New York City School Zone Camera Speeding Tickets

[Music Lover]

On many roads around here 25% or 33% of the lanes are removed to make bike lanes even though cyclists only make up 2% or 3% (at best) of the traffic. And that's only in summer.

I'd like to see a study that compares the extra fuel used stuck in traffic due to fewer lanes compared to the tiny amount saved by removing those lanes for the few cyclists.

 

[Sunset]

So far the courts have upheld the use of speed and red light cameras when challenged for supposedly violating the Sixth Amendment.

Same way for radar guns used by cops. The cops are only looking at the display of the radar gun and not actually measuring a driver's speed themselves, same as looking a speeding camera output.

Now cops in helicopter, that sees a car, then watches it drive a measured distance while using a stopwatch is actually measuring the car speed.

 

[savory]

On many roads around here 25% or 33% of the lanes are removed to make bike lanes even though cyclists only make up 2% or 3% (at best) of the traffic. And that's only in summer.

I'd like to see a study that compares the extra fuel used stuck in traffic due to fewer lanes compared to the tiny amount saved by removing those lanes for the few cyclists.

Below is a link that responds to what happens when lanes are reduced. But if you are a person who is interested in space for your motor vehicle, especially for in town commutes, getting as many motorists to convert to alternate transportation would be a big benefit. In most USA cities, the pushback from motor vehicle owners discourages city officials to make a street network for non motorized vehicles. Consequently, non motorized infrastructure often abruptly and dangerously ends. Doesn’t provide enough protection, perceived or real, from motor vehicles. And more. You are likely seeing the early adaptors who have taught themselves to navigate incomplete infrastructure

Three Reasons Why Congestion Decreases When Cities 'Delete' Road Lanes - Streetsblog California

Elon Musk's insane comments about induced demand once again force advocates to debunk common congestion myths that powerful, but often ill-informed, people continue to promulgate.

cal.streetsblog.org

Your biggest rush hour issue assuming your city is similar to others is school start and end times. Creating infrastructure and support so that parents are encouraged to allow their kids to get themselves to school and you will experience a significant traffic reduction. If you could encourage businesses, perhaps hospitals, to have shift changes that don’t coincide with school that would be helpful too.

Dealing with most people’s big blind spot about our roads, parking, would solve lots of problems with shared road use. If you want more road space for moving vehicles, find a way to eliminate non-moving vehicles from the roads. Most motor vehicles are not used more than 2 hours per day. But people have come to believe that it is their right to park on the street and parking needs to be within feet of their house and local businesses. This space would provide plenty of room for everyone’s moving vehicle. But people who want the ability to move faster don’t want to compromise their ability not to move. Or seemingly not inconvenient themselves by for example, having two cars parked in their driveway and having to work out a method of organization for them.

Your city engineers are very tuned in to Level of Service measurements. For nearly 100 years, all non-motorized movement was compromised for motor vehicle movement. Jay walking laws may have been among the first laws passed for this purpose. If you really want to know what is happening in your city, reach out to them.

 

[The Cosmic Avenger]

Same way for radar guns used by cops. The cops are only looking at the display of the radar gun and not actually measuring a driver's speed themselves, same as looking a speeding camera output.

Now cops in helicopter, that sees a car, then watches it drive a measured distance while using a stopwatch is actually measuring the car speed.

I remember reading that police departments developed calibration requirements to combat early challenges to their accuracy. I don't know what the standard is now, but we've had decades of radar gun tickets, so I'm assuming the methods of proving their accuracy are fairly well established, although that probably took a while.

 

[Music Lover]

Dealing with most people’s big blind spot about our roads, parking, would solve lots of problems with shared road use. If you want more road space for moving vehicles, find a way to eliminate non-moving vehicles from the roads. Most motor vehicles are not used more than 2 hours per day. But people have come to believe that it is their right to park on the street and parking needs to be within feet of their house and local businesses.

What blind spot? Virtually all cities and towns limit street parking in rush hour if traffic flow is an issue.

The dictionary has a definition that is different than yours... nothing about being unavoidable...

an undignified or unprincipled acquisition of a large sum of money with little effort.

OR..

the greedy pursuit of an opportunity for making money especially when done without regard for ethics, concerns, or consequences :

Well, I don't think that expecting people to slow down in school zones is undignified, unprincipled, or unethical.

 

[savory]

Our city has taken millions of dollars of Fed money to add bike lanes - by cutting out a full traffic lane. I've had occasion to count the bike traffic and it is infinitesimal. Our major thoroughfare (King st.) has a bike lane and I rarely see more than a couple of bikes in the lane as I drive the length of King St.

There is also an inherent problem with bike lanes that are not totally separated from car traffic. A car must cross a bike lane in order to turn into a business (or even at cross streets.) Bikes are relatively difficult to see - especially when they are behind rows of parked cars. They can move at 15 to 20 MPH so are virtually un-seeable unless a car fully stops (with their tail sticking out into the traffic lane they are turning from.)

I recently parked on King st. (metered parking) and crossed the bike lane. I almost got hit by a bike which must have been doing 20 mph. In theory, the bikes must yield to pedestrians, but no biker who has gotten that kind of momentum is gonna stop. No one uses those bike "bells" that warn pedestrians of a bike's approach. It's all a recipe for disaster.

We pass laws here and dust off our hands. Changing actual behavior is a bit more complicated but YMMV.

All road work is funded by millions of dollars from the federal government. Cities prioritize their projects based upon their needs AND grants. They do not always align and typically the grant wins.

It is difficult to respond to your city's bicycle infrastructure without seeing it. The League of American Bicyclists provides a rating of bicycle infrastructure by city which would help you know how advanced your city is compared to others for the USA. It is part of the Bicycle Friendly Community program. You can find it online.

In fact, given you are doing your own monitoring, I think you would find it helpful to understand the criteria so if you ever wanted to send a message to your city engineers you would be speaking the same language.

It's not unusual for engineers to make highly compromising decisions on infrastructure to limit motorist feedback. Or, to stay within a budget, especially as it relates to bicycle infrastructure. The problem is that poorly designed infrastructure doesn't encourage more use of infrastructure. Which is what you may have witnessed by low usage. A mistake rarely made for motor vehicles

 

[Texas Proud]

My town installed cameras at some of the main intersections, it was actually run by a private company but the city got a cut. The number of tickets given out went up some crazy amount, like over 1000%. The stats showed it didn't increase the safety at all, which was the initial justification, and after about a year and all the citizen complaints they took them down.

LOL...

This caused me to remember when they had the red light cameras here... some lawyer wanted to challenge them but did not have standing... so he ran a red light that had a camera...

Unfortunately for him a police car was there and pulled him over and gave him a ticket!!! You cannot make this up..

 

[youbet]

My town installed cameras at some of the main intersections, it was actually run by a private company but the city got a cut. The number of tickets given out went up some crazy amount, like over 1000%. The stats showed it didn't increase the safety at all, which was the initial justification, and after about a year and all the citizen complaints they took them down.

What violation were camera generated tickets being issued for? Turning right on red without coming to a full stop first? Running a red light? Not yielding to oncoming traffic while executing a left turn? Not yielding to pedestrians in the crosswalk when making a turn on red? Or just what?

When "the stats showed "it" didn't increase the safety at all," was that because folks just kept driving the same, perhaps dangerous, way despite being ticketed? Or was it because the unlawful behavior didn't actually cause a safety issue?

 

[youbet]

LOL...

This caused me to remember when they had the red light cameras here... some lawyer wanted to challenge them but did not have standing... so he ran a red light that had a camera...

Unfortunately for him a police car was there and pulled him over and gave him a ticket!!! You cannot make this up..

That is wonderful karma! What a hoot!

 

[Koolau]

On many roads around here 25% or 33% of the lanes are removed to make bike lanes even though cyclists only make up 2% or 3% (at best) of the traffic. And that's only in summer.

I'd like to see a study that compares the extra fuel used stuck in traffic due to fewer lanes compared to the tiny amount saved by removing those lanes for the few cyclists.

I can't even find good local stats on how effective our bike lanes are for safety. My personal experience suggests the lanes are a mixed bag when it comes to safety. I can see the flaws while the "official" line is always very positive about how the lanes will (will - future tense) save lives and traffic.

The little data I've seen on utilization was nothing like 2 to 3% and it is ALWAYS summer here. As nearly as I can tell most people do not commute by bike - they ride for pleasure. What's pleasurable about riding along King St. eludes me but I'm not a biker so YMMV.

 

[Music Lover]

• Sidewalk Bicycle Riding - Sidewalk bicycle riding is less safe than the street. It is the result of so many intersections that need to be crossed. It is unfair to add this responsibility to motorists as sidewalks' are not easy to visually manage from a moving vehicle.

I disagree. Pedestrians crossing the street need to be aware of traffic. A person never wins against a car.

The same thinking should apply to cyclists. It's their responsibility to look before they cross.

 

[MichaelB]

Bicycles have the same rights as motor vehicles on the road but are far more exposed. A separate bike lane makes the road safer for everyone and allows autos to travel at a greater speed.

The big problem with bicycle lanes is they force motor vehicle drivers to pay more attention their surroundings. They really aren’t an issue when drivers are paying attention.

Most bike lanes take more space from the road shoulder than the road itself.

 

[youbet]

I disagree. Pedestrians crossing the street need to be aware of traffic. A person never wins against a car.

That's really true here in Chicago. Motorists turning right on green NEVER consider pedestrians entering the marked pedestrian crosswalk on green. They just turn right, hand hard on the horn, daring pedestrians to step off the curb into the marked pedestrian crosswalk on green. It's scary and Chicago is truly not a place where you want to be a pedestrian. There is never a time, despite stop and go lights, marked pedestrian crosswalks or whatever, that you don't take you life in your hands trying to cross an intersection.

Fortunately, some suburbs have established stop and go light configurations where only pedestrians have the green. It's still a problem in that most of our drivers are so aggressive about turn-on-red situations that they ignore the lights and scream around the corner, blaring their horn, and daring the mom with infant twins in the stroller to stop them..........

I agree with you that pedestrians "need to be aware of traffic." But I think our drivers who are so extremely aggressive on right turns, especially turn-on-red situations, need to calm down before screaming across the pedestrian crosswalk with horn blaring. And I think our public officials need to provide for more pedestrian opportunities to cross streets, within pedestrian crosswalks, with all traffic stopped.

 

[savory]

I disagree. Pedestrians crossing the street need to be aware of traffic. A person never wins against a car.

The same thinking should apply to cyclists. It's their responsibility to look before they cross.

I'm not sure how to respond to this..

So what really happens when motorists strike peds when they turn right at an intersection. First they worry about a collision with their own vehicle by a vehicle likely speeding from their left on the street where they are turning. Once they know their car will not be damaged (coast is clear to turn), they start their turn. Opps, there is a ped who also has the right-way. With luck, the motorists stops. They stop most of the time, not all the time. You seem to think the ped had a choice but I can't guess what that is.

Next time your around town, I expect you will see 'bump outs' where corners are made longer, taking up more street space. This design forces those motorists to make wider, slower turns. It also reduces crossing by 2+ feet so the ped is not in the road as long.

You may also see signs that say no turn on red. That represents a recognition that motorists turning right on red are not good at timing their turn and watching for peds. Not that they want to collide with a ped that has the right of way but they simply have too many responsibilities to turn safely as it relates to ped collisions

 

[robnplunder]

We had the cameras for a few years. Then the cities shut them all down because (get this), they were losing money. It costs a lot to run, and many who were caught don't pay. I was caught once by the camera for not stopping fully at a stop sign.

These days, I wish the cameras are back. There are more brazen drivers these days.

 

[Koolau]

That's really true here in Chicago. Motorists turning right on green NEVER consider pedestrians entering the marked pedestrian crosswalk on green. They just turn right, hand hard on the horn, daring pedestrians to step off the curb into the marked pedestrian crosswalk on green. It's scary and Chicago is truly not a place where you want to be a pedestrian. There is never a time, despite stop and go lights, marked pedestrian crosswalks or whatever, that you don't take you life in your hands trying to cross an intersection.

Fortunately, some suburbs have established stop and go light configurations where only pedestrians have the green. It's still a problem in that most of our drivers are so aggressive about turn-on-red situations that they ignore the lights and scream around the corner, blaring their horn, and daring the mom with infant twins in the stroller to stop them..........

I agree with you that pedestrians "need to be aware of traffic." But I think our drivers who are so extremely aggressive on right turns, especially turn-on-red situations, need to calm down before screaming across the pedestrian crosswalk with horn blaring. And I think our public officials need to provide for more pedestrian opportunities to cross streets, within pedestrian crosswalks, with all traffic stopped.

That's interesting. We actually have "cross walks" with only painted-on-the-pavement makings that cross (wait for it) up to 6 lanes of traffic! No signals. Maybe a warning sign of an approaching cross walk - but probably not.

We fixed our problem of killing pedestrians. We passed laws making it illegal. Very effective.

 

[Koolau]

^^^^^^^

Here's an old report - and most of the crosswalks without signals are still there. You can't make this stuff up.

https://www.khon2.com/local-news/kalanianaole-hwy-crosswalk-study-could-lead-to-more-traffic-signals/

 

[Music Lover]

You seem to think the ped had a choice but I can't guess what that is.

My only point was that pedestrians have to pay attention. That includes looking for right and left turning vehicles that may not be in their direct line of vision.

 

[Koolau]

My only point was that pedestrians have to pay attention. That includes looking for right and left turning vehicles that may not be in their direct line of vision.

Yeah, as a pedestrian, trusting drivers is probably not a good idea.

 

[Kings over Queens]

My only point was that pedestrians have to pay attention. That includes looking for right and left turning vehicles that may not be in their direct line of vision.

Many cities and towns in NJ have adopted the "pedestrians in crosswalk have right of way" mantra, which is fine, but still new to many. The shore towns have adjusted quickly because the high level of enforcement. What's happened in the cities, such Hoboken, is that the pedestrians, who outnumber the previous working class (buildings have been converted to residential from commercial) are brazen and will step out in front of you without looking, expecting you see them and will stop.

I no longer drive through Hoboken. "sorry client, lets do a zoom."