Slashdot Mirror
Cities Tampering With Traffic Lights To Generate Revenue
Techdirt is reporting that there has been a rash of reports indicating that red light cameras are being used to generate revenue rather than to promote safety. "Time and time again studies have shown that if cities really wanted to make traffic crossings safer there's a very simple way to do so: increase the length of the yellow light and make sure there's a pause before the cross traffic light turns green (this is done in some places, but not in many others). Tragically, it looks like some cities are doing the opposite! Jeff Nolan points out that six US cities have been caught decreasing the length of the yellow light below the legal limits in an effort to catch more drivers running red lights and [increase] revenue."
Would these sneaky moves be grounds to contest the validity of all of the tickets given by traffic cameras in these cities?
-- Give me ambiguity or give me something else!
I guess I will have to drive faster to make those yellow lights, You know, lights timed for 35 mph are also timed for 70 mph.
Quite simply, if they were there for safety, cities would put warning signs up at intersections that have cameras, people would slow down, less people would run lights, and less accidents would occur. I have never seen a warning sign at such an intersection, so their financial motives are pretty clear.
Airplane Photos, Airline News, Planespotting Guides
"In the 1980s capitalism triumphed over communism. In the 1990s it triumphed over democracy."
"Be light, stinging, insolent and melancholy"
between a bureaucrat's understanding of technology and a technologists understanding of technology.
SLASHDOT: news for people who can't concentrate on work or have no life at all and got tired of yelling back at the TV.
If all you have are silver bullets, everything looks like a werewolf.
After jumping through two blogs (neither of which are the actual story), you'll come to Motorists.org -- the National Motorists Association -- and find the story, dated March 26, 2008 (3 weeks ago). Reading the story, you'll see they cite six different local newspaper articles, some dating back more than a year ago:
http://www.motorists.org/blog/red-light-cameras/6-cities-that-were-caught-shortening-yellow-light-times-for-profit/
So while indeed this is interesting, it is not particularly "new" nor "news." Cities have been doing this for over a decade, and they occasionally get caught, but more often than not, they do not. They will continue to push for the cameras since they generate virtually "free" revenue (free in the sense of little manpower and little initial investment cost).
Here in the UK we've had cameras of some sort looking over traffic for years. Initially they were speed cameras; today there are also red light cameras.
The entire system is set up to make money and it's as clear as day. When a speed camera is placed at the bottom of a steep hill or in the middle of a 2-mile straight, clear stretch of road (with a tree hiding it), it's pretty unrealistic to claim they're purely for safety reasons
Where I live, people are apparently colorblind, because they treat a yellow light as green. Routinely people are still going through as the light turns red, with the cross-traffic having to wait, even while it has a green light. Bring on the fines, I say.
A link to the original article. Techdirt links to a Leftlanenews site that in turn links to the original article.
.5 miles beforehand warning of the speed camera.
The cities involved are Union City, CA, Dallas and Lubbock, TX, Nashville and Chattanooga, TN, Springfield, MO.
As others have pointed out, if the government were truly interested in safety and not revenue, they would put up signs well ahead of the intersections. They would do the same with speed cameras - find where people are driving to fast for conditions (with accident data to back it up), put up a speed camera and then put up a sign
Of course, if safety were actually a reasonable cause for speeding, we would have speed limits actually based around the 85th percentile and other statistically proven safe policies.
Instead we have the police using tickets as a revenue source.
- (c) 2018 Hank Zimmerman
In all the cities near me, there are yellow diamond signs with a picture of an old brownie camera in black in the middle on all approaches to intersections with cameras.
The biggest solution to decreasing accidents at intersections is actually not to increase the amber light and provide more delay before the cross street's green -- the biggest solution is to decrease the number of light cycles per day. The fewer cycles, the fewer accidents per day, even if the same number of accidents occur per cycle.
The trick is to measure the volume of through traffic on both streets per hour on weekdays and weekends and adjust the light timings accordingly, finding the "sweet spot" between causing congestion due to long waits and causing accidents due to short waits.
The long amber and green light delays are only an aid that can help tweak the system once these other factors are accounted for.
Of course, in many cities, the amber light is referred to by drivers as the "go faster" light -- having a long amber actually promotes speeding through intersections in such cities, and results in more pedestrian injuries and deaths.
Yellow lights just tell me to go faster, or I'll hit the red. So when I see one, I speed up... and I usually make it through.
Sometimes I don't make it before the red light, but thats okay - I havn't hit anyone yet!
Dallas recently installed red-light cameras. I'll testify that red-light runners were a major problem here, but I didn't support the cameras because of the potential for abuse. There was concern at City Hall, too, especially from the city's most with-it councilperson, Angela Hunt.
To the surprise of just about everyone, the cameras worked! People actually started slowing down in time to stop if the light turned yellow. The city became safer.
But there was an inevitable downside... the cameras' revenue no longer supported their operating cost.
Once again, the unexpected happened. Dallas did NOT tweak yellow light timing to generate more tickets. Instead, they turned off some of the cameras. Apparently, the contract with the third-party camera operator has a clause that reduces the monthly charge from $3,800 per camera to "a fraction" of that cost (blame the Morning News for failing to tell whether that fraction is 1/10 or 9/10). So they're turning some of them off, noting that "most motorists won't realize this and behave as if the cameras are operational."
Which is what we wanted all along.
The city of Dallas is mired in several messes of its own making, resulting in high-profile FBI probes and even a suicide pact between two of its best-known (and most-troubled) behind-the-scenes power brokers. But in this case, the city comes shining through. And the Rangers won a double-header last night, too. Wonders never cease.
More info available from the Dallas Morning News article.
More info NOT available from "theNewspaper.com", a self-described "journal of the politics of driving" that never hesitates to pass on a story of red light camera *abuse*. I sent a link to the DMN story, but it never showed up. Agenda much?
Stressed? Me? Of course not. Stress is what a rubber band feels before it breaks, silly.
I like driving when the intersection has a pedestrian countdown, 3..2..1, I know when the yellow light is coming and can stop/dash.
Give enough information to make an informed decision whether I can make it or not.
Where I live they already have a gap before cross traffic gets the green light. And I often sit at a green light waiting for 2-3 cars to go through the intersection.
I want to shoot the messenger!
but for crying out loud, HARMONIZE YOUR ROAD LAWS, there's nothing more likely to cause accidents than different people expecting roads to work in the same way as other roads which look pretty much the same, when they infact work differently. There is no reason why individual cities should be able to set the length of the amber light AT ALL. There's no reason to have some states where you can turn on a red, and some states where you can't, red should mean the same thing everywhere. When driving you need as little distraction as possible, and that includes having to apply local interpretation to the traffic signals and road markings.
I had to double check this, and it's probably going to get modded down, but nonetheless:
According to the 08 Illinois Rules of the Road: Yellow Light -- The Yellow light warns when a light is changing from Green to Red. When the red light appears, you may not enter the intersection.
This seems to be the way to go IMHO. You can't ticket someone for running the red light unless they entered the intersection when after the light turns red. I know in Missouri, however, it is the opposite, if any part of your car is in the intersection after the light is red, you can be fined. (This was something I had to remind myself of when I moved to St. Louis, and something I had to remind my wife of when we moved into IL). Just one reason I prefer IL to MO.
I got nuthin
Then I will have to travel fast enough that the red shift causes the reflection of the yellow light off my windshield to appear green.
Should screw up the radar too.
I am colourblind you insensitive clod!
you mean drivers speed through as the light at the top turns grey whilst all the others have to wait at the grey light?
Sure, the original, and perhaps main intent in most installations is still to discourage the behavior of running red lights. But the problem is that the traffic control systems are being tweaked to maximize revenue, and not safety (obviously, the whole point of this story). The system now takes on a whole new purpose for its existence, and consequently works against its original intent.
It's akin to putting a 55MPH (or 90kph) speed limit, followed by a 25MPH (or 40kph) then followed by a 55MPH sign all with a stretch of 100 feet. It doesn't make sense, and it increases the danger of someone who is flagrantly disobeying the traffic controls getting tangled up with someone that is slowing down to anticipate and comply with the traffic controls. Meanwhile the speed camera is set in place, ready to capture as many hapless "speeders" as possible.
I'm just glad that the state I live in has a law that essentially makes any kind of automated traffic violation system unconstitutional. You need to be confronted by your accuser (i.e. cop) to be issued a traffic citation.
---We shall temporarily suspend the moratorium on car analogies for the duration of this story...
We need to standardized the timing on all yellow lights.
"It's gonna turn red soon" doesn't mean shit.
"It's gonna turn red in 5 seconds" is useful information.
I would love standardized timings. The duration of yellow lights greatly affects traffic patterns, and a fixed time of 4 seconds or something would not be ideal.
We can't put a visible timer on them either, because that costs $$$, and some people will see it and think "1 second is PLENTY of time!".
A good solution is to simply scale the delay of the yellow light to the speed of the road.
45 MPH zone? 4.5 seconds.
25 MPH zone? 2.5 seconds.
Also - the solid white lines (dividing lanes) before many intersections are a good rule of thumb.
If you're traveling at/near the speed limit, look at the light when you reach the solid white line.
I believe they are measured out so that if the light is green when you reach that line, you'll make it. If the light is yellow once you reach that solid line, you should stop.
I believe they are measured out for this, but there's definitely no standard, and since they keep fucking with the timing on yellow lights, it's all gone to shit.
In my field, I work with city depts quite a bit. I'm in southern California by the way. Each city has its own traffic engineering department. The timing on lights is based on traffic surveys which are typically requested by the city whenever a development goes in which will affect traffic patters. This has to be paid for by the developer. So though there are DOT and county guidlines, CalTrans in my case. The city does have jurisdiction over the timing of the light.
Now as a citizen it is your right to attend your next council meeting and protest this matter in a public forum. If your lucky someone might request a study be done. your best bet will be to point out inconsistencies between similar public intersections with and without lights, or better yet before and after the light was installed.
As a general rule yoru traffic engineer dept is full of lazy donut eating public servants who avoid teh private sector because of there inability to perform. ie he/she is usually a ripe target.
...the timing of the Yellow and All-Red intervals are pretty straightforward. The Yellow should be 3-6 seconds long, and is based upon the approach speeds (the higher the speed, the longer the Yellow). The purpose of the Yellow is warn traffic of an impending change in Right-of-Way assignment. On a typical urban roadway with speeds of 30 mph, the Yellow should be 3 seconds long.
The All-Red interval should also be 3-6 seconds long, and should be based upon the geometry and size of the intersection, as well as the approach speeds. The purpose of the All-Red interval is to ensure that the intersection is clear of crossing traffic prior to assigning the Right-of-Way to a side street or pedestrian crossing. To determine the appropriate length of an All-Red interval, you need measure the distance from the stop line to the far side of the intersection (typically past the far crosswalk) and determine the approach speed. 30 m.p.h. = 44 ft/sec, so if the distance from the stop line to the far crosswalk is 88 feet, the appropriate All-Red interval would be 2 seconds. To be conservative, you can also add the length of a typical vehicle (~25 ft.) into the equation.
With that knowledge in hand, you may be able to fight a red light-running ticket if you believe the timing provided for you was too short. Those are the general guidelines across the US. Individual states, counties, and cities may have different criteria, though.
The city of Baltimore has been under constant scrutiny for red light camera policies that appear to be unsafe and/or in financial conflict with the public interest. In the report mentioned here, Administrative Judge Keith "One T" Mathews wrote the following summary:
The one thing that red light cameras have always consistently accomplished, however, is revenue generation on a large scale.
No, I have not RTFA. Anything that begins with the standard "they must want the revenue" rationalization is self-deluding crap.
I used to work in Santa Clara, CA, on a street where the drivers where demonstrably crazy. It had 2 lanes plus a center left turn lane. The 35 MPH posted limit was eminently reasonable. Yet people routinely drove much faster, even using the center lane as a passing lane. Worst of all, it was a short street, so that speeding cut a few seconds at most off your commute.
One day, I narrowly escaped a headon collision with a particularly stupid speeder-weaver. I pried my fingers off the steering wheel, went to my office, and wrote a letter to the local police chief detailing conditions on this road, and suggesting a few minor improvements in enforcement.
I didn't get a few minor improvements — I got a major crackdown. I guess that letter was even scarier than I realized. A lot of my co-workers got ticketed. Did any of them admit to being bad drivers. No of course not. They were all perfect drivers. They all agreed that Santa Clara must need the extra revenue.
Face it, bozos. None of you is as good a driver as you think you are. If you think yellow lights are two short, don't fucking race them.
That sounds like a place where traffic cameras are called for.
I won't join Slashcott. OTOH, If Beta goes live, I just won't be back until it's fixed. Sorry Dice.
What kind of garbage is this?
The slashdot article links to another article, which links to a third, which vaguely reference a report done by motorists.org. With no direct link.
Just link us the content, dont take us on a tour of the internet.
In downtown Cleveland, the city has put the traffic cameras in high-traffic areas, but where there is no cross traffic, nor any foot traffic. They actually got in a pile of trouble with the state, and now, people from cleveland SLAM on their brakes as they near these stop lights (they have signs to warn motorists). This is OBVIOUSLY to generate revenue, in fact, the city has bragged about it on a number of occasions! People don't actually run these lights anymore, but the city monetizes speeding violations with the cameras. In the State of Ohio hearings on the matter, it turned out that 97% of the tickets issued were for speeding.
and I am not surprised in the least to see Chattanooga on this list. I've been seeing yellow light times decrease (especially at the red light intersections) for as long as I can remember, and I've been seeing more and more near misses and bullshit tickets given out as drivers who have no safe choice but to continue through a yellow light get bitten by the flash of the camera.
As for myself, I just risk the rear-ender and tend to slam on my brakes when I see camera lights go yellow. Those $50 tickets can add up.
According to this site the legal yellow light times in the state of California are:
Posted Speed or Prima Facie Speed Minimum Yellow Interval
MPH KPH Yellow SECONDS
25 40 3.0
30 48 3.2
35 56 3.6
40 64 3.9
45 72 4.3
50 80 4.7
55 89 5.0
60 97 5.4
65 105 5.8
Sorry, the lameness filter prevents this from being easily read.
One of our competitors trademarked the term "hypothesis". From now on, we will call them "boneheaded ideas".
The plates don't send secret signals. They simply have a special seal on them that is easily recognizable. The police don't give tickets to people with these plates and the people who check the light-camera photos don't issue the ticket. Nothing high tech about it.
-- Will program for bandwidth
For major roads with higher speed limits, there is a simple solution. Install flashers ahead of the light such that if you reach that point and see them flashing, start slowing down because by the time you reach the intersection, they'll be red. If the lights aren't flashing, keep on going at the speed you are going (the speed limit, presumably) and you're guaranteed to make it through the light on green. For those cars close to the intersection when this happens, the yellow light is long enough to let cars that are already committed through. No more slapping on the breaks or racing through. There's just no need for it, and no excuse for it either.
Another good idea is how many countries in the world operate their lights. When the green is getting pretty stale, rather than switch to yellow, they blink green. That's a sign to slow down or speed up, depending on where you are. After that a short yellow light is sufficient. There are not many excuses to end up running red lights in this system. It works extremely well, particularly on city roads. The difference between a yellow and blinking green light is just a psychological thing, but it does work very well in the cities I've seen it.
Even assuming the obvious financial incentives aren't in play, actually increasing people's safety is more complicated than is being represented.
Sure, increasing the length of the yellow light and the pause while all lights are red will unarguably reduce the number of accidents... TODAY. Humans are learning creatures, and in particular they use their learning abilities to engage in "risk homeostasis". They will tend to expose themselves to the same level of risk of running a red light (or more precisely, the possible consequences thereof in terms of tickets/accidents/insurance hikes) over time, and as the system gives them more leeway they will take up the slack.
What is needed is to make intersections PREDICTABLE. The more predictable intersections are, the fewer driving errors will be made. Yellow lights should be of a consistent length (and based on the expected speed/attention of the drivers on that particular stretch of road at that particular time of day). If there are red light cameras, put up big honking signs letting people know! Cameras are put at specific intersections because they have been labeled as "high risk" or "congested", and the goal is to reduce risk of accidents and congestion from people left inside during the change. The more people are aware of the presence of the cameras, the greater the effect.
Actually, I do work in Massachusetts.
For anyone that's interested, the video referred to above is titled "A Meditation On The Speed Limit."
Do not read this sig.
Physics will beat the law each and every time. Why? 'cause, right now at least, basic laws of physics are so far infallible at traffic speeds. It's easy to show that w/ a standard deceleration and speed @ the speed limit, and a yellow light changing when you crossed landmark X that any significant percentage of vehicles may not have the capabilities to stop in that timeframe. Especially if your driving an SUV or heavier car.
How much is your data worth? Back it up now.
Beat it at what? Being right? Sure. Changing it? I've seen precious little in these parts to suggest our lawmakers are even remotely swayed by things like "facts" or "common fucking sense".
Try not to take me more seriously than I take myself.
There is no reason in the world why a hardware provider should get any percentage of the revenue from traffic cameras. Traffic fines should never go to private companies, and they should never benefit any organization related to handing out traffic tickets, otherwise there is just too much potential for abuse.
"However if you don't pay the fines *nothing* happens."
This is also true in Cleveland, Ohio, since red-light camera violations are civil, not criminal violations (in the state of Ohio, anyway).
Until, of course, you want to renew your drivers license. Then you not only have to pay the fine but a substantial penalty as well. Unlike criminal vehicular violations, which have a statute of limitations, civil infractions/verdicts have no such limits. This is how the city gets away with nailing you at the bureau of motor vehicles; the same way they do with parking tickets.
I'm very curious if this is the same in your state, too. And if so, if you've tried to renew *your* license.
uR iGn0ranc3, Their Power