U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Urban Planning
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 05-03-2013, 12:54 PM
 
Location: The Port City is rising.
8,803 posts, read 10,714,285 times
Reputation: 2523

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Patricius Maximus View Post
That's what arterial roads are for - to facilitate efficient travel.

I agree with that, and in fact think 75-85 mph is a moderate proposal, considering that it's the norm in Europe.
My understanding is that europeans exercise greater lane discipline than is typical in America. They dont change lanes so much.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-03-2013, 03:10 PM
 
2,553 posts, read 2,005,466 times
Reputation: 1348
Quote:
Originally Posted by Patricius Maximus View Post
Also, how did we come to discussing red light cameras in a thread titled "Traffic calming"? What do red light cameras have to do with traffic calming?
Someone brought in freeway calming, and then using speeding cameras was suggested, which became a discussion on the value of cameras, specifically red light cameras, as tools of both safety and of the police.

Discussing the difference between the "law-punishment/behavior modification" and "behavior allowance" thought models nicely brought the thread back to traffic calming concepts. Thanks.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-03-2013, 03:51 PM
 
4,023 posts, read 3,266,947 times
Reputation: 2924
Quote:
Originally Posted by KaaBoom View Post
Most red light camera tickets are not given for running a red light. There aren't enough people doing that to make having a red light camera profitable.

The vast majority are given to people who 1. are trying to enter the intersection on the yellow light, but misjudge the timing and enter the intersection in the first second of the red light, or who 2. don't come to a complete stop on a right turn at a red light.

Neither of these violations will by themselves ever cause an collision. For several seconds after a light turns red, the light will still be red in the other direction. So there is no danger of a collision there. And a rolling right turn on red is like rolling through a stop sign. As long as you yield to other traffic, there is no safety issue there either.

Which means that red light cameras simply do not improve safety. Add to that they have been proven to actually increase the chances of rear-end collisions. Red light cameras cause far more accidents then they prevent.

If you want to get of rid red light cameras in your city, demand that they lengthen the yellow lights by one or two seconds. This will reduce the majority of violations, the cameras will be unprofitable, and will be packed up and gone in no time.

Red light cameras are a traffic calming tool. They are not a revenue-raising tool for the city. The fines go to paying for operation and maintenance of the cameras, and excess revenue generally goes for paying for more cameras. They are no more a revenue raising tool than police officers stopping speeding motorists and handing out traffic citations. The IIHS says they do calm traffic. They reducing fatal red light running collisions by 24%, injury crashes by 29% etc. They save lives.

IIHS-HLDI


If you're not slowing down in time to stop for a yellow light or a red light then maybe you need to stop being a leadfoot and start obeying the speed limit. Don't blame the traffic lights. That's the oldest excuse in the book. Tell that to a police officer or a judge and they'll probably chuckle under their breath but it wont get you out of a ticket. It didn't give me enough time! Try something more original because that excuse never works. You didn't have enough time because you were going to fast to stop in time and that's on you.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-03-2013, 04:07 PM
 
Location: Monmouth County, NJ & Staten Island, NY
407 posts, read 407,708 times
Reputation: 661
Quote:
Originally Posted by cisco kid View Post
They are not a revenue-raising tool for the city.
You couldn't be further from wrong.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-03-2013, 04:26 PM
 
Location: Coos Bay, Oregon
7,142 posts, read 8,882,400 times
Reputation: 7732
Quote:
Originally Posted by brooklynborndad View Post
as a pedestrian and cyclist, I find that behavior to be dangerous.

Turning right on red even AFTER coming to a full stop is problematic for peds, which is why in NYC (and most of europe) the default is that its not allowed.

Turing right on red without making a full stop, though its common by drivers (at least as common, I believe, as the oft complained of cyclists blowing through red lights) is quite problematic. Enforcement of that law is a good thing, IMO.
You said it yourself, even AFTER coming to a full stop is problematic. Its problematic either way.

Note that I said, as long as you yield to other traffic, there is no safety issue. By other traffic, I was thinking cars, pedestrians and cyclists. The vast majority of drivers do not come to a complete stop. It is highly unlikely that red light cameras will change many peoples habits. So unless you are just trying to make money for the red light camera operators, I don't see a justification for it.

Anyways aren't there more important driving errors that we should focusing on, rather then something relatively harmless like rolling turns? Focus on the more important things, like failure to yield. I could stop at a could come to a complete stop, then make a right turn right into the path of a pedestrian. The red light camera would see no violation. because it's not programed for that.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-03-2013, 05:21 PM
 
4,023 posts, read 3,266,947 times
Reputation: 2924
Quote:
Originally Posted by KeepRightPassLeft View Post
You couldn't be further from wrong.

Maybe but it doesn't matter. Don't drive so fast and you won't have a problem with them.
I think that's the point.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-03-2013, 07:38 PM
 
Location: Monmouth County, NJ & Staten Island, NY
407 posts, read 407,708 times
Reputation: 661
Quote:
Originally Posted by cisco kid View Post
Maybe but it doesn't matter. Don't drive so fast and you won't have a problem with them.
I think that's the point.
Or I could be driving the speed limit and still get a ticket or maybe get a ticket while I'm parked or maybe even get into an accident because of the lunacy of red light cameras. I'm sorry, but you'd have to be ignorant to think that governments and authorities set these things up purely "for safety" and not revenue enhancement...and you sound like you live in California so you should know all about how your state government looks to nickel and dime you guys to death, but no...they know what's best for us, of course...

If we really had anyone in charge that gave a s#%@ about safety and efficiency of roadway design, we could ditch the cameras and create actual thoroughfares that WORK like this amazing road in Maryland that has synchronized lights, plenty of lanes for through automotive/truck travel, dedicated lanes for buses, bicycles and right turns, pedestrian infrastructure (sidewalks, crosswalks, special timing when needed, refuge islands), long yellow lights, vehicle-sensing and counting left-turn arrows at EVERY intersection and guess what? No cameras needed....people actually drive pretty close to the speed limit on this road because it's designed RIGHT. Instead of dealing with overcrowded crap like this near my house, where the lights are all out of sync to get people to get caught up at this light and get tickets all of the time.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-03-2013, 07:42 PM
 
Location: Vallejo
14,068 posts, read 16,085,690 times
Reputation: 12646
Quote:
Originally Posted by KaaBoom View Post
You said it yourself, even AFTER coming to a full stop is problematic. Its problematic either way.

Note that I said, as long as you yield to other traffic, there is no safety issue. By other traffic, I was thinking cars, pedestrians and cyclists. The vast majority of drivers do not come to a complete stop. It is highly unlikely that red light cameras will change many peoples habits. So unless you are just trying to make money for the red light camera operators, I don't see a justification for it.

Anyways aren't there more important driving errors that we should focusing on, rather then something relatively harmless like rolling turns? Focus on the more important things, like failure to yield. I could stop at a could come to a complete stop, then make a right turn right into the path of a pedestrian. The red light camera would see no violation. because it's not programed for that.
No, but if you ran the pedestrian over it should capture that.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-03-2013, 08:00 PM
 
Location: Laurentia
5,593 posts, read 6,378,199 times
Reputation: 2388
Hmm...more excellent examples of the differences between the punishment approach and the design approach. To Cisco and Brooklyn, keep them coming, and I'd encourage further participation by KeepRightPassLeft as well. I would reply to the replies, but it's getting late and most of the points have already been made. Besides, most of my points weren't even responded to. Instead we got more jabbering about leadfoots and lawbreakers.

I would just like to say that I was ticketed by one of those fiendish cameras when I entered on a yellow and the light turned red while I was halfway through the intersection, and yes, I was going the speed limit at the time. If yellow light intervals were longer your argument might hold water, but at the vast majority of intersections it's easy to be past the point of no return when it turns yellow, even while going at the speed limit*, and then fail to clear the intersection before the light turns red. Ka-ching for the government and the camera manufacturers. How ticketing hapless drivers like that improves safety I have no idea. If they stopped as soon as the light turned yellow they'd be rear-ended, and indeed, an increase in rear-end collisions is common at "cameraed" intersections.

*The speed limit is usually underposted by about 10 mph relative to the capacity of the road and the prevailing flow of traffic, but that's besides the point. Sometimes I try to go at the speed limit to get optimum timing from the lights, but I've seen only one stretch of urban roadway where that worked, i.e. I maintained a steady 25 mph and caught a green for 6 or so consecutive lights. US highway departments need to get to work synchronizing these lights - it will make traffic flow much better.

But there I go again, trying to make things easier for motorists. See how this works? Whenever I go off on a tangent I propose a solution to improve the design of roads to make things easier for drivers. Increasing punishment or strict enforcement never enters my mind. That's a good thing, but the point is that it illustrates the concept.

Last edited by Patricius Maximus; 05-03-2013 at 08:20 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-03-2013, 08:13 PM
 
9,520 posts, read 14,834,426 times
Reputation: 9769
Quote:
Originally Posted by brooklynborndad View Post
My understanding is that europeans exercise greater lane discipline than is typical in America. They dont change lanes so much.
Maybe in Germany. Not Italy or France.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Urban Planning
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top