Table of Contents
Introduction p. 2
How Do Speed Cameras Work? p. 4
Speed Kills p. 5
Speed Camera Facts p. 6
Misconceptions About Speed Cameras p. 7
Speed Camera Success Stories p. 8
The Red Light Camera Precedent p. 10
Appendix A: Speed Camera Photos p. 11
Appendix B: US Speed Camera Vendors p. 12
Appendix C: Speed Camera Enforcement Programs in the US p.
13
Appendix D: Previous NY State Speed Camera Legislation p. 13
Appendix E: Correspondence from J. Michael Bell, Portland OR
Police Dept. p. 14
Appendix F: Model NY State Legislation p. 16
End Notes p. 19
Introduction
Anyone who has ever walked or driven along the Grand
Concourse, Queens Boulevard, Flatbush Avenue, or Manhattan avenues knows that deadly
speeding is rampant on NYC streets. A 1999 study on Queens Boulevard by the
NYC Department of Transportation found that 25% of motorists exceeded 40 mph
– 10 mph over the speed limit.
Unfortunately, as the continued speeding and deadly carnage
on Queens Boulevard has shown, the police cannot be everywhere at all times.
However, automated speed cameras – proven in hundreds of locations
internationally and over two dozen in the U.S. – can provide tremendously
effective, 24 hour a day speeding enforcement that squashes speeding, and saves
lives.
NYC’s automated red light camera enforcement program has
conclusively demonstrated that automated enforcement is a successful, cost-effective
means of reducing traffic accidents, injuries, and deaths, and that the public
supports automated enforcement. For NYC, speed cameras are the logical next
step beyond red light enforcement: they employ the same technology as red light
cameras, and help police to target an equally dangerous driver behavior -
speeding.
Speed
cameras are a cost effective and fair law enforcement tool that:
·
Decrease the number and severity of crashes, and the
number of traffic deaths.
·
Lower overall traffic speeds.
·
Enforce traffic laws without discrimination.
·
Free up police officers for more serious crime
prevention.
·
Increase the overall perception of traffic
enforcement.
·
Put the cost of the program on violators, rather than
taxpayers.
·
Reduce the number of high-speed chases and hazardous
situations for officers.
·
Are supported by the public as a means of reducing
speeds and crashes.
To get speed cameras for NYC, the state legislature should
pass state legislation with a three-year sunset clause that would pilot speed
cameras. The legislation
would introduce 10 cameras in the first year of the program, and 10 more in the
second year, for a total of twenty speed cameras. Program revenues and
effectiveness would be evaluated at one and two-year intervals in reports
submitted by the NYC Chief of Police to the governor, president of the senate,
and speaker of the assembly. The legislation would expire three years from the
start date, unless the sunset clause was extended or repealed before such date.
In order to begin a speed camera program in NYC, home rule
legislation must be passed by the NYC City Council, and State legislation must
be passed by the State Assembly and Senate, and signed into law by Governor
Pataki. Transportation Alternatives will be pursuing all of these paths
vigorously in the 2001 legislative session.
Contact:
Neel Scott, Campaign Coordinator
Transportation Alternatives
115 W. 30th St. Suite 1207
New York, NY 10001
(212) 629-8080
ped@transalt.org
How Do Speed Cameras Work?
Speed cameras – also known as ‘photo radar’ – are a
proven automated technology for regulating speeding. [1]
Speed cameras have been used in Europe for over 30 years, and in the U.S. since
1987, when Paradise Valley AZ became the first town to institute the system. [2]
Speed cameras
combine several pieces of existing equipment—a high-speed traffic camera,
Doppler radar, and a computer monitoring system. This equipment has been used
together or separately in law enforcement for years.
Speeders who exceed a pre-selected
threshold speed trigger the camera and are photographed. The photo contains a
rear view of the vehicle – showing only its license plate, not the driver
– with the date, time, speed and location noted on the photograph. A citation
is mailed from a central facility to the vehicle owner. As with NYC’s red light
camera program, a fine but no points are assigned to a driver’s license.
The speed
camera unit itself consists of a low power, narrow-beam (generally 5 degrees),
Doppler radar antenna aimed at a 20 degree angle across a road. [3]
This angle and low power ensure that radar detectors are incapable of detecting
the photo-radar until they are in the beam, while still allowing the unit to
make accurate speed measurements on roadways up to 5 lanes wide.[4]
The camera is usually in a box mounted on a pole.
Speed Kills
Many motorists see
speeding as a victimless crime – especially when they get behind the wheel.
They’re late to work, they’re running behind schedule – what difference does it
make? The answer is a lot - speed limits exist for a reason.
The faster a motor
vehicle goes, the greater the risk of serious injury or death to those in and
outside a vehicle in a crash.
- Crash
severity increases disproportionately with vehicle speed—a frontal impact
at 35 mph is one-third more violent than one at 30 mph. [5]
- The
chance of death when struck by a car at 40 mph is 70%, at 30 mph, 40%, and
at 25 mph, 25%. [6]
Speeding is one of the
most prevalent reported factors in all crashes.
- Speed
is a factor in 31% of all fatal crashes. It kills an average of 1,000
Americans every month.
- Each
year, more than 15,000 people die in speed related crashes, and 80,000
people are seriously injured.[7]
- Speed
related crashes cost society more than $29 billion each year, with health
care costs alone totaling more
than
$4 billion per year.[8]
Speed Camera Facts
Speed cameras decrease
the number and severity of crashes, and the number of traffic deaths.
According
to the British Medical Journal, the number of deaths in a test corridor in
London reduced threefold, from 68 to 20, and the number of serious injuries
fell by over a quarter, from 813 to 596, over the course of two years. [9]
Speed cameras lower overall traffic speeds.
Speed cameras lower average traffic speeds, and are
especially effective at reducing the number of speeders driving more than 15
mph over the speed limit.[10]
Speed cameras increase traffic enforcement.
Speed cameras can issue 2 to 3 times as many tickets as with
traditional radar enforcement.[11]
Speed cameras free up police officers for more
serious crime prevention and additional traffic enforcement.
Speed
cameras allow officers to work on other traffic problems or crime prevention,
if needed.
Speed cameras increase the overall perception of traffic
enforcement.
When accompanied by an advertising and outreach campaign,
speed cameras slow down drivers even on untreated streets.[12]
Speed cameras put the
cost of the program on violators, rather than taxpayers.
A speed camera program, after an initial investment, generally pays for
itself. As a related example, the FY2000 cost for NYC’s red light camera
program was $7 million, and the FY2000 revenue for the program was $8.6
million.[13]
Speed cameras enforce
traffic laws without discrimination.
Speed
cameras do not discriminate based on race or other factors.
Speed cameras reduce
the number of high-speed chases and hazardous situations for officers.
Routine
traffic stops often escalate into dangerous encounters. High-speed chases are
extremely dangerous for police officers and the public.
The public supports
photo radar as a means of reducing speeds and crashes.
A
nationwide telephone survey conducted in 1995 found that 66% of U.S. residents
favor using cameras to enforce speed limit laws. [14]
Speed cameras are more efficient, practical and cost
effective than ever.
Digital cameras, character recognition software, and
high-speed networking allow speed camera systems to process citations cheaply,
securely and nearly instantaneously.
Misconceptions About Speed Cameras
1. It’s not fair. Speed camera violators lose the
opportunity to face their accuser.
Alleged violators still have the opportunity to argue
their case in court.
2. The gap between an alleged violation and the receipt of
notice of a violation does not constitute a reasonable notice, and compromises
the ability of the defendant to prepare an adequate defense.
All citations would be
mailed within six business days of the alleged offense, or the violation will
be dismissed. This has been upheld as a reasonable notice in other locations.
3. Speed cameras target the owner of a vehicle—who may not
be the driver.
While it’s true that the
owner of a vehicle might not have been the driver, a speed camera citation
would not represent a moving violation, but rather a fine. Currently in NYC,
parking and red light fines make the same assumptions.
4. Speed cameras don’t discourage speeding—they’re just a
cash cow for the city.
Speed cameras have been proven to reduce speeding and
accidents, especially excessive speeding and severe accidents (see ‘Speed
Camera Success Stories’ below). New York City speed camera legislation would
have a provision putting any revenues from a speed camera program back into the
program. A review of existing speed camera programs shows that none are
bringing in significant revenues above costs.
5. Speed cameras
cannot determine whether a driver is licensed, insured, competent or sober.
While it’s true that speed
cameras do not address these issues directly, they significantly reduces
speeding, and frees up police resources and manpower to deal with these
problems.
6. This is ‘Big
Brother’.
Not so – only the license plates of speeding vehicles are
photographed. The motoring public is accustomed to red light cameras and
approves of them. Speed radar is no different.
Speed Camera Success Stories
London
According to the British Medical Journal, the number of
deaths in a test corridor in London were reduced threefold, from 68 to 20, and
the number of serious injuries fell by over a quarter, from 813 to 596 after
speed cameras were installed. [15]
Norway
The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety reported that
speed cameras reduced all injury crashes by 20 percent in Norway. [16]
Victoria, Australia
After 15
months of speed camera operation, the incidence of speeding dropped from 23% to
11%. [17]
After
eight years of the program, the number of road deaths dropped from 777 in 1989
to 378 in 1997, a 51% reduction. This 1997 total is the lowest since monthly
records were first compiled in Victoria in 1951. In the same time period, collisions were reduced by 22%, and
serious fatalities by 34%. [18]
British Columbia
Research showed a 7% reduction in crashes and a 20% decline
in deaths after British Columbia’s speed camera program was started. The
percent of speeding vehicles declined from 66% in 1996 to 40% in 1999. [19]
Portland, OR
J. Michael Bell, Captain, Traffic Division of the Portland
Police Department stated:
“The use of photo radar is an efficient and effective
enforcement tool and a good use of personnel time.” [20]
On one street in Portland, 88% of vehicles traveled in
excess of 11 mph or greater over the speed limit. After eight deployments of
speed cameras, only 12% of vehicles were traveling 11 mph or greater over the
limit. [21]
Fort Collins, CO
Speed cameras reduced the accident rate per vehicle mile
traveled (VMT) by 16% between 1995 and 1999. 70% of the fines issued were paid.
[22]
Beaverton, OR
The percentage of vehicles speeding declined by 28% on
streets with speed cameras. [23]
Campbell, CA
James A. Cost, the Chief of Police in Campbell, CA, stated:
“After one year of operation, the numbers of speeding vehicles decreased by
63%. I know of no other traditional method which could have possibly achieved
these results.”[24]
Sandy, UT
Town officials attributed a 27% reduction in crashes and a 7
mph reduction in the 85th percentile speed in one year to the deployment
of speed cameras.[25]
Paradise Valley
Town officials have credited speed cameras with a 40%
reduction in collisions since 1987. [26]
National City, CA
Speed cameras were credited by the town government with reducing
accidents by 26% in a 10-month period. The number of crashes per six-year
period decreased 51% (from 1304 to 628) before and after the program was
started in 1991.[27]
Deputy City Attorney Linda Harter stated: “It’s the only
thing that’s been truly effective in slowing traffic since the invention of the
automobile.” [28]
The Red Light Camera Precedent
NYC’s successful red light camera program provides an
important precedent for speed cameras. The program uses the same technology as
speed cameras, but targets red light runners. The logistics and operation of
the program are also the same. NYC’s red light camera program issues citations,
not moving violations; does not photograph the driver; presumes that the owner
of the vehicle is the driver; is unmanned; and has not been successfully
attacked on due process or privacy grounds.
Background
In 1993, the NYC City Council and NY State Legislature
passed laws authorizing NYC to establish a red light camera program. The
program began with 18 cameras, was increased to 25, then 35 and most recently
to 50. The program was the first of its kind in the United States and was
awarded the Ford Foundations Award for Innovation in Government. Currently NYC
has installed 35 red light cameras at locations in all 5 boroughs. Unlike red
light summonses issued by a police officer, no points are assessed a light
runners drivers license. However, a $50 fine or “Notice of Violation” is issued
to the vehicles owner - not the driver, as is the case if an officer is present
- through the mail.
Effectiveness
Red light running at locations with cameras has dropped from
an average of 32 vehicles a day to 21, a 34% reduction. While there has been no
review of red light accident data in NYC, extensive studies conducted in
Phoenix, Arizona and London, England found that the cameras reduce crashes by
40% or more where they are installed.
Notices of Liability (NOL), FY 2000: 140,000 Per Camera: 4,000
% of Recorded Violations Resulting in fine : 51%.
Expected to be 65-80% in FY 2001.
Cost
The red light program generates slightly more in fines than
it incurs in expenses. Thus, NYC is employing, at essentially no cost, a
traffic safety method that reduces red light running and crashes.
Annual Program Cost (FY 2000): $7
million. Cost Per Camera:
$200,000
Annual Program Income (FY 2000): $8.6
Million Income Per Camera:
$245,714
Compliance
66% of motorists issued
red light fine by camera pay within the first 30 days.
20% of motorists issued red light summons by officer pay
within the first 30 days.
3.8% of motorists contest red light camera fines / NOL. 85%
are convicted.
20% of motorists contest red light summonses issued by
police officer. 30% are convicted. [29]
Appendix A
Clockwise from upper left: speed camera pictures during
the day, at night, in the snow, and in the rain.
A speed camera installed
on a roadway. A speed camera installed
in a police vehicle.
Appendix B
US Speed Camera Vendors