• Ongoing coronavirus / COVID-19 discussion: how is the pandemic affecting your community, workplace, and wellness? 🦠

    Working from home? So are we. Come join us! Cyburbia is a friendly big tent, where we share our experiences and thoughts about urban planning practice, planning adjacent topics, and whatever else comes to mind. No ads, no spam, no social distancing.

Humps out, cameras in

Dharmster

Cyburbian
Messages
440
Points
13
This is an interesting idea that should be explored in the US, replacing speed humps with speed cameras. However, that would appear be too Orwellian to the average GW Bush voting Republican:

Humps out, cameras in
 

ludes98

Cyburbian
Messages
1,264
Points
22
Would not go over well in my neck of the woods. Some cities do have photo radar, but nothing like the article describes. Here they have mobile units in vans they park alongside the road. Currently most speed cameras still have a flash. I wouldn't want a flash of any type in my neighborhood.

Redlight running cameras are extremely popular here though. Since AZ has the highest percentage of red light running, I suppose we needed it the most!
 

Rumpy Tunanator

Cyburbian
Messages
4,473
Points
25
I remember there was some article about speed cameras in San Diego and how the company was getting a good chunk of the money out of the fines. I think the courts declared the lights unconsitutional or something. I know Erie PA has them because I had to take a detour through there once.

Here, there is the 5 second rule. You have 5 seconds to go through an intersection after the light turns red. Thats why there is such a delay for the light to turn green. Rolling through stop signs, running red lights, driving 45 in a 30mph zone, people don't care. Even the cops will run the light right behind you and not pull you over.
 

JNL

Cyburbian
Messages
2,449
Points
25
Do you want a camera on YOUR street?

Cameras to protect property.
Cameras to catch speeding drivers.
Cameras to "prevent" crime.
Cameras to detect vandalism to other cameras. :5

Cameras, cameras everywhere! Is this being fuelled by those in the security technology industry?

Cameras are ugly, expensive, prone to vandalism, and IMO, overused. I'm not entirely anti-camera as I think they can be useful in certain situations, but cameras in quiet residential areas seems a little OTT. There are many traffic calming strategies available that can be much less intrusive, such as visually narrowing a road through the use of paving colour.

[/rant] :-D
 

boiker

Cyburbian
Messages
3,889
Points
26
[sarcasm]JNL You just don't get it. Paint is "ancient" technology. We've been coloring things forever. You gotta think outside the box, you gotta think bigger....You gotta think of the future. Cameras man!
[/sarcasm]

To quote Yogi Berra, It's deja-vu all over again. First we eliminated personal costs in factories with robotic automation. Now we are replacing traffic enforcement personal with cheap, apathetic, computers and cameras.

From what I've seen, restriping or narrowing of roadways, on street parking, and other techniques to narrow the appearance of a road are just as effective at reducing speeders as humps, bumps, tables, or cameras.
 

JNL

Cyburbian
Messages
2,449
Points
25
boiker said:
From what I've seen, restriping or narrowing of roadways, on street parking, and other techniques to narrow the appearance of a road are just as effective at reducing speeders as humps, bumps, tables, or cameras.
Yes... I would like to see the evidence that says that cameras are clearly more effective than any of these other measures available, before I could support widespread use of cameras in residential areas. I haven't seen any yet.
 

freewaytincan

Cyburbian
Messages
125
Points
6
Dharmster said:
This is an interesting idea that should be explored in the US, replacing speed humps with speed cameras. However, that would appear be too Orwellian to the average GW Bush voting Republican:

Humps out, cameras in
I'm not a Republican, I'm voting for Bush, and I'm not worried about any Orwellians.

Not at the moment, anyway.



Okay, so they want to use standard cameras. Great idea for catching toll runners, red light runners, and the like, but a horrible concept when it comes to speeders. Is this going to stop them? No. We already know this happens with our current form of anti-drug campaings, for example; the governments of our nation go about these things the wrong way almost all the time. It's already proven what happens with the convential ways of road law enforcement. With speed bumps/humps, you get people braking fast for the bump, then gunning the engine in between. I fear the same would be true for cameras. Over time, the cameras would be seen, or at least their locations learned, and everyone would know how to avoid them and not get caught. Simple as that. So among these problems and others, such as vandalism, spacing, maintnance, and the overall insanity of such a proposal, has anyone considered cost? I thought it was ideal to shrink the budget when it comes to roads and automobiles.
 

Tranplanner

maudit anglais
Messages
7,917
Points
36
boiker said:
From what I've seen, restriping or narrowing of roadways, on street parking, and other techniques to narrow the appearance of a road are just as effective at reducing speeders as humps, bumps, tables, or cameras.
Yes, but none of those techniques generate the revenue that cameras do... [/sarcasm]
 

pete-rock

Cyburbian
Messages
1,550
Points
24
You want cameras? We got cameras.

Chicago police have approximately 20 of these cameras in high-crime neighborhoods already, and they're ordering 50 more.

Police in squad cars can operate them remotely. They sit on street lights and can view about a four block radius. They have flashing blue lights on the top that flash 24/7, and they've been used to catch red-light runners as well as drug dealers, robbers, murderers and rapists. The cameras have been in some areas for about a year.

Crime is definitely down in areas where the cameras are located, but I think this is a suit waiting to happen.

EDIT: Apparently the City of Chicago goes to great lengths to prevent linking to their site. If you want to see the cameras, go to the City of Chicago website and under Chicago Headlines, click on the story titled "Police To deploy More High Tech Crime Prevention Devices."
 

jresta

Cyburbian
Messages
1,474
Points
23
NJN recently did this half-hour special on police cameras in Jersey City.
They presented it as fairly split among the residents for and against the cameras.
Nearly everyone they interviewed agreed that the crime had just moved 3 blocks away.

This is def. Orwellian and once again not a proactive approach but it never ceases to amaze me how irony is completely lost on authoritarians.
 

GeogPlanner

Cyburbian
Messages
1,433
Points
25
Rumpy Tunanator said:
Here, there is the 5 second rule. You have 5 seconds to go through an intersection after the light turns red. Thats why there is such a delay for the light to turn green. Rolling through stop signs, running red lights, driving 45 in a 30mph zone, people don't care. Even the cops will run the light right behind you and not pull you over.
Except on the last 3 days of the month...quotas you know.
 

boilerplater

Cyburbian
Messages
916
Points
21
Those Brits love to watch...

Traffic enforcement with cameras was outlawed in NJ, though they do use them for traffic monitoring. You can even access them on the web to see if your commute route is jammed. Ultimately I think they'll allow them. Cops would rather be working on real crime. Yeah, you can't put them everywhere, but it will still be cheaper than putting more traffic cops out there. And they can move them if the public becomes habituated to them.

Ever hear that story about the guy who was annoyed at getting a picture of his license plate with a speeding fine? He thought he was clever, so he sent them a picture of a check for the amount of the fine. Then they sent him a picture of a pair of handcuffs!
 

Bear Up North

Cyburbian Emeritus
Messages
9,329
Points
31
boiker said:
[sarcasm]JNL You just don't get it. Paint is "ancient" technology. We've been coloring things forever. You gotta think outside the box, you gotta think bigger....You gotta think of the future. Cameras man!
[/sarcasm]

To quote Yogi Berra, It's deja-vu all over again. First we eliminated personal costs in factories with robotic automation. Now we are replacing traffic enforcement personal with cheap, apathetic, computers and cameras.

From what I've seen, restriping or narrowing of roadways, on street parking, and other techniques to narrow the appearance of a road are just as effective at reducing speeders as humps, bumps, tables, or cameras.
Here's a quote that has been circulating through many businesses for the past few years.....

THE FACTORY OF THE FUTURE will have one (1) worker and (1) dog. The dog will be there to keep the worker from touching the machines. The worker will be there to feed the dog.

Flash Bear
 

Dan

Dear Leader
Staff member
Moderator
Messages
18,705
Points
69
Dharmster said:
However, that would appear be too Orwellian to the average GW Bush voting Republican:
(Dan) Where's the smiley? Keep potentially divisive comments in the FAC.
 

Wulf9

Member
Messages
923
Points
22
If stopping speeding (not revenue) is the goal, Pleasanton CA is about to install radar that turns lights red when speeders approach. Interesting?
 

Journeymouse

Cyburbian
Messages
443
Points
13
Just thought I'd share British ideas on traffic control methods :)

Britain introduced 'Home Zones' in the last 4 or 5 years. These are basically roads through built up housing estates made up terrace (what's the American for that? :)) and semi-detached (duplex) housing; and generally the ones that aren't used for rat-racing (getting to and from work). These consist of slapping a 20 mile an hour limit on the road, including rather 'long' bumps and narrowing the road to single carriageway at strategic points by expanding the kerb. What makes this even more fun is that in some places, home-owners start using the bits 'inside' the narrowed sections (i.e. those of standard width) parking places. Sometimes cycle lanes are included, too. All in all, the virtual assualt course slows everyone down to the target speed, and it seems to work.

Just before I left Surrey County council, they were working on slowing rat-racing through country 'lanes' and encouraging more cyclists, equestrians and pedestrians. The main idea was to remove fencing and walling where possible, put in cattle grds and sit back. A ton of beast (cow) can do an unhealthy amount of damage to any vehicle, and the faster they go, the worse it gets. A sheep can also leave a nasty dint, but not as impressively. Aside from the animal pain issue, most farmers don't mind the idea of a vehicle going into their animals as they get the insurance. This is an idea that anyone who has driven in the remoter areas of the Pennines, Wales, Cumbria, etc is familiar with. White lines were also going to be included to effectively narrow the roads. However, as an idiot country driver myself, I can tell you that a single carriageway road doesn't slow me down unless it's a sunken lane full of 90 degree bends, a thick hedge or stone wall on either side and no passing places. I never do more than the national speed limit (60 m.p.h.), though. :-D

About cameras. In the UK we had a rise in the nuber of accidents on the stretches of road where cameras were put. Apperently, the numbers have gone down, but not to the projected baseline one would expect without. Almost all of this difference seems to be caused by those idiots who slam on their brakes to make sure they don't get caught speeding. Personally, I don't speed in the first place - it's safer. (And sooooooo self-righteous, eh?)

Finally, my brother-in-law said this: "If they really want to make sure people stop speeding, they should make the engines blow up when they top 70!" 70 being the highest 'legal' speed in the UK (dual carriageways and motorways), although in most cases police turned a blind eye on fast roads until you top 80. He also said: "If they want people to stop driving so far, they should stop looking after the roads!" The theory being that an uncomfortable drive will discourage more driving. However, the average (driven) commute distance in the UK is between 30 and 45 miles (which in a small country is a huge distance) and it's to do with house prices, school cachement areas, etc.

Here endeth the lesson ;-)
 

Rem

Cyburbian
Messages
1,523
Points
23
Some of you folks are not going to like to driving in Australia when you join the exodus of North American planners to the new, new world.

We have fixed and mobile speed cameras, red light cameras, 40 kmh (say 25 mph) 'school zones', 40 kmh school bus stop zones, 50 kmh (say 31 mph) in residential streets, yield to all buses, yield to all trams, roundabouts, coloured pavements, hoizontal pavement marking, pavement narrowing, speed humps in public streets, PBA max. of 0.02% and probably a bunch of other Orwellian means to reduce road tolls.

The statistics seem to prove that each of these measure makes a significant contribution to reducing crashes and the severity of crashes and that these methods do not reduce crashes or the severity of crashes. In fact they make crashes more frequent and more severe, or not. Lies, damned lies and statistics.
 
Top