8 Responses to “Police data shows collisions down since introduction of red light cameras”

1. bbox231 Says:
   March 20th, 2010 at 9:21 am

   Good (and incomplete) data.

   Summarizing the info in large time intervals like this may mask trends which would be much clearer if broken down into single years and which presumably should be just as readily accesible.

   But, while you have city-wide collission data and while this is interesting, it is largely irrelevant to the central question of the effectiveness of red light cameras. (By this logic, I could easilly conclude that red light cameras have reduced the price of single-family dwellings in Fremont since their price tags have fallen over the same period of time)

   We’re trying to answer the question “What is the effectivness of red light cameras ?” – -

   with “effectivness” being defined as either #’s of collissions *at the controlled* (not all) intersections and/or #’s of red light violations (also) at controlled intersections – - – BOTH OF WHICH, are numerators for the other piece of data you need which is total vehicles using the intersections during the same periods of time.

   P.D. can offer the first piece of this puzzle.

   City traffic engineers have techniques for approximating flow through major arteries and intersections and will periodically validate these approximations with specific surveys.

2. Watchdog Says:
   March 21st, 2010 at 5:51 am

   We know red light cameras are effective at generating revenue. 5 of our 10 cameras do not generate enough in fines to pay the roughly $72,000 annual fee for each them. One is marginally making expenses. The remaining 4 cameras generated 73% of citations in 2009. 3 of these 4 cameras issue large volumes of citations for right turn violations. I am curious why only a Yield is required at many of our signalized intersections when turning right; and a stop on red is required at other intersections before turning right. To me it seems safer to configure intersections to allow turns on red with a Yield sign. This change to our 3 right turn cameras would put the whole camera program in the loss column, however.

3. JC Says:
   March 21st, 2010 at 6:07 am

   One conclusion that you could draw from the information provided is that while the number of collisions has decreased the number of fatalities has remained pretty flat… if you divided the number of collisions by the number of fatalities in each year it would seem that the number of fatalities has actually increased relative to the number of collisions..

   I thought the original purpose of the cameras was to decrease fatalities…

4. FremontResident2010 Says:
   March 21st, 2010 at 3:05 pm

   Since the only place you have data are the camera intersections, you can easily attribute any change to the cameras. Without knowing what has been happening throughout the city, and you can’t because you are not monitoring other intersections, you cannot draw any conclusions, or credit the cameras for any change.

   Afterall, the late 1990s was the end of the boom years, then we had a fairly stagnant period in the economy, and now the deep recession. Fewer employed people means less traffic, which leads to fewer traffic violations.

   Also, changes in lane and light configuration at these intersections reduces the backup. which lowers the temptation to rush through and beat the light rather than wait an inordinate amount of time.

5. VOR Says:
   March 22nd, 2010 at 10:19 am

   From the SJMerc story link:
   In South San Francisco, 98 percent of the 672 red-light violations recorded in January and February at El Camino Real and Westborough Boulevard were for right turns. Other cities say four of five tickets are going to people turning right at some intersections.

6. Californiaguy Says:
   March 22nd, 2010 at 10:38 am

   We need to fix this, write Mayor Wasserman.
   “The cost of a violation can approach $550. Although many complain that’s too much for a rolling right turn, cameras are growing in popularity among cash-strapped cities”
   A example of a trap is at Auto Mall Parkway & Fremont Blvd. The four corners of the intersection for right hand turns, three are yield signs and one is a stop sign, yes , you are right that is where the camera is.
   It has been reported that people are obeying the red lights, so in order to generate more income, they are setting traps.
   This is not right. Who is running Fremont, Mayor Wasserman or the puppet master Fred Diaz.

7. Bruce Says:
   March 22nd, 2010 at 12:14 pm

   Fremont police officers will sometimes park by Grimmer facing the Water Park so they can ticket people making a rolling right from Paseo Padre onto Grimmer. Having a camera just makes it more efficient.
   Mind you, I’m going with the modified behavior myself, can’t afford any more of tickets whatever the source.

8. Watchdog Says:
   March 24th, 2010 at 2:58 pm

   Try accessing this link to a report of all citations generated by Fremont cameras. Annual totals by intersection from 2001 through 2009.

   http://www.highwayrobbery.net/TrcDocsFremontTicketCounts2001-2009recd2010Feb28.xls

Leave a Reply

Name (required)

Mail (will not be published) (required)

Website

MediaNews Group - Northern California Network