Accident rate rises at intersections with red-light cameras, N.J. study shows

[cpzilliacus]

NJ.COM: Accident rate rises at intersections with red-light cameras, N.J. study shows

TRENTON – They were installed at dangerous intersections to reduce the number of crashes, but New Jersey's controversial red-light cameras have actually seen an increase in collisions, according to a new state report.

A New Jersey Department of Transportation analysis of two dozen intersections that have had the automated traffic cops for at least a year found that accidents – particularly rear-end crashes – have increased, and the collisions are more costly.

[NE2]

Two things need to happen:

The public needs to be assured that yellow time is adequate per whatever AASHTO manual applies.

People following too closely (and thus causing rear-enders) need to be ticketed.

[jeffandnicole]

The public needs to be assured that yellow time is adequate per whatever AASHTO manual applies.

Much of the red light camera system was shut down in June for about a month because of questions related to the timing of the yellow.  NJ requires the minimums that the Feds require, but anything that's a 1/2 second is rounded up.  For example: a 45 mph roadway should have at least a 4.5 second yellow; NJ would require it to be 5 seconds.  A few intersections were proven to show yellow light timings were less that permitted, prompting the shutdown.

A month later, the state ruled that all the intersections were in complience. 

[vdeane]

The public needs to be assured that yellow time is adequate per whatever AASHTO manual applies.

That would defeat the point of the camera$.

[Special K]

The public needs to be assured that yellow time is adequate per whatever AASHTO manual applies.

That would defeat the point of the camera$.

Which is...?

[MrDisco99]

The public needs to be assured that yellow time is adequate per whatever AASHTO manual applies.

That would defeat the point of the camera$.

Which is...?

To earn revenue... duh!

[kphoger]

Note the dollar sign.

[Duke87]

An FHWA study from 2005 showed an overall decrease.
But I can see where this would be a definite "results may vary" sort of thing.

Of course, regardless of their effect on safety, the cameras aren't going anywhere so long as they continue to have a positive effect on revenue.

[Interstatefan78]

This is sort of a good NJ.com article about red light cameras, and the one on RT-122/US-22 has been shut downed due to red light camera accidents, and most of the revenue going to Pohatcong which owns one of the cameras on the Eastbound side of the intersection, and Greenwich not receiving some of the red light camera arrests on it's own red light camera on the Westbound side of the US-22/RT-122 intersection. 

[cpzilliacus]

This is sort of a good NJ.com article about red light cameras, and the one on RT-122/US-22 has been shut downed due to red light camera accidents, and most of the revenue going to Pohatcong which owns one of the cameras on the Eastbound side of the intersection, and Greenwich not receiving some of the red light camera arrests on it's own red light camera on the Westbound side of the US-22/RT-122 intersection. 

In my non-existent perfect world, red light cameras (and speed cameras) on state-maintained highways would only be installed by the state highway agency (and never by a local government), and any resulting revenues would go to the  state's general fund, or, even better, to a fund that does not benefit the agency setting-up the automated enforcement at all.

In Virginia, most of the money collected from state traffic fines goes to the Commonwealth's Literacy Fund (which funds the purchase of textbooks and library books), so there is no implication that the fines collected benefit the Virginia State Police or VDOT. 

[Sykotyk]

This is sort of a good NJ.com article about red light cameras, and the one on RT-122/US-22 has been shut downed due to red light camera accidents, and most of the revenue going to Pohatcong which owns one of the cameras on the Eastbound side of the intersection, and Greenwich not receiving some of the red light camera arrests on it's own red light camera on the Westbound side of the US-22/RT-122 intersection. 

In my non-existent perfect world, red light cameras (and speed cameras) on state-maintained highways would only be installed by the state highway agency (and never by a local government), and any resulting revenues would go to the  state's general fund, or, even better, to a fund that does not benefit the agency setting-up the automated enforcement at all.

In Virginia, most of the money collected from state traffic fines goes to the Commonwealth's Literacy Fund (which funds the purchase of textbooks and library books), so there is no implication that the fines collected benefit the Virginia State Police or VDOT. 

Take the monetary concern out of it, and it's halfway noble.

Just watch which 'fund' it goes to. If the state government decides to 'limit' funding, they could also propose that more funding could be made from red light cameras.

In my world, red light cameras should simply be: video cameras watching the intersection. That way if there's an accident, clear evidence of the accident can be saved and used to prove fault and punish the reckless and/or guilty parties. Can also be used for rear end accidents, protect pedestrians rights by having evidence if any are hit. Or, have the camera set up a notable 'red light runner' intersection and station a cop down the road with a wireless view of the intersection. When he sees the transgression, he can just go and safely pull them over without the 'rear end accident' issue. But, that's more costly than just posting an officer to watch the intersection (which sometimes there's no land available they're allowed to park on with a clear view).

Instead of we have automated teller machines for the state agency in need of funds.

[vdeane]

They could also give the funds to charity; that way, no part of the state government gets any direct benefits.

[ARMOURERERIC]

IIRC, a New CA law takes effect Wednesday requiring an advance sign along the road alerting you that the upcoming signal is photo enforced.

[cpzilliacus]

IIRC, a New CA law takes effect Wednesday requiring an advance sign along the road alerting you that the upcoming signal is photo enforced.

The District of Columbia has solved that by putting "photo enforced" plates under a huge number of speed limit signs all around the city, so drivers tend to ignore them (though regular drivers know where most of the automated photo speed enforcement is located).

[kkt]

The District of Columbia has solved that by putting "photo enforced" plates under a huge number of speed limit signs all around the city, so drivers tend to ignore them (though regular drivers know where most of the automated photo speed enforcement is located).

Maybe that's the best approach.  Really, drivers shouldn't be running any red lights.  Post all red lights as photo enforced and shuffle the equipment around every few weeks and eventually behavior will improve.   

[vdeane]

Only if yellow lights are timed properly... the majority of red light violations happen in the first 1/10 second of the red, and lengthening of the yellow, despite the protests of the "safety" advocates, actually does result in a permanent reduction in red light running.

[roadman65]

The District of Columbia has solved that by putting "photo enforced" plates under a huge number of speed limit signs all around the city, so drivers tend to ignore them (though regular drivers know where most of the automated photo speed enforcement is located).

Maybe that's the best approach.  Really, drivers shouldn't be running any red lights.  Post all red lights as photo enforced and shuffle the equipment around every few weeks and eventually behavior will improve.   

That would be too easy!