3. SITE SELECTION

As stated previously (see Section 1), it was determined that the study site should contain neighborhoods/streets in which:

• There has been no traffic calming and none is planned.
  
  
• Traffic calming has been in place for some time.
  
  
• There has been no traffic calming but implementation of traffic calming is planned during the study period.

In addition, it was determined that the following site selection criteria were desirable:

• Cooperation of key officials including the police and engineering personnel
  
  
• Existence of adequate “before” data or a willingness to collect sufficient baseline data prior to implementing any countermeasures
  
  
• Reasonable accessibility to the Dunlap offices
  
  
• A concern for pedestrians among the involved city officials. It was considered beneficial to work in locales in which pedestrian safety was an established priority.

Telephone contacts were made with representatives from selected communities that were recommended as possible test sites by participants in the NHTSA speed workshop. With the exception of Phoenix , Arizona , contacts were limited to communities on the East Coast because of their relative proximity to the Dunlap offices. Phoenix was included because of previous working relationships with the city's traffic engineering department in the conduct of other NHTSA field studies (Blomberg and Cleven, 1998). In all, contacts were made with eight communities/jurisdictions to solicit possible participation in the study.

As a result of the telephone contacts, two communities were identified as prime candidates to participate as study sites: Boca Raton , Florida , and Phoenix , Arizona . Both cities had active traffic calming programs and several neighborhoods that met the study criteria. In addition, traffic engineers in both cities were eager to participate in the study and had excellent working relationships with the local police departments to secure their support. The balance of the eight candidates either did not express an interest in participating or did not offer the same level of engineering/police cooperation that appeared to be available in Boca Raton and Phoenix .

During the selection process, the study's contact in Boca Raton left and accepted a position in Peoria , Arizona , a neighboring city to Phoenix . Since Peoria also had several neighborhoods that met study criteria and it was contiguous to Phoenix , it was decided to use the two cities as one “mega site.” Both cities met all site selection criteria, and liaison with both could be accomplished simultaneously because the traffic engineering representatives in the two cities knew each other and were eager to work together on a steering committee for the study. The Peoria and Phoenix police departments were also interested in the study and in forging a collaborative effort.

Using both Phoenix and Peoria as test sites provided the following benefits:

• Replication of the countermeasure tests in a variety of neighborhoods
  
  
• More test sites so that testing of education and enforcement alone and in conjunction with engineering traffic calming efforts would be possible
  
  
• Larger sample sizes
  
  
• Greater variety in types of roadways included in the program

Once Phoenix and Peoria were identified as study sites, a subcontract arrangement was established with each. The cities were provided with approximately $25,000 each to cover the cost of additional police patrols and the acquisition of study-related equipment. These funds were only a small percentage of the value of police and city staff time provided by each site. The remaining effort was paid for by the sites themselves.