County Red Light Running Facts and Statistics

Traffic lights for normal vehicles or pedestrians always have two main lights, a red one that means stop and a green(or white for pedestrians) that means go. Usually, the red light contains some orange in its hue, and the green light contains some blue, to provide some support for people with red-green color blindness. In most countries there is also a yellow (or amber) light, which when on and not flashing means stop if able to do so safely. In some systems, a flashing amber means that a motorist may go ahead with care if the road is clear, giving way to pedestrians and to other road vehicles that may have priority. A flashing red essentially means the same as a regular stop sign. There may be additional lights (usually a green arrow or "filter") to authorize turns. A turn light preceding the opposing through movement is called a leading left turn in the U.S., because it leads the opposing through green light (likewise, in the U.S., a left turn arrow that follows the opposing through movement is known as a "lagging left turn").

Traffic lights for special vehicles (such as buses or trams) may use other systems, such as vertical vs. horizontal bars of white light.

History

In the 1920s, after continued destruction of a standard traffic light in its Tipperary Hill Irish neighborhood, the City of Syracuse in the United States gave up and installed a traffic light with green on the top. Residents of Irish descent had objected to the fact that "British" red was placed above "Irish" green.

On 10 December 1868, the first traffic lights were installed outside the British Houses of Parliament in London. They resembled railway signals of the time, with semaphore arms and red and green gas lamps for night use.

The modern electric traffic light is an American invention. As early as 1912, Salt Lake City policeman Lester Wire set up the first red-green electric traffic lights. On 5 August 1914, the American Traffic Signal Company installed a traffic signal system on the corner of 105th Street and Euclid Avenue in Cleveland, Ohio. Based on the design of James Hoge, it had two colors, red and green, and a buzzer to provide a warning for color changes. The first three-color traffic lights were introduced in New York and Detroit in 1920.

The first interconnected traffic signal system could be seen in Salt Lake City, Utah in 1917, with six connected intersections controlled simultaneously from a manual switch. Automatic control of interconnected traffic lights was introduced March 1922 in Houston, Texas.[3]

The first automatic experimental traffic lights in England were deployed in Wolverhampton in 1927. [4]

Garrett Morgan is sometimes mistakenly credited as the inventor of the traffic light. See [5].

According to FARS and GES, each year, more than 1.8 million intersection crashes occur. Of those in 2003, about 206,000 were due to red light running — resulting in 934 deaths and approximately 176,000 injuries.
Based on analysis of FARS data, on a national basis, fatal motor vehicle crashes at traffic signals increased 13.2 percent between 1993 and 2003, far outpacing the 6.6 percent rise in all other fatal crashes. Red light running is a big part of the problem. Based on analysis of FARS data, The Insurance Institute for HIghway Safety researchers determined that during this time period there were 9,300 fatal red light running crashes, rising from 853 deaths in 1993 to 934 deaths in 2003, an increase of about 10 percent.

Question: How serious is the red light running problem?

Answer: Red light running (RLR) is a serious traffic safety problem. According to the Safety Evaluation of Red-Light Cameras (FHWA-HRT-05-048, April 2005), RLR is estimated to produce more than 100,000 crashes and approximately 1,000 deaths per year in the United States.

Question: Why do people run red lights?

Answer: RLR is a dangerous form of aggressive driving. Based on self-reported behavioral surveys, RLR is a result of people wanting to save time. However, several factors can lead to RLR such as impatient and inattentive drivers, improperly timed traffic signals, lack of enforcement efforts and the attitude that no harm will come from running a red light.

Question: Do studies show that there are safety benefits from installation of these cameras systems? Do rear-end collisions increase when RLCs are installed - in which case, aren't we just trading one type of crash for another?

Answer: Analysis of data in the most comprehensive study to date (Safety Evaluation of Red-Light Cameras (FHWA-HRT-05-048, April 2005)) from seven jurisdictions (Baltimore; Charlotte; El Cajon, CA; Howard County, MD; Montgomery County, MD; San Diego; San Francisco) at 132 intersections using RLCs found:

25% decrease of total right-angle crashes
16% decrease of injury right-angle crashes
15% increase of total rear-end crashes
24% increase of injury rear-end crashes

The conflicting direction effects for rear end and right-angle crashes justified the conduct of the economic effects analysis to assess the extent to which the increase in rear end crashes negates the benefits for right-angle crashes. This analysis, which was based on an aggregation of rear end and right-angle crash costs for various severity levels, showed that RLC systems do indeed provide a modest aggregate crash-cost benefit. Economic analysis showed that RLCs saved society $39,000 to $50,000 annually at each intersection where they are installed. (The costs considered include: hospital bills, property damage to vehicles, insurance expenses, value of lost quality of life, and other costs.)

Primary factors for the greatest economic benefits for RLC installation include: locations where there are relatively few rear end crashes and many right-angle ones, higher proportion of entering average annual daily traffic (AADT) on the major road, shorter cycle lengths and intergreen periods (yellow clearance + all-red), and one or more left turn protected phases.

A survey conducted as part of Impact of Red Light Camera Enforcement on Crash Experience (National Cooperative Highway Research Program Synthesis 310, 2003) found that a majority of jurisdictions (including Boulder, CO; Polk County, FL; Mesa, AZ; Sacramento, CA; Laurel, MD, & others) reported downward trends in RLR crashes and violations because of RLCs.

Question: Are other measures as effective as cameras, or are cameras the only option?

Answer: Like any traffic safety problem, there is no single solution or answer, but rather a multitude of solutions depending on the specific situation. Engineering improvements can make a difference. Enforcement, whether traditional or automated, can be an effective deterrent. FHWA and NHTSA have developed the Red Light Camera Systems Operational Guidelines (FHWA-SA-05-002, January 2005) and the Institute of Transportation Engineers and FHWA have developed an informational report, "Engineering Countermeasures to Reduce Red Light Running," to assist communities in reducing RLR crashes.

Question: In light of the consequences - increased insurance costs, for example - do insurance companies support RLCs out of self-interest?

Answer: Most states using RLCs do not add points to the driver's license. Therefore, RLR citations do not result in higher insurance rates because most states do not report the citations to insurance companies. The insurance industry does have a vested interest in the traffic safety programs that result in fewer crash claims for vehicles hit or damaged in RLR crashes.

Question: It often takes weeks before a person receives a RLR citation in the mail - will this make his or her ability to challenge it more difficult?

Answer: Photo enforcement technology and processing systems typically mail the citation in a very short timeframe. This is also comparable to many court dates motorists would receive from traffic citations given by police patrol officers.

Red light cameras are used for law enforcement in New York City; Sacramento, San Diego, and San Francisco, California; Washington, D.C.; Denver, Colorado; Baltimore, Maryland; Phoenix, Arizona; Chicago, Illinois; Portland, Oregon; and Charlotte, North Carolina, in addition to many smaller communities. For a complete list, see http://www.iihs.org/research/topics/rlc_cities.html
For information on automated enforcement laws in each state see: http://www.hwysafety.org/aws/state_laws/auto_enforce.html
Engineering countermeasures that we consider useful include improving signal visibility (placement and number of signal heads, size of signal display, line of sight), improving signal conspicuity (redundancy, light emitting diode signal lenses, backplates, strobe lights), increasing the likelihood of stopping (signal ahead signs, advanced warning flashers, rumble strips, left-turn signal signs and pavement condition), addressing intentional violations (traffic signal optimization, change in cycle lengths, change in timing of yellow and red intervals, and dilemma zone protection), and eliminating the need to stop (remove unwarranted signals, change to flashing mode operation or convert intersections to roundabouts).