The Impact of Red Light Cameras (photo-red Enforcement) on Crashes in Virginia


Book Description

Red light running is a significant public health concern, killing more than 800 people and injuring 200,000 in the United States per year (Retting et al., 1999a; Retting and Kyrychenko, 2002). To reduce red light running in Virginia, six jurisdictions (Alexandria, Arlington, Fairfax City, Fairfax County, Falls Church, Vienna) deployed red light cameras at some point during the 10-year period when they were permitted under Virginia law. This report documents the safety impacts of those cameras based on 7 years of crash data for the period January 1, 1998, through December 31, 2004. Consistent with the findings of a previous Virginia study (Garber et al., 2005), this study finds that cameras are associated with an increase in rear-end crashes (about 27% or 42% depending on the statistical method used as shown in Tables ES1 and H1) and a decrease in red light running crashes (about 8% or 42% depending on the statistical method used as shown in Tables ES1 and H2). This report also shows that there is significant variation by intersection and by jurisdiction: one jurisdiction (Arlington) suggests that cameras are associated with an increase in all six crash types that were explicitly studied (rear-end, angle, red light running, injury red light running, total injury, and total) whereas two other jurisdictions saw decreases in most of these crash types. It is therefore not surprising that when the comprehensive crash costs for rear-end and angle crashes are monetized, the cameras are associated with an increase in crash costs in some jurisdictions (e.g., an annual increase of $140,883 in Arlington) and a net reduction in comprehensive crash costs in other jurisdictions (e.g., an annual reduction of $92,367 in Vienna). When these results are aggregated across all six jurisdictions, the cameras are associated with a net increase in comprehensive crash costs. However, when considering only injury crashes, if the three fatal angle crashes that occurred during the after period are removed from the analysis (the only fatalities that occurred during the study out of 1,168 injury crashes), then the cameras were associated with a modest reduction in the comprehensive crash cost for injury crashes only. These results cannot be used to justify the widespread installation of cameras because they are not universally effective. These results also cannot be used to justify the abolition of cameras, as they have had a positive impact at some intersections and in some jurisdictions. The report recommends, therefore, that the decision to install a red light camera be made on an intersection-by-intersection basis. In addition, it is recommended that a carefully controlled experiment be conducted to examine further the impact of red light programs on safety and to determine how an increase in rear-end crashes can be avoided at specific intersections.




The Impact of Red Light Cameras (automated Enforcement) on Safety in Arizona


Book Description

Red Light Cameras (RLCs) have been used in a number of U.S. cities to yield a demonstrable reduction in red light violations; however, evaluating their impact on safety (crashes) has been relatively more difficult. Accurately estimating the safety impacts of RLCs is challenging for several reasons. First, many safety related factors are uncontrolled and/or confounded during the periods of observation. Second, "spillover" effects caused by drivers reacting to non-RLC-equipped intersections and approaches can make the selection of comparison sites difficult. Third, sites selected for RLC installation may not be randomly selected, and as a result may suffer from the regression to the mean effect. Finally, crash severity needs to be considered to fully understand the safety impacts of RLCs. With these challenges in mind this study was designed to estimate the safety impacts of RLCs on traffic crashes at signalized intersections in the state of Arizona and to identify which factors are associated with successful installations. RLC equipped intersections in the cities of Phoenix and Scottsdale are examined in detail to draw conclusions as to the relative success of RLC programs in these two jurisdictions. Both jurisdictions are operating successful installations of RLCs. Factors related to RLC effectiveness appear to include crash type and severity, left-turn phasing, presence of warning signs, approach speeds, and signal timing. Recommendations are made as to under what conditions should RLCs be considered.




Automated Enforcement for Speeding and Red Light Running


Book Description

The goal of this research was to find out which automated enforcement programs have been successful and what contributed to their success, as well as which programs have been unsuccessful and to draw lessons from their experiences. This was accomplished through a comprehensive assessment of automated speed and red light running enforcement activity in the United States and Canada, which led to the development of guidelines to assist agencies in implementing and operating successful automated enforcement programs. Over 350 jurisdictions with current or past automated enforcement programs were contacted by survey and phone as part of the assessment. In addition to the survey, an extensive literature review was conducted to determine the effect of the programs, cost effectiveness, and resource requirements, and to get the perspective of the public.







Safety Evaluation of Red-light Cameras


Book Description

The fundamental objective of this research was to determine the effectiveness of red-light-camera (RLC) systems in reducing crashes. The study involved an empirical Bayes (EB) before-after research using data from seven jurisdictions across the United States to estimate the crash and associated economic effects of RLC systems. The study included 132 treatment sites, and specially derived rear end and right-angle unit crash costs for various severity levels. Crash effects detected were consistent in direction with those found in many previous studies: decreased right-angle crashes and increased rear end ones. The economic analysis examined the extent to which the increase in rear end crashes negates the benefits for decreased right-angle crashes. There was indeed a modest aggregate crash cost benefit of RLC systems. A disaggregate analysis found that greatest economic benefits are associated with factors of the highest total entering average annual daily traffic (AADT), the largest ratios of right-angle to rear end crashes, and with the presence of protected left-turn phases. There were weak indications of a spillover effect that point to a need for a more definitive, perhaps prospective, study of this issue.




Guidance for Using Red Light Cameras


Book Description

Red light running is one of the major causes of crashes, deaths, and injuries at signalized intersections. Most recent crash statistics show that nearly 1,000 Americans were killed and 176,000 were injured in 2003 due to red light running related crashes. The monetary impact of crashes to our society is approximately $14 billion annually. The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) support a comprehensive approach to intersection safety that incorporates engineering, education, and enforcement countermeasures to prevent red light running and improve intersection safety. Red light cameras can be a very effective countermeasure to prevent red light running. There are a number of studies that indicate reduction in crashes at signalized intersections due to red light cameras. FHWA is promoting red light cameras as one of its identified priority, market-ready safety technologies. This document is an update to a previous version dated March 2003. The information contained in this document is intended to foster discussions and initiatives that will improve intersection safety by reducing crashes due to red light running. This document is not a regulatory requirement and the decision to use red light cameras is a matter for local decision-makers.




Traffic Engineering Handbook


Book Description

Get a complete look into modern traffic engineering solutions Traffic Engineering Handbook, Seventh Edition is a newly revised text that builds upon the reputation as the go-to source of essential traffic engineering solutions that this book has maintained for the past 70 years. The updated content reflects changes in key industry standards, and shines a spotlight on the needs of all users, the design of context-sensitive roadways, and the development of more sustainable transportation solutions. Additionally, this resource features a new organizational structure that promotes a more functionally-driven, multimodal approach to planning, designing, and implementing transportation solutions. A branch of civil engineering, traffic engineering concerns the safe and efficient movement of people and goods along roadways. Traffic flow, road geometry, sidewalks, crosswalks, cycle facilities, shared lane markings, traffic signs, traffic lights, and more—all of these elements must be considered when designing public and private sector transportation solutions. Explore the fundamental concepts of traffic engineering as they relate to operation, design, and management Access updated content that reflects changes in key industry-leading resources, such as the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM), Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD), AASSHTO Policy on Geometric Design, Highway Safety Manual (HSM), and Americans with Disabilities Act Understand the current state of the traffic engineering field Leverage revised information that homes in on the key topics most relevant to traffic engineering in today's world, such as context-sensitive roadways and sustainable transportation solutions Traffic Engineering Handbook, Seventh Edition is an essential text for public and private sector transportation practitioners, transportation decision makers, public officials, and even upper-level undergraduate and graduate students who are studying transportation engineering.