Aurora may add cameras to catch red light runners
April M. Washington
Originally published 06:25 p.m., March 26, 2008
Updated 11:23 p.m., March 26, 2008
- Email this
- Print this
- Comments
- Change text size
- Subscribe to print edition
- iPod friendly
Police have received the green light to explore adding red light cameras at as many as 25 intersections over time.
Meanwhile, the city will begin seeking bids from contractors to install permanent and portable cameras at the city's 10 most-dangerous intersections. The cameras photograph drivers who run red lights.
"The police department didn't drive this program, but now that it is here, it has proven to be effective in reducing accidents," said Police Chief Daniel Oates. "We think there's a value to taking the program to the next step."
Councilwoman Sue Sandstrom, chairwoman of the Aurora Public Safety Committee gave a thumbs up to the expansion. But she urged police to proceed with caution, as some critics see the cameras as big-brother government.
"I want them limited to where we have problems," she said.
Oates contends that beefed-up red light enforcement could go a long way to reduce injury accidents at the city's most-dangerous intersections, including East Hampden Avenue at South Buckley Road and East Hampden at South Tower Road.
Aurora launched its red light camera program in May 2005. The city installed cameras at four intersections, including Mississippi Avenue and Chambers Road and Alameda Avenue and Abilene Street.
Accident statistics show no pattern.
City records show the injury-accident rate dropped by 60 percent at one location from 2005 to 2006.
However, rear-end accidents skyrocketed at three intersections, including Mississippi and Potomac (up 175 percent) and Alameda and Abilene (up 100 percent), from 2005 to 2006.
Critics say that red light camera enforcement is being abused by cities to "shake down" drivers for revenue. Aurora is among 334 cities and towns nationwide using red light cameras.
The National Motorists Association contends that studies have found that better engineering at problem intersections, such as making yellow lights longer and improved traffic flow, would reduce violations and accidents. "It's basically a violation of due process," said Bonnie Sesolak, spokeswoman for National Motorists Association.
Aurora City Councilman Bob Fitzgerald argues drivers who follow the law have no worries.
washingtonam@RockyMountainNews.com or 303-954-5086
Aurora's red lights by the numbers
2006
Citations: 9,172
Revenue: $236,095
2007
Citations: 9,915
Revenue: $237,172
Aurora looks into installing cameras to catch red light runners at these intersections:
* Iliff Avenue at Havana Street
* Parker at Arapahoe roads
* Parker at Peoria Street
* Parker at Havana
* Parker at Quincy Avenue
* Buckley Rd. at Hampden Ave.
* Tower Road at Hampden
* Iliff at Chambers Road
* Chambers at Hampden
* Peoria at Mississippi Avenue
Comments
Posted by happymike44 on March 26, 2008 at 11:12 p.m. (Suggest removal)
To all the people of aurora,don't,as community don't you think you pay enough taxes for the community already.These cameras were installed in houston at 243 intersections.They proved to cost more they were worth.Solution 43 cameras were decomissioned because they found out that at those intersections people were obeyng the law.This smacks of big brother,Why is it you elect someone to office and they turn around and try to find more ways to get money from the taxpayers enough is enough.They should put things like this to a vote and I bet and no one would vote for it.
Posted by randyj01 on March 27, 2008 at 6:48 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I would vote fore it without a doubt. It is not about Big Brother, it is about idiots who don't want to stop. They are dangerous and deserve a ticket. If it makes money for the city, great. All people have to do is quit breaking the law and there would not be a need for these cameras or photo rader.
Posted by greenleaf on March 27, 2008 at 7:04 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I am supportive of anything that would discourage even a small percentage of red light runners. Many times in recent years, I have entered an intersection to turn on a green light only to have to avoid colliding with the third car to run the red light. I am then the one impeding traffic. I say get the yahoos before they kill someone!
Posted by kathyM on March 27, 2008 at 8:47 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I second greenleaf's motion. Get the dufuses who think "right of way" means "right of wait."
Posted by CWW on March 27, 2008 at 9:19 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Surprisingly, I agree with greenleaf. Yellow doesn't mean "speed up" and red doesn't mean "just one more car."
Posted by sheepherder on March 27, 2008 at 10:40 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I like the cameras. All red light runners deserve expensive tickets!
Posted by robmason on March 27, 2008 at 10:47 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I'm surprised greenleaf admits to violating turning rules and then complains about the danger. You're not supposed to enter an intersection to wait to turn left! From the Colorado Driver Handbook:
"If you are turning left, you should wait at the
stop line or crosswalk until there is a gap in traffic large
enough to allow you to pull into the intersection and complete
your turn. Pulling into the intersection to wait to turn left
blocks the intersection for emergency vehicles, limits visibility
for oncoming traffic and puts you in a position to get in an
accident if the light changes and oncoming traffic runs the
red light while you are making your turn."
Posted by Broomhilda on March 27, 2008 at 10:59 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Just one more reason (there are many) that I will NEVER spend a penny in Aurora CO again. That's right people, they're doing it to keep you safe. Just like the camera vans by schools where the speed limit changes every block and there are no warning lights. I hope everyone who likes the idea gets their ticket first!! No officer to discuss it with, just trust the camera and pay your $80 ticket.
Posted by randyj01 on March 27, 2008 at 11:31 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Broomhilda must have been caught a few too many times.
About people speeding up to not let you in, I drive a highway every day that has one or more lanes closed most of the way for construction. There are signs posted a mile away but some will go to the end and cut in front of you so they don't have to wait in line. I do my best to keep them from cutting in and get tired of it after 4 or 5 cars. I start speeding up after that. Drives me crazy.
Posted by robmason on March 27, 2008 at 11:49 a.m. (Suggest removal)
How come we don't "go to the end" and alternate merge like they do in most places (alternate merge does not equal cutting in front of you). How far back should people wait in line when there is an open lane to drive in? One mile? Five miles? Wherever the slowdown starts?
Posted by randyj01 on March 27, 2008 at 12:04 p.m. (Suggest removal)
We should, but the rude, inconsiderate drivers who don't want to wait ruin ideas like that. If somebody signals and waits to move over I will always let them in but the ones who race to the end are the ones I have issues with and I will do my best to stop them. I have watched some drivers get out of line a few rows behind me just to get a few cars ahead. No body want to take turns.
Posted by greenleaf on March 27, 2008 at 12:54 p.m. (Suggest removal)
robmason,
Imagine my surprise at learning this! I confess its been over 40 years since I had to study that handbook. I have committed to turn in that manner the whole time and even taught my daughter that method.
My friends do it, my relatives do it and I always see other people doing it. I haven't had a ticket in 23 years ( ironically for running a red light the year the daughter mentioned above was born ). I can't believe a policeman wouldn't have seen me doing that in all these years!
So robmason, you may be doing more than a few of us a service by mentioning this. I'll have to get a copy of the handbook to examine to see if I'm doing anything else that's illegal or questionable.
I would be curious to see if any other posters were unaware of this law as I was?
Posted by theQ on March 27, 2008 at 2:02 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Don't think for one min that the powers to be that approved this had a conversation like...hey lets put cameras there to improve safety...no..it went more like this..we need to somehow get more revenue..i know lets put cameras at this intersection to catch people going thru red lights and then we will charge a certain amount and this will give us xxx amount of dollars. These people have discussions on how to screw the public out of money and do it in such a way to make it seem like its good for the public. You need to throw these people out of office.
Posted by randyj01 on March 27, 2008 at 3:25 p.m. (Suggest removal)
At least they know where the money is. Always somebody there to go through the lights. What is so hard to understand? If you stop at a red light instead of running it you do not have a problem. When did it become alright to break all the traffic laws?
Posted by PACE2008 on March 27, 2008 at 3:29 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Don't we already pay taxes to fund an organization that is supposed to enforce motor vehicle laws?
Posted by AC on March 27, 2008 at 3:42 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Randy: It is proper driving procedure when approaching a lane closure or merge point to continue using both lanes to the merge point. That nad drivers here try to block people from doing that is the problem, not the other way around. It's called the Zipper merge and many states post signs advising you to do that. Use the lanes that are open until the merge, people, and traffic will move much more efficiently.
Also, the driver manual is in conflict with the motor vehicle code. When you are trying to make a left turn on a green ball, it is proper and legal to proceed into the intersection. At many locations in Denver (think: Colorado Blvd at places that do NOT have a left turn arrow) this is the ONLY way you could ever make a left at certain times of the day.
Posted by greenleaf on March 27, 2008 at 3:46 p.m. (Suggest removal)
AC,
So I have been right to enter the intersection on green to make a turn! Thank you! I hope Robmason is still checking this thread!
Posted by Golden on March 27, 2008 at 4:45 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Robmason...You are quoting the handbook! You can't be serious... What do the traffic LAWs state? It states you may enter an intesection when the light turns green...
Seriously, if every moron waited until there was enough room to clear an intersection before they entered an intersection, we'd all be sitting in traffic right now.
Posted by theairdog on March 27, 2008 at 5 p.m. (Suggest removal)
These comments from the Colorado Driver's Handbook explain WHY so few people manage to get through the light on left turns. Back East, you are taught to enter the intersection, but not to turn your wheels in the direction of the turn until you are ready to turn - so as not to get pushed into oncoming traffic if you are rear-ended. There is SO much traffic, that people NEED to expedite through the turn process.
Colorado could use a lesson here. I have sat through many lights where only one person makes it through because the drivers here are SO SLOW.....
-----------------------------------------------------
Posted by robmason on March 27, 2008 at 10:47 a.m.
I'm surprised greenleaf admits to violating turning rules and then complains about the danger. You're not supposed to enter an intersection to wait to turn left! From the Colorado Driver Handbook:
"If you are turning left, you should wait at the
stop line or crosswalk until there is a gap in traffic large
enough to allow you to pull into the intersection and complete
your turn. Pulling into the intersection to wait to turn left
blocks the intersection for emergency vehicles, limits visibility
for oncoming traffic and puts you in a position to get in an
accident if the light changes and oncoming traffic runs the
red light while you are making your turn."
Posted by The_Punnisher on March 27, 2008 at 6:01 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Where is Captain GATSO when you need him??
http://www.speedcam.co.uk/welcome.htm
Posted by jjez on March 27, 2008 at 6:42 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I'm all for ticketing red-light runners! And they'd better not get pissed for getting caught breaking the law! But what really needs to be done is for all left-turn arrows to be NO LEFT TURN ON RED ARROW. That way, nobody is trying to turn left after the rest of the lights turn red. Also, take out the 10 second delay between one way going red and the other going green. Because people KNOW this, the think they'll get thru. Until someone is turning left in front of them. Make sure it's widely publicized or the accident rate will go up. Post signs at every intersection. (But wait, people don't pay attention to the red light, why would they pay attention to a sign?? What was I thinking!?) Have you heard the saying "the third car through a red light will be from CO"? We have a reputation. Which is why it will be a money maker for the cities that have it. But it may also have the benefit of reducing our insurance rates because they'll be paying out less. But until people start obeying the laws, it'll still happen. Until people start having common sense and do it on their own, it'll still happen.
As to the people cutting others off, it's because they think that they're the only important ones on the planet & nobody should be in front of them. They're probably also the ones who zigzag through traffic trying to get ahead of everyone else.
Posted by robmason on March 27, 2008 at 9:13 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I agree...sitting behind the stop line waiting to turn left is stupid! I certainly don't do that nor does anyone else that I'm aware of including numerous police vehicles I've observed. Also, that procedure isn't referenced in the Model Traffic Code (which most cities adopt in full).
So why do you suppose the brainiacs at the DMV include that in their driving manual? Bureaucratic power-trip. Making up the rules as they go along? Just assuming that's the way it should be?
Puzzling...
Posted by PMSXpress on March 27, 2008 at 10 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Airdog: I've lived here all my life and learned that same method so it isn't specifically a back-East thing. But remember, there are way more drivers here that came from other places with their funky regional driving habits thrown into the mix. It's sort of like the Goldilocks syndrome... Some are too slow. Some are too fast. Some are jussssssst right. The real problem is there are too many for the infrastructure to support, especially during workday commutes.
Has anyone noticed the growing trend of drivers that will romp the foot to the floor to make a left turn (no turn arrow installed) on a just-turned green light, taking the right of way from those that are proceeding straight on? My visiting relative from Connecticut laughs at this and says this is normal driving etiquette back in Hartford. He says get used to it as it is probably here to stay. Great.
Post your comment (Requires free registration.)
Comments are the sole responsibility of the person posting them. You agree not to post comments that are off topic, defamatory, obscene, abusive, threatening or an invasion of privacy. Violators may be banned. Click here for our full user agreement.