Here’s an excerpt from a note I received from Doug Mandell, a reader:
Today I read your article about Sam Adams looking at how to spend surplus funds and I noticed that he was looking to install red light cameras.
The issue of red light cameras and their effectiveness is not something you’ve commented on previously on Portland Transport, I think a lot of communities are waking up to the fact that they don’t do a very good job of reducing accidents, not nearly as good as lengthening the yellow light time by about a second or so.I took the following paragraph from a Wikipedia page and posted it in the feedback section on Sam’s blog:
In May 2001 Dick Armey, then Majority Leader of the United States House of Representatives, issued a report suggesting that a more effective alternative to red light cameras would be to increase the yellow traffic light warning times. He suggested red light cameras exploited intersections where signal timing was shorter than necessary for some motorists to come to a complete stop (July 2001 U.S. House testimony). A
2004 Texas Department of Transportation study found, “crashes decrease with an increase in yellow interval duration and a reduction in speed limit.” After 1.0 second was added to the yellow signal timing at test intersections, accidents dropped by 35 to 40%. This compares with a 6.4% reduction for “area-wide officer enforcement of intersection traffic control devices… during the time of the enforcement activity”I also asked him to take a look at the conclusions in this study:
http://tti.tamu.edu/documents/0-4196-2.pdf
This isn’t something that I’m particularly passionate about, I’ve noticed a few studies that have indicated that increased yellow light times drastically reduce the running of red lights, and think that if it were indeed the case the city could make the appropriate changes at these intersections without spending any of that money at all.
Doug also passed on a link to this article from Popular Mechanics that suggests our red light cameras may have increased rear-end collisions.
What do folks think?
14 responses to “Questioning the Logic of Red Light Cameras”
Well I’ve just made the official decision that if I am ever driving around in my car that can stop about 2x faster than other cars on the road, I’m slamming on the brakes just for EFFECT!
Wow, I could sue like a mofo, and then just say, “well if the Police didn’t put this light up here ot make me stop so quick it wouldn’t have happened!”
Obviously i think they’re a total waste. Of course unless the priority (which is the functional result of a lot of “policing” of roadways) is merely an increase in budgets.
…oh yeah, and then there is also the fact that these things are illegal in several states (one’s that are keen on individual privacy)
Obviously i think they’re a total waste.
Before they installed the Red Light Cameras at MLK and Madison –the intersection I go through every day to cross the Hawthorne Bridge into downtown– the intersection was often in gridlock from the folks on MLK running the red lights and not clearing the intersection.
Never happens anymore. Despite all the red-light running you see around town…it doesn’t happen here anymore.
I love it.
I’d support Red Light Cameras on every intersection in Portland…except that no one would run red lights anymore, so how would you pay for it?
“Individual privacy” Adron? I could care less what you do in your bedroom… but what how you interact with me on a public highway is a matter of public –and my– concern.
I write this, too, as someone who got nailed by the camera for (barely) running a red light on Burnside by PGE Park. I wasn’t paying enough attention, rubber-necking the new high-rise going up there. It’s not about personal “privacy”…it’s about personal responsibility.
Frank:
I’m not sure why red light cameras would prevent gridlock, they’re designed to take a photo of someone who ENTERS an intersection after the traffic light turns red, those cars that enter (and sit) in an intersection before the light turns red don’t get their photo taken.
I think that if the stated purpose of photo red light is to reduce accidents then we need to take a look at the data. Most studies indicate there is no reduction in accidents, and that in some cases an increase in accidents results.
It also helps to understand why people run red lights. Most studies have shown that when a yellow light is longer it seems more “stale” to drivers, which means they expect it to change soon and slow down to stop for it.
You can read the data from a bunch of studies here:
http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/04/430.asp
I want to repeat that I *don’t* have an axe to grind on this issue, I’ve never been issued a ticket by photo red light, I’ve never gotten a ticket for running a red light, period. Having read several articles that indicate that the effectiveness of these devices are seriously questionable I just think that we should investigate their actual effectiveness at reducing accidents before we install more of these things.
All intersection should have a uniform yellow signal interval, unless they are on thoroughfares with speeds 45 mph or greater, in which case they should have a longer interval. Placing a short interval on some intersection, (I have encountered this on West Burnside) in conjunction with a camera, is merely a ploy to gain easy revenue. It is a deceptive trap when a motorist is used to a longer interval on other intersections to shorten that and then emplace enforcement personnel and/or devices. A veritable speed trap!
Why should they be longer on faster routes? Weather conditions, visibility blocked by tall trucks, brakes out of adjustment, worn tires—these are some conditions which make it difficult for even the conscientious motorist to come to a safe stop. With longer yellow intervals, then drivers who run the red light at excessive speeds with no effort to stop should pay big fines. Intent should be a factor in determining guilt.
Man Law! Go, Dick Armey…..!
Red light cameras are not only expensive, but they also discriminate against motorists. A true story case in point; as I rolled up to a stop on NE 39th at Sandy Boulevard, an intersection that has a red light camera, I watched as a reckless riding bicyclist “sped” right past my vehicle then crossed four lanes of traffic against the signal, no flash, no license plate to read and therefore no citation.
Furthermore, red light cameras have also been known to contribute to an increasing number of rear end crashes. Although red light cameras often do not pay for themselves, and are touted as a safety enforcement tool, moreover, the underlying reason for installing them is to establish an incoming revenue stream for government that does not involve high personnel costs. However the overriding concern/issue is that red light cameras are unable to apply traffic laws equally to all vehicles that use the roads. Therefore equal enforcement should trump red light cameras which should cause them to be removed and banned.
Red light cameras tend to provide $39,000 to $50,000 in economic benefits when they’re installed at appropriate intersections.
And sure, more harmful angle crashes may be partially replaced with less dangerous rear-end crashes in the short term — and then maybe we’ll all learn not to tailgate.
It’s not a panacea, nor appropriate for all situations, but increasing the likelihood of being caught is hugely important in making sure drivers are safe out there.
“It’s not a panacea, nor appropriate for all situations, but increasing the likelihood of being caught is hugely important in making sure drivers are safe out there.”
Yeah? How about going after the fast driving SUV’ers who figure, because they have to rush to keep paying their bills, will tailgate you until you get out of “their” way. These folks are often ignored by the traffic cops or can talk their way out of a fine. They certainly make me nervous. I’m sure most everyone has seen these types on the freeway–going twenty miles faster than everyone else. They must be making enough money to not worry about tickets.
I also find that the likelihood of violating a given law goes way up when there is a cop lurking somewhere. It undoubtedly unnerves me enough to fall in their trap.
I seriously don’t have anything against red light cameras—if they are used to actually catch people who ignore stoplights. However, setting the yellow interval too short is not a reputable solution.
“And sure, more harmful angle crashes may be partially replaced with less dangerous rear-end crashes in the short term — and then maybe we’ll all learn not to tailgate.”
But that’s not necessarily true, on the link I posted above are these two summaries:
In 2005, The Washington Post found:
“The analysis shows that the number of crashes at locations with cameras more than doubled, from 365 collisions in 1998 to 755 last year. Injury and fatal crashes climbed 81 percent, from 144 such wrecks to 262. Broadside crashes, also known as right-angle or T-bone collisions, rose 30 percent, from 81 to 106 during that time frame.”
A 2004 North Carolina A&T University study found:
“Our findings are more pessimistic, finding no change in angle accidents and large increases in rear-end crashes and many other types of crashes relative to other intersections.”
I’m not sure why red light cameras would prevent gridlock, they’re designed to take a photo of someone who ENTERS an intersection after the traffic light turns red…
Why it’s made such an impact is so many drivers –before the red light cameras– would just keep going through the intersection after the red light until they couldn’t fill the intersection anymore. Absolute anarchy replaced by courtesy…and very much in the interests of all the cyclists getting on the Hawthorne there.
A “And sure, more harmful angle crashes may be partially replaced with less dangerous rear-end crashes in the short term — and then maybe we’ll all learn not to tailgate.”
B Less dangerous? Not necessarily. With increased seat belt use also came increased neck and back injuries that which are most prevalent in rear end crashes – and when will bicyclists learn and understand that red light signals and stop signs are not just to be arrogantly ignored. They apply to bicyclists too, not just motorists.
Portland Yellow Light Cameras are what they really are. Reports say that Rear end collisions at the camera intersections are up 140% since the city installed them. Today I drove past several of the yellow light cameras and noticed that the traffic lights seem to be timed differently than at other intersections. You reach the speed limit and then suddenly the camera turns yellow. Unlike other yellow lights on the same streets these yellow lights flash on and off faster. They seem to to but I am not sure and do not have the time to go back and test the thesis with a stop watch. One would think that if one can be moving at a velocity of 25 mph to 30 mph according to speed limit signs one might think that the yellow lights at those intersections would last longer and espeically those with the yellow light cameras. The red light camera is the wrong name for these because it seems that the city is catching more drivers entering the intersections when the lights are turning from green yellow to red than from after yellow to red. I came to a screching halt just going the speed limit at one of them today because trying to guess how much time I had to go though the intersection at 25 mph was nearly impossible being at that velocity. I think the city should provide me a warning devise in my car so my perception of when the light is going to flip to yellow and then quickly to red is going to try and trap me. The yellow light should be long enough so that anyone approaching the intersection at the designated speed limit can make it into the intersection while it is still yellow and get though before it turns red. The City seems to be using these devises to make money more than to prevent accidents. It is so funny that when I approch one of these traffic signals I have trouble guessing when it is going to turn yellow unlike any other traffic lights in town.
Portland Yellow Light Cameras are what they really are.
I’ve seen the cameras snag multiple offenders, and I’ve never seen them go off when the car had already entered the intersection when the light was Yellow, so I think it is incorrect to call them “yellow light” cameras.
From my observations, the algorithm seems quite simple and predictable: There are sensor loops right before the crosswalk. If a car is moving over a sensor loop when the light turns red, and continues to move so that the loop is uncovered, the camera goes off.
Anyone already beyond the sensor loop when the light turns from yellow to red is not photographed.
I used the crosswalk today at 39th and Sandy, where there is a photo red-light camera, and saw multiple people “push” the yellow but not get photographed. (The strobe goes off even in the daytime when photos are taken.)
Bob R. Says:
I’ve seen the cameras snag multiple offenders, and I’ve never seen them go off when the car had already entered the intersection when the light was Yellow, so I think it is incorrect to call them “yellow light” cameras.
I have definitely observed “yellow light” behavior at the camera on Broadway at Grand(?, might be MLK). I’ve had the camera flash when I entered the intersection as it turned yellow. However, just because it took the photo doesn’t mean a citation is issued.