New CR Speed Camera Article/Study

**wxman1** · 03-14-2012, 09:34 AM

Interesting article in the Gazette this morning.

Criticism remains as Cedar Rapids traffic cameras turn 2 years old | TheGazette

Overall accidents are down and people are driving much safer which is very noticeable. There are numerous good points on both sides of the safety and revenue aspects in the article as well.

**dmclone** · 03-14-2012, 11:24 AM

Good article, I wonder if dm will do a similar study on 235?

**agrabes** · 03-14-2012, 11:28 AM

Originally Posted by wxman1

Interesting article in the Gazette this morning.

Criticism remains as Cedar Rapids traffic cameras turn 2 years old | TheGazette

Overall accidents are down and people are driving much safer which is very noticeable. There are numerous good points on both sides of the safety and revenue aspects in the article as well.

The only thing that disappointed me about the article (and continues to disappoint me about pretty much any traffic camera issue in the state) was that they consulted an engineer from the University of Iowa.

When ISU has inTRANS/CTRE and is considered a national leader in traffic studies and road design, we need to stop going elsewhere for academic opinions on these cameras.

**labontefan31** · 03-14-2012, 11:28 AM

Maybe the fact that it didn't snow much last year had something to do with the decreased numbers

**ISUAgronomist** · 03-14-2012, 11:31 AM

Originally Posted by labontefan31

Maybe the fact that it didn't snow much last year had something to do with the decreased numbers

+1

**wxman1** · 03-14-2012, 11:41 AM

Originally Posted by labontefan31

Maybe the fact that it didn't snow much last year had something to do with the decreased numbers

If I remember right it did snow after January 1st though so that would have been 2011...

Although the snow does lead to more accidents most of the accidents were not weather related but more going 70-75+ in an area that simply has too much traffic and such going on. In bigger cities you can get away with that when everyone is used to driving that fast, here that is not the case and it is not safe.

**besserheimerphat** · 03-14-2012, 11:42 AM

There needs to be a better metric for measuring this. Like accidents per capita to normalize for the number of cars on the road. I'd bet that the DOT has traffic data showing how many cars drive on that stretch of 380 from year to year. Then they need to go back many more years and see if the data from the last few years has a difference that is statistically significant.

**bawbie** · 03-14-2012, 11:44 AM

Originally Posted by agrabes

The only thing that disappointed me about the article (and continues to disappoint me about pretty much any traffic camera issue in the state) was that they consulted an engineer from the University of Iowa.

When ISU has inTRANS/CTRE and is considered a national leader in traffic studies and road design, we need to stop going elsewhere for academic opinions on these cameras.

It's the Gazette. ISU is in a foreign land for them.

**wxman1** · 03-14-2012, 11:45 AM

Originally Posted by besserheimerphat

There needs to be a better metric for measuring this. Like accidents per capita to normalize for the number of cars on the road. I'd bet that the DOT has traffic data showing how many cars drive on that stretch of 380 from year to year. Then they need to go back many more years and see if the data from the last few years has a difference that is statistically significant.

This would be interesting to see. They should be able to very easily figure that out from the cameras. Pre-cameras might be a little tougher to figure out though.

**VeloClone** · 03-14-2012, 12:00 PM

Originally Posted by wxman1

If I remember right it did snow after January 1st though so that would have been 2011...

Yeah, I thought that northern Iowa got hit by a lot of the storms that we (Twin Cities) expected to get in the winter of '10-11. Any weathermen have access to data to figure out how much snow and winter rain fell on CR in calendar year 2011? I can't find it on the interwebs.

**besserheimerphat** · 03-14-2012, 12:01 PM

Originally Posted by wxman1

This would be interesting to see. They should be able to very easily figure that out from the cameras. Pre-cameras might be a little tougher to figure out though.

There must be pre-camera traffic data out there somewhere, they'd need it to justify building the road initially and then expanding it.

**Wesley** · 03-14-2012, 12:02 PM

Wait till they start putting up fake cameras....

**NickTheGreat** · 03-14-2012, 12:12 PM

Originally Posted by agrabes

The only thing that disappointed me about the article (and continues to disappoint me about pretty much any traffic camera issue in the state) was that they consulted an engineer from the University of Iowa.

When ISU has inTRANS/CTRE and is considered a national leader in traffic studies and road design, we need to stop going elsewhere for academic opinions on these cameras.

You should be angry at all the out of state agencies that are hired to administer everything.

**dmclone** · 03-14-2012, 12:29 PM

A couple of things I noticed.

7 red light cameras and 3 of them had as many or more accidents.

The one on second and third went from 1 accident a year before the cameras to 3 this year. If it's all about safety, why did they put one at an intersection that has one accident per year.

The department saved 542 hours of manpower. I assume they would be ok with letting a few cops go then right?

In summary, if you have a problem area with a lot of accidents, you can reduce the number through other methods.

**Clonefan94** · 03-14-2012, 12:45 PM

I am not as sold on Red light cameras as I am on speeding cameras. Most people who run red lights and then cause a major accident, (my personal feelings, no numbers) aren't doing it on purpose, imo. From what I have seen in my lifetime, most major accidents at read lights are from people flat out not paying attention. My wife has gotten a red light ticket. I was in the car with her when she got it. If you'd ask me today weather or not she stopped, I'd swear she did. But, it was a rolling stop. Those aren't the ones that kill. She was proceeding with caution, she just didn't push the break hard enough for long enought. And this is where they are making their money. On technicalities, not the true safety of the incident.

It's similar to lowering the blood alcohol limit. Again my personal feelings on the matter. But you never hear of that person at .08 that barreled through the intersection or was driving the wrong way on the highway and killed 4 people. Its' always the person riding a .20 or higher. Perople who aren't just impared, but are completely blasted. I agree, you shouldn't drink and drive at all, but in all honesty, lowering the limit just allows you to ticket more people. The person who usually does serious damage doesn't give a damn if the limit is .08 or .00, they are drunk and they are driving.

In the end, I wish they would focus a little of the money into areas on how to eliminate the problems. I really don't think that it's the cameras or the lowering of blood alcohol levels that is really solving the problems, it's creating awareness. But as I said before, people who are willing to blast through a red light and cause serious damage aren't going to be deterred by a camera. They either don't care or are completely unaware that a red light is in front of them.