 17 High Injury Network Intersections and Roadways To identify high-crash locations within the City, a High-Injury Network (HIN) methodology was applied to the 5-year crash dataset. Crashes High Injury Network Collision Volumes on
involving a fatality were weighted at 3.0, and crashes involving a severe Intersections and Roadways Laguna Hills injury were weighted at 1.5. Crashes were identified as intersection or Higher roadway crashes when location within or in extent of 500-feet of an Lower Mission
intersection, respectively. To calculate the density of crashes, GIS was applied to measure the linear distance of roadway centerline miles within the City. Roadway crashes were then divided by the number of centerline miles within the City to identify crashes per mile.

The following three (3) intersections had the most reported crashes:

1. Cabot Road/Crown Valley Parkway

2. Moulton Parkway-Golden Lantern/Crown Valley Parkway

3. Alicia Parkway/Crown Valley Parkway
Laguna Niguel
The following six (6) roadways had the highest volume of reported severity-adjusted crashes:

1. Paseo de Colinas*

2. Crown Valley Parkway

3. Moulton Parkway
Con Toni

4. Camino del Avion
Capistrano

5. Golden Lantern*

6. Alicia Parkway
*A review of collisions on Paseo De Colinas, between El Sur and Camino Capistrano, found 59% of motorists were descending the hill prior to causing a collision. The slope of the Paseo De Colinas hill is approximately 6% between El Sur and Camino Capistrano. Similar percentages are expected on Golden Lantern Dona Point
past Hidden Hills Road.

LRSP 20 OF 51

LA MARK
• = THOMAS
Emphasis Area Strategies
During input from the SWG members and review of documented crash data between 2015 and 2019, the following seven (7) project emphasis areas were identified to improve travel safety:

1. Speed Management

2. Reduce Impaired Driving
Reduce Distracted Driving

4. Eliminate High-Crash Locations

5. Improve Safety at Intersections and Around Schools

6. Increase Active Transportation Road User Safety

7. Increase Safe Driving in Older Adults and Teens
The following details recommended actions to address the LRSP emphasis areas based on input and information provided by the SWG. While the SWG provided input to prioritize the following emphasis areas, additional transportation safety improvements can be implemented through regular review and evaluation by City staff.

Emphasis Area 1: Speed Management
• Collisions caused by unsafe speed are the Figure 18 Severity and Crash Type in Unsafe Speed Collisions second most-common primary collision
factor and represent 19% of the dataset. Unsafe Speed Collisions • Unsafe speeds most often result in rear-
PDO (40%) Complane ofPan(38%) l Visibie Injury (20%) Ill Severe Injury (2%) end collisions and have caused zero 200
fatalities between 2015 and 2019.
• Approximately 2% of unsafe speed Count of Unsafe Speed Colisions collisions result in a KSI.

Goal for Emphasis Area 1: 2C
• Reduce Unsafe Speed collisions from 2%
Head on Hit Osject Oiner Overturned Rear ond Sidesma
Brandite 11% 3% 5% 74%
KSI to 0% KSI
Strategy for Emphasis Area 1: Reduce motorist speeding through education, enforcement, and infrastructure improvements at specific locations.

Action 1.1: Community Education Campaigns. Leverage existing OTS resources and implement a citywide campaign to address speeding behavior. This campaign will target all motorists throughout the community, with an emphasis on school communities and will be distributed through digital media and printed brochures.

LRSP 21 OF 51
A MARK
THOMAS
Table 1 Action 1.1 Programming
Lead City of Laguna Niguel | Develop and distribute annual content and distribution methods Support Capistrano Unified Distribute printed material to new drivers (Juniors & Seniors) at high School District schools annually concurrent with issuance of parking permits.

Promote City-prepared "School Traffic Safety" brochure and content through CUSD Communications.

Orange County Health Review messaging and content in advance of publishing.

Care Agency Promote content with local 4th District Parent Teacher Association (PTA) representatives & after school programs
Funding Office of Traffic Safety
Timeline 1st Year
Action 1.2: Police Enforcement. Focus police enforcement on roadways that frequently experience high motorist vehicle speeds or have high numbers of speed-related crashes.

Table 2 Action 1.2 Programming
Lead Orange County Conduct speed enforcement on roadways with high speeding behavior Sheriff's Department and high speed-related crashes.

Pursue grant funding to conduct the program.

Support City of Laguna Niguel | Provide annual crash data to inform the locations and time frames to effectively implement speed enforcement campaigns.

Funding Office of Traffic Safety
Timeline 1-5 Years
vehicle speeds andstecture treatments plenions vastrecture treate co trous to seduce unsay, Infrastructure Treatments. Implement infrastructure treatments proven to reduce unsafe occur. Unsafe Speed collisions occurred most frequently on Crown Valley Parkway (26%), Golden Lantern (14%), and Alicia Parkway (13%).

Table 3 Action 1.3 Programming
Lead City of Laguna Niguel | Pursue grant, local, or regional funding for infrastructure treatments.

Implement infrastructure treatments at key locations.

Support All Partners Provide Letter of Support for grant pursuits Funding Highway Safety Improvement Program
State and Regional Grants
Timeline 1st-5 Years
LRSP 22 OF 51

LA MARK
• • THOMAS
Emphasis Area 2: Reduce Impaired Driving
• Collisions caused by driving under the Figure 19 Severity and Crash Type of DUI Collisions influence are the third most-common
primary collision and represent 16% of the Driving Under the Influence Collisions dataset.
• Laguna Niguel ranked 62nd out of 102 for 120 I DO (634) Complain: of Pain (17%) B Visale Injury (13%) M Severe hijay 6% a rally (%) collisions involving an intoxicated driver 100
Tota DU Co sons
under the age of 21 per OTS rankings.
• Approximately 7% of driving under the 60
influence collisions result in a KSI. 40
20 Goal for Emphasis Area 2: Broadside Head-on Hit Object Overturned Rear-end 9% 4% 45% 28%
• Reduce DUI KSI crashes from 7% to 4% or
lower.

Provide vouchers for 100 sober free rides home in the first 6 months of program implementation.

Strategy for Emphasis Area 2: Increase access to sober rides, implement targeted campaigns, and enact sobriety checkpoints citywide.

Action: 2.1: Ride Hail Promotions. Coordinate with a ride-hail company (e.g., Uber, Lyft, etc.) to provide citywide vouchers for a sober ride home, eligible for riders ages 16 and up. Vouchers may be eligible year- round or during critical periods of the year, such as holidays and regional events. Program advertising will be strategically placed near locations where driving under the influence is likely to originate. Distribution methods include digital and printed media such as physical advertisements, social media, subscriber newsletters, and news coverage.

Table 4 Action 21 Programming
Lead City of Laguna Niguel Coordinate with ride-hail service providers.

Support Orange County Provide guidance and lessons learned to City based on prior joint Transportation OCTA/City of San Clemente ride-hail voucher program.

Authority
Orange County Provide guidance regarding DUI trip origins.

Sheriff's Department
Participate in distribution of vouchers
Funding Office of Traffic Safety
Timeline 1-5 Years
Action 2.2: ( Focused Education Campaigns. Leverage Office of Traffic Safety (OTS) resources and implement a citywide campaign to address impaired driving. Communication methods include digital media, social media, and video advertisements.

LRSP 23 OF 51

LA MARK
THOMAS
Table 5 Action 22 Programming
Lead City of Laguna Niguel | Develop and distribute content and distribution methods.

Support Orange County Provide resources from past, existing, or future campaigns to Transportation supplement city efforts.

Authority Consider promotion of campaign messaging on interior/exterior of OCTA buses where feasible.

Consider a full-wrap bus to promote a campaign subject to review of financial impacts.

Orange County Participate in campaign funding pursuit, content development, Sheriff's Department distribution methods, and promotion.

Funding Office of Traffic Safety
Timeline 1st Year
Action 2.3: Sobriety Checkpoints. Conduct DUI Figure 20 DUI Collisions by Month of the Year checkpoints on holidays or timed with local events
when drivers are more likely to drive under the DUI Collision Trends influence.

DUl collisions in the dataset most commonly
occurred in February and October and on Crown Average Cul Colisers per Year Valley Parkway (16%) and Golden Lantern (15%).

Crash data trends can be used to inform locations
and time frames to implement DUI checkpoints
within the City. LONGE
Table 6 Action 2.3 Programming
Lead Orange County Conduct DUI Checkpoints.

Sheriff's Department
Support City of Laguna Niguel Pursue funding to conduct DUI checkpoints.

Funding Office of Traffic Safety
Timeline 1-5 Years
LRSP 24 OF 51

LA MARK
• • THOMAS
Emphasis Area 3: Reduce Distracted Driving
• Of associated factors catalogued in the Figure 21 Driver at Fault Cause of Collision collisions' party at fault, inattention is the
third most common recorded factor, after Party at Fault - Associated Factors "violation" and "none apparent".

Violaton
Goal for Emphasis Area 3: Inattention
Other
• Increase citations for distracted motorists
Vision Obscurements I
by 50% in the first implementation year of Defectme Vehoe Cquprent I High Visibility Enforcement program. Uninvolved Vehicle B Untamir With Road a
• Distribute campaign materials to all Stopard Go Trafic I parking-permit holding students, 4" District 50 100 15C 200 250 Count of Colicions
PTA representatives, and 4* District PTA
after school program participants within the City.

Train 100 parent participants in the Parent Intervention Program in the first year of implementation.

Strategy for Emphasis Area 3: Develop a culture against distracted driving through campaigns, training, and enforcement.

Action 3.1: High Visibility Enforcement. Implement increased police presence supported by paid and earned media in support of laws banning the use of handheld cell phones while driving. Communication methods include website, digital, and social media.

Table 7 Action 3.1 Programming
Lead Orange County Increase citation efforts against distracted driving.

Sheriff's Department
Support City of Laguna Niguel Pursue grant funding to support the Orange County Sheriff's Department's efforts.

Funding Office of Traffic Safety
Timeline 1-5 Years
Action 3.2: Parent Intervention Program. Create a program directed at parents to educate their teens about the importance of driving without distractions. Target audience for the program includes parents of teen drivers. Communication methods include website, digital, and social media.

LRSP 25 OF 51

LA MARK
THOMAS
Table 8 Action 3.2 Programming
Lead City of Laguna Niguel Create a new "how-to" brochure for parents to discuss safe driving behavior and methods to avoid distractions with new youth drivers Support Capistrano Unified Distribute City content and consider requiring students commit to School District distraction-free driving behavior as a condition of securing parking permits.

Orange County Support content development and methods to evaluate results with Healthcare Agency parents.

Orange County Participate in campaign funding pursuit, content development, Sheriff's Department distribution methods, and promotion.

Funding Office of Traffic Safety
Timeline 1st Year
Action 3.3: Regional Education Campaigns. Leverage Office of Traffic Safety (OTS) resources and implement a campaign directed towards drivers aged 16 and over to address the dangers and consequences of distracted driving. Distribution methods include posters, banners, videos on digital and social media, and advertisements.

Table 9 Action 3.3 Programming
Lead City of Laguna Niguel Develop and distribute content and distribution methods.

Support Capistrano Unified Distribute City content to students and parents.

School District
Orange County Consider leading interactive classes for student drivers subject to OCHCA Healthcare Agency staff resource availability. Training could be virtual and in-class training.

Orange County Participate in campaign funding pursuit, content development, Sheriff's Department distribution methods, and promotion.

Funding Office of Traffic Safety
Timeline 1st Year
LRSP 26 OF 51

LA MARK
• THOMAS
Emphasis Area 4: Eliminate High-Crash Locations
• High-crash intersections include:
• Cabot Road and Crown Valley Parkway (average 12.4 collisions per year) • Crown Valley Parkway and Moulton Parkway/Golden Lantern (average 8.9 collisions per year
• Alicia Parkway and Crown Valley Parkway (average 7.3 collisions per year) • High-crash roadways include:
• Paseo de Colinas (average 10.8 collisions per mile per year) • Crown Valley Parkway (average 9.7 collisions per mile per year) • Moulton Parkway (average 8.9 collisions per mile per year) • Camino del Avion (average 8.3 collisions per mile per year) • Street of the Golden Lantern (average 8.2 collisions per mile per year) • Alicia Parkway (average 7.7 collisions per mile per year) Goal for Emphasis Area 4:

Implement infrastructure treatments at three intersections within 2-3 years. • Implement infrastructure treatments along six roadways within 2-3 years.

Strategy for Emphasis Area 4: Conduct Road Safety Audits and develop infrastructure improvements for inclusion in the City's Capital Improvement Program.

Action 4.1: Road Safety Audits. Public Works staff will continue to contract Road Safety Audits, as described earlier in this LRSP. A Road Safety Audit (RSA) is the formal safety performance examination of an existing or future road or intersection by an independent, multidisciplinary team. It qualitatively estimates and reports on potential road safety issues and identifies opportunities for improvements in safety for all road users?.

Table 10 Action 4.1 Programming
Lead City of Laguna Niguel Contract licensed professionals to perform Road Safety Audits.

Funding FHWA Office of Safety
FHWA Division Offices
State DOT
Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP)
State and Community Highway Safety Grant Program (Section 402) Transportation Alternatives Program
Timeline | 1-5 Years
3Crowe, B., & Allred, C. (2018, August 10). Road safety Audits (RSA) - Safety: Federal Highway Administration.

Safety. Retrieved September 9, 2021, from https://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/rsal.

LRSP 27 OF 51

LA MARK
THOMAS
Action 4.2: Capital Improvement Program. Utilize LRSP identified intersections and roadways for capital improvement and pursue grant, local, or regional funding for implementation of infrastructure treatments that will 1) reduce crash risk factors 2) address the type of collisions and primary collision factor at the high-crash location 3) have a high benefit to cost ratio, and 4) have high systematic applicability. The City will consider treatments for incorporation in the City of Laguna Niguel Capital Improvement Program and follow an incremental approach to solutions dependent on conditions and needs.

Table 11 Action 4.2 Programming
Lead City of Laguna Niguel Consider LRSP-identified infrastructure projects for funding pursuits and inclusion in the City's Capital Improvement Program.

Funding Highway Safety Improvement Program
Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) Measure M2 Regional Capacity Program (Project O) Timeline 1-5 Years
Figure 22 Engineering Recommendations Require Multi-Year Efforts for Planning, Funding, and Implementation LRSP 28 OF 51

LA MARK
• • THOMAS
Emphasis Area 5: Improve Safety at Intersections and Around Schools • The majority of collisions in the dataset Figure 23 All and KSI Collisions by Location occurred at or approaching an intersection
throughout the City. Crashes by Distance from an Intersection • Collisions at or approaching intersections
EKS Crashes Il AN Crashes
occur at an average of 237 per year.
• Pedestrian injury is the third-leading cause of Crash Intersection
of injury-related death among elementary Location. ‹500 feet from center and middle schoolers in the United States4
• Child pedestrians involved in crashes stayed Roadway
:500 feet from
longer in hospitals and had more severe intersection
injuries than adult pedestrians.
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Goal for Emphasis Area 5:
• Reduce collisions at or approaching intersections by 25%. • Develop a set of effective infrastructure recommendations for each school within the City.

Strategy for Emphasis Area 5: The City will prioritize intersection improvements to reduce the severity and likelihood of collisions at or approaching intersections.

Action 5.1: Intersection Improvements with Emerging Technologies. The City's Department of Public Works will incorporate emerging technologies for intersection improvements. According to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 94% of serious crashes are due to dangerous choices or errors made by drivers!. Roadways equipped with emerging technology designed to support autonomous vehicles (AV) may reduce collisions due to human error. While emerging technology will continue to evolve, existing recommendations include lane markings, roadside sensors, and smart signage.

Table 12 Action 5.1 Programming
Lead City of Laguna Niguel Incorporate emerging technology into City's projects as applicable.

Prioritize emerging technology implementation at intersections near schools.

Funding Automated Driving System Demonstration Grants by U.S. Department of Transportation Timeline 1-5 Years
4 Borse NN, Gilchrist J, Dellinger AM, Rudd RA, Ballesteros MF, Sleet DA. CDC childhood injury report: Patterns of unintentional injuries among 0-19 years olds in the United States, 2000-2006. Atlanta: National Center for Injury Prevention and Control, CDC: 2008
5 Robert W. Derlet, Joseph Silva, James Holcroft, Pedestrian accidents: Adult and pediatric injuries, The Journal of Emergency Medicine, Volume 7, Issue 1, 1989.
6 https://www.nhtsa.gov/technology-innovation/automated-vehicles-safety LRSP 29 OF 51

LA MARK
THOMAS
Action 5.2: Countermeasure Monitoring. Public Works staff will apply police-reported collision data from SWITRS or TIMS to review the pre-construction and post-construction benefits of infrastructure treatments. Countermeasure monitoring results will benefit future funding pursuits for built improvements by illustrating measurable differences in traffic safety following the implementation of treatments.

Table 13 Action 5.2 Programming
Lead City of Laguna Niguel | Develop a process for analyzing pre-construction and post-construction traffic safety at locations planned for infrastructure improvements.

Funding California Active Transportation Program
Safe Routes to School Technical Assistance Resource Center Timeline 5+ Years
Figure 24 Continental Crosswalk at Aliso Creek Road Crossing Alicia Parkway LRSP 30 OF 51
M MARK
• = THOMAS
Emphasis Area 6: Increase Active Transportation Road User Safety • Collisions involving pedestrians or bicyclists Figure 25 All and KSI Collisions by Mode of Travel have a higher likelihood of resulting in a
fatality or serious injury (KSI), according to Total Crashes by Mode the dataset.

EKSI Crashes El All Crastes
• Bicyclists involved in a collision are 9 times
90%
more likely to result in a KSI than a
motorist.
• Pedestrians involved in a collision are 17
41%
40%
times more likely to result in a KSI than a
motorist. 203 12%
0%
Pecestrian Bicycle Molorcycle Vehicie
Goal for Emphasis Area 6:
• Reduce collisions involving a pedestrian to
> 1 per year.
• Reduce collisions involving a bicyclist to >1 per year.

Strategy for Emphasis Area 6: Pursue grant funding to construct pedestrian and bicycle improvements or implement non-infrastructure safety programming and implement engineering solutions specifically to increase pedestrian and bicyclist safety.

Figure 26 Woman with stroller and youth on scooter crossing in a crosswalk near commercial and park uses LRSP 31 OF 51

LA MARK
THOMAS
Action 6.1 Engineering Solutions. The City will apply data analysis and planning studies to determine locations citywide where engineering solutions are needed tor bicycle and pedestrian safety. It is recommended that City staff continue to monitor crash data affecting youth riding on bicycles (electric and non-electric) near local schools to determine engineering, education, or enforcement strategies to address potential increases.

Table 14 Action 6.1 Programming
Lead City of Laguna Niguel Develop and implement treatments to enhance safety for pedestrians and bicyclists at key locations.

Support Orange County Coordinate with the City to plan for safety treatments consistent with the Transportation Guidance for Administration of the Orange County Master Plan of Authority Arterial Highways.

Funding Caltrans Active Transportation Program
Caltrans Sustainable Communities Grant
Timeline 5+ Years
Action 6.2: Pursue Grant Funding. The City will submit applications to State and Federal programs to fund identification, design, and construction of pedestrian and bicycle safety improvements and consider pursuit of funding for local police offering of bicycle infraction "traffic diversion" program consistent with Assembly Bill 902 (2016).

Table 15 Action 6.2 Programming
Lead City of Laguna Niguel Pursue grant funding to study, develop recommendations, and construct improvements for pedestrians and bicyclists.

Support All SWG Agencies Promote project initiatives and provide letters of support Funding Caltrans Active Transportation Program
Caltrans Sustainable Communities Grant
Timeline 1-5 Years
LRSP 32 OF 51

LA MARK
THOMAS
Emphasis Area 7: Increase Safe Driving in Older Adults and Teens • Teenage drivers (age 14 to 19) account for Figure 27 Age Distribution of Drivers Causing Collisions 13% of drivers who are "at fault" in a
collision within the dataset. Party at Fault Age
• Older drivers (age 70 and over) account for
12% of drivers who are "at fault" in a
collision within the dataset.
0 8°
Goal for Emphasis Area 7:
• Reduce collisions caused by teenage drivers ∞ 00000
80° 000.00°
by 50%
Reduce collisions caused by older drivers 8
20 by 50%
Strategy for Emphasis Area 7: The City will implement separate, targeted campaigns for older adults and teens and coordinate with OCTA to provide safe and more comfortable alternatives to driving.

Action 7.1: Targeted Campaigns for Older Adults. Utilize AARP and AAA resources to educate the senior community (ages 65 and over) about safe driving practice as they age. Distribution methods include print and digital media at Sea Country Senior Center.

Table 16 Action 7.1 Programming
Lead City of Laguna Niguel Partner with the Sea Country Senior Center to present and distribute available published materials.

Support Orange County Continue providing alternatives to driving for older adults through OC Transportation Bus Senior Discounts and OC Flex Microtransit services.

Authority Promote content through OCTA communication channels to target audience
Funding Office of Traffic Safety
Orange County Transportation Authority
Southern California Association of Governments
Timeline | 1st Year
LRSP 33 OF 51

Table 17 Action 7.2 Programming
Lead Orange County Fire Continue organizing annual "Every 15 Minutes" campaign; 2-day Authority program on distracted/impaired driving. Typically coordinated with CUSD, OCSD, Coroners Dept, Care Ambulance.

Support Capistrano Unified Continue partnership with partners to ensure annual delivery of the School District "Every 15 Minutes" safety education program at relevant schools.

Orange County
Sheriff's Department
City of Laguna Niguel Promote the effort and campaign through organized City communication methods.

Orange County Continue providing alternatives to driving for teens through OC Flex Transportation Microtransit services and free transit rides for youth aged 6 to 18 on fixed Authority route busses.

Funding Office of Traffic Safety
California Highway Patrol
California Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control
Timeline 1st Year
Figure 28 "Every 15-Minutes" campaign demonstration of collision caused by intoxicated driving 'STO
LRSP 34 OF 51

NA MARK
• • THOMAS
Recommended Infrastructure Improvements
As described throughout the emphasis areas, engineering Figure 29 Local Roadway Safety Manual Cover Page treatments are recommended throughout the City to address specific traffic collision trends, specifically for Actions 1.3, 4.2,

5.1, 6.1, 6.2, and 7.3. Engineering treatments and Local Roadway Saret A Manual for California's Local Road Owner:
countermeasures are identified to address documented crash Version 1.5
April 2020
history and specific locations identified by City staff and OCSD representatives. Countermeasures funded by HSIP for
implementation have empirical before/after studies that document the crash reduction factor (CRF) which represents the expected percent decrease in crashes upon implementation of the countermeasure.

Countermeasures with a CRF are identified in the following published document created by Caltrans in conjunction with the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and Safe
Transportation Research and Education Center (SafeTREC) at the University of California, Berkeley:

1. Local Roadway Safety, A Manual for California's Local Safe has pron Caltrans SafelREC
Road Owners (Version 1.5, April 2020)
Where an infrastructure recommendation is included in the Local Roadway Safety Manual then a unique identifier is provided such as S02 for improved signal hardware.

Speed Management Treatments

1. Speed Limit Pavement Markings: Where speeding traffic problems have been documented, speed limit pavement markings may be installed to remind drivers to check their speed. Speed limit pavement markings are numerals applied in the traffic lane to remind drivers of the regulatory speed limit. In addition, a "SLOW" word legend may be applied with the speed legend. The treatment 1) provides a clear indication of the speed limit to drivers who are watching the road; 2) does not become obscured by streetside vegetation growth, parked trucks, or other obstructions; 3) is relatively easy and low cost to install; and 4) does not slow emergency vehicles?
Install Speed Feedback Signs (SFS): SES at select locations within the City to reduce speeding behavior through improved driver awareness of actual speed versus posted speed limits. SFS equipment is already installed at various locations throughout the City. Existing SES have provided speed reduction benefits.

Permanent or temporary SFS will continue to be implemented in areas with high numbers of speed related crashes.
https://www.cabq.gov/neighborhood-traffic-management-program/documents/speed-limit-pavement- markings.pdf
LRSP 35 OF 51

NA MARK
• THOMAS

3. Optical Speed Bars: Optical speed bars are used at spot locations or along a corridor to reduce speeding.

These are transverse pavement markings across the travel lane or along its edges placed with decreasing spacing in the direction of travel, which makes it appear to drivers that they are traveling faster than their true speed. They are placed in advance of a speed transition zone or other critical location. This treatment should be used sparingly, else it will lose its novelty effect, and should be maintained to ensure its usefulness.&

4. Reduced Lane Width: Reducing lane width to as narrow as 10 feet can reduce speeds. This can be accomplished by restriping narrower lanes without reducing pavement width. The remaining space can then be used for active transportation uses, buffer areas between travel lanes and bicycle lanes, or space for on- street parking?

5. NS14: A center island or raised median can be used to create a shift in the travel path. Shifting traffic is an effective way to reduce speeds. A center island or raised median may also be used to narrow the "optical width" of the roadway, which will make the roadway appear narrower, thereby reducing speeds. Medians have been shown to be effective in lowering operating speeds, especially when they create a deflection in the vehicle path at the beginning of the median. However, attention must be given to the design of the deflection to achieve a speed reduction without compromising safety. For this reason, center islands and raised medians are typically applied in existing low speed contexts? High-Crash Locations/Intersection Treatments

1. S01: Add intersection lighting. Providing lighting at the intersection itself, or both at the intersection and on its approaches, improves the safety of an intersection during nighttime conditions by (1) making drivers more aware of the surroundings at an intersection, which improves drivers' perception-reaction times, (2) enhancing drivers available sight distances, and (3) improving visibility of non-motorists. Intersection lighting is of particular benefit to non-motorized users. Lighting not only helps them navigate the intersection but also helps drivers see them better.

S02: Improve signal hardware. lenses, back-plates with retroreflective borders, mounting, size, and number.

This item is included specifically related to installation of the retroreflective borders to provide improved visibility of traffic signals, which is a new standard being employed by the state at all Caltrans-managed traffic signals. Consistent with industry standards, all City of Laguna Niguel signalized intersections currently utilize 12-inch diameter signals.

3. S04: Provide Advanced Dilemma-Zone Detection for high-speed approaches. Clearance times provide safe, orderly transitions in right-of-way assignment between conflicting streams of traffic. Advanced detection has several benefits which include: reducing the frequency of red-light violations; reducing the frequency of crashes associated with the traffic signal phase change; reducing delay and stop frequency on the major road; and reducing overall intersection delay.

4. S09: Install raised pavement markers and striping (through intersection). Adding clear pavement markings can guide motorists through complex intersections. When drivers approach and traverse through complex intersections, drivers may be required to perform unusual or unexpected maneuvers. Providing more effective guidance through an intersection will minimize the likelihood of a vehicle leaving its appropriate lane and encroaching upon an adjacent lane.
8 FHWA Speed Management Guidebook
LRSP 36 OF 51

LA MARK
• I THOMAS

5. S10: Install flashing beacons as advance warning (signalized intersection). Increased driver awareness of an approaching signalized intersection and an increase in the driver's time to react. Driver awareness of both downstream intersections and traffic control devices is critical to intersection safety. Crashes often occur when the driver is unable to perceive an intersection, signal head, or the back of a stopped queue in time to react. Advance flashing beacons can be used to supplement and call driver attention to intersection control signs

6. S11: Improve pavement friction (High Friction Surface Treatments) Improving the skid resistance at locations with high frequencies of wet-road crashes and/or failure to stop crashes can result in reductions of 50 percent for wet-road crashes and 20 percent for total crashes. Applying HFST can double friction numbers, e.g. low 40s to high 80s. This CM represents a special focus area for both FHWA and Caltrans, which means there are extra resources available for agencies interested in more details on HFST projects.

7. NS06: Install/upgrade larger or additional stop signs or other intersection warning/regulatory signs.

Intersection visibility and, thus, the ability of approaching drivers to perceive them can be enhanced by installing larger regulatory and warning signs at or prior to intersections. A key to success in applying this strategy is selecting a combination of regulatory and warning sign techniques appropriate for the conditions on a particular unsignalized intersection approach.

8. NS07: Upgrade intersection pavement markings (non-signalized intersection). Intersection visibility and, thus, the ability of approaching drivers to perceive them can be enhanced by installing appropriate pavement delineation in advance of and at intersections, which will provide approaching motorists additional information at these locations. Providing visible stop bars on minor road approaches to unsignalized intersections can help direct the attention of drivers to the intersection's presence. Drivers should be more aware that the intersection is coming up, and therefore make safer decisions as they approach the intersection.

9. NS10: Install transverse rumble strips on approaches. When motorists are traveling along the roadway, they are sometimes unaware they are approaching an intersection. Transverse rumble strips warn motorists that something unexpected is ahead that they need to pay attention to.

10. NS11: Improve sight distance to intersection (clear sight triangles). Adequate sight distance for drivers at stop or yield-controlled approaches to intersections has long been recognized as among the most important factors contributing to overall safety at unsignalized intersections. By removing sight distance restrictions (e.g, vegetation, parked vehicles, signs, buildings) from the sight triangles at stop or yield-controlled intersection approaches, drivers will be able to see approaching vehicles on the main line without obstruction and thus make better decisions about safely entering the intersection.

11. NS15: Create directional median openings to allow (and restrict) left turns and U-turns (non-signalized intersection). Agencies are increasingly using access management techniques on urban and suburban arterials to manage the number of conflicts experienced at an intersection. A key element of access management is to restrict certain movements, create directional median openings, or close median openings that are deemed too close to an intersection.

12. NS16: Reduced left turn conflict intersections (non-signalized intersection). Reduced left turn conflict intersections are geometric designs that alter how left turn movements occur in order to simplify decisions and minimize the potential for related crashes. Two highly effective designs that rely on U-turns to complete certain left turn movements are known as the restricted crossing U-turn and the median U-turn.

LRSP 37 OF 51
A MARK
• • THOMAS

13. R26: Install dynamic/variable speed warning signs. This strategy primarily addresses crashes caused by motorists traveling too fast around sharp curves. It is intended to get the drivers attention and give them a visual warning that they may be traveling over the recommended speed for the approaching curve. Care should be taken to limit the placement of these signs to help maintain their effectiveness.

14. R28: Install edge-lines and centerlines. Installing edge-lines and centerlines where none exists or making significant upgrades to existing lines (paint to thermoplastic, adding audible disks/bumps in the thermoplastic stripes, or adding RPMs) are intended/designed to help drivers who might leave the roadway because of their inability to see the roadway's edge along the pavement's horizontal edge or crossover the roadway's centerline into oncoming traffic. New pavement marking products tend to be more durable, are all weather, more visible, and have a higher retro reflectivity than traditional pavement markings.

15. Double Yellow Center Lines: Stripe double yellow center line adjacent to median curbs. The addition of striping narrows the far-left lane to reduce vehicle speed and provides a visual cue to motorists to avoid the median.

16. Red Light Indicator Lights (RLILs) are auxiliary lights mounted on signal hardware and directly connected to a traffic-control signal. The RLIL activates at the onset of the red phase and allows an enforcement officer to observe red-light running from downstream of the intersection. The low-cost solution, in coordination with enforcement support, has been shown effective toward crash reductions. RLILs are beneficial for locations experiencing red-light running.

Treatments Near Schools and for Active Transportation Users

1. S17PB: Install pedestrian countdown signal heads. A pedestrian countdown signal contains a timer display and counts down the number of seconds left to finish crossing the street. Countdown signals can reassure pedestrians who are in the crosswalk when the flashing "DON'T WALK" interval appears that they still have time to finish crossing. Countdown signals begin counting down either when the "WALK" or when the flashing "DON'T WALK" interval appears and stop at the beginning of the steady "DON'T WALK" interval.

These signals also have been shown to encourage more pedestrians to use the pushbutton rather than jaywalk.

2. S2OPB: Install advance stop bar before crosswalk (bicycle box). Adding advance stop bar before the striped crosswalk can enhance both pedestrian and bicycle safety. Stopping cars well before the crosswalk provides a buffer between the vehicles and the crossing pedestrians. It also allows for a dedicated space for cyclists, making them more visible to drivers.

3. S21PB: Modify signal phasing to implement a Leading Pedestrian Interval (LPI). This countermeasure is included for consideration at high pedestrian locations and near schools, parks, civic buildings, and other specific land uses. Locations within the City of Laguna Niguel meeting these initial setting criteria, such as the intersection of Alicia Parkway and Niguel Road, are appropriate candidates to study for potential LPI implementation. A leading pedestrian interval (LPI) gives pedestrians the opportunity to enter an intersection 3-7 seconds before vehicles are given a green indication. With this head start, pedestrians can better establish their presence in the crosswalk before vehicles have priority to turn left. LPIs provide (1) increased visibility of crossing pedestrians; (2) reduced conflicts between pedestrians and vehicles; (3) Increased likelihood of motorists yielding to pedestrians; and (4) enhanced safety for pedestrians who may be slower to start into the intersection.

LRSP 38 OF 51

LA MARK
• • THOMAS

4. NS19PB: Install raised medians (refuge islands). Raised pedestrian refuge islands, or medians at crossing locations along roadways, are another strategy to reduce exposure between pedestrians and motor vehicles. Refuge islands and medians that are raised (i.e., not just painted) provide pedestrians more secure places of refuge during the street crossing. They can stop partway across the street and wait for an adequate gap in traffic before completing their crossing.

5. NS21PB: Install/upgrade pedestrian crossing at uncontrolled locations (with enhanced safety features).

Adding pedestrian crossings that include enhanced safety features have the opportunity to enhance pedestrian safety at locations noted as being especially problematic. The enhanced safety elements help delineate a portion of the roadway that is designated for pedestrian crossing. Incorporating advanced "yield" markings provide an extra safety buffer and can be effective in reducing the 'multiple-threat danger to pedestrians. Nearly one-third of all pedestrian-related crashes occur at or within 50 feet of an intersection. • NS22PB: Install Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacon (RRFB). RRFBs can enhance safety by increasing driver awareness of potential pedestrian confiicts and reducing crashes between vehicles and pedestrians at unsignalized intersections and mid-block pedestrian crossings. The addition of RRFB may also increase the safety effectiveness of other treatments, such as crossing warning signs and markings.

7. Continental Crosswalk Pavement Striping: Install continental crosswalk pavement striping to provide improved crosswalk visibility for pedestrian use. Many jurisdictions have begun utilizing continental style crosswalks at high pedestrian locations and near schools, parks, civic buildings, and other specific land uses.

Installation of the continental (or ladder style) crosswalk pavement striping was first deployed by the City at the Alicia Parkway/Aliso Creek Road intersection with feedback indicating an improved condition for both motorists and pedestrians.

8. Bicycle Lane Buffer. Install a new bicycle lane buffer next to existing on-street bicycle lanes. Installation of bicycle lane buffers pavement striping has been deployed by the City on Alicia Parkway and Crown Valley Parkway with feedback indicating an improved condition for both motorists and cyclists. Buffered bike lanes are conventional bicycle lanes paired with a designated buffer space separating the bicycle lane from the adjacent motor vehicle travel lane and/or parking lane. The treatment 1) provides greater shy distance between motor vehicles and bicyclists; 2) provides space for bicyclists to pass another bicyclist without encroaching into the adjacent motor vehicle travel lane; and 3) appeals to a wider cross-section of bicycle users.

9. Green Conflict Zone Striping: Install green conflict zone striping for bicycle lane visibility. Colored pavement within a bicycle lane increases the facility's visibility, identifies potential areas of conflict, and reinforces priority to bicyclists in conflict areas and in areas with pressure for illegal parking. Colored pavement can be utilized either as a corridor treatment along the length of a bike lane or cycle track, or as a spot treatment, such as a bike box, conflict area, or intersection crossing marking. Color can be applied along the entire length of bike lane or cycle track to increase the overall facility's visibility. Consistent application of color across a bikeway corridor is important to promote clear understanding for all users.

LRSP 39 OF 51
L MARK
• • THOMAS
Treatments to Support Emergency Vehicle Services

1. SO5: Install emergency vehicle pre-emption systems. Upon installation of a new traffic signal, the City will consider providing emergency vehicle pre-emption capability. Emergency vehicle pre- emption at a new signal can be a highly effective strategy to reduce the likelihood of a new crash as emergency vehicles try to navigate through intersections and as other vehicles try to maneuver out of the path of the emergency vehicles. In addition, a signal pre-emption system can improve emergency vehicle response times, therefore, decreasing the time in receiving emergency medical attention, which is critical in addressing public health needs following a crash.

LRSP / 40 OF 51

LA MARK
• THOMAS
Table 18 Recommended Infrastructure Improvements
Primary Collision 5 5 8 8 Expected Life (years) ≤ IF ≤ Systemic Opportunity** Location Type of Collision Factor Type of Treatment Countermeasure (%) Signalized Intersection All Improper Turning Lighting Add intersection lighting 488 Crash Reduction Factor HE Fending ligibility 502 Signalized Intersection Improper Turing Signal Modification Improve signal hardware: lenses, back-plates with retrorefective borders mounting, size, and number 504 Signalized Intersection Rear-end Unsafe Speed Signal Modification Provide Advanced Dilemma-Zone Detection for high speed approaches 505 Signalized intersection NA Signal Modification Install emergency vehicle pre-emption syster 509 Signalized Intersection Sideswipe Improper Turning Operation/Warning Install raised pavernent markers and striping (Through Intersection) S10 Signalized Intersection Rear-end! Unsafe Speed Operation Warning Install flashing beacons as advance warning S11 Signalized Intersection Rear-end Unsafe Speed Operation/Warning Improve pavernent friction (High Friction Surface Treatments).

S17PB Signalized Intersection Pedestrian/Bicycle Pedestrian/Bicycle Pedestrian/Bicycle Install pedestrian countdown signal heads S20PB Signalized Intersection Pedestrian/Bicycle Pedestrian/Bicycle Pedestrian/Bicycle Install advance stop bar before crosswalk (Bicycle Box) S21PB Signalized Intersection Pedestrian/Bicycle Pedestrian/Bicycle Pedestrian/Bicycle Modify signal phasing to implement a Leading Pedestrian Interval (LPI) NS03 Non-signalized intersection Improper Turning Control Install Signals NS06 Non-signalized Intersection Improper Turning Operation/Warning, Install/upgrade larger or additional stop signs or other intersection warning/regulatory signs NS07 Non-signalized Intersection Improper Turning Operation/Waring Upgrade intersection pavement markings (NS.I) NS10 Non-signalized Intersection Rear-end Unsafe Speed Operation/Warning nstall transverse rumble strips on approaches NS11 Non-signalized Intersection Rear-end Unsafe Speed Operation/Warning Improve sight distance to intersection (Clear Sight Triangles) NS14 Non-signalized Intersection Rear-end Unsafe Speed Geometric Modification Install raised median approaches NS15 Non-signalized Intersection Broadside Improper Turning Geometric Modification Create directional median openings to allow (and restrict) left turns and U-turns 3533= NS16 Non-signalized Intersection Broadside Improper Turning Geometric Modification Reduced Left Tum Conflict Intersections NS19PB Non-signalized Intersection Pedestrian/Bicycle Pedestrian/Bicycle Pedestrian/Bicycle Install raised medians (refuge islands) Non-signalized Intersection Pedestrian/Bicycle Pedestrian/Bicyde Pedestrian/Bicycle Install/upgrade pedestrian crossing at uncontrolled locations (with enhanced safety features) Non-signalized Intersection Pedestrian/Bicycle Pedestrian/Bicycle Pedestrian/Bicycle Install Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacon (RRFB) R26 Roadway/Midblock Rear-end Unsafe Speed Operation/Warning Install dynamic/variable speed warning signs R28 Roadway/Midblock Hit Object Unsafe Speed Operation/Warning Install edge-lines and centerlines Roadway/Midblock Rear-end Unsafe Speed Operation/Warning Install speed limit pavement marking Roadway/Midblock Rear-end Unsafe Speed Operation/Warning Install Speed Feedback Signs (SFS) Roadway/Midblock Rear-end Unsafe Speed Operation/Waming Install optical speed bars Roachway/Midblock Rear-end Unsafe Speed Geometric Modification Reduce vehice lane widths Roacway/Midblock Hit object Unsafe Speed Geometric Modification Stripe double yellow center line adjacent to median curbs Intersection Unsafe Speed Signal Modification Install Red Light Indicator Lights (RLILs) on signal hardware Intersection Pedestrian/Bicycle Pedestrian/Bicycle Pedestrian/Bicycle Install continental crosswalk pavement striping Roadway/Midblock Pedestrian/Bicycle Pedestrian/Bicycle Pedestrian/Bicycle nstall 11-feet wide travel lanes adjacent new bike lane buffer Roadway/Midblock Pedestrian/Bicycle Pedestrian/Bicycle Pedestrian/Bicycle Install green conflict zone striping for bicycle lane visibility *Local Roadway Safety Manual HSIP Countermeasure Code
** VH-Very High: HaHigh: M=Medium: L-Low
LRSP 41 OF 51

LA MARK
THOMAS
Focus Intersections and Roadways
The High-Injury Network Analysis identified three intersections and six roadways which experience the highest volume of collisions per year and collisions per roadway mile, respectively. These intersections and collisions should be prioritized for project submission to HSIP infrastructure funding, which include:

Intersections
Cabot Road/Crown Valley Moulton Parkway-Golden Alicia Parkway/Crown Valley Parkway Lantern/Crown Valley Parkway Parkway
Roadways
Paseo de Colinas Moulton Parkway Golden Lantern
Crown Valley Parkway Camino Del Avion Alicia Parkway
Additionally, further HSIP consideration for the following locations should be considered based on feedback from City staff and OCSD:

Alicia Parkway/Aliso Creek Road intersection
Alicia Parkway/Bike Crossing (south of Aliso Creek Road) intersection Alicia Parkway/Niguel Road intersection
Greenfield Drive/Crown Valley Parkway intersection
La Gracia-Rancho Azul/Rancho Niguel Road intersection
Aliso Creek Road between Alicia Parkway and La Paz Road Treatments for each focus location should be prioritized by comparing the benefits and costs of implementation. This comparison can help the implementation phase by starting with the strategies that provide the highest benefit for the least cost. However, costs and benefits are not the only considerations.

Other considerations for prioritization may include the availability of staff resources, relative importance of each emphasis area, incorporation into other capital improvement projects, and concurrent land development activities. Based on overlapping corridors and intersections identified in the High-Injury Network Analysis, the focus locations are recommended for further study in a three-tier system, as described in the following sections.

Table 19 Focus Intersections and Roadways Prioritization Tiers Tier 1 Tier 2 Tier 3
Crown Valley Parkway (CVP) Alicia Parkway
Aliso Creek Rd (Alicia Pkwy to Paseo de Colinas
Roadways Moulton Parkway Camino del Avion
Golden Lantern La Paz Rd)
CVP/Cabot Alicia Pkwy/Niguel Rd
La Gracia-Rancho Azul/Rancho
Intersections CVP/Alicia Alicia Pkwy/Bike X-ing Niquel Rd Moulton/Golden Lantern Alicia/Aliso Creek Rd
LRSP 42 OF 51
LAMARK
• THOMAS
Non-Infrastructure (NI) Program Implementation
The following implementation process is adapted for the City of Laguna Niguel based on the Guidance for Implementation Model Process of the AASHTO Strategic Highway Safety Plan and establishes a process checklist for implementing the Emphasis Area Action Items described in this LSRP's earlier sections. The degree of detail and the amount of work required to complete some of these steps will vary between Action Item programs depending upon the situation.

Figure 30 Non-Infrastructure (NI) Program Implementation Model Identify Program
and Problem
Assess the
Review and
Program in
Confirm Emphasis
Annual SWG
Area Goals
Meeting
Carry out the Develop Program
Action Plan Specifications
Develop an Action
Plan
Step 1: Identify Program and Problem
Initial data analyses have been completed to inform strategic approaches to each of the seven SWG- identified emphasis areas. The identified SWG agencies involved in each Action Item should initiate program development by reviewing the key data points and determining if further detailed analysis is needed, with the objective to highlight over-representation of the problem within the community.

Step 2: Review and Confirm Emphasis Area Goals
Recommended crash reduction metrics have been identified under Emphasis Areas in earlier sections of this LRSP. The identified SWG agencies involved in the Action Item should review and confirm the metrics.

When working within an emphasis area, it may be desirable to specify certain crash types, as well as the severity level, being targeted. There are a few key considerations for establishing a quantitative goal. The stakeholders should achieve consensus on this issue. The goal should be challenging, but achievable. Its feasibility depends in part on available funding, the timeframe in which the goal is to be achieved, the degree of complexity of the program, and the degree of controversy the program may experience.

LRSP 43 OF 51

LA MARK
• • THOMAS
Step 3: Develop Program Specifications
A foundation and framework are needed for carrying out the Action Item programs toward solving identified safety problems. The implementation process will need to be guided and evaluated according to a set of specifications and related performance measures. These will formalize what the intended result is and how success will be measured. The overlying crash reduction goal, described in Step 2, will provide the context for the more specific goals established in this step. The specifications and performance measures will be used much later to evaluate what is implemented. Therefore, they should be jointly outlined at this point and agreed to by all program stakeholders.

Step 4: Develop an Action Plan
At this stage, stakeholder will detail the program responsibilities into an action plan, with all the details needed by both decision makers, who will have to commit to the investment of resources, and those charged with carrying it out. The effort involves defining target audience, number of participants, outreach and engagement timeline, resource requirements, organizational and institutional arrangements needed, schedules, etc. During this phase of implementation, City staff will work with the SWG to decide on educational campaign content to implement in the recommended non-infrastructure programs. It also should be designed at this point, to achieve consensus among the stakeholders on what constitutes "success." Knowing this helps maintain the validity of what is being done, encourages future support from management, and provides good intelligence on how to proceed after the program is completed.

Step 5: Carry Out the Action Plan
Conditions have been established to allow the program to be started. The implementation activities may be divided into activities associated with field preparation for whatever actions are planned and the actual field implementation of the plan. The activities can involve installation of program elements, training, and the actual operation of the program. This step also includes monitoring for the purpose of maintaining control and carrying out mid- and post-program evaluation of the effort.

Step 6: Assess the Program in Annual SWG Meeting
The program evaluation will have been first designed in Steps 3 and 4, which occur prior to any field implementation. The program will usually have a specified operational period. An evaluation of both the process and performance will have begun prior to the start of implementation. It may also continue during the course of the implementation, and it will be completed after the operational period of the program.

The overall effectiveness of the effort should be measured to determine if the investment was worthwhile and to guide top management on how to proceed into the post-program period. This often means that there is a need to quickly measure program effectiveness in order to provide a preliminary idea of the success or need for immediate modification.

The results of the work are usually reported back to those who authorized it and the stakeholders, as well as any others in management who will be involved in determining the future of the program. Decisions must be made on how to continue or expand the effort, if at all. If a program is to be continued or expanded (as in the case of a pilot study), the results of its assessment may suggest modifications.

LRSP 44 OF 51

LA MARK
• • THOMAS
Finally, the results of the evaluation using performance measures should be fed back into a knowledge base to improve future estimates of effectiveness.

Infrastructure Project Implementation
The following guidance is adapted for the City of Laguna Niguel based on the FHWA Highway Safety Benefit-Cost Analysis Guide and informed by practices applied in Systemic Safety Analysis Report development. The degree of detail and the amount of work to complete some of these steps will vary between infrastructure priority locations depending upon the situation.

To arrive at a logical basis for prioritizing and selecting among alternative infrastructure treatments, there are several steps that need to be performed. The process involves making estimates for each of the treatments and comparing them, both individually and in total. To do this in a quantitative manner requires some basis for estimating the effectiveness of each strategy. Cost-benefit and cost-effectiveness analyses should be applied to help identify inefficient or inappropriate strategies, as well as to establish priorities.

Figure 31 Infrastructure Project Implementation Model
Step 1: Network
Screening
Step 6: Apply for
Step 2: Diagnosis
Project Funding
Step 5: Project Step 3:

Countermeasure
Prioritization
Selection
Step 4: Economic
Appraisal
LRSP 45 OF 51

LA MARK
• • THOMAS
Step 1: Network Screening
Initial network screening has been completed to identify locations within the City that could benefit from treatments to improve safety performance based on crash frequencies and severities and police-reported crashes occurring between January 1, 2015 and December 31, 2019. The crash dataset should be re- analyzed at a minimum of every 5 years for continued screening of intersections and roadways where safety improvements are needed. In addition, further detailed analysis may be needed with the objective to highlight geographic concentrations of a problematic roadway setting.

Step 2: Diagnosis
The City should implement a Traffic Safety Study or Road Safety Audit at specific intersections and/or roadways identified in the network screening process. Detailed analyses should result in an understanding of collision patterns and crash contributing factors occurring specific to the site(s), including 1) what elements of the road may present a safety concern and 2) what opportunities exist to eliminate or mitigate identified safety concerns.

Step 3: Countermeasure Selection
The City should consider an approach to address citywide collision data that may be considered spot, systemic, or comprehensive in nature.
• Spot countermeasures are applied at specific locations or roadway segments • Systemic countermeasures are usually low-cost and deployed in a widespread manner. • Comprehensive countermeasures can include a spot or systemic countermeasure with the addition of outreach and enforcement.

A series of potential treatments have been identified for the City in the Recommended Infrastructure Treatments section of this LRSP, based on the documented crash history between 2015 and 2019.

Additional countermeasures may be considered according to the detailed results from Step 2: Diagnosis.

Step 4: Economic Appraisal
Estimate the economic cost and benefit associated with a particular countermeasure or set of countermeasures. Various measures, indices, and factors are available to compare and select project alternatives and are further detailed in the FHWA Highway Safety Benefit-Cost Analysis Guide.

Figure 32 Comparison of economic appraisal measures
Economic Measure Cooters Cond and Beni
Present value cost (PVC) Yes No No
Present value benefit (PVB) No Yes No
Cost-effectiveness index (CEl) Yes Yes No
Benefit-cost ratio (BCR) Yes Yes Yes
Net present value (NPV) Yes Yes Yes
Payback period Yes Yes Yes
Grant applications submitted for California HSIP funding require quantitative analysis using the Benefit Cost Ratio (BCR) format.

LRSP 46 OF 51

MA MARK
• • THOMAS
The BCR is the ratio of present value benefits (including negative benefits) to present value costs (initial and continuing costs over the project lifecycle). In this context, the BCR is the same as the rate of return and return on investment. A BCR greater than 1.0 indicates that benefits exceed costs, and the project is economically justified. In general, a higher BCR is desirable. The BCR is most appropriate for prioritizing alternatives when funding restrictions apply (e.g., prioritizing countermeasures or locations within a project with a fixed budget).

Benefit Cost Ratio = Present Value Benefit / Present Value Cost Step 5: Project Prioritization
Treatments for each focus location should be prioritized by comparing the benefits and costs of implementation. This comparison can help the implementation phase by starting with the strategies that provide the highest benefit for the least cost. However, costs and benefits are not the only considerations.

Other considerations for prioritization may include the availability of staff resources, relative importance of each emphasis area, incorporation into other capital improvement projects, concurrent land development activities, and whether the treatments are feasible to implement in spot, systemic, or comprehensive projects (see Step 3: Countermeasure Selection).

The City should develop a prioritized list of projects to improve the safety performance (i.e., reduce crash frequency and severity) of the road network, considering available resources. Project prioritization involves policy-level decisions such as overall agency goals and may include multiple (and sometimes competing) factors such as safety, operational efficiency, environmental impacts, and equity.

Step 6: Apply for Project Funding
The City of Laguna Niguel should apply for project funding annually, according to program guidelines and timelines. Since the introduction of COVID-19, call for project deadlines have been extended or revised from standard timelines to allow agencies flexibility in coordinating data collection and public outreach in accordance with public safety health guidelines. The City of Laguna Niguel should stay up to date with announcements via newsletters and/or attending workshops provided by funding agencies and apply for project funding accordingly.

LRSP 47 OF 51

LA MARK
• • THOMAS
Next Steps
The City of Laguna Niguel Public Works Department will coordinate among departments, local agencies, and organizations as needed to apply or co-apply for funding resources or grant opportunities. The City will advance strategies and continue partnership with stakeholders to implement the education, enforcement, engineering, and emerging technology strategies as needed to assist in implementing the vision and goals of this LRSP. The following tables provide a summary of actions for the following:
• Table 20 LRSP First Year Actions
• Table 21 LRSP Near & Long-Term Actions Summary
This LRSP will be a living document and will be updated as needed by the City of Laguna Niguel Public Works Department with input from the SWG representatives. SWG representatives will attend an annual meeting to confirm the direction, process, and progress of the LRSP. City staff can evaluate annually the membership of the SWG to determine if additional representation would be effective such as participation by senior citizen groups, electric and non-electric bicycle groups, motorcycle groups, high school students, etc. The annual meeting will be tentatively planned in the fall each year, and a representative from each SWG organization will be invited to attend. The annual meeting will provide an opportunity to review status and weigh in upon upcoming year priorities.

The LRSP goals will be evaluated as needed (at minimum, every 5 years) to measure success and progress toward the identified goals, as well as to evaluate collision statistics and identify any new applicable goals that should be worked toward or collision trends that arise Figure 33 City of Laguna Niguel City Council Placard Located at City Hall

LAGUNA NIGUEL CITY HALL
DEDICATED OCTOBER 15, 2011

CITY COUNCIL
Gary Capata, Mayor
Paul Glaab, Mayor Pro Tem
Joe Brown, Council Member
Linda Lindholm, Council Member
Robert Ming, Council Member
Tim Casey, City Manager
And lie
CW. Driver
Constraction Manager
LRSP 48 OF 51

LA MARK
= THOMAS
Table 20 LRSP First Year Actions - Lead and Support Agency Timeline Matrix Laguna Niguel Draft 2022 Local Roadway Safety Plan cantan Undid Shock blanke Change County Shard!': Cerainent First Year Actions
Initiative, Emphasis Area Action [Detail
OCHCA
SG Meeting (Annual Gily of taguna Niguel to host annual meeting and invite all Stakehcider agencies to attend Develoo and distntute annual content and distrbulen methods Districute printed material to new divers (luniors & Seniors) at high schols annually centurment with issuance of parking permis Speed Management 1 Community Education Campaigns Promote City-prepared Schoel Trafic Safety brochure and content through CUSD Communications Render messaging and content in advance of pubishing
Promote content with local 4th Dstnct Parent Teacher Association (PTA) representatives & after school programs Speed Management 13 Infrastructure Treatments Pursue gran, local, or regional funding for infrastructure treatments Pronde Letter of Suoport for grant pursuts
Develep and distribute content and distribution methcds Provide resources from past, existing, or future campaigns to supplement City efforts Reduce Impaired Driving 22 Focused Education Campaigns Consider promotion of campaign messaging on intenor/exterior of OCTA buses where feasible Consider a full-wrap bus to promote a campaign subject to review of financial impacts Participate in campaign funding pursuit. content development, distribution methods, and promotion Create a new now-to" brochure tor parants to discuts sate anung benarer and methods to avoid distractions with new youth driners Reduce Distracted Orving 32 Parent Intensention Program Distribute City content and consider reguring studenis commit to distraction free driang behavior as a conditional securing parking perruls Support content development and methods to evaluate resulls with parents (Participate in campaign funding pursuit, content develcoment, distnution methods and promotion Develop dnd dstnitute content and distributich methods
Reduce Distracted Onving 33 Regional Education Campaigns Distribute City content to students and parents Consider leading interactive classes for student drivers subject to OCHA staff resource availability Participate in campaign funding pursuit, content development, distribution methods, and promotion Elminate High-Crash Locations 41 Road Safety Audits Contract licensed professionals to cerform Road Salery Audits Partner with the Sea Country Senior Center to present and dstribute available published materials Increase Safe Onving in Older Adults and Teens 7.% Targeted Campagns for Older Aduits Continue providing aiteratives to dring for older adults through OC Bus Senic Disccunts and CC Flex Microtranst serves Promote content through OCTA communication channels to target audience Continue organang annual Every 15 Minutes campagn: 2-day program on cistracted/impared dring Typically coordinated with CUSD, OCSD, Coroners Dept. Care Ambulance I increase Safe Driving in Older Aduits and Teens 7.2 Targeted Campaigns for Teens Continue partnership with partners to ensure annual delvery of the "Every 15 Minutes' safety education crootam at relevant schools Premote the elfon and campaign through organized City communication methods Continue providing alternatives to driving for teens through OC Flex Microtransit services and free transit rides for youth aged 6 to 18 on fixed route busses LEGEND: SUPPORT
LRSP 49 OF 51:

LA MARK
= = THOMAS
Table 21 LRSP Near & Long-Term Actions Summary - Lead and Support Agency Timeline Matrix Capistrano Unified School District 9 Orange County Fire Authorty Ecrange county neath care Age it @ Orange County Iransportation Authorty Orange County Shef's Department Laguna Niguel Draft 2022 Local Roadway Safety Plan A City of Laguna Niguel @Falck/Care Ambulance Action Item Summary by Timeframe
1ST YEAR
SWG Meeting (Annual)
Action 1,1: Speed Management - Community Education Campaigns Education Action 1.3: Speed Management - Infrastructure Treatments Engingenng Action 2.2: Reduce Impaired Driving - Focused Education Campaigns Education Action 3.2: Reduce Distracted Driving - Parent Intervention Program Education Action 3.3: Reduce Distracted Driving - Regional Education Campaigns Education Action 4.1: Eliminate High-Crash Locations - Road Safety Audits Engineenng Action 7.1: Increase Safe Driving in Older Adults and Teens - Targeted Campaigns for Older Adults Education Action 7.2: Increase Safe Driving in Older Adults and Teens - Targeted Campaigns for Teens Education 1-5 YEARS
Action 1,2: Speed Management - Police Enforcement Enforcement Action 2.1: Recluce Impaired Driving - Ride Hail Promotions Emerging Technology Action 2.3: Reduce Impaired Driving - Sobriety Checkpoints Enforcement Action 3.1: Reduce Distracted Driving - High Visibility Enforcement Enforcement Action 5.1: Improve Safety at Intersections and Around Schools - Intersection Improvements wth Emerging Technologies Emerging Technology Action 5.2: Improve Safety at Intersections and Around Schools - Countermeasure Monitoring Engineering Action 6.2: Increase Active Transportation Road User Safety - Pursue Grant Funding Engineering 5+ YEARS
Evaluate Crash Data and Review Goals (at minimum every 5-years) Requirement Action 4.2: Eliminate High-Crash Locations - Capital Improvement Program Engineenng Action 6.1: Increase Active Transportation Road User Safety - Engineering Solutions Engineering LEGEND: LEAD SUPPORT
LRSP 50 OF 51
LAMARK
THOMAS
APPENDIX A: LETTERS OF SUPPORT
LRSP / 51 OF 51

ORANGE COUNTY

SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT SHERIFF-CORONER DON BARNES
September 3, 2020
Jacki Scott, PE, TE
Public Works Director

CITY OF LAGUNA NIGUEL
30111 Crown Valley Parkway
Laguna Niguel, CA 92677
RE: Letter of Support for Local Roadway Safety Plan
Dear Ms. Scott,
On behalf of the Orange County Sheriff's Department/ Laguna Niguel Police Services, we would like to offer this letter of support documenting our support for improving transportation safety in the City of Laguna Niguel. The Orange County Sheriff's Department has been an active participant during the preparation of the Local Roadway Safety Plan (LRSP) led by the City. We concur with the project vision dedicated to a roadway network that provides safe travel throughout the city.

As a stakeholder involved in the LRSP, our organization representatives have been involved in review of five years of vehicle, pedestrian, and bicycle crash history, identitication of potential solutions to address trends, and prioritization of strategies aligned with the project emphasis areas. We applaud the City of Laguna Niguel's focus to create a culture of safe travel behaviors and reduce severe and fatal transportation crashes citywide.

To achieve positive outcomes, the Orange County Sheriff's Department commits to continued partnership on the LRSP, including potential involvement through:
• Input on best methods to promote safety during dedicated campaigns (social media, in- school programs, etc.),
Incorporate partner-provided safety messaging into communications (as appropriate), Promotion of safety events and activities to our constituents, • Written letter of support for future grant pursuits led by City or other partners for LRSP activities, and
Attendance at annual URSP Stakeholder Working Group update meeting.

Sincerely,
Vinal Asici
Captain Virgil Asuncion
Chief of Laguna Niguel Police Services
www.dieshoriff.gov
Integrity without compromise | Service above self | Professionalism in the performance of duty | Vigilance in safeguarding our community

CAPISTRANO UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT

CAPISTRANO
UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT 33122 VALLE ROAD, SAN JUAN CAPISTRANO CA 92675 BOARD OF TRUSTEES TELEPHONE: (949) 234-9200/FAX: 496-7681 www.capousd.org

UDY BULLOCKL
'RESIDEN

KRISTA CASTELLANO

VICE PRESIDEN
September 8, 2020

GILLONES
Jacki Scott, PE, TE
Public Works Director PAMELA BRAUNSTEIN

CITY OF LAGUNA NIGUEL LISA DAVIS
30111 Crown Valley Parkway AMY HANACEK
Laguna Niguel, CA 92677 MARTHA MCNICHOLAS

SUPERINTENDENT
KIRSTEN M. VITAL BRULTE
RE: Letter of Support for Local Roadway Safety Plan
Dear Ms. Scott,
On behalf of Capistrano Unified School District, we would like to offer this letter of support documenting our support for improving transportation safety in the City of Laguna Niguel.

Capistrano Unified has been an active participant during the preparation of the Local Roadway Safety Plan (LRSP) led by the City. We concur with the project vision dedicatedto a roadway network that provides safe travel throughout the city.

As a stakeholder involved in the LRSP, our organization representatives have been involved in review of five years of vehicle, pedestrian, and bicycle crash history, identification of potential solutions to address trends, and prioritization of strategies aligned with the project emphasis areas. We applaud the City of Laguna Niguel's focus to create a culture of safe travel behaviors and reduce severe and fatal transportation crashes citywide.

To achieve positive outcomes, Capistrano Unified commits to continued partnership on the LRSP, including potential involvement through:
• Input on best methods to promote safety during dedicated campaigns (social media, in-school programs, etc.),
• Incorporate partner-provided safety messaging into communications (asappropriate),
• Promotion of safety events and activities to our constituents, • Written letter of support for future grant pursuits led by City or other partners for LRSP activities, and
• Attendance at annual LRSP Stakeholder Working Group update meeting.

SERVING THE COMMUNITIES OF:

ALISO VIEJO • COTO DE CAZA • DANA POINT • LADERA RANCH • LAGUNA NIGUEL • LAS FLORES • MISSION VIEJO RANCHO MISSION VIEJO • RANCHO SANTA MARGARITA • SAN CLEMENTE • SAN JUAN CAPISTRANO We look forward to continued involvement with the City of Laguna Niguel to bring about positive change in the community. If you should have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me at (949)234-9541, or by email at [email protected].

Sincerely,
Carlos Chicas
Executive Director Maintenance, Operations, Transportation Capistrano Unified School District

CLAYTON CHAU, MD PHO

DIRECTOR/COUNTY HEALTH OFFICER
¿Chealth JENNA SARIN, MSN, RN, PHN

INTERIM ASSISTANT AGENCY

CARE AGENCY LIFORN DIRECTOR

MARAN HEAT BEANE
PuBLIC HEALTH SERVICES

HEALTH PROMOTION AND TAMINSION MANAGER

COMMUNITY PLANNING EALTH PROMOTION AN

OMMUNITY PLANNIN
SANTA AMA. CA B2705
-MAIL: [email protected]
September 16, 2021
Jacki Scott, PE, TE
Public Works Director
City of Laguna Niguel
30111 Crown Valley Parkway
Laguna Niguel, CA 92677
RE: Letter of Support for Local Roadway Safety Plan
Dear Ms. Scott,
On behalf of Orange County Health Care Agency (OCHCA), we would like to offer this letter of support documenting our support for improving transportation safety in the City of Laguna Niguel. OCHCA has been an active participant during the preparation of the Local Roadway Safety Plan (LRSP) led by the City. We concur with the project vision dedicated to a roadway network that provides safe travel throughout the city.

As a stakeholder involved in the LRSP, a representative of our organization has been involved in review of five years of vehicle, pedestrian, and bicycle crash history, identification of potential solutions to address trends, and prioritization of strategies aligned with the project emphasis areas. We applaud the City of Laguna Niguel's focus to create a culture of safe travel behaviors and reduce severe and fatal transportation crashes citywide.

To achieve positive outcomes, OCHCA commits to continued partnership on the LRSP, including potential involvement through:
• Input on best methods to promote safety during dedicated campaigns (social media, in- school programs, etc.),
• Incorporate partner-provided safety messaging into communications (as appropriate), • Promotion of safety events and activities to our constituents, • Written letter of support for future grant pursuits led by City or other partners for LRSP activities, and
• Attendance at annual LRSP Stakeholder Working Group update meeting.

Letter of Support for Local Roadway Safety Plan
September 16, 2021

Page 2 of 2 ends

Sincerely,
(mes
Tamarra Jones, DrPH
Division Manager
Health Promotion and Community Planning
OCTA

BOARD OF DIRECTORS
September 16, 2021
Jacki Scott, PE, TE
Public Works Director
City of Laguna Niguel
30111 Crown Valley Parkway
Laguna Niguel, CA 92677
Subject: Letter of Support for Local Roadway Safety Plan Dear Ms. Scott:

We would like to offer this letter expressing our support for improving transportation safety in the City of Laguna Niguel (City). The Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) staff has actively participated in the preparation of the Local Roadway Safety Plan (LRSP) led by the City. OCTA supports with the project vision dedicated to a roadway network that provides safe travel throughout the City and across Orange County.

To achieve positive and lasting safety outcomes, OCTA recognizes the importance of continued partnership on the LRSP. OCTA looks forward to continued involvement with the City to bring about positive and lasting transportation safety improvements in the community within the context of countywide mobility and accessibility solutions. If you should have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact Warren Whitaker, Principal Transportation Analyst, at (714) 560-5748 or [email protected].

Sincerely,
tafae
Kia Mortazavi
Executive Director, Planning
KM:ww
c: Warren Whitaker, OCTA
Ürange County Trespertation Aotbontr
550 South Man Stroet P0 Pox 14184 / Granco / Calorma 929631584 / T7) 500-QC74 :52023

FIRE ORANGE COUNTY FIRE AUTHORITY
SANTE COUN P. O. Box 57115, Irvine, CA 92619-7115 • 1 Fire Authority Road, Irvine, CA 92602-0125 Brian Fennessy Fire Chief (714) 573-6000 www.oefa.org
October 7, 2021
Jacki Scott, PE, TE
Public Works Director

CITY OF LAGUNA NIGUEL
30111 Crown Valley Parkway
Laguna Niguel, CA 92677
RE: Letter of Support for Local Roadway Safety Plan
Dear Ms. Scott,
On behalf of the Orange County Fire Authority (OCFA), we would like to offer this letter of support documenting our support for improving transportation safety in the City of Laguna Niguel. OCFA has been an active participant during the preparation of the Local Roadway Safety Plan (LRSP) led by the City. We concur with the project vision dedicated to a roadway network that provides safe travel throughout the city.

To achieve positive outcomes, OCFA commits to continued partnership on the LRSP, including potential involvement through:
• Input on best methods to promote safety during dedicated campaigns (social media, in-school programs, etc.),
• Incorporate partner-provided safety messaging into communications (as appropriate), • Promotion of safety events and activities to our constituents, • Written letter of support for future grant pursuits led by City or other partners for LRSP activities, and • Attendance at annual LRSP Stakeholder Working Group update meeting.

We look forward to continued involvement with the City of Laguna Niguel to bring about positive change in the community. If you should have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me at (949) 237-3200 or by email at [email protected]
Sincerely
Mike Contreras
Division Chief, OCFA Division 5
Serving the Cities of: Aliso Viejo • Buena Park • Cypress • Dana Point • Garden Grove • Irvine • Laguna Hills • Laguna Niguel • Laguna Woods • Lake Forest • La Palma Los Alamitos • Mission Viejo • Rancho Santa Margarita •San Clemente • San Juan Capistrano • Santa Ana • Seal Beach • Stanton • Tustin • Villa Park Westminster • Yorba Linda • and Unincorporated Areas of Orange County

RESIDENTIAL SPRINKLERS AND SMOKE ALARMS SAVE LIVES
FALCK
City of Laguna Niguel
Jacki Scott, PE, TE
Public Works Director
30111 Crown Valley Parkway Falck Moble Health Corp.

Laguna Niguel, CA 92677 dba Care Ambulance
via email 1517 W Braden Court
Orange, CA 92868
Phone (714)288-3800
Local Roadway Safety Plan https://us.falck.com/
October 14, 2021
Dear Ms. Scott,
On behalf of Falck Mobile Health Corp. dba Care Ambulance, we would like to offer this letter to acknowledge we have been an active participant during the preparation of the Local Roadway Safety Plan (LRSP) led by the City. We concur with the project vision dedicated to a roadway network that provides safe travel throughout the city.

As a stakeholder involved in the LRSP, our organization representatives have been involved in re- view of five years of vehicle, pedestrian, and bicycle crash history, identification of potential solu- tions to address trends, and prioritization of strategies aligned with the project emphasis areas. We applaud the City of Laguna Niguel's focus to create a culture of safe travel behaviors and reduce severe and fatal transportation crashes citywide.

To achieve positive outcomes, Care Ambulance commits to continued partnership on the LRSP, in- cluding potential involvement through:

Input on best methods to promote safety during dedicated campaigns (social media, in- school programs, etc.),
• Incorporate partner-provided safety messaging into communications (as appropriate). • Promotion of safety events and activities to our constituents, • Attendance at annual LRSP Stakeholder Working Group update meeting.

Kind regards
Robert Viera
Division Manager
[email protected]
714 288 3883

Page 1 ends

LAGUNA NIGUEL

CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
Wemean business
March 9, 2022
Public Works Department
City of Laguna Niguel
30111 Crown Valley Parkway
Laguna Niguel, CA 92677
Attn: Jacki Scott, Public Works Director/City Engineer
Dear Jacki,
Thank you for the opportunity to review the 2022 Local Roadway Safety Plan, on behalf of the Laguna Niguel business community. The Chamber of Commerce places a high priority on traffic and transportation safety throughout our city, which certainly is a key element of the outstanding lifestyle and supportive business environment our residents and business owners enjoy.

It is important to know that the City places a high priority on this critical issue and has dedicated resources to complete this study. The draft Local Roadway Safety Plan is an excellent snapshot of the many initiatives the City takes to ensure safety around the local roadway network.

The Chamber of Commerce finds the draft report to be comprehensive in looking at pedestrian, bicycle, and vehicular safety, which are all very important to the health and vitality of the local economy and the success of businesses located here. The Chamber of Commerce is supportive of the findings within the draft report and looks forward to many more improvements throughout the City's roadway network to ensure continued safety for all roadway users. The Chamber of Commerce also looks forward to investments in transportation technology as we anticipate a thriving future for the residents and businesses located within the City of Laguna Niguel.

It is with great appreciation that the Chamber of Commerce supports approval of the 2022 Local Roadway Safety Plan by the City Council and looks forward to participating in future stakeholder meetings as this document is revisited and updated in future years.

My best regards,
Sartan
Scott Alevy
President & CEO
LAGUNA
NIGUEL
LRSP Vision:

The City of Laguna Niguel is dedicated to a roadway network that provides safe travel throughout the city.
markthomas.com

ATTACHMENT B
Traffic and Transportation Commission Staff Report,
December 8, 2021

CITY OF LAGUNA NIGUEL
TraffIc AnD Transportation CoMMISSIOn

AGENDA ITEM
To: Traffic and Transportation Commission Members
FROM: Kathy Nguyen, Engineering Services Manager/City Traffic Engineer DATE: December 8, 2021
SUBJECT: City of Laguna Niguel Local Roadway Safety Plan

RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Traffic and Transportation Commission recommend that the City Council adopt the City of Laguna Niguel Local Roadway Safety Plan.

BACKGROUND
The Fixing America's Surface Transportation Act (FAST) was signed into law on December 4, 2015. Under FAST, the Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) is a federal-aid program for the purpose of achieving a significant reduction in fatalities and serious injuries on all public roads. California's HSIP focuses on infrastructure projects with signalization, geometric, or operational countermeasures. Local HSIP projects must be identified on the basis of crash experience, crash potential, crash rate, or other data- supported means. Starting with HSIP Cycle 11 in spring 2022, a Local Roadway Safety Plan (LRSP) will be required for an agency to be eligible to apply for federal HSIP funds.

The purpose of the LRSP is to provide a proactive approach to addressing satety needs for motorists, bicyclists, and pedestrians on City of Laguna Niguel managed roadways.

Development of the LRSP was funded by the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans).

Page 2 ends

As part of an ongoing effort to identify and implement roadway safety improvements, the intent of an LRSP document is to:

1. Evaluate and plan for focused improvements on local highway safety needs

2. Maintain eligibility for future HSIP grant funding opportunities

3. Evaluate crash history affecting all transportation modes

4. Identify crash types and locations

5. Develop recommendations for improvements

6. Develop a Working Group with stakeholders representing multiple disciplines LRSPs have been proven to reduce fatalities on local roads in states that have implemented them, and implementation of this LRSP will improve transportation safety for the City's residents and visitors.

The City of Laguna Niguel has demonstrated a history of promoting safety and improving the transportation network aligned with the City's Strategic Plan and the LRSP vision.

Existing efforts have included traffic safety studies at multiple locations citywide, grant funding pursuits, education programs for youth and seniors, and infrastructure improvements, such as installation of traffic signal pre-emption, audible pedestrian signals (APS), buffered bike lanes, high-visibility crosswalks, raised medians, speed feedback signs, and traffic calming measures.

ANALYSIS
As part of this LRSP, a collision database was developed using data from the Statewide Integrated Traffic Records System (SWITRS) and Office of Traffic Safety (OTS) rankings.

The crash history was analyzed to identify the primary causes and concerns for traffic collisions within the network. The analysis found that overall, there were 1,340 police- reported crashes between January 1, 2015 and December 31, 2019 on the City of Laguna Niguel transportation network. Of these, 61 resulted in fatalities or severe injuries (KSI crashes), which represent 5% of all crashes. The study network experiences an average of 268 crashes and 2 to 3 fatalities per year. The most common type of violation for KSl crashes was Driving Under the Influence which represent 25% of KSI crashes, followed by Automobile Right of Way, representing 20% of KSI crashes.

The project created a Stakeholder Working Group (SWG) consisting of multi-disciplinary decision-makers and partners who have played a key role in development of the LRSP.

The SWG has furthered the development process by helping to plan, implement, and evaluate methods to achieve the LRSP's Vision, Mission, and Goals. Stakeholders will convene annually, at the request of the City of Laguna Niguel, to confirm the safety goals and direction of the LRSP. The SWG included representatives from City of Laguna Niguel Community Development and Public Works Departments, the Orange County Sheriff's Department, Orange County Fire Authority, Capistrano Unified School District, the Orange County Transportation Authority, the Orange County Health Care Agency, and Falck/Care Ambulance.

A total of four SWG meetings occurred between June and September 2021 to review crash data, define the LRSP's Vision, Mission, and Goals, and organize non-infrastructure

Page 3 ends

(NI) programs to address the emphasis areas. The SWG collaborated to define lead and support agencies, resources, communication methods, and implementation timelines for each NI program. Involvement and continued participation by the SWG members are documented through letters of support included in the LRSP.

Infrastructure improvements were identified for consideration at roadways and intersections with documented history of crashes. The City of Laguna Niguel will determine appropriate placement of identified improvements for future grant funding pursuits such as the HSIP.

ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED
The City Council may decide not to recommend adoption of the LRSP. This alternative is not recommended because an LRSP document is a requirement for public agencies to be eligible to apply for HSIP funding in spring 2022.

FISCAL REVIEW
There is no fiscal impact in adopting the LRSP. The cost to implement recommendations in the LRSP depends upon the initiative, such as availability of grant funding, and whether the recommendation is an infrastructure or non-infrastructure treatment. The recommendations would be budgeted in future fiscal years for City Council consideration and approval.

LEGAL REVIEW
No legal review is required for this report.

CONCLUSION
Staff recommends that the Traffic and Transportation Commission recommend that the City Council adopt the City of Laguna Niguel Local Roadway Safety Plan.

Kathy Nguyen -
Engineering Services Manager/
City Trafic Engineer
Attachment:

A. City of Laguna Niguel Local Roadway Safety Plan

ATTACHMENT A
Traffic and Transportation Commission Agenda Item -
December 8, 2021
City of Laguna Niguel Local Roadway Safety Plan
I Paz
2022 LOCAL ROADWAY

SAFETY PLAN PREPARED
FOR
Draft Report City of COUNT
1989
November 2021 Laguna Niguel

MARK THOMAS
LAMARK
THOMAS

CITY OF LAGUNA NIGUEL

LOCAL ROADWAY SAFETY PLAN
Acknowledgements
The 2022 Laguna Niguel Local Roadway Safety Plan was funded through a grant provided by the California Department of Iransportation (Caltrans). The City of Laguna Niguel, in collaboration with multidisciplinary partner agencies and stakeholders, collaborated to develop a plan that increased roadway safety for people traveling within the city's roadway network. The study was managed by Jacki Scott, PE, TE and Kathy Nguyen, PE, TE of the City's Department of Public Works, in coordination with a Stakeholder Working Group (SWG). A consulting team led by Mark Thomas assisted the City of Laguna Niguel and the SWG in preparing the plan.

Project Partners Orange County Fire Authority
City of Laguna Niguel Michael Contreras
Jacki Scott Jason Lopez
Kathy Nguyen Orange County Health Care Agency
Edgar Abrenica Maria Minaglia
Jonathan Orduna Orange County Transportation Authority
John Morgan Warren Whitaker
Phil Robinson Orange County Sheriff's Department
Capistrano Unified School District Isaac Flores
Mike Beekman Joe Bucaro
Jay McNamara
Falck/Care Ambulance
Carolynn Carraway Consultant Team
Shane Ryan Mark Thomas & Associates
Matt Spencer Paul Martin
Jae Riddle
Ed Noriega

CAPISTRANO
health

CARE AGENCY OCTA

MARK THOMAS
LRSP 1 OF 47

LA MARK
THOMAS
Table of Contents
Introduction. 4
Executive Summary. 4
Study Parameters. 5
LRSP Development Process.. 5
Stakeholder Working Group 5
Vision, Mission, and Goals. 6
Existing Safety Efforts... 7
Traffic Safety Studies. 7
HSIP Grant Funding Pursuits... 9
Paseo de Colinas Safety Barrier
Bicycle Lane Improvements...

High Visibility Crosswalk... 9
Audible Pedestrian Signals. 9
Speed Feedback Signs.. 10
Traffic Signal Pre-Emption. 10
Youth & Senior Education Efforts ... 11
Citywide Collision Data. . 12
Data Collection.. .12
Statewide Integrated Traffic Records System... ... 12
Office of Traffic Safety Collision Data.. 12
Police Traffic Patrol Identified Improvement Locations. . 12 Crash Analysis Results.. ....13
Crash Data Charts.. .. 13
Crash Data Maps. 14
Crash Tree Diagrams... 15
High Injury Network Analysis .17
Emphasis Area Strategies..... .. 18
Emphasis Area 1: Speed Management. 18
Emphasis Area 2: Reduce Impaired Driving..... ..20
Emphasis Area 3: Reduce Distracted Driving.... ..22
Emphasis Area 4: Eliminate High-Crash Locations. .24
Emphasis Area 5: Improve Safety at Intersections and Around Schools... ..26 Emphasis Area 6: Increase Active Transportation Road User Safety... ...28 Emphasis Area 7: Increase Safe Driving in Older Adults and Teens... ...30 LRSP 2 OF 47

LA MARK
•THOMAS
Recommended Infrastructure Improvements.. ...32
Speed Management Treatments.... .32
High-Crash Locations/Intersection Treatments... .33
Treatments Near Schools and for Active Transportation Users.. ..35 Treatments to Support Emergency Vehicle Services... 36
Focus Intersections and Roadways.. 38
Non-Infrastructure (NI) Program Implementation.... ... 39 Infrastructure Project Implementation .... 41
Next Steps.... 44
Appendix A: Letters of Support...... ........ 47
LRSP 3 OF 47

LA MARK
• • THOMAS
Introduction
Executive Summary
The City of Laguna Niguel is committed to providing a vibrant quality of life for all residents, businesses, and visitors in a safe, beautiful, and involved community! The Laguna Niguel Local Roadway Safety Plan (LRSP) supports that commitment to preserve quality of life through enhancing public safety on the City's roadway network. The purpose of the LRSP is to provide proactive approach to addressing safety needs for motorists, bicyclists, and pedestrians on City of Laguna Niguel managed roadways. Development of the LRSP was funded by the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans).

As part of an ongoing effort to identify and implement roadway safety improvements, the intent of the LRSP is to:

1. Evaluate and plan for focused improvements on local highway safety needs

2. Maintain eligibility for future Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) grant funding opportunities

3. Evaluate crash history affecting all transportation modes

4. Identify crash types and locations

5. Develop recommendations for improvements

As part of this LRSP, a collision database was developed to identify locations with a history of collisions.

The analysis found that 1,340 police-reported crashes occurred on the City of Laguna Niguel transportation network between January 1, 2015 and December 31, 2019. Of these, 61 resulted in fatalities or severe injuries (KSI crashes), which represent 5% of all crashes. The study network experiences an average of 268 crashes and 2 to 3 fatalities per year. The most common type of violation for KSI crashes was driving under the influence (DUI) which represent 25% of KSI crashes, followed by automobile right of way, representing 20% of KSI crashes. Engineering improvements are recommended for the following locations:

Intersections
• Cabot Road/Crown Valley • Alicia Parkway/Bike Crossing Parkway (south of Aliso Creek Road)
Moulton Parkway-Golden • Alicia Parkway/Niguel Road
Lantern/Crown Valley Parkway • Greenfield Drive/Crown Valley Alicia Parkway/Crown Valley Parkway
Parkway • La Gracia-Rancho Azul/Rancho
• Alicia Parkway/Aliso Creek Road Niguel Road
' Laguna Niguel: 2050 - Pursuit of Happiness Strategic Plan LRSP 4 OF 47
L MARK
THOMAS
Roadways
• Paseo de Colinas • Golden Lantern
• Crown Valley Parkway • Alicia Parkway
• Moulton Parkway Aliso Creek Road between Alicia
• Camino del Avion Parkway and La Paz Road
Additionally, non-infrastructure strategies have been identified in conjunction with key stakeholders and timeframes for implementation have been identified.

Study Parameters
The LRSP evaluates collision history and provides countermeasures for local, collector, and arterial roadways within the City of Laguna Niguel. The collision database is a compilation of collisions on City managed roadways between January 1, 2015 and December 31, 2019. The primary source of the collision database was the Statewide Integrated Traffic Records System (SWITRS), consisting of police-reported collisions throughout the State of California.

LRSP Development Process
The LRSP project kicked off in April 2021 with a meeting between the City of Laguna Niguel Public Works Department staff, Orange County Sheriff's Department representatives, and consultants. The team discussed the City's goals for the project, confirmed an outreach and engagement schedule, developed a Stakeholder Working Group invitee list, and reviewed initial crash analysis data analysis on the City's roadway network.

Stakeholder Working Group
The project created a Stakeholder Working Group (SWG) consisting of multi-disciplinary decision-makers and partners who have played a key role in development of an LRSP. The SWG has furthered the development process by helping to plan, implement, and evaluate methods to achieve the RSP's Vision, Mission, and Goals. Stakeholders will convene annually, at the request of the City of Laguna Niguel, to confirm the safety goals and direction of the LRSP.

LRSP 5 OF 47

LA MARK
• THOMAS
Stakeholder Membership included representatives from the following organizations:

City of Laguna Niguel
Capistrano Unified School District
Falck/Care Ambulance
Orange County Fire Authority
Orange County Healthcare Agency
Orange County Transportation Authority
Orange County Sheriff's Department
Vision, Mission, and Goals
The LRSP's Vision, Mission, and Goals were developed through a collaborative process between City representatives and SWG members. The resulting feedback between City staff and SWG members identified the following:

Vision
The City of Laguna Niguel is dedicated to a
roadway network that provides safe travel
throughout the city.

Mission
Promote safety and invest resources to reduce
traffic hazards.

Goals

1. Create a culture of safe travel behaviors

2. Educate the community about safe travel
practices

3. Reduce severe and fatal crashes

4. Maintain a safe, thoughtful, and well-
managed roadway network

5. Collaborate with multidisciplinary partners

6. Implement proven cost-effective treatments
LRSP 6 OF 47

LA MARK
• • THOMAS
Existing Safety Efforts
The City of Laguna Niguel has demonstrated a history of promoting safety and improving the transportation network aligned with the City's Strategic Plan and the LRSP vision. Existing efforts have included traffic safety studies at multiple locations citywide, education programs for youth and seniors, and infrastructure improvements, such as installation of traffic signal pre-emption, audible pedestrian signals (APS), buffered bike lanes, raised medians, speed feedback signs, and traffic calming measures.

Traffic Safety Studies
Traffic Safety Studies are an initiative to evaluate roadway concerns and identify solutions. City staff has performed data collection, field observations and analyses to address traffic concerns at multiple locations citywide:

Charter School Circulation: The City evaluated parking and traffic conditions in the neighborhoods surrounding Community Roots Academy (CRA) and Orange County Academy of Sciences and Arts (OCASA) charter school campuses. The surrounding neighborhood is impacted by pick-up and drop-off parking and traffic, teacher and staff overflow parking, and blocked driveways and streets. Existing conditions were examined through an outreach workshop, field observations, and average daily traffic (ADT) volumes to provide recommendations for improving traffic conditions. Recommendations in the Charter School Circulation Study include installation of all-way stop signs at the school exit driveway, school-staffed enforcement of pick-up and drop-off locations, and application of red curb paint where motorists block driveways.

Intersection Traffic Studies: The City conducted traffic operations and safety evaluations at Alicia Parkway and Crown Valley Parkway intersection, Aliso Niguel and Moulton Parkway intersection, and Westgreen Drive and Club House Drive. The studies were conducted using traffic volume data, collision data, and field reviews. Existing conditions were analyzed to provide recommendations for improved traffic safety at these intersections.

Pacific Island Drive: The City conducted an evaluation of Pacific Island Drive between Casalero Drive and Alicia Parkway Drive based on resident feedback concerning motorist speeds and visibility along the corridor. The Pacific Island Drive evaluation provided a summary and analysis of existing conditions, collision data, field observations, and recommendations for future improvements. Recommendations include high visibility pedestrian warning signs, enlarged speed limit signs, and bicycle lane buffers.

Clubhouse Stop Signs: The City received requests to install stop signs at the intersections of Club House Drive/Via Lindosa and Club House Drive/Calle Barbosa. A stop sign analysis evaluated existing conditions at both intersections to determine the necessity of installing new stop signs. Based on guidance from the City's Traffic Manual and the California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CA MUTD), the study determined that limited visibility and vehicle speeds on Club House Drive justified installation of stop signs on both Via Lindosa and Calle Barbosa at the intersection with Club House Drive.

LRSP 7 OF 47

LA MARK
• • THOMAS
Rancho Niguel Road & Rancho Azul Corridor Operations and Safety Study: An operations and safety study was conducted for the Rancho Niguel Road corridor due to concerns from community members regarding motorist speeds, traffic safety, and signal control at intersections. Traffic signal warrant analyses were completed for the unsignalized intersections of Rancho Niguel Road/Rancho De Linda, Rancho Niguel Road/La Garcia, and Rancho Niguel Road/Rancho Azul. The study concluded that the Rancho Niguel/La Gracia intersection satisfied the signal warrants, and recommended installation of new signs and roadway striping modifications.

Costco Heather Ridge Circulation and Signal Warrant Analysis: A signal warrant analysis was completed for Heather Ridge/Costco driveway intersection. The analysis included review of average daily traffic (ADT), collision data, and field observations. Results of the study indicate multiple treatment types are applicable at the intersection to improve traffic flow, including a traffic signal, signage, and a designated left turn pocket. The City of Laguna Niguel and Costco are continuing to coordinate on the results of the study and next steps for improved traffic operations.

Figure 1 Rancho Niguel Road & Rancho Azul Corridor Operations and Safety Study Excerpt

PADILLA

NTS LA MUJERA
MOULTO: PALMS

RANCHO NIGUEL RD

GRACIA RANCHO RANCHO NIGUEL
CENTER

RANCHO NIGUEL HO

RANCHO-CRISTIANG
LEGEND

SACED FETDRASA SON SPEED

STOP SON DO NOI
DESTINS 90% MUSt 25
• SIREET INT 3
SONAZTO N'ERSECTION 93-7(RT) 85-1 210-2 $5-1 K2-22 W5-3 X4-2

POIL- ALL DICES CISPLAYED DECORATOR PARING STANONE, AND SIGHING SON LRSP 8 OF 47.

L MARK
THOMAS
HSIP Grant Funding Pursuits
The City of Laguna Niguel submitted an HSIP grant application to improve Rancho Niguel Road corridor, including a traffic signal at La Gracia-Rancho Azul and roadway lane striping modifications.

Paseo de Colinas Safety Barrier
The City of Laguna Niguel installed a concrete safety barrier to address history of crashes concentrated at the site location. The barrier reduces severity of crashes near the crossing of the creek and railroad tracks. The treatment is an example of data- driven engineering treatments applied to address a common, specific type of vehicle crash.

Bicycle Lane Improvements
The City has tested the installation of buffers between motor vehicle travel lanes and LANE existing on-street bike lanes on Alicia Parkway and Crown Valley Parkway. The use of buffered bike lanes has enhanced the separation between cyclists and motorists along these roadways and, in specific areas, has utilized 11-feet wide travel lanes. The initial demonstration projects have been implemented without documented motorist concerns, achieving an improved condition for both motorists and cyclists.

High Visibility Crosswalk
The City has implemented a pilot program applying "continental" crosswalks, proven to increase effectiveness in visibility of people crossing the street. The treatment was implemented at Alicia Parkway and Aliso Creek Road, a high-use location by youth, bicyclists, and pedestrians. The treatment raises visibility of the crosswalk, provides for a safer street crossing, and has been well-received by the community.

LRSP 9 OF 47
LAMARK
THOMAS
Speed Feedback Signs
Speed feedback signs (SFS) have been installed by the City to reduce speeding behavior through improved driver awareness of actual speed versus posted speed limits. Locations where SFS have been installed or planned for installation include:

Rancho Niguel Road Figure 2 Existing and Planned Speed Feedback Signs Facing Eastbound Traffic, West of
Rancho de Linda. Speed Feedback Signs
Existing or Planned
Facing Westbound Traffic, at Rancho de Speed Feedback Signs Laguna His Y Linda.

Pacific Island Drive
Facing Northbound traffic, North of
Starview Lane.

Facing Southbound traffic, North of
Starview Lane.

Golden Lantern
Facing Northbound traffic, at Dunes.

Aliso Creek Road
Facing Eastbound traffic, East of Niguel
Laguna Niguel
Heights Boulevard.

Facing Southbound traffic, North of
Skate Park Way.

Crown Valley Parkway
Facing Southbound Traffic, at Glenrock.

Son Juan
Capistrano
Existing SFS have proven to provide speed
reduction benefits. Permanent or
temporary SFS will continue to be
implemented in areas with high numbers of
speed related crashes.

Dana Point
Traffic Signal Pre-Emption
Traffic signal pre-emption systems provide remote communication between the traffic signal and an approaching emergency response vehicle, allowing the response vehicle control over the signal phasing. The use of pre-emption equipment is estimated to reduce emergency vehicle response times by up to 25%. The City has proactively installed traffic signal pre-emption at all City-managed traffic signals.

LRSP 10 OF 47

LA MARK
• THOMAS
Youth & Senior Education Efforts
City staff have regularly coordinated with Figure 3 City prepared School Zone Brochure Capistrano Unified School District (CUSD) staff and
Relevant
local school principals to annually evaluate traffic
California Vehicle Traffic Laws
operations at local schools and identify efforts to Code (CVC) Regulations
improve circulation and safety for youth and
Double Parkiby
Disobeying o Crossing Gard
parents traveling to/from school. Additionally, City
staff have made presentations to youth discussing
Male and
record ty lull many da pact we
the role of City government to manage the
Parting is frest of Pusle Driee
transportation network and provide satety Talking on a Cell Phone Whe Driving guidance. artine Walla Divind
The City of Laguna Niguel Sea Country Senior
Center has held various in-person and online
Driver's Education Courses, including a California
Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) written test
preparation course, Drivers Safety Course hosted
by the American Association of Retired Persons (AARP), presentation by the California Highway Patrol (CHP), and an online guide by the DMV. These courses are available to senior drivers throughout the City of Laguna Niguel.

Figure 4 Laguna Niguel Senior Resource Guide - Figure 5 Suggested Walking and Bicycling Routes - Laguna Niguel Elementary School

CITY OF LAGUNA NIGUEL
SENIOR

RESOURCE
GUIDE
minute walk 10-minute
LEGEND The Cay of Loguna Nigues
Laguna Novel Ew mentary School
seicers to use this map fo
Crossng Gurd
TRANSPORTATION Sgreized beersecton
Parents are repartitle for
Ally Stop/tense sor choosing the most
Ill Marted Crosswal
nathan neolatan o
24602 Also Crock Rd | Laghu Newel |CA | 92677
constion: on the different
As So Allas
Sigpestet Rotese Schec Tea of their the feet

LAGUNA NIGUEL ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
Suggested Walking & Bicycling Routes
LRSP 11 OF 47
I MARK
• • THOMAS
Citywide Collision Data
Data Collection
This LRSP was developed using a data-driven approach toward identifying locations and behaviors contributing to collisions on the City's roadway network. Resources utilized include the Statewide Integrated Traffic Records System, Office of Traffic Safety Collision Data, and direct input from the Orange County Sheriff's Department.

Statewide Integrated Traffic Records System
A collision database was comprised of local police-reported crashes as published by the Statewide Integrated Traffic Records System (SWITRS) between January 1, 2015, and December 31, 2019. During screening, few crash incidents needed subsequent identification of geocoordinates based on identified primary road, secondary road, distance from intersection, and direction from intersection.

An evaluation of the records provided a descriptive analysis of crash data at the citywide level, and crash density maps for primary collision factors, types of crashes, roadway crashes, intersection crashes, and total crashes. The collision data forms the basis for identifying crash-based countermeasures for implementation at focus corridors and intersections, as well as emphasis area recommendations.

Office of Traffic Safety Collision Data
Additional information on citywide collisions is provided by the California Office of Traffic Safety (OTS).

OTS develops annual collision rankings for all California cities and counties.

OTS rankings from 2018, the latest year available, indicate that Laguna Niguel ranks 99th out of 102 similarly sized jurisdictions (with a larger number indicating positive comparative results). The positive outcome of the statewide OTS rankings indicate the crash history within the City of Laguna Niguel is low when compared to cities of similar size.

Police Traffic Patrol Identified Improvement Locations
Orange County Sheriff's Department (OCSD) traffic patrol staff provided input based on observations at the following locations for potential improvement:

Alicia Parkway/Aliso Creek Road
Alicia Parkway/Bike Crossing (south of Aliso Creek Road) Alicia Parkway/Niguel Road
Aliso Creek Road between Alicia Parkway and La Paz Road Golden Lantern/Crown Valley Parkway
Greenfield Drive/Crown Valley Parkway
LRSP 12 OF 47
4 MARK
• THOMAS
Crash Analysis Results
Crash Data Charts
Crash data charts provide Figure 6 Five-Year Collision Trendline Figure 7 Five-Year Severity Trendlines graphic illustrations of
crash types and primary Total Crashes by Year Collisions by Year and Severity collision factors, and
informed decisions in
50%
developing emphasis
areas of the LRSP. The
dataset indicates crashes annual Share of Total Crashes 268
in Laguna Niguel occur at
250 254
an average of 268 total 10%
collisions and 2 to 3 fatal 240
230 2015 2016 2017 2018
2015 2019
or severe injury collisions 2016 2017 2018 2019
Property Complaint • Visible Injury • Severe Injury - Fatal • Annual Crashes • Average Crashes Damage Only of Pain
(KSI) per year.

Figure 8 Total and KSI Collision Types Figure 9 Total and KSI Primary Collision Factors Type of Collision Primary Collision Factors
•KSI Crostes All Crashes I KS/ Crashes I All Crashos
30%
26% hare or Crashes
· 25% 22% 182 192 19%
· 20% 4%
14% 13%
10%
5%
0% 1%
Rear-End Broadside Hit Object Sideswipe Other Head-Cn Pedestrian Overturned Not Stated Improper Unsafe DUI Auto Right Traffic Signals Unknown All Others lurning Speod of Way and Signs (>10% ALl)
LRSP 13 OF 47
A MARK
• THOMAS
Crash Data Maps
Collisions were mapped using Geographic Information Systems (GIS) software to Figure 12 Heatmap of All Citywide Collisions illustrate the distribution of collisions within the dataset. Heatmaps were generated from the crash data to illustrate the density of collisions citywide, and filtered for roadways or All Collisions High occurrences
intersections.

Low occurences
Figure 10 Heatmap of All Roadway Collisions Figure 11 Heatmap of All Intersection Collisions Roodway Collisions htersection Collisions
Laguna Niguel
Laguna Niguel Laguna Niguel
LRSP 14 OF 47

LA MARK
• THOMAS
Crash Tree Diagrams
Crash tree diagrams illustrate Figure 13 Crash Tree Diagram of Collisions Involving a Pedestrian, Bicyclist, or Motorcyclist possible outcomes of events by
following the possible paths CRASH TREE DIAGRAM
City of Laguna Niguel Crashes
PEDESTRIAN, BICYCLE, MOTORCYCLE COLLISIONS All: 1,340
ale the dachan of state. KSI: 61 (4.6%)
probability of varying types of
Vehicle-only Crashes Motorcycle-involved Crashes
crashes as defined by mode, All: 85(5.4%) All: 1,204 (89.9%) All: 50 (3.7%) KSI: 18(29.5) KSI: 25(41.0%) KSI: 18 (29.5%)
location, type of crash, and
primary collision factor. Crash 2
Pedestrian Crashes: Bicycle Crashes Intersectior
tree diagrams provide a
All: 41 (3.1%) All: 45(3.3%)
detailed perspective regarding KSI: 11(18.0%) KSI: 7(11.5%) travel behaviors throughout the
network. Pedestrian Action Driver Fault Bicyclist Fault Broadside Overturned Crossing in Crosswalk at Intersection: 21 (KSt: 5) All: 11(0.8%) All: 23 (1.7%) All: 19 (1.4%) All: 14 (1.0%) The crash trees include total In Road, including Shoulder: 10 (KSI:3) KSI: 1(1.6%) KSI: 3(4.9%) KSI: 10 (16.4%) KSI: 4 (6.6%) Crossing Not In Crosswalk: 5 (KS: D
crashes as well as fatal and Not In Road: 3 (KSI: 2)
Not Stated: 2 At Fault Movement At-Fault Movement
serious injury crashes; however, Making Right Tum: 4 Proceeding Straight: 13 (KSH:1) Hit Object Sideswipe Making Left Tum: 3 Other Unsefe Turning: 4 (KSl: 1) All: 7(0.5%) KSI: 2 (3.3%) All: 6 (0.4%)
the major cause of the crash Proceeding Straight: 2 Traveling Wrong Way. 3(KSl: 1) KSI: 2 (3.3%)
Entering Traffic. 1 (KSt 1) Making Right Turn: 1
and manner of crash are Other: Making Left Tum: 1
Entering Traffic: 2
reported only for total crashes. Rear-End Other
All: 3 (0.2%) All: 1(0.1%)
In the city, the fatal and serious KSI: 0(0.0%) KSI: 0(0.0%) injury crashes had similar major
causes and manners of crash as
the total crashes.

LRSP 15 OF 47
L MARK
• THOMAS
Figure 14 Crash Tree Diagram of All Collisions Involving Motor Vehicles Only CRASH TREE DIAGRAM Top three Primary Collision Factors Shown.

City of Laguna Niguel Crashes Top five Driver Actions shown VEHICLE COLLISIONS All: 1,340 PC's and Actions reported os "Other", or not steted not shown KSI: 61 (4.6%)
Bike/Ped-involved Crashes Vehicle crily Greshes Motorcycle-involved Crashes All: 86 (6.4%) AL: 1,204 (89.9%) All: 50 (3.7%)
KSI: 18 (29.5%) KS:28 41927 KSI: 18 (29.5%)
Roadway Crashes Intersection Crashes
Al: 133(9.9%) All: 1,071 (79.9%)
KSI: 19(31.1%)
Rear-End Broadside Hit Object Sideswipe Head-On Overturned Other Not Stated All: 321 (24.0%) All: 246 (19.7%) All: 241(18.0%) All: 155 (11.6%) All: 52 (3.9%) All: 6 (0.4%) All: 26 (1.9%) All: 6 (0.4%) KSI: 6 (9.8%) KSI: 8 (13.1%) KSI: 5 (8.2%) KSI: 1(1.6%) KSI: 3(4.9%) KSI: 1(1.6%) KSI: 0 (0.0%) KSI: 0 (0.0%) Primary Collision Factors Primary Collision Factors Primary Collision Factors Primary Collision Factors Primary Collision Factors Primary Collision Factors Primary Collision Factors Primary Collision Factors Unsafe Speed: 169 Traffic Signals and Signs: 112 Improper Turning: 117 improper Turning: 38 Automobile Right of Way: 17 Unsafe Speed: 4 Unsafe Starting or Backing: 12 Automobile Righ: of Way: 3 Driving Under the influence: 54 Automobile Right of Way: 80 Driving Under the Influence: 78 Unsafe Lane Change 26 Traffic Signals and Signs: 14 Improper Turning: 2 Other Than Driver: 3 Unsafe Starting or Backing: 40 Improper Turning: 21 Unsafe Spend: 19 Driving Under the Influence: 19 Driving Under the Influence: 7 Other Improper Tuming: 2 At-fault Driver Action At-fault Driver Action At-fault Driver Action At-fault Driver Action At-fault Driver Action At-fault Driver Action Preceding Collision Preceding Collision Preceding Collision Preceding Collision Preceding Collision Preceding Collision Proceeding Straight: 203 Proceeding Straight: 112 Other Unsafe Turning: 101 Changing Lanes: 28 Proceeding Straight: 18 Backing: 13 Other Unsafe Turning: 12 Making Left Turn: 66 Proceeding Straight: 42 Olher Unsafe Turning 24 Making Left Turn: 16 Slowing/Stopping: 10 Entering Traffic: 10 Making Right Turn: 24 Proceeding Straight: 24 Making Right Turn: 5 Stopped: 8 Making Right Turn: 8 Making Left Turn: 22 Making Left Turn: 13 Other Unsafe Turning: 3 Changing Lanes: 6 Making U-Turn: 7 Ran Off Road: 5 Making Right Turn: 9 Hit Object Rear-End Broadside Sideswipe Head-On Other Not Stated All: 50 (3.7%) All: 27 (2.0%) All: 23 (1.7%) All: 17(1.3%) All: 5 (0.4%) All: 10 (0.7%) All: 1(0.1%) KSI: 4 (6.6%) KSI: 0 (0.0%) KSI: 0 (0.0%) 051: 1(169) KSI: 1(1.6%) KSI: 0 (0.0%) KSI: 0 (0.0%) →
Primary Collision Factors Primary Collision Factors Primary Collision Factors Primary Callision Factors Primary Collision Factors Primary Collision Factors Primary Collision Factors Improper Tuming: 24 Unsafe Speed: 18 Automobile Right of Way: 16 Driving Under the Influence: 6 Automobile Right of Way: 2 Unsafe Starting or Backing: 7 Other Than Driver: 1 Driving Under the Influence: 17 Driving Under the Influence: 3 Improper Turning: 4 Improper Turning: 5 Improper Turning: 2 Other Than Driver: 2 Unsafe Speed: 7 Following Too Closely: 1 Unsafe Speed: 1 Unsafe Lane Change: 2 Driving Under the Influence: 1 Improper Turning: 1 At-fault Driver Action At-fault Driver Action At-Fault Driver Action At-fault Driver Action At-fault Driver Action At-fault Driver Action Preceding Collision Preceding Collision Preceding Collision Preceding Collision Preceding Collision Preceding Collision Other Unsafe Turning: 32 Proceeding Streight: 19 Making Left Turn: 10 Other Unsafe Turning: 7 Making Left Turn: 2 Backing: 7 Proceeding Straight: 13 Slowing/Stopping: 2 Entering Traffic: 6 Proceeding Straight: 3 Other Unsafe Turning: 2 Other Unsafe Turning: 1 Backing: 1 Making Right Turn: 1 Making Right Turn: 2 Changing Lanes: 2 Proceeding Straight: 1 Making Left Turn: 1 Maldng U-Turne1 Making U-Tum: 2 Making U-Turn: 1 Other Unsofe Turning: 1 Changing Lones 1 Possing Other Vehicle: 1 LRSP 16 OF 47

LA MARK
• THOMAS
High Injury Network Analysis Figure 15 High Injury Network Intersections and Roadways To identify high-crash locations within the City, a High-Injury Network (HIN) methodology was applied to the 5-year crash dataset. Crashes High Injury Network involving a fatality were weighted at 3.0 and crashes involving a severe Average Collisions per Year (intersection)
injury were weighted at 1.5. Crashes were identified as intersection or Average Collisions per Mile
and Year (Roadway)
3-4 Mission
intersection, respectively. To calculate the density of crashes, GIS was Vlejo 2 - 3
applied to measure the linear distance of roadway centerline miles within the City. Roadway crashes were then divided by the number of › 1 centerline miles within the city to identify crashes per mile.

The following three (3) intersections had the most reported crashes:

1. Cabot Road/Crown Valley Parkway

2. Moulton Parkway-Golden Lantern/Crown Valley Parkway

3. Alicia Parkway/Crown Valley Parkway
Laguna Niguel
The following six (6) roadways had the highest volume of reported severity-adjusted crashes:

1. Paseo de Colinas

2. Crown Valley Parkway

3. Moulton Parkway

4. Camino del Avion San Juan
Capistrano

5. Golden Lantern

6. Alicia Parkway
na Point
LRSP 17 OF 47

LA MARK
• THOMAS
Emphasis Area Strategies
During input from the SWG members and review of documented crash data between 2015 and 2019, the following seven (7) project emphasis areas were identified to improve travel safety:

1. Speed Management

2. Reduce Impaired Driving

3. Reduce Distracted Driving

4. Eliminate High-Crash Locations

5. Improve Safety at Intersections and Around Schools

6. Increase Active Transportation Road User Safety

Emphasis Area 1: Speed Management
• Collisions caused by unsafe speed are the Figure 16 Severity and Crash Type in Unsafe Speed Collisions second most-common primary collision
factor and represent 19% of the dataset. Unsafe Speed Collisions • Unsafe speeds most often result in a rear-
EPDO (40%) # Complant of Pan (38%) Visble Injury (20%) I Severe injury (2%) end collisions and have caused zero 200
fatalities between 2015 and 2019.
• Approximately 2% of unsafe speed Count of Unsafe Soced Collisions collisions result in a KSI.

Goal for Emphasis Area 1: 20
• Reduce Unsafe Speed collisions from 2%
Broadside Head on HE Coject Omer Overturned Rear end Sdoswor 5%
KSI to 0% KSI
Strategy for Emphasis Area 1: Reduce motorist speeding through education, enforcement, and infrastructure improvements at specific locations.

Action 1.1: Community Education Campaigns. Leverage existing OTS resources and implement a citywide campaign to address speeding behavior. The campaign will target all motorists throughout the community, with an emphasis on school communities, and will be distributed through digital media and printed brochures.

LRSP 18 OF 47
A MARK
THOMAS
Table 1 Action 1.1 Programming
Lead City of Laguna Niguel Develop and distribute annual content and distribution methods Support Capistrano Unified Distribute printed material to new drivers (Juniors & Seniors) at high School District schools annually concurrent with issuance of parking permits.

Promote City-prepared "School Traffic Safety" brochure and content through CUSD Communications.

Orange County Health Review messaging and content in advance of publishing.

Table 2 Action 1.2 Programming
Lead Orange County Conduct speed enforcement on roadways with high speeding behavior Sheriff's Department and high speed-related crashes.

Pursue grant funding to conduct the program.

Support City of Laguna Niguel Provide annual crash data to inform the locations and time frames to effectively implement speed enforcement campaigns.

Funding Office of Traffic Safety
Timeline 1-5 Years
Action 1.3: Infrastructure Treatments: Implement infrastructure treatments proven to reduce unsafe vehicle speeds and lower crash risk factors at locations where unsafe speed collisions most commonly occur. Unsafe Speed collisions occurred most frequently on Crown Valley Parkway (26%), Golden Lantern (14%), and Alicia Parkway (13%).

Table 3 Action 1.3 Programming
Lead City of Laguna Niguel | Pursue grant, local, or regional funding for infrastructure treatments.

Implement infrastructure treatments at key locations.

Support All Partners Provide Letter of Support for grant pursuits Funding Highway Safety Improvement Program
State and Regional Grants
Timeline 1st-5 Years
LRSPR 19 OF 47
LAMARK
• THOMAS
Emphasis Area 2: Reduce Impaired Driving
• Collisions caused by driving under the Figure 17 Severity and Crash Type of DUI Collisions influence are the third most-common
primary collision and represent 16% of the Driving Under the Influence Collisions dataset.
@ PDO (633) Complains of Fan (17%) • Visible Irjury (13%) l Severe Injury (6%) I Fatality (1%) • Laguna Niguel ranked 621° out of 102 for 120
collisions involving an intoxicated driver 100
Total DUl Collisions
under the age of 21 per OTS rankings. RO
• Approximately 7% of driving under the 60
influence collisions result in a KSI. 40
20 Goal for Emphasis Area 2:

Head on
9% 45%
• Reduce DUIKSI crashes from 7% to 4% or
lower.
• Provide vouchers for 100 sober free rides home in the first 6 months of program implementation.

Strategy for Emphasis Area 2: Increase access to sober rides, implement targeted campaigns, and enact sobriety checkpoints citywide.

Table 4 Action 2.1 Programming
Lead City of Laguna Niguel Coordinate with ride-hail service providers.

Support Orange County Provide guidance and lessons learned to City based on prior joint Transportation OCTA/City of San Clemente ride-hail voucher program.

Authority
Orange County Provide guidance regarding DUl trip origins.

Sheriff's Department Participate in distribution of vouchers Funding Office of Traffic Safety
Timeline 1-5 Years
Action 2.2: Focused Education Campaigns. Leverage Office of Traffic Safety (OTS) resources and implement a citywide campaign to address impaired driving. Communication methods include digital media, social media, and video advertisements.

LRSP 20 OF 47

LA MARK
THOMAS
Table 5 Action 2.2 Programming
Lead City of Laguna Niguel | Develop and distribute content and distribution methods.

Support Orange County Provide resources from past, existing, or future campaigns to Transportation supplement city efforts.

Authority
Consider promotion of campaign messaging on interior/exterior of OCTA buses where feasible.

Consider a full-wrap bus to promote a campaign subject to review of financial impacts.

Orange County Participate in campaign funding pursuit, content development, Sheriff's Department distribution methods, and promotion.

Funding Office of Traffic Safety
Timeline 1st Year
Action 2.3: Sobriety Checkpoints. Conduct DUI Figure 18 DUl Collisions by Month of the Year checkpoints on holidays or timed with local events
when drivers are more likely to drive under the DUI Collision Trends influence.

DUI collisions in the dataset most commonly
occurred in February and October, and on Crown Average DUI Callisons per Year ANNIDA NIS Valley Parkway (16%) and Golden Lantern (15%).

Crash data trends can be used to inform locations
and time frames to implement DUl checkpoints
within the City.

Table 6 Action 2.3 Programming
Lead Orange County Conduct DUI Checkpoints.

Sheriff's Department
Support City of Laguna Niguel Pursue funding to conduct DUl checkpoints.

Funding Office of Traffic Safety
Timeline 1-5 Years
LRSP 21 OF 47

LA MARK
• • THOMAS
Emphasis Area 3: Reduce Distracted Driving
• Of associated factors catalogued in the Figure 19 Driver at Fault Cause of Collision collisions' party at fault, inattention is the
third most common recorded factor, after Party at Fault - Associated Factors "violation" and "none apparent".

Vislation
Goal for Emphasis Area 3: Inattention 10%
• Increase citations for distracted motorists Other
Vision Obscurements E
by 50% in the first implementation year of Defectve Vehe e Equgrent • High Visibility Enforcement program. Uninvolved Vehicle Unfamiliar With Road I
• Distribute campaign materials to all S:op ond Go Trafk I parking-permit holding students, 4* District 50 100 15C 200 250 Count of Colsions
PTA representatives, and 4 District PTA
after school program participants within the City.

Train 100 parent participants in the Parent Intervention Program in the first year of implementation.

Strategy for Emphasis Area 3: Develop a culture against distracted driving through campaigns, training, and enforcement.

Table 7 Action 3.1 Programming
Lead Orange County Increase citation efforts against distracted driving.

Sheriff's Department
Support City of Laguna Niguel Pursue grant funding to support the Orange County Sheriff's Department's efforts.

Funding Office of Traffic Safety
Timeline | 1-5 Years
Action 3.2: Parent Intervention Program. Create a program directed at parents to educate their teens about the importance of driving without distractions. Target audience for the program includes parents of teen drivers. Communication methods include website, digital, and social media.

LRSP 22 OF 47

Support Capistrano Unified Distribute City content and consider requiring students commit to School District distraction-free driving behavior as a condition of securing parking permits.

Orange County Support content development and methods to evaluate results with Healthcare Agency parents.

Orange County Participate in campaign funding pursuit, content development, Sheriff's Department distribution methods, and promotion.

Table 9 Action 3.3 Programming
Lead City of Laguna Niguel Develop and distribute content and distribution methods.

Support Capistrano Unified Distribute City content to students and parents.

School District
Orange County Consider leading interactive classes for student drivers subject to OCHCA Healthcare Agency staff resource availability. Training could be virtual and in-class training.

Orange County Participate in campaign funding pursuit, content development, Sheriff's Department distribution methods, and promotion.

Funding Office of Traffic Safety
Timeline 1st Year
LRSP 23 OF 47

LA MARK
• • THOMAS
Emphasis Area 4: Eliminate High-Crash Locations
• High-crash intersections include:
• Cabot Road and Crown Valley Parkway (average 12.4 collisions per year) • Crown Valley Parkway and Moulton Parkway/Golden Lantern (average 8.9 collisions per year)
• Alicia Parkway and Crown Valley Parkway (average 7.3 collisions per year) • High-crash roadways include:
• Paseo de Colinas (average 10.8 collisions per mile per year) • Crown Valley Parkway (average 9.7 collisions per mile per year) • Moulton Parkway (average 8.9 collisions per mile per year) • Camino del Avion (average 8.3 collisions per mile per year) • Street of the Golden Lantern (average 8.2 collisions per mile per year) • Alicia Parkway (average 7.7 collisions per mile per year) Goal for Emphasis Area 4:
• Implement infrastructure treatments at three intersections within 2-3 years. • Implement infrastructure treatments along six roadways within 2-3 years.

Strategy for Emphasis Area 4: Conduct Road Safety Audits and develop infrastructure improvements for inclusion in the City's Capital Improvement Program.

Funding HWA Office of Safety
FHWA Division Offices
State DOT
Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP)
State and Community Highway Safety Grant Program (Section 402) Transportation Alternatives Program
Timeline 1-5 Years
«Crowe, B., & Allred, C. (2018, August 10). Road safety Audits (RSA) - Safety: Federal Highway Administration.

Safety. Retrieved September 9, 2021, from https://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/rsa/.

LRSP 24 OF 47
LAMARK
THOMAS
Action 4.2: Capital Improvement Program. Utilize LRSP identified intersections and roadways for capital improvement and pursue grant, local, or regional funding for implementation of infrastructure treatments that will 1) reduce crash risk factors 2) address the type of collisions and primary collision factor at the high-crash location 3) are low cost to implement, and 4) have high systematic applicability. The City will consider identified treatments for incorporation in the City of Laguna Niguel Capital Improvement Program.

Table 11 Action 4.2 Programming
Lead City of Laguna Niguel | Consider LRSP-identified infrastructure projects for funding pursuits and inclusion in the City's Capital Improvement Program.

Funding Highway Safety Improvement Program
Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) Measure M2 Regional Capacity Program (Project O) Timeline 1-5 Years
Figure 20 Engineering Recommendations Require Multi-Year Efforts for Planning, Funding, and Implementation Oava
LRSP 25 OF 47
LAMARK
• • THOMAS
Emphasis Area 5: Improve Safety at Intersections and Around Schools • Approximately 88% of collisions in the Figure 21 All and KSI Collisions by Location dataset occurred at or approaching an
intersection. Crashes by Distance from an Intersection
• Collisions at or approaching intersections
I KS Crashes #lAl Crashes
occur at an average of 237 per year.
• Pedestrian injury is the third-leading cause Location of Cath Intersection
of injury-related death among elementary ‹500 feet from center and middle schoolers in the United States?
• Child pedestrians involved in crashes stayed Roadway
500 feet from
longer in hospitals and had more severe intersection
injuries than adult pedestrians*.
0% 20% 403% 60% 80% 100%
Goal for Emphasis Area 5:
• Reduce collisions at or approaching intersections by 25%. • Develop a set of effective infrastructure recommendations for each school within the City.

Strategy for Emphasis Area 5: The City will prioritize intersection improvements to reduce the severity and likelihood of collisions at or approaching intersections.

Action 5.1: Intersection Improvements with Emerging Technologies. The City's Department of Public Works will incorporate emerging technologies for intersection improvements. According to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 94% of serious crashes are due to dangerous choices or errors made by drivers?. Roadways equipped with emerging technology designed to support autonomous vehicles (AV) may reduce collisions due to human error. While emerging technology will continue to evolve, existing recommendations include lane markings, roadside sensors, and smart signage.

Table 12 Action 5.1 Programming
Lead City of Laguna Niguel Incorporate emerging technology into City's projects as applicable.

Prioritize emerging technology implementation at intersections near schools.

Funding Automated Driving System Demonstration Grants by U.S. Department of Transportation Timeline 1-5 Years
3 Borse NN, Gilchrist J, Dellinger AM, Rudd RA, Ballesteros MF, Sleet DA. CDC childhood injury report: Patterns of unintentional injuries among 0-19 years olds in the United States, 2000-2006. Atlanta: National Center for Injury Prevention and Control, CDC; 2008.
4 Robert W. Derlet, Joseph Silva, James Holcroft, Pedestrian accidents: Adult and pediatric injuries, The Journal of Emergency Medicine, Volume 7, Issue 1, 1989.
5 https://www.nhtsa.gov/technology-innovation/automated-vehicles-safety LRSP 26 OF 47

Funding California Active Transportation Program
Safe Routes to School Technical Assistance Resource Center Timeline 5+ Years
Figure 22 Continental Crosswalk at Alicia Parkway Crossing Aliso Creek Road LRSP 27 OF 47

LA MARK
• • THOMAS
Emphasis Area 6: Increase Active Transportation Road User Safety • Collisions involving pedestrians or bicyclists Figure 23 All and KSI Collisions by Mode of Travel have a higher likelihood of resulting in a
fatality or serious injury (KSI), according to Total Crashes by Mode the dataset.

IKS Crashes I All Crashes
• Bicyclists involved in a collision are 9 times
90%
more likely to result in a KSI than a
motorist.
• Pedestrians involved in a collision are 17
415
40%
times more likely to result in a KSI than a
*8%
motorist. 20% 12%
0%
Pecestrian Bicycle Motorevels Vehicle
Goal for Emphasis Area 6:
• Reduce collisions involving a pedestrian to
> 1 per year.
• Reduce collisions involving a bicyclist to > 1 per year.

Figure 24 Woman with stroller and youth on scooter crossing in a crosswalk LRSP 28 OF 47

Table 14 Action 6.1 Programming
Lead City of Laguna Niguel Develop and implement treatments to enhance safety for pedestrians and bicyclists at key locations.

Table 15 Action 6.2 Programming
Lead City of Laguna Niguel Pursue grant funding to study, develop recommendations, and construct improvements for pedestrians and bicyclists.

LA MARK
I • THOMAS
Emphasis Area 7: Increase Safe Driving in Older Adults and Teens • Teenage drivers (age 14 to 19) make Figure 26 Age Distribution of Drivers Causing Collisions account for 13% of drivers who are "at
fault" in a collision within the dataset. Party at Fault Age • Older drivers (age 70 and over) account for
12% of drivers who are "at fault" in a
collision within the dataset.
0 8º
Goal for Emphasis Area 7:
• Reduce collisions caused by teenage drivers 0°
000°
by 50%
• Reduce collisions caused by older drivers
by 50% Age of Driver
Strategy for Emphasis Area 7: The City will implement separate, targeted campaigns for older adults and teens, and coordinate with OCTA to provide safe and more comfortable alternatives to driving.

Table 16 Action 7.1 Programming
Lead City of Laguna Niguel Partner with the Sea Country Senior Center to present and distribute available published materials.

Support Orange County Continue providing alternatives to driving for older adults through OC Transportation Bus Senior Discounts and OC Flex Microtransit services.

LA MARK
THOMAS
Action 7.2: Targeted Campaigns for Teens. Continue safety campaigns such as Every 15 Minutes campaign that educates teens about safe driving behaviors and provide alternatives to driving Table 17 Action 7.2 Programming
Lead Orange County Fire Continue organizing annual "Every 15 Minutes" campaign; 2-day Authority program on distracted/impaired driving. Typically coordinated with CUSD, OCSD, Coroners Dept, Care Ambulance.

Support Capistrano Unified Continue partnership with partners to ensure annual delivery of the hool Distri "Every 15 Minutes" safety education program at relevant schools. range Coun
Sheriff's Department
City of Laguna Niguel Promote the effort and campaign through organized City communication methods.

Orange County Continue providing alternatives to driving for teens through OC Flex Transportation Microtransit services and free transit rides for youth aged 6 to 18 on fixed Authority route busses.

Funding Office of Traffic Safety
California Highway Patrol
California Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control
Timeline 1st Year
Figure 27 "Every 15-Minutes" campaign demonstration of collision caused by intoxicated driving LRSP 31 OF 47
L MARK
• • THOMAS
Recommended Infrastructure Improvements
As described throughout the emphasis areas, engineering Figure 28 Local Roadway Safety Manual Cover Page treatments are recommended throughout the City to address specific traffic collision trends, specifically for Actions 1.3, 4.2,

5.1, 6.1, 6.2, and 7.3. Engineering treatments and _ocal Roadway Safety i Manual for California's Local Road Owner:
countermeasures are identified to address documented crash Version 1.5
history and specific locations identified by City staff and OCSD April 2020 marty
representatives. Countermeasures funded by HSIP for
implementation have empirical before/after studies that document the crash reduction factor (CRF) which represents the expected percent decrease in crashes upon implementation of the countermeasure.

1. Local Roadway Safety, A Manual for California's Local SafeTREC Coltons el Highnin Aricial
Road Owners (Version 1.5, April 2020)
Where an infrastructure recommendation is included in the Local Roadway Safety Manual then a unique identifier is provided such as S02 for improved signal hardware.

Speed Management Treatments

1. Speed Limit Pavement Markings: Where a problem of speeding traffic has been documented, speed limit pavement markings may be installed to remind drivers to check their speed. Speed limit pavement markings are numerals applied in the traffic lane to remind drivers of the regulatory speed limit. In addition, a "SLOW" word legend may be applied with the speed legend. The treatment 1) provides a clear indication of the speed limit to drivers who are watching the road; 2) do not become obscured by streetside vegetation growth, parked trucks, or other obstructions; 3) are relatively easy and low cost to install; and 4) do not slow emergency vehicles.

2. Install Speed Feedback Signs (SFS): SFS at select locations within the City to reduce speeding behavior through improved driver awareness of actual speed versus posted speed limits. SFS equipment is already installed at various locations throughout the City. Existing SFS have provided speed reduction benefits.

Permanent or temporary SFS will continue to be implemented in areas with high numbers of speed related crashes.
6 https://www.cabg.gov/neighborhood-traffic-management-program/documents/speed-limit-pavement- markings.pdf
LRSP 32 OF 47
MAMARK

I THOMAS

3. Optical Speed Bars: Optical speed bars are used at spot locations or along a corridor to reduce speeding.

1. S01: Add intersection lighting: Providing lighting at the intersection itself, or both at the intersection and on its approaches, improves the safety of an intersection during nighttime conditions by (1) making drivers more aware of the surroundings at an intersection, which improves drivers' perception-reaction times, (2) enhancing drivers' available sight distances, and (3) improving the visibility of non-motorists. Intersection lighting is of particular benefit to non-motorized users. Lighting not only helps them navigate the intersection, but also helps drivers see them better.

SO2: Improve signal hardware: lenses, back-plates with retroreflective borders, mounting, size, and number.

3. S04: Provide Advanced Dilemma-Zone Detection for high-speed approaches. Clearance times provide safe, orderly transitions in right-of-way assignment between conflicting streams of traffic. An Advanced Dilemma- Zone Detection system has several benefits relative to traditional multiple detector systems, which have upstream detection for vehicles in the dilemma zone but do not take the speed or size of individual vehicles into account. These benefits include: reducing the frequency of red-light violations; reducing the frequency of crashes associated with the traffic signal phase change (for example, rear-end and angle crashes); reducing delay and stop frequency on the major road; and reducing overall intersection delay.

LA MARK
• • THOMAS

5. S10: Install flashing beacons as advance warning (signalized intersection). Increased driver awareness of an approaching signalized intersection and an increase in the driver's time to react. Driver awareness of both downstream intersections and traffic control devices is critical to intersection safety. Crashes often occur when the driver is unable to perceive an intersection, signal head or the back of a stopped queue in time to react. Advance flashing beacons can be used to supplement and call driver attention to intersection control signs

6. S11: Improve pavement friction (High Friction Surface Treatments). Improving the skid resistance at locations with high frequencies of wet-road crashes and/or failure to stop crashes can result in reductions of 50 percent for wet-road crashes and 20 percent for total crashes. Applying HFST can double friction numbers, e.g. low 40s to high 80s. This CM represents a special focus area for both FHWA and Caltrans, which means there are extra resources available for agencies interested in more details on HFST projects.

7. NS06: Install/upgrade larger or additional stop signs or other intersection warning/regulatory signs. The visibility of intersections and, thus, the ability of approaching drivers to perceive them can be enhanced by installing larger regulatory and warning signs at or prior to intersections. A key to success in applying this strategy is to select a combination of regulatory and warning sign techniques appropriate for the conditions on a particular unsignalized intersection approach.

8. NS07: Upgrade intersection pavement markings (non-signalized intersection). The visibility of intersections and, thus, the ability of approaching drivers to perceive them can be enhanced by installing appropriate pavement delineation in advance of and at intersections will provide approaching motorists with additional information at these locations. Providing visible stop bars on minor road approaches to unsignalized intersections can help direct the attention of drivers to the presence of the intersection. Drivers should be more aware that the intersection is coming up, and therefore make safer decisions as they approach the intersection.

10. NS11: Improve sight distance to intersection (clear sight triangles). Adequate sight distance for drivers at stop or yield-controlled approaches to intersections has long been recognized as among the most important factors contributing to overall safety at unsignalized intersections. By removing sight distance restrictions (e.g., vegetation, parked vehicles, signs, buildings) from the sight triangles at stop or yield-controlled intersection approaches, drivers will be able see approaching vehicles on the main line, without obstruction and therefore make better decisions about entering the intersection safely.

LRSP 34 OF 47

LA MARK
• • THOMAS
T3. R26: Install dynamic/variable speed warning signs. This strategy primarily addresses crashes caused by motorists traveling too fast around sharp curves. It is intended to get the drivers attention and give them a visual warning that they may be traveling over the recommended speed for the approaching curve. Care should be taken to limit the placement of these signs to help maintain their effectiveness.

14. R28: Install edge-lines and centerlines. Installing edge-lines and centerlines where none exists or making significant upgrades to existing lines (paint to thermoplastic, adding audible disks/bumps in the thermoplastic stripes, or adding RPMs) are intended/designed to help drivers who might leave the roadway because of their inability to see the edge of the roadway along the horizontal edge of the pavement or crossover the centerline of the roadway into oncoming traffic. New pavement marking products tend to be more durable, are all weather, more visible, and have a higher retro reflectivity than traditional pavement markings.

Treatments Near Schools and for Active Transportation Users

1. S17PB: Install pedestrian countdown signal heads. A pedestrian countdown signal contains a timer display and counts down the number of seconds left to finish crossing the street. Countdown signals can reassure pedestrians who are in the crosswalk when the flashing "DON'T WALK" interval appears that they still have time to finish crossing. Countdown signals begin counting down either when the "WALK" or when the flashing "DONT WALK" interval appears and stop at the beginning of the steady "DON'T WALK" interval.

These signals also have been shown to encourage more pedestrians to use the pushbutton rather than jaywalk.
, S20PB: Install advance stop bar before crosswalk (bicycle box). Adding advance stop bar before the striped crosswalk has the opportunity to enhance both pedestrian and bicycle safety. Stopping cars well before the crosswalk provides a buffer between the vehicles and the crossing pedestrians. It also allows for a dedicated space for cyclists, making them more visible to drivers

3. S21PB: Modify signal phasing to implement a Leading Pedestrian Interval (LPI). This countermeasure is included for consideration at high pedestrian locations and near schools, parks, civic buildings, and other specific land uses. A leading pedestrian interval (LPI) gives pedestrians the opportunity to enter an intersection 3-7 seconds before vehicles are given a green indication. With this head start, pedestrians can better establish their presence in the crosswalk before vehicles have priority to turn left. LPIs provide (1) increased visibility of crossing pedestrians; (2) reduced conflicts between pedestrians and vehicles; (3) Increased likelihood of motorists yielding to pedestrians; and (4) enhanced safety for pedestrians who may be slower to start into the intersection

LRSP 35 OF 47
NAMARK
• THOMAS

5. NS21PB: Install/upgrade pedestrian crossing at uncontrolled locations (with enhanced safety features).

Adding pedestrian crossings that include enhances safety features has the opportunity to enhance pedestrian safety at locations noted as being especially problematic. The enhanced safety elements help delineate a portion of the roadway that is designated for pedestrian crossing. Incorporating advanced "Yield" markings provide an extra safety buffer and can be effective in reducing the 'multiple-threat' danger to pedestrians. Nearly one-third of all pedestrian-related crashes occur at or within 50 feet of an intersection.

6. NS22PB: Install Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacon (RRFB). RRFBs can enhance safety by increasing driver awareness of potential pedestrian conflicts and reducing crashes between vehicles and pedestrians at unsignalized intersections and mid-block pedestrian crossings. The addition of RRFB may also increase the safety effectiveness of other treatments, such as crossing warning signs and markings.

7. Continental Crosswalk Pavement Striping: Install continental crosswalk pavement striping to provide improved visibility of crosswalks for use by pedestrians. Many jurisdictions have begun utilizing continental style crosswalks at high pedestrian locations and near schools, parks, civic buildings, and other specific land uses. Installation of the continental (or ladder style) crosswalk pavement striping was first deployed by the City at the Alicia Parkway/Aliso Creek Road intersection with feedback indicating an improved condition for both motorists and pedestrians.

8. Bicycle Lane Buffer: Install new bicycle lane buffer next to existing on-street bicycle lanes. Installation of bicycle lane buffers pavement striping has been deployed by the City on Alicia Parkway and Crown Valley Parkway with feedback indicating an improved condition for both motorists and cyclists. Buffered bike lanes are conventional bicycle lanes paired with a designated buffer space separating the bicycle lane from the adjacent motor vehicle travel lane and/or parking lane. The treatment 1) Provides greater shy distance between motor vehicles and bicyclists; 2) Provides space for bicyclists to pass another bicyclist without encroaching into the adjacent motor vehicle travel lane; and 3) Appeals to a wider cross-section of bicycle users.

9. Green Conflict Zone Striping: Install green conflict zone striping for bicycle lane visibility. Colored pavement within a bicycle lane increases the visibility of the facility, identifies potential areas of conflict, and reinforces priority to bicyclists in conflict areas and in areas with pressure for illegal parking. Colored pavement can be utilized either as a corridor treatment along the length of a bike lane or cycle track, or as a spot treatment, such as a bike box, conflict area, or intersection crossing marking. Color can be applied along the entire length of bike lane or cycle track to increase the overall visibility of the facility. Consistent application of color across a bikeway corridor is important to promote clear understanding for all users.

Treatments to Support Emergency Vehicle Services

1. S05: Install emergency vehicle pre-emption systems. Upon installation of a new traffic signal, the City will consider providing emergency vehicle pre-emption capability. Emergency vehicle pre- emption at a new signal can be a highly effective strategy to reduce the likelihood of a new crash as emergency vehicles try to navigate through intersections and as other vehicles try to maneuver out of the path of the emergency vehicles. In addition, a signal pre-emption system can improve emergency vehicle response times, therefore, decreasing the time in receiving emergency medical attention, which is critical in addressing public health needs following a crash.

LRSP 36 OF 47

LA MARK
• THOMAS
Table 18 Recommended Infrastructure Improvements
≤ Systemic Opportunity*
Primary Collision
Location Type of Collision Factor Type of Treatment Countermeasure (%) Signalized Intersection All Improper Tuming. Lighting Add intersection lighting HS Fanding Eligibility 502 Signalized Intersection Improper Tuming Signal Modification Improve signall hardware: lenses, back-plates with retroreflective borders, mounting, size, and number 885} Exed Life (years 504 Signalized Intersection Rear-end Unsafe Speed Signal Modification Provide Advanced Dilemma-Zone Detection for high speed approaches S05 Signalized Intersection NA NA Signal Modification Install emergency vehicle pre-emption system 509 Signalized Intersection Sideswipe Improper Tuming Operation Warning Install raised pavement markers and striping (Through Intersection) S10 Signalized Intersection Rear-end Unsafe Speed Operation /Waming Install fashing beacons as advance warning Signalized Intersection Rear-end Unsafe Speed Operation/Waming Improve pavement friction (High Friction Surface Treatments) S17PB Signalized Intersection Pedestrian/Bicyde Pedestrian/Bicycle Pedestrian/Bicycle Install pedestrian countdown signal heads S20PB Signalized Intersection Pedestrian/Bicycle Pedestrian/Bicycle Pedestrian/Bicycle Install advance stop bar before crosswalk (Bicycle Box) S21PB Signalized Intersection Pedestrian/Bicycle Pedestrian/Bicycle Pedestrian/Bicycle Modify signal phasing to implement a Leading Pedestrian Interval (LPI) NS03 Non-signalized Intersection improper Tuming Control Install Signals NS06 Non-signalized Intersection Improper Tuming Operation/Warning Install/upgrade larger or additional stop signs or other intersection waming/requlatory signs 88888 Crash Reduction Factor
NS07 Non-signalized Intersection Improper Turning Operation Warning Upgrade intersection pavement markings (NS.) NS10 Non-signalized Intersection Rear-end Unsafe Speed Operation/Warning, Install transverse rumble strips on approaches NS11 Non-signalized Intersection Rear-end Unsafe Speed Operation/Warning Improve sight distance to intersection (Clear Sight Triangles) NS14 Non-signalized Intersection Rear-end Unsafe Speed Geometric Modification Install raised median approaches NS15 Non-signalized Intersection Broadside Improper Tuming Geometric Modification Create directional median openings to allow (and restrict) left turns and U-turns NS16 Non-signalized Intersection Broadside Improper Tuming Geometric Modification Reduced Left Turn Conflict Intersections NS19PB Non-signalized Intersection Pedestrian/Bicycle Pedestrian/Bicycle Pedestrian/Bicycle Install raised medians (refuge islands) NS21PB Non-signalized Intersection Pedestrian/Bicyde Pedestrian/Bicycle Pedestrian/Bicycle Install/upgrade pedestrian crossing at uncontrolled locations (with enhanced safety features) NS22PB Non-signalized Intersection Pedestrian/Bicycle Pedestrian/Bicycle Pedestrian/Bicycle Install Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacon (RRFB) R26 Roadway/Midblock Rear-end Unsafe Speed Operation/ Warning. Install dynamic/variable speed warning signs R28 Roadway/Midblock Hit Object Unsafe Speed Operation/Warning Install edge-lines and centertines Roadway/Midblock Rear-end Unsafe Speed Operation/ Warning Install speed limit pavement marking Roadway/Midblock Rear-end Unsafe Speed Operation Warning, Install Speed Feedback Signs (SFS) Roadway/Midblock Rear-end Unsafe Speed Operation Warning Install optical speed bars Roadway/Midblock Rear-end Unsafe Speed Geometric Modification Reduce vehicle lane widths Roadway/Midblock Hit object Unsafe Speed Geometric Modification Stripe double yellow center line adjacent to median curbs Intersection Pedestrian/Bicyde Pedestrian/Bicycle Pedestrian/Bicycle Install continental crosswalk pavement striping Roadway/Midblock Pedestrian/Bicyde Pedestrian/Bicycle Pedestrian/Bicycle Install 11-feet wide travel lanes adjacent new bike lane buffer Roadway/Midblock Pedestrian/Bicycle Pedestrian/Bicycle Pedestrian/Bicycle. Install green conflict zone striping for bicycle lane visibility *Local Roadway Safety Manual HSIP Countermeasure Code
** VH-Very High: H=High: M=Medium; L=Low
LRSP 37 OF A7

LA MARK
THOMAS
Focus Intersections and Roadways
The High-Injury Network Analysis identified three intersections and six roadways which experience the highest volumes of collisions per year and collisions per roadway mile, respectively. These intersections and collisions should be prioritized for project submission to HSIP infrastructure funding, which include:

Intersections
Cabot Road/Crown Valley Moulton Parkway-Golden Alicia Parkway/Crown Valley Parkway Lantern/Crown Valley Parkway Parkway
Roadways
Paseo de Colinas Moulton Parkway Golden Lantern
Crown Valley Parkway Camino Del Avion Alicia Parkway
Additionally, recommendations have been provided for the following locations based on feedback from City staff and OCSD:

Table 19 Focus Intersections and Roadways Prioritization Tiers Tier 1 Tier 2 Tier 3
Crown Valley Parkway (CVP) Alicia Parkway Paseo de Colinas Roadways Moulton Parkway Aliso Creek Rd (Alicia Pkuy to Camino del Avion
Golden Lantern La Paz Rd)
CVP/Cabot Alicia Pkwy/Niguel Rd La Gracia-Rancho Azul/Rancho Intersections CVP/Alicia Alicia Pkwy/Bike X-ing Niguel Rd Moulton/Golden Lantern Alicia/Aliso Creek Rd
LRSP 38 OF 47
L MARK
• THOMAS
Non-Infrastructure (NI) Program Implementation
The following implementation process is adapted for the City of Laguna Niguel based on the Guidance for Implementation Model Process of the AASHTO Strategic Highway Safety Plan and establishes a process checklist for implementing the Emphasis Area Action Items described in earlier sections of this LRSP. The degree of detail and the amount of work required to complete some of these steps will vary between Action Item programs depending upon the situation.

Figure 29 Non-Infrastructure (NI) Program Implementation Model Identify Program
and Problem
Assess the
Review and
Program in Confirm Emphasis
Annual SWG
Area Goals
Meeting
Carry out the Develop Program
Action Plan Specifications
Develop an Action
Plan
Step 1: Identify Program and Problem
Initial data analyses have been completed to inform strategic approaches to each of the seven SWG- identified emphasis areas. The identified SWG agencies involved in each Action Item should initiate program development by reviewing the key data points and determining if further detailed analysis is needed, with the objective to highlight over-representation of the problem within the community.

When working within an emphasis area, it may be desirable to specify certain types of crashes, as well as the severity level, being targeted. There are a few key considerations for establishing a quantitative goal.

The stakeholders should achieve consensus on this issue. The goal should be challenging, but achievable.

Its feasibility depends in part on available funding, the timeframe in which the goal is to be achieved, the degree of complexity of the program, and the degree of controversy the program may experience.

LRSP 39 OF 47

Step 4: Develop an Action Plan
At this stage, stakeholder will detail the program responsibilities into an action plan, with all the details needed by both decision makers, who will have to commit to the investment of resources, and those charged with carrying it out. The effort involves defining target audience, number of participants, outreach and engagement timeline, resource requirements, organizational and institutional arrangements needed, schedules, etc. It also should be designed at this point, to achieve consensus among the stakeholders on what constitutes "success." Knowing this helps maintain the validity of what is being done, encourages future support from management, and provides good intelligence on how to proceed after the program is completed.

Step 5: Carry Out the Action Plan
Conditions have been established to allow the program to be started. The activities of implementation may be divided into activities associated with field preparation for whatever actions are planned and the actual field implementation of the plan. The activities can involve installation of program elements, training, and the actual operation of the program. This step also includes monitoring for the purpose of maintaining control and carrying out mid- and post-program evaluation of the effort.

Finally, the results of the evaluation using performance measures should be fed back into a knowledge base to improve future estimates of effectiveness.

LRSP 40 OF 47

LA MARK
• • THOMAS
Infrastructure Project Implementation
The following guidance is adapted for the City of Laguna Niguel based on the FHWA Highway Safety Benefit-Cost Analysis Guide and informed by practices applied in Systemic Safety Analysis Report development. The degree of detail and the amount of work to complete some of these steps will vary between infrastructure priority locations depending upon the situation.

Figure 30 Infrastructure Project Implementation Model
Step 1: Network
Screening
Step 6: Apply for Step 2: Diagnosis
Project Funding
Step 3:

Step 5: Project
Countermeasure
Prioritization
Selection
Step 4: Economic
Appraisal
Step 1: Network Screening
Initial network screening has been completed to identify locations within the City that could benefit from treatments to improve safety performance, based upon crash frequencies and severities, based on police- reported crashes occurring between January 1, 2015 and December 31, 2019. The crash dataset should be re-analyzed at a minimum of every 5 years for continued screening of intersections and roadways where safety improvements are needed. In addition, further detailed analysis may be needed with the objective to highlight geographic concentrations of a problematic roadway setting.

LRSP 41 OF 47
L MARK
• • THOMAS
Step 2: Diagnosis
The City should implement a Traffic Safety Study or Road Safety Audit at specific intersections and/or roadways identified in the network screening process. Detailed analyses should result in an understanding of collision patterns and crash contributing factors occurring specific to the site(s), including 1) what elements of the road may present a safety concern, and 2) what opportunities exist to eliminate or mitigate identified safety concerns.

Step 3: Countermeasure Selection
The City should consider an approach to address citywide collision data that may be considered spot, systemic, or comprehensive in nature.
• Spot countermeasures are applied at specific locations or roadway segments. • Systemic countermeasures are usually low-cost and deployed in a widespread manner. • Comprehensive countermeasures can include a spot or systemic countermeasure with the addition of outreach and enforcement.

A series of potential treatments have been identified for the City in the Recommended Infrastructure Treatments section of this LRSP, based on the documented crash history between 2015 and 2019.

Additional countermeasures may be considered according to the detailed results from Step 2: Diagnosis.

Figure 31 Comparison of economic appraisal measures
Considers consider: onsiders Monet
Economic Measure Benefits sts and Benel
Costs
Present value cost (PVC) Yes No No
Present value benefit (PVB) No Yes No
Cost-effectiveness index (CEl) Yes Yes No
Benefit-cost ratio (BCR) Yes Yes Yes
Net present value (NPV) Yes Yes Yes
Payback period Yes Yes Yes
Grant applications submitted for California HSIP funding require quantitative analysis using the Benefit Cost Ratio (BCR) format.

The BCR is the ratio of present value benefits (including negative benefits) to present value costs (initial and continuing costs over the project lifecycle). In this context, the BCR is the same as the rate of return and return on investment. A BCR greater than 1.0 indicates that benefits exceed costs, and the project is economically justified. In general, a higher BCR is desirable. The BCR is most appropriate for prioritizing alternatives when funding restrictions apply (e.g., prioritizing countermeasures or locations within a project with a fixed budget).

Benefit Cost Ratio = Present Value Benefit / Present Value Cost LRSP 42 OF 47

LA MARK
• • THOMAS
Step 5: Project Prioritization
Treatments for each focus location should be prioritized by comparing the benefits and costs of implementation. This comparison can help the implementation phase by starting with the strategies that provide the highest benefit for the least cost. However, costs and benefits are not the only considerations.

Other considerations for prioritization may include the availability of staff resources, relative importance of each emphasis area, incorporation into other capital improvement projects, concurrent land development activities, and whether the treatments are feasible to implement in spot, systemic, or comprehensive projects (see Step 3: Countermeasure Selection).

The City should develop a prioritized list of projects to improve the safety performance (ie., reduce crash frequency and severity) of the road network, considering available resources. Project prioritization involves policy-level decisions such as overall agency goals and may include multiple (and sometimes competing) factors such as safety, operational efficiency, environmental impacts, and equity.

LRSP 43 OF 47
• MARK
• THOMAS
Next Steps
The City of Laguna Niguel Public Works Department will coordinate among departments, local agencies, and organizations as needed to apply or co-apply for funding resources or grant opportunities. The City will advance strategies and continue partnership with stakeholders to implement the education, enforcement, engineering, and emerging technology strategies as needed to assist in implementing the vision and goals of the LRSP. The following tables provide a summary of actions for the following:
• Table 20 LRSP First Year Actions
• Table 21 LRSP Near & Long-Term Actions Summary
The LRSP will be a living document and will be updated as needed by the City of Laguna Niguel Public Works Department with input from the SWG representatives. SWG representatives will attend an annual meeting to confirm the direction, process, and progress of the LRSP. The annual meeting will be tentatively planned in the fall each year, and a representative from each SWG organization will be invited to attend.

The annual meeting will provide an opportunity to review status and weigh in upon upcoming year priorities.

Figure 32 City of Laguna Niguel City Council Placard Located at City Hall

LAGUNA NIGUEL CITY HALL
DEDICATED OCTOBBR 15, 2011

CITY COUNCIL
Gary Capata, Mayor
Paul Glaab, Mayor Pro Tem
Joe Brown, Council Member
Linda Lindholm, Council Member
Robert Ming, Council Member
Tim Casey, City Manager
CIV. Dever
Construction Manager
LRSP 44 OF 47

LA MARK
• THOMAS
Table 20 LRSP First Year Actions - Lead and Support Agency Timeline Matrix Laguna Niguel Draft 2022 Local Roadway Safety Plan ace Laguna Nige vote ambulance air county we ninesy cony ren care mensy Dunde County Trangs /thony mang County Sherl's Deranment First Year Actions
Tnitiative Emphasis Area Action Detail
SinG Meterg (Annual Cry of Lagund Niguel to host annual meeting and unvite all Stakehdider agencies to attend Develop and distribute annual conlent and dstribution methods Speed Management 11 Community Education Campaigns
Reww messaging and content in advance of publishing
(Promote content with local 4th Distnet Parent Teacher Association (PTA) representates & after school programs Speed Management Pursue grant local or regional funding for infrastructure treatments. i3 infrastructure Treatments
Pronge Letter of Support for grant pursuits
Develop and distbute content and distribution methods
provide rescurces Scim past existing, or future campaigns to supalement City efforts Reduce Impaired Drivng 22 Focused Education Campaigns Consider promation of campaign messaging on intenor/exterior of OCTA buses where feas ble Consider a full-wrap bus to promote a campaign subject to review of financial impacts Panicipale in campaign finding pursuil, content development, distributien methods, and promotion Create a new how-to" brochure fo-parents to discuss sate dung behavior and methods to avoid distractions unth new youth drvers Reduce Distracted Driving 32 Parent Intervention Program Distribute City content and consider requiring sludents commit to distraction-free driving behavior as a condition of securing parking permits Support content develoerent and methods to evaluate results with parents Participate in campaign funding pursuit, content development distabution methods, and promotion Develop and distribute content and distribution methads Reduce Distracted Driving 33 Regional Education Campaigns Distribute City content to students and parents Consider leading interactive ciasses for student drivers subject to OCCA staff resource availability Particoate in campaign funding cursuil, content development, discribution methods, and promotion TErnate High-Crash Locations 41 Road Safety Audits Contract licensed professionals to cerform Road Safaty Audits Paither with the Sea Country Senior Center to resent and distribute avaiable puttished materials increase Safe Onving in Older Aduits and Teens 7.1 Targeted Campaigns for Older Adults Continue providing alternates to dring for older adults through OC Bus Senior Discounts and OC Rex Microtrarst senices Promote content through OCTA communication channels to target audience Centre organzing annual Every 15 Minutes campaign: 2-day program on distracted/impared driving Typcally cordinated with CUSD. OCSD. Coroners Dept. Care Ambulance Increase Safe Dnwng in Older Adults and Teens 72 Targeled Campaigns or Teens Continue partnership with partners to ensure annual delivery of the "Every 15 Minutes" safety education program at relevant schools Promise the effort and campaign theough organded City communeaten metheds Centnue providing alternatives to ding for teens through OC Flex Microtransit services and free Irarsit rides for youth aged 6 to 18 on Sued route pusses LEGEND: SUPPORT
LRSP
45 OF 47
A MARK
e = THOMAS
Capistrano Unified School District Orange County Fire Aulhoty range County Heath Care Agency Orange County Transportation Authonty Orange County Sheriff's Department Laguna Niguel Draft 2022 Local Roadway Safety Plan Gay of Laguna Niguel ฿ Faick/Care Ambulance Action Item Summary by Timeframe
IST YEAR Program Type
SWG Meeting (Annual) Requirement
Action 1.1: Speed Management - Community Education Campaigns Education Action 1.3: Speed Management - Infrastructure Treatments Engineering Action 2.2: Reduce Impaired Driving - Focused Education Campaigns Education Action 3.2: Reduce Distracted Driving - Parent Intervention Program Education Action 3.3: Reduce Distracted Driving - Regional Education Campaigns Education Action 4.1: Eliminate High-Crash Locations - Road Safety Audits Engineenng Action 7.1: Increase Safe Driving in Older Adults and Teens - Targeted Campaigns for Older Adults Education Action 7.2: Increase Safe Driving in Older Adults and Teens - Targeted Campaigns for Teens Education 1-5 YEARS
Action 1.2: Speed Management - Police Enforcement Enforcement Action 2.1: Reduce Impaired Driving - Rice Hail Promotions Emerging Technology Action 2.3: Reduce Impaired Driving • Sobriety Checkpoints Enforcement Action 3.1: Recluce Distracted Driving - High Visibility Enforcement Enforcement Action 5.1: Improve Safety at Intersections and Around Schools - Intersection Improvements wth Emerging Technologies Emerging Technology Action 5.2: Improve Safety at Intersections and Around Schools - Countermeasure Monitoring Engineering Action 6.2: Increase Active Transportation Road User Safety - Pursue Grant Funding Engineering 5+ YEARS
Evaluate Crash Data and Review Goals (at minimum every 5-years) Requirement Action 4.2: Eliminate High-Crash Locations - Capital Improvement Program Engineering Action 6.1: Increase Active Transportation Road User Safety - Engineering Solutions Engineering LEGEND: LEAD SUPPORT
LRSP 46 OF 47.

LA MARK
THOMAS
APPENDIX A: LETTERS OF SUPPORT
LRSP / 47 OF 47

ORANGE COUNTY

SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT SHERIFF-CORONER DON BARNES
September 3, 2020
Jacki Scott, PE, TE
Public Works Director

To achieve positive outcomes, the Orange County Sheriffs Department commits to continued partnership on the LRSP, including potential involvement through:
• Input on best methods to promote safety during dedicated campaigns (social media, in- school programs, etc.),
Incorporate partner-provided safety messaging into communications (as appropriate), . Promotion of safety events and activities to our constituents, • Written letter of support for future grant pursuits led by City or other partners for RSP activities, and
Attendance at annual RSP Stakeholder Working Group update meeting.

Sincerely,
Viral Asuci
Captain Virgil Asuncion
Chief of Laguna Niguel Police Services
www.ocshcriff.gov
Integrity without compromise | Service above self | Professionalism in the performance of duty | Vigilance in safeguarding our community

CAPISTRANO UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT

CAPISTRANO
UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT 33122 VALLE ROAD, SAN JUAN CAPISTRANO CA 92675 BOARD OF TRUSTEES TELEPHONE: (949) 234-9200/FAX: 496-7681 www.capousd.org IUDY BULLOCKU:

PRESIDENT

ISTA CASTELLAN

E PRESIDI
September 8, 2020
Jacki Scott, PE, TE GILDONES
Public Works Director PAMELA BRAUNSTEIN
CITY OF LAGUNA NIGUEL LISA DAvIS
30111 Crown Valley Parkway AMY HANACEK
Laguna Niguel, CA 92677 MARTHA MCNICHOLAS

To achieve positive outcomes, Capistrano Unified commits to continued partnership on the LRSP, including potential involvement through:
• Input on best methods to promote safety during dedicated campaigns (social media, in-school programs, etc.),
• Incorporate partner-provided safety messaging into communications (asappropriate),
• Promotion of safety events and activities to our constituents, Written letter of support for future grant pursuits led by City or other partners for LRSP activities, and
• Attendance at annual LRSP Stakeholder Working Group update meeting.

SERVING THE COMMUNITIES OF:

Sincerely,
Carlos Chicas
Executive Director Maintenance, Operations, Transportation Capistrano Unified School District
CLAYTON CHAU, MD Pho

DIRECTOR/COUNTY HEALTH OFFICER
échealth JENNA SARIN, MSN, RN, PHN

INTERIM ASSISTANT AGENCY

ALIFOR DIRECTOR

CARE AGENCY
MARGARET BREDEHOFT, DrPH

DEPUTY AGENCY DIRECTOR

PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICES PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICES
HEALTH PROMOTION AND TAMARRA JONES, DrPI

DIVISION MANAGE

COMMUNITY PLANNING IEALTH PROMOTION AN

OMMUNITY PLANNIN
1725 W. 17TH STREE
ANTA ANA, CA 9270
PH 14) 37-0228
E-MAIL: [email protected]
September 16, 2021
Jacki Scott, PE, TE
Public Works Director
City of Laguna Niguel
30111 Crown Valley Parkway
Laguna Niguel, CA 92677
RE: Letter of Support for Local Roadway Safety Plan
Dear Ms. Scott,
On behalf of Orange County Health Care Agency (OCHCA), we would like to offer this letter of support documenting our support for improving transportation safety in the City of Laguna Niguel. OCHCA has been an active participant during the preparation of the Local Roadway Safety Plan (LRSP) led by the City. We concur with the project vision dedicated to a roadway network that provides safe travel throughout the city.

As a stakeholder involved in the LRSP, a representative of our organization has been involved in soviets fove dres tres and pristina, an of strat cres lined wientie pron of prential areas. We applaud the City of Laguna Niguel's focus to create a culture of safe travel behaviors and reduce severe and fatal transportation crashes citywide.

To achieve positive outcomes, OCHCA commits to continued partnership on the LRSP, including potential involvement through:
• Input on best methods to promote safety during dedicated campaigns (social media, in- school programs, etc.),
Incorporate partner-provided safety messaging into communications (as appropriate, Promotion of safety events and activities to our constituents, • Written letter of support for future grant pursuits led by City or other partners for LRSP activities, and
• Attendance at annual LRSP Stakeholder Working Group update meeting.

Letter of Support for Local Roadway Safety Plan
September 16, 2021

Page 2 of 2 ends

Sincerely,
Tamarra Jones, DrPH
Division Manager
Health Promotion and Community Planning
OCTA

To achieve positive and lasting safety outcomes, OCTA recognizes the importance of continued partnership on the LRSP. OCTA looks forward to continued involvement with the City
transportation safety improvements in the community within the context of countywide mobility and accessibility solutions. If you should have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact Warren Whiteaker, Principal Transportation Analyst, at (714) 560-5748 or [email protected].

Sincerely,
Kia Mortazavi
Executive Director, Planning
KM:ww
c: Warren Whiteaker, OCTA
İrange County Transportation Anthony
550 South Man Street / PO Bord84/ Orange /CaMore 02963-1584/078: 500-0C74 62821

FIRE ORANGE COUNTY FIRE AUTHORITY
SATE COURT P. O. Box 57115, Irvine, CA 92619-7115 • 1 Fire Authority Road, Irvine, CA 92602-0125 Brian Fennessy Fire Chief (714) 573-6000 www.ocfa.org
October 7, 2021
Jacki Scott, PE, TE
Public Works Director

Sincerely
Mike Contreras
Division Chief, OCFA Division 5
Serving the Cities of: Aliso Viejo • Buena Park • Cypress • Dana Point • Garden Grove • Irvine • Laguna Hills • Laguna Niguel • Laguna Woods • Lake Forest • La Palma Los Alamitos • Mission Viejo • Rancho Santa Margarita •San Clemente • San Juan Capistrano • Santa Ana • Seal Beach • Stanton • Tustin • Villa Park Westminster • Yorba Linda • and Unincorporated Areas of Orange County

RESIDENTIAL SPRINKLERS AND SMOKE ALARMS SAVE LIVES
FALCK
City of Laguna Niguel
Jacki Scott, PE, TE
Public Works Director
30111 Crown Valley Parkway Ick Mobile Health Co
Laguna Niguel, CA 92677 a Care Ambular
1517 W Braden Court
via email Orange, CA 92868
Phone (714)288-3800
Local Roadway Safety Plan https://us.falck.com/
October 14, 2021
Dear Ms. Scott,
On behalf of Falck Mobile Health Corp, dba Care Ambulance, we would like to offer this letter to acknowledge we have been an active participant during the preparation of the Local Roadway Safety Plan (LRSP) led by the City. We concur with the project vision dedicated to a roadway network that provides safe travel throughout the city.

To achieve positive outcomes, Care Ambulance commits to continued partnership on the LRSP, in- cluding potential involvement through:
• Input on best methods to promote safety during dedicated campaigns (social media, in- school programs, etc.),
• Incorporate partner-provided safety messaging into communications (as appropriate). • Promotion of safety events and activities to our constituents, • Attendance at annual LRSP Stakeholder Working Group update meeting.

Kind regards
Robert Viera
Division Manager
[email protected]
714 288 3883

Page 1 ends

LAGUNA
NIGUEL
LRSP Vision:

The City of Laguna Niguel is dedicated to a roadway network that provides safe travel throughout the city.
markthomas.com

ATTACHMENT C
Traffic and Transportation Commission Meeting Minutes,
December 8, 2021

MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL MEETING OF

THE CITY OF LAGUNA NIGUEL

TRAFFIC AND TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
December 8, 2021 - 7:00 p.m.

CALL TO ORDER - The meeting was called to order by Chair Kinney at 7:00 p.m.

ROLL CALL
Commission Members: Chair John Kinney - Present
Vice Chair Susan Harden - Present
Commissioner Amy Betonte - Present
Commissioner Foster "Gene" Johns - Present
Commissioner Gregory Clements - Absent
Council Liaisons: Council Member Fred Minagar - Present Council Member Rischi Paul Sharma - Present
City Staff Present: City Traffic Engineer Kathy Nguyen
Chief of Police Virgil Asuncion
Administrative Sergeant Isaac Flores
Deputy Sheriff Joe Bucaro
Commission Secretary Cyndee Wilcox
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE - Commissioner Johns

PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS
Taylor Parham, resident, spoke about speeding on his street, La Plata Drive, and stated that he would like to gain an understanding about what the City can do about speeding on his street. He noted that he has seen radar speed feedback trailers and occasionally a motorcycle officer. He stated that his neighbors are thrilled to see the motor officer on their street. He stated that he has read through the Laguna Niguel Residential Traffic Management Policy and listed several traffic calming measures he would like to see, including speed bumps. He stated that his neighbors tried to get speed bumps installed in 2017 but that the vote was opened to residents who did not live on La Plata Drive.

Those residents voted "no" on the speed bumps while the residents who live on La Plata Drive voted "yes." He stated that the residents who do not live on La Plata Drive do not experience the same issues as the residents who live on La Plata Drive. He asked what can be done to address the speeding issue and what would be his next steps as a resident.

City Traffic Engineer Nguyen thanked Mr. Parham for his comments and stated that City staff will look into implementing traffic calming improvements on La Plata Drive and can assist the residents with the installation of speed bumps. She stated that there is a process that the neighborhood would have to go through for speed bumps and that staff can work with the residents to see if this neighborhood meets the requirements.

Mr. Parham stated his appreciation and stated that he read through the policy which outlines the process for speed bumps. He stated that if there are alternative, progressive means besides the speed bumps, he and his neighbors would be open to that.

Traffic & Transportation Commission Special Minutes Page 1 of 13 December 8, 2021 City Traffic Engineer Nguyen stated that she would provide Mr. Parham with her business card to discuss possible solutions with him offline.

Council Member Minagar asked the Chair if he can respond to Mr. Parham and stated that he does not usually respond to citizens' questions during Public Communications as it is not on the agenda. He stated that on this specific issue, during the past 22 years in the City of Laguna Niguel, when he was on the Traffic and Transportation Commission for almost 8 years, speeding on La Plata Drive used to come up a lot. He stated that some of Mr. Parham's neighbors used to complain about the speeds and that any time the neighborhood pursued the installation of speed bumps, it failed because they have to go through the process and the protocol that was established by the City Council prior to Council Member Minagar's term on the Council. Council Member Minagar stated that, as a practitioner, he can tell that the pursuit of speed bumps, specifically in that area of the City, will likely fail due to the lack of getting the minimum required number of signatures. He noted that the residents can still go through the process and proceed with the request. Council Member Minagar stated that residential areas in the State of California, specifically Laguna Niguel is no exception, fall under prima facie category so residential areas by default is 25 MPH. He stated that anybody that takes their driver's license test should know this because it is one of the questions on the test. He stated that the residents are knowingly speeding and going beyond the prima facie speed limit.

Council Member Minagar stated that the City has an excellent Police Department that is always vigilant and has done an excellent job over the years but they cannot be at every place in the City at any given time. He stated that the Police Chief would make proper accommodations for deputies to show up randomly to check and make sure that residents are adhering to the posted speed limits of the residential areas which are, by default, even if there is a sign or legend, 25 MPH. He stated that this is the existing and that he will go on to comment on the future. He stated that he helped one of his friends, Assemblywoman Laura Friedman, who is the former Mayor of the City of Glendale and is the Chairwoman of the State Assembly, change the laws in the State of California. He stated that effective January 1, 2022, every City in California, 482 Cities, would have to comply and adhere to one of the new laws that would allow Cities such as Laguna Niguel as a municipal corporation to reduce some of the speed limits. He stated that the law is not in effect yet because it has to come to the City Council and has to be ratified. He stated that this City is indeed going to be pursuing that so that there is more flexibility for the Traffic Engineering Division of the Public Works Department to review and modify speed limits by 5 to 10 MPH less than what has been posted or under the category of prima facie. He noted that this is a very fluid thing because it's a new law. He stated that other Cities do not want it because of all kinds of variations that it is going to create but that this change is down the pipe and that by the year 2024, according to the Secretary of State of the State of California, all the Cities would have to be compliant with the new law. He stated that Laguna Niguel has three years to get adjusted and acclimated to make proper accommodations, revisions, and modifications to all the speed limits in the future. He stated that, for now, staff is going to look into Mr. Parham's request in more detail. He stated that, especially in this area, because of the grade, the slope does impact the way the driving public would be behaving. He stated that he would like to add that when the City did the first traffic survey of this specific area approximately 15 to 16 years ago, he asked the former Police Chief to let him know who the speeders were. He noted that he didn't want their names as that is not legal but he wanted to see who they were based on their license plates. He stated that based on the report that he received, 100% of the speeders were the neighbors - they were all living in the same area, the same Traffic & Transportation Commission Special Minutes | Page 2 of 13 December 8, 2021 cluster of homes. He stated that he just wanted to give the history of the area and that the City visited that area quite a few times over the years and he wanted to make sure what staff is going to be doing is most likely to accentuate and reinforce the existing traffic control devices, to make sure that there is a legend, that it needs to supplemented, amplified by a sign or other measures to slow down. He stated that the City can do that, but anything beyond that, staff cannot do because they have to go by the prima facie in California as this is a legal thing that the City cannot change without any justification that we can refer to. He stated that he hopes he clarified the situation for Mr. Parham.

Mr. Parham stated his appreciation for Council Member Minagar's comments and stated that something has to be done to address the speeding in the neighborhood.

Council Member Minagar stated that Mr. Parham's points have been well taken, but that in the interest of time, the Traffic and Transportation Commission has a special presentation to get to and he is sure that staff will assist the neighborhood with a speed feedback trailer for a short period of time on a random basis. Council Member Minagar stated that he wanted to help Mr. Parham and the other residents. He stated that public safety is our number one job in the City.

Aniko Sherry, resident, presented three items. She stated that the recent street resurfacing work within the Rancho Niguel single family community was a good chance to put in some speed calming, or street painting, not to add the speed bumps at all but just some speed calming and street painting. She stated that didn't happen, although she had spoken to someone from Public Works before and someone came out and looked at the speed. She stated that, at that time, we had the pandemic so not too many cars were driving through and it was wonderful, but now we are back to the same traffic pattern. She stated that mostly we have cut through traffic and, as mentioned by Council Member Minagar, we do have our own neighbors flying through at 65 MPH. She stated that the quality of the resurfacing was surprising to the homeowners. She stated that she has worked with American Asphalt a number of times and they do quality work but not this time. She stated that there is parking infiltration on Rancho Cristiano. She stated that the City approved permit parking only for our area on Rancho De Linda and thinks we need to add more streets for permit parking. She inquired about the status of Crown Valley Parkway at the on-ramp northbound to I-5 and if we are going to have two on- ramps. She would like to receive a follow-up.

CONSENT CALENDAR
Approval of Minutes of the Traffic and Transportation Commission Meeting on October 27, 2021
Chair Kinney stated that page 3 of the Minutes of the Traffic and Transportation Commission Meeting on October 27, 2021 should be amended to reflect that he inquired about the right lane closure on La Paz Road by the County Regional Park, not Commissioner Johns.

A MOTION was made by Commissioner Johns, seconded by Vice Chair Harden, to approve the minutes as amended.

Motion carried 4-0-1; with Commissioner Clements being absent.

Approved as amended.

Traffic & Transportation Commission Special Minutes Page 3 of 13 December 8, 2021

DISCUSSION ITEMS

1. City of Laguna Niguel Local Roadway Safety Plan
City Traffic Engineer Nguyen provided a brief introduction of the Local Roadway Safety Plan (LRSP) and introduced the City's LRSP consultant, Paul Martin from Mark Thomas & Company, Inc., who presented a PowerPoint on the LRSP.

Vice Chair Harden stated that the document was well done and found it interesting to read the history of the things that have been done most recently as well as reviewing all of the actions in the plan. She stated that looking at all the recent improvements in the PowerPoint slide, she noticed that some of them had dates next to them, and when she was reading the plan, she was wondering what the dates were on some of those improvements. She stated that she thought it would be great to have dates next to all of the improvements since the document covers five years and it would make it easier if the document gets reviewed again to see when those improvements would be happening.

Vice Chair Harden stated that an update of the document would occur in a minimum of five years, but given the last couple of years, 2020 and 2021, and the increase in bicycling and electric bikes, she would like to know when the next round of crash data would come out and if there was an opportunity to update this document in less than five years.

Mr. Martin stated that the crash data covered five years between 2015 and 2019.

He stated that we are in 2021 and the State published data only goes up to 2019 currently. He stated that there is data added every year. He stated there might have been less travel during COVID in the last couple years. He stated that, in a couple years, it will be interesting to take another look to do a comparison pre- COVID with COVID.

Vice Chair Harden stated that she wanted to see crash data particularly around Shark Bay and the schools with so many more students biking to middle school and we are seeing more bikes on the road. She would like to see if the trend will change the crash data.

Vice Chair Harden noted that there was a PowerPoint slide that showed the severity of the injuries and the fatalities in Laguna Niguel were low compared to other Cities. She stated that this data showing the breakdown was not provided in the report.

Mr. Martin acknowledged that the table was not included in the report and was only presented in the PowerPoint slide.

Vice Chair Harden stated that she would like to see the table in the report.

Commissioner Betonte stated that she noticed that the working group was more of an executive committee and asked the consultant if, based on your experience, working groups consisted of smaller breakout groups. She stated that the working group could enlist more community involvement not only with high school and Traffic & Transportation Commission Special Minutes Page 4 of 13 December 8, 2021 senior citizens groups but also e-biker clubs that are probably going to be starting up soon if they haven't already, motorcycle groups, bike groups, and high school students to help figure out what would influence them to put that phone down and diminish distracted driving, same thing with our senior citizens, likewise engaging our local courts. She proposed a diversion program so that if a senior citizen or anybody gets caught speeding or in an accident that, in lieu of financial penalties, they are diverted into a program that helps the City of Laguna Niguel come up with solutions to solve some of the problems that we're having with some of these subgroups. She inquired if there is anything that other communities do that's more unique than the typical things that we've seen on a day to day basis.

Mr. Martin stated that a lot of the things mentioned by Commissioner Betonte are within the realm of possibility. He stated that that degree of public engagement with focus groups or with youth or with other ages is all something that can happen in the future. He stated that it's a matter of how much the City wants to grow the range of engagement. He stated that at the very least, we wanted to make sure we talked to anyone who's related to travel safety such as law enforcement, the school district, Orange County Health Care Agency, and OCTA. He stated that the City can open this up to a wider audience with focus groups. He stated that the public engagement could also be rolled into other things like the General Plan update or a dedicated bicycle/pedestrian/active transportation plan. He stated that these types of engagement do not have to be restricted to the Local Roadway Safety Plan.

City Traffic Engineer Nguyen stated that, per the State grant requirements, the State had envisioned that the City reach out to these groups to discuss the goals of the LRSP and that the City can take the extra step to engage the community for input. She stated that as part of the plan, we do have community engagement to address a lot of the issues, so the plan itself does advocate community engagement, but in the process of putting the plan together, the State had originally just envisioned these particular groups in the County and at the local level.

Commissioner Johns stated that he appreciated the report. He stated that it was very detailed and very easy to read considering what it was. He noted that he saw from 2015 to 2019 in the report, our numbers of collisions has drastically dropped.

He stated that we were at a high of 289 at one point and we're down to 254, so obviously what we are doing already seems to be helping quite a bit with the collisions in our City and that's documented in the report. He stated that he appreciated that was easy to see. He stated that the one thing that struck him was that 88% of the collisions are in or near intersections where the schools are, so out of 254 accidents that we had last year in our City, 237 of them were at those intersections. He stated that there is something we need to do there and we need to make sure that's a priority that we look at that. He stated that he saw that we were 62nd out of 102 cities with intoxication of people under the age of 21, but then when he looked further, it was one person. He stated that even though we're 62nd !, it's kind of deceiving that that was there. He stated that the read was easy and it was really good, but in a couple of places, he cringed when he read that we're going to do those things that are easy and not expensive, that don't cost much. He stated that what we need is that we can do them without City Council having to approve the funds that are available that we can spend for certain things Traffic & Transportation Commission Special Minutes Page 5 of 13 December 8, 2021 so maybe we can reword that so that it doesn't look like we're only doing those things that are not expensive. He stated that he doesn't think safety has anything to do with the cost. He stated that it struck him wrong when he read it. He stated that he knew what we meant by it, but he thinks we can clarify that. He stated that, other than that, it was a fantastic report.

Chair Kinney stated that his two points were covered by the other Commissioners and asked for a motion to approve.

Council Member Minagar stated that before the Chair can move to a motion on this, this is a public hearing because we are using it as a special meeting for the Traffic and Transportation Commission, and by law based on the LRSP statutes in the State of California, this is a forum for everyone to input their comments because then it's going to jump from here to the City Council for the ratification.

He stated that this is the only opportunity for us as well as anyone in the audience to echo and all comments have to be recorded and it has to be integrated as a part of the full report that is going to be submitted later on. He stated that it's going to come to the City Council to ratify it, it's going to go to Caltrans District 12 for their review, and then it goes to CTC and Caltrans headquarters for their approval.

He stated that he has quite a few technical questions because this is the only time that he has and this is the only forum that he can use to echo his feedback. He stated that the report mentioned that the SWITRS report was used and asked if the TIMS report was used
Mr. Martin stated that they looked at both data sources to be able to pull crash data.

Council Member Minagar acknowledged that the consultant compared the database from UC Berkeley with SWITRS from Office of Traffic Safety. He inquired if the consultant then did an aggregation of the two.

Mr. Martin stated that typically, the SWITRS data is not the interface.

Council Member Minagar stated that SWITRS is not user-friendly and it just populates everything because it's a report from the Police Department or Sheriff's Department to CHP and Office of Traffic Safety. He stated that as long as you used TIMS, you need to mention that in the report or it's illegal. He stated that you need to mention that you downloaded all the TIMS databases because UC Berkeley does all the number crunching for you and they create the heat maps for you, with clusters. He stated that when you got to the TIMS report at UC Berkeley, they do show not only the data from Office of Traffic Safety/SWITRS report which is from our Sheriff's Department, but also if you scroll down, it has ATP databases, and it does have SRTS, state and federal. He inquired if the consultant reviewed those two documents in conjunction with this. He noted that one of our Commissioners mentioned the bikers and the pedestrians and what you get from SWITRS is highly concentrated on the motoring public. He stated that we want to see what are the activities surrounding the schools, the elementary schools in the city, the middle schools, which is very crucial. He stated that we don't have any high schools here. He stated that he wanted to make sure that those are included in the assessment before this report comes to the City Council because it's going to be too late. He stated that we do not want to send it back from the City Council Traffic & Transportation Commission Special Minutes Page 6 of 13 December 8, 2021 to the Traffic Commission. He stated that he is trying to help staff get to the finish line so that the report not only would be complete but it will be comprehensive so that it will serve the residents of this City because we were lucky that we were able to get funding to do the LRSP which is a platform for getting funding for HSIP projects. He inquired if the consultant used SRTS, state or federal.

Mr. Martin stated that the crash data includes all that information for the safe routes, the crashes affecting youth. He stated that it's all encompassed in the data that we pulled from SWITRS and TIMS.

Council Member Minagar inquired if the consultant combined them in this report that was presented which is in the public domain that anyone can review as a matter of public record.

Mr. Martin confirmed.

Council Member Minagar stated that, with regard to the stakeholders, he noticed that OCTA, Sheriffs Department, and Capo Unified School District were included.

He inquired about any citizen groups such as Chamber of Commerce or e-bikers.

He stated that maybe we haven't established the e-biker groups yet but pretty soon we are moving in that direction because the elected officials get a lot of requests from citizens that the City ought to be doing this. He stated that our Sheriff's Department and our Public Works are working in sync to make sure that we do the best for the City and we are way ahead of other Cities in Orange County He stated that he saw one of the ambulance companies listed as a stakeholder.

He inquired if the consultant got any data or reports from them.

Mr. Martin stated that part of the goal of that stakeholder working group was to address emerging technology and emergency responders. He stated that there were a series of prompts for the various stakeholder working groups, for example, Enforcement or Emergency Response: Are there any issues going on within your jurisdictions? He stated that his firm is doing the LRSP for King's County in the central valley.

Council Member Minagar noted that it is a rural county.

Mr. Martin stated that in Laguna Niguel, ambulance providers can use Crown Valley Parkway and go straight on to the hospital. He stated that the City of Laguna Niguel has traffic signal synchronization, optimization, preemption, and so on. He stated that in King's County, in these other jurisdictions and throughout those wide expanses in the State of California, ambulance providers have issues with response times. He stated that it's problematic to go to a hospital that is 10 or more miles away, so in a place like King's County, we're finding that the emergency response, and having the ambulance provider involved, guides the recommendations. He stated that in Laguna Niguel, we had Falck, the ambulance provider, to be able to do that double check, but the reality is that the Public Works Department is ahead of the curve on that and has already got the typical solutions.

He stated that we went through those prompts with the various groups, with the school district, with Orange County Public Health, and with OCTA. He stated that if there is an interest in trying to make the focus groups happen, then certainly that can be done in the future going forward.

Traffic & Transportation Commission Special Minutes Page 7 of 13 December 8, 2021 Council Member Minagar stated that because this is a special meeting of the Traffic and Transportation Commission, it serves again as a public hearing. He inquired if the purpose of this special meeting was accentuated or amplitied so that the citizens can come here and hear about this and provide input. He inquired if there is anything with regard to the RSP on the City's website.

City Traffic Engineer Nguyen stated that the agenda and the report are posted on the City's website.

Council Member Minagar inquired if, on the City's website, there was anything standalone as LRSP or public meeting or public input is needed.

City Traffic Engineer Nguyen stated that this is a special meeting because the report wasn't ready when staff originally anticipated to take it to the Traffic Commission in October. She stated that staff didn't want to hold the report until 2022 which is why staff called for this special meeting to be able to present it to the Traffic Commission this year. She stated that whenever there is an opportunity, staff lets the public know that there is a Local Roadway Safety Plan that's being developed. She stated that the report is on the website as part of this meeting agenda but there isn't a special page dedicated to the study. She stated that the purpose of this meeting isn't to solicit input as part of a public hearing and that this is a special meeting only because it is not part of the regularly scheduled meetings.

Council Member Minagar stated that he understands because of the Christmas holiday and complexity of that. He stated that, again, he wanted to save time before the report comes to our City Council Meeting. He stated that he is helping the City to make sure that we get the full funding from the State of California. He stated that the State is going to do all the checkmarks, how the public was informed. He stated that, after this meeting, he suggests to upload this presentation and document to the City's website and spelled out, "Local Roadway Safety Plan." He stated that a lot of Cities in California have done that and he checked it before coming to the meeting. He stated that he does not want to add more layers, but it's a process that we have to comply and conform. He stated that he noticed that there are eight intersections and seven segments that were identified as priorities in the report. He stated that the LRSP manual, which is dated 2020, the Bible of the State of California for LRSP, requires that we look at the top 10 to top 15. He asked the consultant, when you have eight intersections and seven segments, was it because we did not have any other crashes of any significance? He inquired why a minimum threshold of 10 locations was not met.

Mr. Martin stated that the list certainly could grow and that the locations were identified based on the engagement with the stakeholder working group and crash data. He stated that we can grow that list, if desired, up to 10.

Council Member Minagar stated that our Traffic Commission is going to make a vote on this, then send it to the City Council. He stated that you'd have to be an engineer to see how many intersections or segments are required. He stated that the City Council does not have the manuals to look into it. He stated that he wanted to make sure that anything that is determined tonight, that our great Traffic & Transportation Commission Special Minutes Page 8 of 13 December 8, 2021 Commissioners would be voting upon it, that we are not deviating from the requirements. He stated that when the report comes to the City Council, it will be too late for us to add locations to it.

City Traffic Engineer Nguyen stated that staff will definitely incorporate the comments received tonight by the City Council and the Traffic Commission and make those changes before the document is brought before the City Council for adoption. She stated that the recommendation can be modified to state that these changes be made to the report and then recommend it to the City Council for adoption.

Council Member Minagar stated that his final question is the most critical one. He stated that he noticed that you have countermeasures, countermeasures need to come up with specific engineering solution for that cluster of crashes, as part of that, did you look at other intersections within the city, about 82 signalized intersections in the city, how many other potential locations would fall into that category, if they happen to be on one of the SWITRS reports that we've had traffic crashes there, so that we can use it as a location to improvise, to enhance, to improve the quality and the type of control devices that we have, so as a part of that, do you know that there are locations that 1) to add for those retroreflective backplates and 2) to change the lenses from 8" to 12".

Mr. Martin stated for everyone's benefit, 8" and 12" is the size of the lenses as you approach the traffic signal. He stated that historically, 8" was used at a lot of traffic signals, and as signals get upgraded, the new standard is 12".

Council Member Minagar stated that he is done with all his questions in the interest of time. He stated that he just wanted to make sure from a legality perspective, all these elements are incorporated so that we get the full funding.

He inquired if it is 80/20 or 90/10?
City Traffic Engineer Nguyen stated that the grant that the City received from the state was $54,000 and it was based on population.

Council Member Minagar stated that he knows that but would like to know the percentage. He inquired if it was 10% or 20%?
City Traffic Engineer Nguyen stated that she would have to do the math. She stated that it was about 35%.

Mr. Martin stated that the Local Roadway Safety Plan was funded primarily by a grant. He stated that the State said, "you need to do this, and fortunately we have some funding for our mandate." He stated that the State did provide some funding opportunities and that the majority of this effort was funded by the State grant and the City provided a match.

City Traffic Engineer Nguyen stated that the grant has minimum requirements.

She stated that staff is making sure that we are meeting those requirements so that we can keep the grant. She stated that the reason the City contributed a little bit more to this effort is because we went a little bit above and beyond the minimum requirements of the grant. She stated that the grant didn't ask for an Traffic & Transportation Commission Special Minutes Page 9 of 13 December 8, 2021 implementation plan. She stated that the document gives you the general direction of where the City wants to go in terms of its safety improvement plans.

She stated that we took the extra step to put together a more concrete schedule and we also asked Mark Thomas to look into funding opportunities so that we can implement a lot of the improvements that are proposed in the plan.

Commissioner Betonte inquired if this plan was a living document so that it can be amended on an on-going basis to fit the needs of our community. She wanted to confirm that we're not limited to the four corners of this document so we can springboard into other intersections if we want by amending the plan through a formal or an informal process.

City Traffic Engineer Nguyen stated that Commissioner Betonte was correct and that the State did say that this is a living document and wanted to make that very clear which is why they recommended that the document be updated every five years and that is just a recommendation. She stated that, as Vice Chair Harden requested, we can update this document more frequently and staff is proposing that we meet with our stakeholders every year to reevaluate the improvements that are proposed in this plan and see if it is still current to meet the changing needs of our City. She stated that it is a living document, and we can certainly make changes as needed. She stated that it doesn't even have to be every year and that staff can make changes as needed.

Council Member Sharma thanked staff for the presentation and stated that, unlike this piece of paper with the heat maps and the accidents or maybe an intersection in the middle of Kansas, Laguna Niguel has a lot of rolling hills. He stated that he would like to draw attention to Golden Lantern past Hidden Hills Road going down towards Crown Valley Parkway and then Paseo De Colinas down towards the Gateway. He stated that those specific areas illustrate the rolling hill nature of Laguna Niguel, and he would be very curious to understand not only were there accidents in these areas or these specific areas, but did the accidents occur on the ascending side of the road or the descending side of the road. He stated that if he could overlay the map of speed feedback sign locations in the City, there's nothing relative to speed feedback signs on any of the descending aspects of our intersections. He stated that he does not know if that would be a solution that would assist, but extra attention to the descending side of the road would be warranted, specifically in that area. He stated that, as was mentioned before by a couple of the Commissioners, there are schools located in the area and that a lot of students travel in the area throughout the course of the day. He stated that as he looked at the proposed education resources, he thinks it's important that we still talk about speeding. He stated that speed and cell phones become a bit passé where people stop paying attention to it, but it's probably a bit more in tune with the seasonality that we are going through right now to draw additional attention to weather conditions. He stated that we are getting into a rainy season, oils after the first rain, and a lot of people don't understand the dynamics of how that works and how that affects the ability to transport oneself in a vehicle. He stated that additional attention should also be paid towards the wear and tear of vehicles, such as worn-down tires, inappropriate window cleaning systems such as windshield wipers, etc. He stated that if you are trying to educate, going beyond the "don't text and drive" and "don't speed" can help people understand how to mitigate damage relative to transportation to themselves and their families.

Traffic & Transportation Commission Special Minutes Page 10 of 13 December 8, 2021 Mr. Martin stated that, in general, staff was not trying to say "here's what your message should be," but that Council Member Sharma's thoughts are definitely valid and is the type of thing that staff can work with the communications team to say. He stated that speeding might be a focus area and we want to get the word out and it could cover these types of things. He stated that in some jurisdictions, they have issues with westbound travel, going into the sun this time of year being difficult, or we see a lot of Cities that have customized messaging around the time change, managing driving behavior and the change patterns, so all that can be rolled into messaging and education. He stated that our document provides the springboard for the City to say that education is important and we need to do it.

He stated that the document contains the topics and each of the messages can be customized.

Council Member Sharma stated that it would be really interesting to see what the study says about the descending and ascending accidents.

Mr. Martin stated that he took notes on the locations.

Council Member Sharma confirmed that the locations include Hidden Hills Road going down towards Golden Lantern, there's a school, and it crosses over to Paseo De Colinas, and if you take a right there and go down Paseo De Colinas, it goes downhill again. He stated that both of those are very steep descending hills.

Mr. Martin stated that staff will take a look at the descending and ascending locations mentioned. He stated that some of the crash data from the State is aggregated down and staff will have to take a look if staff is able to discern directionality of the crash data and possibly work with the Sheriff's Department to obtain this data.

Council Member Sharma stated that we should focus our resources there instead of covering the entirety of the road if we know the majority of accidents are happening on one side versus the other, or in one direction versus the other.

Mr. Martin stated that when staff went through the crash data in the first meeting with Sergeant Flores and Deputy Bucaro, their heads were nodding in agreement le stated that it was information that they can confirm from doing enforcement within the City. He stated that Council Member Sharma's intuition probably matches what the officers are seeing.

Vice Chair Harden stated that she had a question regarding adding to the list of intersections and roadways. She asked if we are required to add to that list and, if so, if staff is going to add to the list that we make sure it doesn't dilute the priority roadways and intersections that are currently identified. She stated that if we are going to add them, note that they're not as much of a priority. She inquired if this was a requirement of the grant.

Mr. Martin stated that he would double check and go through the checklist and verify that everything is fully addressed and that it doesn't create some sort of conflict.

Traffic & Transportation Commission Special Minutes Page 11 of 13 December 8, 2021 Chair Kinney asked if City Traffic Engineer Nguyen can reword the recommendation.

City Traffic Engineer Nguyen stated that the original recommendation was that staff recommends that the Traffic and Transportation Commission recommends that the City Council adopt the City of Laguna Niguel Local Roadway Safety Plan.

She stated that the new recommendation would be that staff recommends that the Traffic and Transportation Commission recommend that the City Council adopt the LRSP amended to incorporate the comments received at the Special Traffic and Transportation Commission Meeting on December 8, 2021.

A MOTION was made by Vice Chair Harden, seconded by Commissioner Johns, to recommend that the City Council adopt the LRSP amended to incorporate the comments received at the Special Traffic and Transportation Commission Meeting on December 8, 2021.

Motion carried 4-0-1; with Commissioner Clements being absent.

STAFF, CITY COUNCIL, AND COMMISSION COMMENTS
City Traffic Engineer Nguyen provided updates on the Heather Ridge Costco Traffic Study, Travel Time and Delay Studies, and Pacific Island Drive Traffic Calming Improvements.

City Traffic Engineer Nguyen stated that, on behalf of the staff, she would like to thank the City Council and Traffic Commission for their support of staff's recommendations this year. She stated that we are happy to serve you and look forward to another great year ahead.

Police Services stated that they had nothing to report.

Council Member Sharma stated that he had nothing to add or report Commissioner Johns wanted to wish everyone a Happy Holidays and hope everybody's safe and see you next year.

Vice Chair Kinney asked if staff knew which Commissioners were being termed out.

City Traffic Engineer Nguyen stated that she would check with the City Clerk and get back to the Traffic and Transportation Commission.

Vice Chair Harden inquired if the City has ever considered developing a residential traffic calming plan or handbook that provides a more robust toolbox.

City Traffic Engineer Nguyen stated that the City has a Traffic Manual that is a very technical document that staff uses to address concerns received from the community.

She stated that staff was in the middle of updating the Traffic Manual, but with the shift in priorities, it was placed on hold. She stated that staff can finalize the update and bring it before the Traffic Commission. She stated that staff can update the toolbox in the document.

Traffic & Transportation Commission Special Minutes Page 12 of 13 December 8, 2021 Vice Chair Harden inquired if staff is pursuing grants for a pedestrian/bicycle or active transportation master plan.

City Traffic Engineer Nguyen stated that the Community Development Department is updating the General Plan and will be looking at updating the various elements of the General Plan in the near future.

ADJOURNMENT - Chair Kinney adjourned the meeting at 8:31 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,
yndee Wilcon
endee Wilco
Traffic and Transportation Commission Secretary
Traffic & Transportation Commission Special Minutes Page 13 of 13 December 8, 2021

ATTACHMENT D
Comments and Responses Received at the
December 8, 2021 Traffic and Transportation
Commission Meeting

RESPONSE TO COMMENTS RECEIVED ON THE LAGUNA NIGUEL LOCAL ROADWAY SAFETY PLAN AT THE DECEMBER 8, 2021 TRAFFIC & TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION Member Comment Response to Comment
Vice Chair Requested update to report to include dates identifying when the See revised report under Existing Safety Efforts (Page 8).

Harden recent improvements were implemented by the City.

Vice Chair Requested monitoring of crash data near Niguel Hills Middle School Refer to the LRSP Emphasis Area 6 (Page 31) which focuses on active Harden including Shark Bay to see if trends change over time with increased transportation road user safety and revised Action 6.1 related to cycling by students. potential increases in active transportation crashes.

Vice Chair Requested update to the report to include the Office of Traffic Safety See revised report under Data Collection (Page 14).

Harden OTS) statewide published crash rankings.

Commissioner Requested consideration of additional focus groups and stakeholders See revised report under Next Steps (Page 48).

Betonte (youth and senior groups, ebike groups, motorcycle groups, etc.) in future updates to the report.

Commissioner Inquired if bicycle traffic diversion program can be utilized for Betonte education after police citation. potential bicycle traffic diversion course to improve active transportation safety.

Commissioner Suggested the language encourage financially effective capital See revised report under Action 4.2 (Page 28).

Johns projects be pursued and not just low cost solutions.

Council Member Requested the report cite the source for the crash data. See revised report under Citywide Collision Data (Page 14).

Minagar
Council Member Requested if the report utilized crash data provided by Ambulance The report utilized state published crash data and can be Minagar service providers in City. supplemented in future evaluations.

Council Member Inquired about the number of intersections evaluated in the study. The LRSP was prepared consistent with guidance from FHWA and Minagar Caltrans which recommends high crash locations be identified. 10 Council Member Inquired if any traffic signals within the City utilize 8" lenses, if so See revised report under Recommended Infrastructure Improvements Minagar recommended change to 12" lenses. (Page 36) which clarifies that all traffic signals within the City utilize 12" diameter lenses.
11 Commissioner Inquired if the plan is a living document that gets amended or See revised report under Next Steps (Page 48) which provides Betonte updated as needed. additional language indicating the LRSP is a living document with an annual stakeholder working group review of progress towards safety goals.

RESPONSE TO COMMENTS RECEIVED ON THE LAGUNA NIGUEL LOCAL ROADWAY SAFETY PLAN AT THE DECEMBER 8, 2021 TRAFFIC COMMISSION

RESPONSE TO COMMENTS RECEIVED ON THE LAGUNA NIGUEL LOCAL ROADWAY SAFETY PLAN AT THE DECEMBER 8, 2021 TRAFFIC & TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION Member Comment Response to Comment
12 Council Member Asked if crashes more frequently occur on downhill portion of See revised report under High Injury Network Analysis (Page 20) Sharma Golden Lantern past Hidden Hills Road towards Crown Valley which discusses crashes along Paseo De Colinas and Golden Lantern Parkway and downhill portion of Paseo De Colinas down towards along the downhill portion.

Camino Capistrano.

Council Member Asked about the location of speed feedback sign locations in the Refer to Figure 3 (Page 11) showing the location of speed feedback Sharma City. signs installed within the City.
14 Council Member Asked about opportunities to customize education topics such as cell The LRSP provides recommendations for safety education Sharma phone use, speeding, vehicle maintenance, and driving in inclement campaigns. The messaging and topics can be customized by the City weather. for publication to the community.

RESPONSE TO COMMENTS RECEIVED ON THE LAGUNA NIGUEL LOCAL ROADWAY SAFETY PLAN AT THE DECEMBER 8, 2021 TRAFFIC COMMISSION

ATTACHMENT E
Laguna Niguel Chamber of Commerce Letter of Support

LAGUNA NIGUEL
= CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
We mean busmess
March 9, 2022
Public Works Department
City of Laguna Niguel
30111 Crown Valley Parkway
Laguna Niguel, CA 92677
Attn: Jacki Scott, Public Works Director/City Engineer
Dear Jacki,
Thank you for the opportunity to review the 2022 Local Roadway Safety Plan, on behalf of the Laguna Niguel business community. The Chamber of Commerce places a high priority on traffic and transportation safety throughout our city, which certainly is a key element of the outstanding lifestyle and supportive business environment our residents and business owners enjoy.

My best regards,
Sorting
Scott Alevy
President & CEO

Laguna Niguel City CouncilMay 3, 2022

Laguna Niguel City Council
May 3, 2022