Red Light Camera Effectiveness Evaluation

Red Light Camera Effectiveness Evaluation
City of Rochester
Monroe County, New York
Project No. 35002
November 2014
Updated March 2016
Prepared For:
City of Rochester
City Hall, 30 Church St, Room 300B
Rochester, NY 14614
Attn: Mr. James R. McIntosh
Prepared By:
3495 Winton Place

Building E, Suite 110
Rochester, New York 14623
Traffic Study
City of Rochester, NY
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I.
INTRODUCTION...................................................................................................................................1
II.
PURPOSE OF RED LIGHT CAMERA ENFORCEMENT ...............................................................1
III.
RED LIGHT CAMERA LOCATIONS & OPERATION ..................................................................2
IV.
EFFECTIVENESS OF THE RED LIGHT CAMERAS ........................................................................4
V.
COST ANALYSIS.................................................................................................................................. 23
VI.
CONSIDERATION OF CAMERA REMOVAL .............................................................................. 23
VII. CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................................ 24
LIST OF TABLES
TABLE I
RED LIGHT CAMERA LOCATIONS & ACTIVATION DATES ........................................3
TABLE II CRASHES AND VIOLATIONS AT RED LIGHT CAMERA INTERSECTIONS .............5

TABLE III CHANGES IN CRASH RATES AND VIOLATIONS ............................................................5
TABLE IV CRASH ANALYSIS & VIOLATIONS BY INTERSECTIONS ...............................................7
TABLE V COST SAVINGS .......................................................................................................................... 23
LIST OF REFERENCES
1.
City of Albuquerque Red Light Camera Study Final Report. Institute for Social Research,
University of New Mexico, October 2010.
2.
New York City Red Light Camera Program 2007 Report. New York City Department
of Transportation.
3.
City of Rochester website. Retrieved from http://www.cityofrochester.gov/redlight/
4.
Average Accident Costs/Severity Distribution State Highways. NYSDOT Safety

Information Management System. August 1 2011-July 31 2013, dated April 16, 2014.
ii
November 2014
Updated March 2016
Traffic Study
I. INTRODUCTION
Improving intersection safety is important for

the health and well-being of the communitys
residents and visitors. Safety improvement
strategies may range from educational
materials and enforcement campaigns, to
engineering enhancements. The City of
Rochester, since November 2010, has
installed red light cameras at 32 city
intersections using 48 total cameras. The goal
of the program has been to improve traffic
Image 1 State St @ Jay St, Rochester, NY
and public safety and reduce the frequency of
right angle1 crashes and crashes whereby drivers have disregarded the traffic control
device. With the program operational for over three years, the primary task of this study
is to evaluate the effectiveness the red light cameras in reducing the frequency and severity
of accidents due to red light running through data-driven analysis.
II. PURPOSE OF RED LIGHT CAMERA ENFORCEMENT
Red light running is defined as a vehicle that enters the intersection or passes the stop
line after the red light turns on. This may include not fully stopping before turning right
on red, passing through the all-red interval immediately following the yellow, and going
through a red light while other movements in the intersection are being served.
Red-light running is a serious intersection safety issue across the nation. According to the
National Highway Traffic Safety Administrations (NHTSA) Traffic Safety Facts 2012
Report, there were more than 2.5 million reported intersection-related crashes, resulting
in more than 2,850 fatalities and approximately 680,000 injury crashes in 2012. Red light
running is estimated to cause more than 100,000 crashes and approximately 1,000 deaths
per year in the United States.
Red light running is complex and there is no single reason to explain why drivers run red
lights. Red light running is generally a result of drivers wanting to save time, however,
some factors also include eating while driving, drowsiness, and distracted driving, others
factors may include speeding and aggressive driving. Motorists are more likely to be
injured in urban crashes involving red light running than in any other type of urban
crashes.2 A study of urban crashes conducted by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety
(IIHS) found that running red lights and other traffic controls was the most common cause
of all accidents.
1 Two vehicles approaching from non-opposing angular directions collide, typically resulting as one vehicle failed to
either stop or yield right of way from a Stop or Yield sign, ran a red light, or was not cleared from the intersection
upon the onset of the conflicting movement's green signal.
2 Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS)
November 2014
Updated March 2016
Traffic Study
Several studies have found that red light camera programs reduce the number of and rate
of red light running violations. In short periods after red light camera programs are
implemented, violation rates drop dramatically.
Red light cameras have been used for over a
decade in over 400 American cities. They
have been used to increase traffic signal
enforcement at intersections where there is
a noted history of red light running and
crashes, and record the violations for legal
prosecution. For signalized intersections, red
light running affects the public health and
safety of passing motorists and pedestrians.
The most frequent crashes resulting from red
Image 2 - Right angle crash, FHWA
light running at signalized intersections are
right angle and rear end3 crashes with right angle crashes resulting in greater injury
severity. To that end, the installations of red light cameras are intended to reduce the
frequency of crashes, particularly the more severe right angle crashes, to improve public
safety.
III. RED LIGHT CAMERA LOCATIONS & OPERATION
The City of Rochester initiated a Red Light Photographic Enforcement Program in

October 2010. Since that time, 48 cameras have been installed at 32 intersections
throughout the City. The camera locations were selected based upon the following
criteria:
Recommendations from the Rochester Police Department based on intersection
accident history,
Review of accident data by City staff, and
Traffic volumes.
Once potential locations were identified, a portable camera was placed at each location
for a 12 hour period to determine signal compliance. An intersection approach was
recommended for installation of a red light camera upon consideration of the following
conditions:
1. Fifteen or more vehicles were observed running the red light or turning left on
the red indication during the 12 hour test period.
2. The intersection exhibited a history of pedestrian/cyclist/vehicle accidents.
3. Criteria determined by the camera manufacturer.
A team comprised of City staff from the Rochester Police, Information Technology,
Engineering, Law, and Budget departments made the final decision on red light camera
3 Two vehicles in a position of one behind the other and collide, regardless of what movement(s) either vehicle was
in the process of making with the exception of one or both vehicles backing.
November 2014
Updated March 2016
Traffic Study
locations. Of the 207 potential locations recommended for study, 48 were selected for
the program based upon the above criteria.
Table 1 lists the current camera locations and the dates of installation.
TABLE I
RED LIGHT CAMERA LOCATIONS & ACTIVATION
DATES
Approach/
Direction
Go-Live
Date
Approach/
Direction
Go-Live
Date
WB
11/9/10
Lyell Ave. & Murray St.
WB
9/30/11
EB
11/9/10
Maple St. & Saxton St.
WB
9/30/11
State St. & Jay St.
NB
11/9/10
SB
10/17/11
SB
11/9/10
Norton/Hudson
Broad /Ford St. & W. Main
St.
State St. & Jay St.

North St. & Clifford
Ave.
North St. & Clifford
Ave.
EB
10/31/11
NB
11/9/10
West Ridge and Ridgeway
EB
11/23/11
SB
11/9/10
West Ridge and Ridgeway
WB
11/23/11
Dewey & Ridgeway
EB
2/19/11
Lake Ave. & W. Ridge Rd.
EB
11/23/11
Dewey & Ridgeway

Clinton Ave. & Norton
St.
Clinton Ave. & Norton
St.
SB
2/19/11
Lake Ave. & W. Ridge Rd.
WB
11/23/11
NB
1/27/11
Lake Ave. & Driving Park
SB
12/12/11
SB
2/19/11
Lake Ave. & Driving Park
NB
12/12/11
Culver Rd. & East Ave.
NB
2/19/11
NB
12/12/11
Culver Rd. & East Ave.

N. Clinton Ave. &
Andrews St.
WB
2/19/11
Lake Ave. & Ridgeway

West Ridge and Bonesteel
St.
EB
01/12/12
NB
1/27/11
Mt. Read Blvd. & Lyell Ave.
EB
02/11/12
West Ave. & Ames St.

West Main St. & Brown
St./Genesee St.
St. Paul St. & Pedestrian
Crossing
St. Paul St. & Pedestrian
Crossing
SB
6/3/11
SB
02/11/12
EB
6/3/11
NB
4/4/12
NB
6/3/11
SB
4/4/12
SB
6/3/11
Mt. Read Blvd. & Lyell Ave.

Mt. Read Blvd. & Emerson
St.
Mt. Read Blvd. & Emerson
St.
Mt. Read Blvd. & Driving
Park
SB
4/4/12
Goodman St. & I-490
NB
7/31/11
Monroe/Alexander
SB
04/12/12
State St. & Allen St.
NB
7/31/11
NB
04/12/12
State St. & Allen St.

St. Paul St. & Upper
Falls Blvd.
St. Paul St. & Upper
Falls Blvd.
SB
10/17/11
EB
08/10/12
EB
9/30/11
Goodman/Clifford
E. Main St. & N. Goodman
St.
E. Main St. & N Goodman
St.
WB
08/10/12
WB
9/30/11
Alexander/University
WB
12/07/12
Brown St. & Broad St.
WB
9/30/11
SB
12/07/12
Lyell Ave. & Murray St.
EB
9/30/11
Chestnut St. & Court St.

Mt Hope Ave. &
Elmwood Ave.
SB
09/13/13
Intersection
Alexander St. &
Broadway St.
Alexander St. &
Broadway St.
Intersection
November 2014
Updated March 2016
Traffic Study
The red light cameras capture still and video images of vehicles in the act of a red-light
violation, which then initiates the procedure to deliver a Notice of Liability to the
registered owner of the vehicle. The violation is a civil matter and is not reported to
insurance companies nor does it generate points on a drivers license.
Evidence captured by the red light cameras is reviewed by the camera vendor and
potential violations are forwarded to the Rochester Police Department where a sworn
officer determines whether a violation has occurred. A Notice of Liability is then delivered
in the mail to the registered owner of the vehicle. The cameras operate 24 hours a day
and capture still photographs and video of every vehicle that runs a red light at the
intersection. Cameras photograph only the vehicle and license plate of vehicles running
the red lights. No images of the driver or passengers are captured.
IV. EFFECTIVENESS OF THE RED LIGHT CAMERAS
Crash data at each red light camera intersection was provided by the Rochester Police
Department. The data encompassed all crashes occurring at the study intersections
between January 1, 2007 and December 31, 2014. The data was then sorted for analysis
as follows:
1) Intersection approaches without red light cameras were omitted from the analysis.
2) As noted above, crash data for each intersection covers the same time period (January
1, 2007 through December 31, 2014). However, given that the cameras went live on
different dates at each location, the pre-camera time period and post-camera time
periods differ from intersection to intersection depending upon the date of camera
activation.
3) Total crashes include only right angle and rear end crashes for analysis purposes in
this study.
The analysis includes crash results for:
Total crashes (right angle + rear end)

Total right angle crashes
Right angle crashes with injury
Total rear end crashes
Rear end crashes with injury
Total crashes involving disregard of a traffic control
Disregard of a traffic control devices with injury
Cost associated with each crash
Since every camera was activated on a different date, the before and after evaluation time
periods differ from location to location as indicated above. In order to provide data
comparisons at each location, the crash data was converted into a rate (in crashes per
year) that can be compared from intersection to intersection. It is noted that the
calculated crash rates are not volume weighted and in no way account for traffic volumes
4
November 2014
Updated March 2016
Traffic Study
at their respective intersections. Table II summarizes the overall results of the evaluation
inclusive of all of the camera locations as well as total red light camera violations4. Table
III summarizes the overall results for all of the camera locations.
The average crash rate for total crashes5 on the red light camera approaches has been
reduced by 20.9%. The average crash rate for crashes involving disregard for a traffic
control device (TCD) have been reduced by 53.2%. Red light camera violations have
decreased 44% from the time that the cameras were installed. It is noted that the results
vary from intersection to intersection, however, when reviewing the combined impact of
the red light cameras on a Citywide basis, the number and severity of crashes are
significantly reduced.
TABLE II
CRASHES AND VIOLATIONS AT RED LIGHT CAMERA

INTERSECTIONS5
Average Crash Rate for Total Crashes5

Total Injury Crashes
Total Right Angle Crashes
Total Right Angle Crashes with Injury
Total Rear End Crashes
Average PreCamera
Crash Rate
(crashes/year)/
Violations
7.6
1.7
2.4
1.0
5.2
Average PostCamera
Crash Rate
(crashes/year)/
Violations
6.0
1.3
1.7
0.6
4.3
Total Crashes Involving Disregard of TCD
1.4
0.6
-53.2%
% Change in
Crash Rate/
Violations
-20.9%
-21.8%
-29.3%
-37.5%
-16.7%
Total Injury Crashes Involving Disregard of TCD
0.6
0.2
-60.2%
Total Red Light Camera Violations
1st 3 Months
Post-Installation:
42,376
June 1, 2015 thru

August 31, 2015:
23,746
-44.0%
TABLE III
CHANGES IN CRASH RATES AND VIOLATIONS
Total Crashes
Total Right Angle Crashes
Total Rear End Crashes
Total Violations
No. of Intersections
w/Increases in
Crash
Rates/Violations
8
9
8
9
w/ no change in
Crash
Rates/Violations
1
2
3
1
w/Decreases in
Crash
Rates/Violations
23
20
20
22
Violations summarized in the tables in this report include only those incidents where the Rochester Police
Department determined that a violation occurred and a citation was issued.
5 The analyses in this study include all right angle and rear end crashes occurring on the approaches that are
monitored by red light cameras.
November 2014
Updated March 2016
Traffic Study
Overall, eight locations experienced increases in the crash rate for total crashes while 23
experienced decreases in the crash rate for total crashes; and one location experienced
no change. The right angle crash rate increased at nine intersections, decreased at 20
intersections, and stayed the same at two locations. The rear end crash rate increased at
8 intersections, decreased at 20 intersections and stayed the same at 3 intersections.
Violations increased at nine locations and decreased at 22 locations; one location stayed
the same. All of the crash rates and violations noted in the following tables are also
summarized in a complete table listing all of the intersections in the Appendix of this
Report.
The pre- and post-camera crash rates are also summarized in Figure 1 on the following
page which graphically depicts the data in bar chart format. Figure 2 presents the same
pre- and post-camera crash rates in the form of a heat map. The map goes from the lowest
crash rate using a purple/gray color to the highest crash rate using a red color to show
where there are higher crash rates and how the crash rates have changed since the
cameras were installed. Figure 3 is also a heat map showing the difference in red light
camera violations from the first three months after camera installation to the most recent
three months of data currently available.
The eight intersections experiencing increases in crash rates were evaluated in greater
detail to determine any potential causes and/or mitigation that would decrease the crash
rates. The majority of the crashes reviewed in detail indicate driver error resulting from
inattention or poor decisions. There were no identifiable causes or obvious mitigation at
Court & Chestnut, Goodman & Clifford, Mt. Read & Lyell, St Paul & Upper Falls, and State
& Jay intersections. However, review of the Lake & West Ridge, Lake & Ridgeway, and
West Ridge & Ridgeway intersections indicates that there may be some confusion on the
part of motorists as to which signal indications apply to their direction of travel. This
triangle of intersections are currently under review by NYSDOT to determine additional
improvements that may be appropriate for this location.
Table IV summarizes the analysis results at each individual intersection. The table also
summarizes the number of violations recorded by the cameras during the three months
immediately following the cameras activation as well as the most recent three month
period of data available between June 1, 2015 and August 31, 2015. The comparison of
violations provides an indication of motorists reaction to greater enforcement at these
locations.
All of the intersection locations are operated and maintained by either the Monroe
County Department of Transportation (MCDOT) or the New York State Department of
Transportation (NYSDOT). Both agencies were contacted to determine if any changes
were made to signal timings or phasing after installation of the cameras. Any changes are
noted in the discussions following each table. If no changes are noted, then no changes
have been made since installation of the cameras.
November 2014
Updated March 2016
Crashesperyear
10
12
14
16
18
Intersection
CrashratebyIntersectionpre andpostcamera
PostCamerarate
PreCamerarate
FIGURE 1: PRE- AND POST-CAMERA CRASH RATE COMPARISON
LE
AL
ST
AT
E
LS
LEXINGTON
LOO
D
OA
BR
I-4
ERSIT
UNIV
RO
MO
N
EAS
MAPLE
OA
D
W
RO
BR
!
!
!
AIN
WM
Y
JA
EWS
T
COUR
CL
ON
INT
OA
Y
WA
90
Low
High
I-490
VARD
PARK
ATLANTIC
EAST
WESTFALL
Study Intersections
ELMWOOD
HAR
ERSIT
UNIV
Y
IN
N
LE
AL
ST
AT
E
LS
LOO
MO
N
EAS
MAPLE
RO
ERSIT
UNIV
OA
D
W
RO
B
BR
!
!
!
AIN
WM
Y
JA
October 2015
N
LE
AL
ST
AT
E
Post-Camera Crash Rate Heat Map
ER
INN
WEST
LYELL
IN
E MA
JAY
SENECA
LEXINGTON
EMERSON
D
BROA
R FAL
UPPE
PA
R
Downtown Crashes Only
W MA
I-490
Y
JA
BUFFALO
I-490
90
Crash Rate Intensity
CHESTNUT
IN
E MA
BAY
CLIFFORD
IN
IV
DR
BONESTEEL
I-4
October 2015
ANDR
FALLS
RIDGEWAY
Y
WA
AL
N
LE
R
UPPE
NORTON
104
KODAK PARK
LS
E
ANDR
WS
T
COUR
NORTON
IN
E MA
Low
High
Study Intersections
CHESTNUT
Crash Rate Intensity
R FAL
UPPE
RIDGE
TITUS
ON
INT
ST
AT
E
RIDGE
CL
Pre-Camera Crash Rate Heat Map
IN
ER
INN
WEST
E MA
JAY
LYELL
EMERSON
D
BROA
FAL
PPER
BONESTEEL
PA
RK
DEWEY
RIDGE
D
OA
BR
Downtown Crashes Only
IN
W MA
I-490
Y
JA
BUFFALO
I-490
IN
DR
IV
SENECA
LAKE
SAXTON
JEFFERSON
PA
UL
AN
GE
NOR
TH
MT READ
MT READ
EXC
H
POR
T
RIDGEWAY
SOU
TH
DEWEY
KODAK PARK
BR
O
OK
S
NG
HA
EXC
ER
GS
AMES
ALEX
A
PE
HO
MT
ALEX
AND
MEI
DMA
GOO
LAN
DMA
GOO
MURRAY
AMES
MURRAY
NDE
R
GENESEE
MAN
GOO
D
FORD
MT
GENESEE
LAKE
SAXTON
JEFFERSON
ST
WILS
O
HOP
E
FORD
OK
S
RIDGE
ER
AN
GE
ALEX
AND
TITUS
BR
O
POR
T
D
LAN
N
DMA
PA
UL
DMA
PARK
I-490
VARD
EAST
ATLANTIC
ELMWOOD
HAR
WESTFALL
BAY
104
ERSIT
UNIV
CLIFFORD
CUL
VER
MT READ
MT READ
EXC
H
ST
WILS
O
CUL
VER
E
WIN
TO
AUL
ST P
ALEX
A
ON
CLINT
NDE
R
RO
N
MO
DMA
TH
AUL
ST P
GOO
BR
AY
DW
ON
CLINT
MT
NOR
TH
D
OA
Y
WA
HOP
E
NG
UL
PA
HA
ST
TH
MO
PLY
EXC
CLINTON
SOU
PE
CONKEY
ON
CLINT
TH
MO
PLY
HO
JOSEPH
BR
MT
HUDSON
SOU
TH
UL
PA
ST
GS
CLINTON
TH
SOU
MEI
CONKEY
ON
CLINT
GOO
JOSEPH
RO
HUDSON
N
MO
WIN
TO
IN
AR
W
GOO
IN
AR
W
G
CUL
VE R
CUL
VE R
EAST RIVER
WEST
LYELL
MAPLE
BR
OA
D
W
RO
LAKE
AIN
WM
Y
JA
ST
AT
E
N
LE
AL
R
UPPE
ANDR
EWS
FALLS
T
COUR
CHESTNUT
RIDGE
NORTON
ON
INT
IN
E MA
Study Intersections
CL
October 2015
Less Violations
More Violations
PARK
I-490
VARD
EAST
ATLANTIC
ELMWOOD
HAR
WESTFALL
BAY
104
Violations Heat Map - First 3 Months After Installation
CHI
LI
BUFFALO
I-490
JAY
THURSTON
BONESTEEL
EMERSON
DEWEY
MT READ
MT READ
LEXINGTON
AMES
MURRAY
PA
RK
SAXTON
PA
UL
IN
DR
IV
PE
SENECA
BR
O
OK
S
NOR
TH
SOU
TH
!
!
!
ER
GS
POR
T
GENESEE
ALEX
AND
MEI
DMA
GOO
ERSIT
UNIV
CLIFFORD
LI
CHI
BUFFALO
I-490
MT READ
MT READ
RIDGEWAY
NG
HA
IN
IV
DR
G
K
JAY
SENECA
LEXINGTON
EAST RIVER
WEST
LYELL
EMERSON
PA
R
RIDGEWAY
KODAK PARK
AMES
MAPLE
MURRAY
BONESTEEL
THURSTON
LAN
DMA
GOO
DEWEY
RIDGE
GENESEE
N
W
RO
OA
D
!
!
!
BR
LAKE
SAXTON
KODAK PARK
JEFFERSON
IC
DR
FORD
MT
AIN
WM
Y
JA
N
LE
AL
ST
AT
E
FORD
ST
WILS
O
HOP
E
BR
O
OK
S
LS
E
ANDR
WS
R FAL
UPPE
T
COUR
CHESTNUT
!
NORTON
RIDGE
TITUS
IN
E MA
Study Intersections
NOR
TH
RIDGE
WIN
TO
9
I-3
DR
EXC
ER
BAY
104
PARK
I-490
VARD
EAST
ATLANTIC
ELMWOOD
HAR
DMA
CUL
VE R
ERSIT
UNIV
CLIFFORD
October 2015
Violations Heat Map - 6/1/15-8/31/15
Less Violations
More Violations
WESTFALL
KE
N
HO
MT
ALEX
AND
TITUS
9
I-3
RO
KE
N
JEFFERSON
ST
WILS
O
CUL
VER
N
MO
MT
TH
OA
AY
DW
ON
INT
E
HOP
E
BR
IC
NG
UL
PA
HA
ST
TH
MO
PLY
EXC
CLINTON
SOU
PE
CONKEY
ON
CLINT
D
OA
Y
WA
CL
RO
JOSEPH
N
MO
WIN
TO
HUDSON
UL
PA
TH
MO
PLY
HO
ST
BR
MT
POR
T
D
LAN
N
DMA
PA
UL
CLINTON
TH
SOU
SOU
TH
CONKEY
ON
CLINT
GS
JOSEPH
GOO
HUDSON
MEI
CUL
VER
IN
AR
W
GOO
IN
AR
W
G
CUL
VE R
Traffic Study
TABLE IV
CRASH ANALYSIS & VIOLATIONS BY INTERSECTION
Intersection:
Camera location(s): Northbound
Total Crashes
Total Injury
Total Right Angle
Total Right Angle w/Injury
Total Rear End
Total crashes involving disregard of
a traffic control device
Total Injury crashes involving
disregard of a traffic control device
Violations
N. Goodman @ Clifford, Go Live Date: 4/12/12

Pre-Camera
Post-Camera
1/1/07-4/12/12
4/12/12-12/31/14
Total
Crash Rate
Total
Crash Rate
Crashes (crashes/year) Crashes (crashes/year)
17
2
5
1
12
3.2
0.4
0.9
0.4
2.3
11
2
5
2
6
4.0
0.7
1.8
0.7
2.2
0.6
0.4
0.4
1st 3 months after

camera installation
222
June 1, 2015 thru

August 31, 2015
222
The crash rate related to the northbound approach at the North Goodman/Clifford
Street intersection has increased since the camera was installed on April 12, 2012. While
the right angle crash rate has increased, the rear end crash rate has decreased slightly.
The number of violations is the same.
Intersection:
Camera location(s): Southbound
Total Crashes
Total Injury
Total Right Angle
Total Rear End
Total crashes involving disregard
of a traffic control device
Violations
Monroe @ Alexander, Go Live Date: 4/12/12

Pre-Camera
Post-Camera
1/1/07-4/12/12
4/12/12-12/31/14
Total
Crash Rate
Total
Crash Rate
10.6
4.4
56
12
1.1
0
6
0
4.7
1.5
25
4
0.6
0
3
0
5.9
2.9
31
8
12
2.3
0.7
0.6
1st 3 months after

camera installation
242
June 1, 2015 thru

August 31, 2015
325
Overall the total crash rates, right angle crash rates, and rear end crash rates have
decreased since camera installation. Violations have increased slightly, approximately
34.3%.
7
November 2014
Updated March 2016
Traffic Study
Intersection:
Camera location(s):
Eastbound & Westbound
Total Crashes
Total Injury
Total Right Angle
Total Rear End
Violations
Alexander @ Broadway, Go Live Date: 11/09/10

Pre-Camera
Post-Camera
1/1/07-11/09/10
11/09/10-12/31/14
Total
Crash Rate
Total
Crash Rate
26
10
20
10
6
6.7
2.6
5.2
2.6
1.6
17
3
13
1
4
4.1
0.7
3.1
0.2
1.0
15
3.9
2.2
2.3
0.2
1st 3 months after

camera installation
June 1, 2015 thru

August 31, 2015
1,172
414
The total crash rate at the Alexander/Broadway intersection has decreased since the
camera was installed as well as the right angle crash rate and rear end crash rate. The
violations have decreased significantly since the cameras were installed, approximately
64.7%. It is noted that MCDOT extended the yellow clearance interval by 0.5 seconds on
Alexander Street at the Broadway/Alexander intersection on March 15, 2010, prior to
the cameras Go live Date.
Intersection:
Camera location(s):
Northbound & Southbound
Total Crashes
Total Injury
Total Right Angle
Total Rear End
disregard of a traffic control
device
Violations
State @ Jay, Go Live Date: 11/09/10

Pre-Camera
Post-Camera
1/01/07-11/09/10
11/09/10-12/31/14
Total
Crash Rate
Total
Crash Rate
3.4
4.3
13
18
0.3
1.0
1
4
1.0
1.5
4
6
0
0.7
0
3
2.3
2.9
9
12
4
1.0
0.5
0.5
1st 3 months after

camera installation
June 1, 2015 thru

August 31, 2015
2,210
459
The total crash rate, right angle crash rate and rear-end crash rates have increased slightly.
However, violations have decreased significantly, 79.2%.
November 2014
Updated March 2016
Traffic Study
Intersection:
Camera location(s):
Total Crashes
Total Injury
Total Right Angle
Total Rear End
North @ Clifford, Go Live Date: 11/09/10

Pre-Camera
Post-Camera
1/01/07-11/09/10
11/09/10-12/31/14
Total
Crash Rate
Total
Crash Rate
20
7
12
6
8
5.2
1.8
3.1
1.6
2.1
11
3
4
3
7
2.7
0.7
1.0
0.7
1.7
2.1
0.5
0.8
0.5
st
Violations
1 3 months after
camera installation
383
June 1, 2015 thru

August 31, 2015
474
In general crash rates have decreased significantly at North & Clifford. Violations have
increased slightly, approximately 23.8%, from 383 during the first three months following
camera installation to 474 during the last three months of this study.
Intersection:
Camera location(s):
Eastbound & Southbound
Total Crashes
Total Injury
Total Right Angle
Total Rear End
Dewey@ Ridgeway, Go Live Date: 2/19/11

Pre-Camera
Post-Camera
1/01/07-2/19/11
2/19/11-12/31/14
Total
Crash Rate
Total
Crash Rate
56
13.5
25
6.5
9
2.2
5
1.3
16
3.9
6
1.6
6
1.5
1
0.3
40
9.7
19
4.9
10
2.4
0.5
1.2
st
Violations
1 3 months after
camera installation
June 1, 2015 thru

August 31, 2015
595
896
All crash rates have decreased significantly at Dewey & Ridgeway. Violations have
increased from 595 to 896, approximately 50.6%.
Intersection:
Clinton @ Norton, Go Live Date: 1/27/11
November 2014
Updated March 2016
Traffic Study
Camera location(s):
Total Crashes
Total Injury
Total Right Angle
Total Rear End
Violations
Pre-Camera
1/01/07-1/27/11
Total
Crash Rate
Crashes (crashes/year)
Post-Camera
1/27/11-12/31/14
Total
Crash Rate
24
7
7
3
17
5.9
1.7
1.7
0.7
4.2
8
1
1
0
7
2.0
0.3
0.3
0
1.8
0.7
0.5
1st 3 months after

camera installation
June 1, 2015 thru

August 31, 2015
619
891
All crash rates have decreased at Clinton & Norton; however violations have increased
approximately 43.9% from 619 to 891.
Intersection:
Camera location(s):
Northbound & Westbound
Total Crashes
Total Injury
Total Right Angle
Total Rear End
Culver @ East, Go Live Date: 2/12/11

Pre-Camera
Post-Camera
1/01/07-2/12/11
2/12/11-12/31/14
Total
Crash Rate
Total
Crash Rate
48
11.7
19
4.9
8
2.0
3
0.8
20
4.9
10
2.6
3
0.7
1
0.3
28
6.8
9
2.3
11
2.7
0.8
0.2
st
Violations
1 3 months after
camera installation
892
June 1, 2015 thru

August 31, 2015
411
In general, crash rates and violations have both decreased significantly (more than 50% in
both cases) at the Culver/East intersection.
Intersection:
Clinton @ Andrews, Go Live Date: 1/27/11
10
November 2014
Updated March 2016
Traffic Study
Camera location(s):
Northbound
Total Crashes
Total Injury
Total Right Angle
Total Rear End
Violations
Pre-Camera
1/01/07-1/27/11
Total
Crash Rate
15
3.7
7
1.7
12
2.9
7
1.7
3
0.7
Post-Camera
1/27/11-12/31/14
Total
Crash Rate
13
3.3
7
1.8
10
2.6
6
1.5
3
0.8
1.5
1.8
0.7
1.0
1st 3 months after

camera installation
June 1, 2015 thru

August 31, 2015
174
259
Total crash rates and right angle crash rates have decreased at Clinton & Andrews while
rear end crash rates have increased slightly. Violations have also increased, approximately
48.9%, from 174 to 259.
Intersection:
Camera location(s):
Southbound
Total Crashes
Total Injury
Total Right Angle
Total Rear End
West @ Ames, Go Live Date: 6/03/11

Pre-Camera
Post-Camera
1/01/07-6/03/11
6/03/11-12/31/14
Total
Crash Rate
Total
Crash Rate
13
2.9
3
0.8
4
0.9
0
0
3
0.7
0
0
2
0.5
0
0
10
2.3
3
0.8
1
0
st
Violations
0.2
1 3 months after
camera installation
June 1, 2015 thru

August 31, 2015
3176
764
All types of crash rates have decreased significantly, more than 70%, at this intersection.
In addition, violations have decreased very significantly (approximately 75.6%) from 3,176
to 764.
11
November 2014
Updated March 2016
Traffic Study
Intersection:
Camera location(s):
Eastbound
Total Crashes
Total Injury
Total Right Angle
Total Rear End
Violations
W. Main @ Brown @ Genesee,

Go Live Date: 6/03/11
Pre-Camera
Post-Camera
1/01/07-6/03/11
6/03/11-12/31/14
Total
Crash Rate
Total
Crash Rate
27
6.1
15
4.2
8
1.8
2
0.6
5
1.1
4
1.1
4
0.9
2
0.6
22
5.0
11
3.1
5
1.1
0.3
0.9
1st 3 months after

camera installation
563
June 1, 2015 thru

August 31, 2015
474
All types of crash rates have decreased at W. Main & Brown. Violations are down
approximately 15.8%.
Intersection:
Camera location(s):
Total Crashes
Total Injury
Total Right Angle
Total Rear End
State @ Allen, Go Live Date: 7/31/11

Pre-Camera
Post-Camera
1/01/07-7/31/11
7/31/11-12/31/14
Total
Crash Rate
Total
Crash Rate
57
12.4
36
10.5
12
2.6
10
2.9
36
7.9
19
5.6
10
2.2
7
2.1
21
4.6
17
5.0
19
4.1
2.1
2.0
0.9
st
Violations
1 3 months after
camera installation
June 1, 2015 thru

August 31, 2015
2969
356
All types of crash rates have decreased at the State & Allen intersection with the
exception of total injury and rear end crash rates which have both increased slightly. It is
noted that the lane configurations were modified in the fall of 2012 to eliminate the
southbound dual left from State Street onto the Inner Loop eastbound. The approach
became a single left turn lane and a through only lane (instead of a left turn lane and shared
left and through lane). In addition, NYSDOT added back plates to the signal heads in
March 2015. Violations have decreased by the greatest amount, 88%, at this intersection.
12
November 2014
Updated March 2016
Traffic Study
Intersection:
Camera location(s):
Total Crashes
Total Injury
Total Right Angle
Total Rear End
Violations
St. Paul @ Upper Falls Blvd, Go Live Date: 9/30/11

Pre-Camera
Post-Camera
1/01/07-9/30/11
9/30/11-12/31/14
Total
Crash Rate
Total
Crash Rate
31
10
9
6
22
6.5
2.1
1.9
1.3
4.6
27
8
5
2
22
8.3
3.0
1.5
0.6
6.8
1.3
1.6
0.8
0.6
1st 3 months after

camera installation
June 1, 2015 thru

August 31, 2015
1431
426
Total crash rates, injury crash rates, and rear end crash rates have increased at the St.
Paul/Upper Falls Blvd intersection. However, violations have decreased significantly from
1,431 to 426, approximately 70.2%.
Intersection:
Camera location(s):
Westbound
Total Crashes
Total Injury
Total Right Angle
Total Rear End
Brown @ Broad, Go Live Date: 9/30/11

Pre-Camera
Post-Camera
1/01/07-9/30/11
9/30/11-12/31/14
Total
Crash Rate
Total
Crash Rate
18
3.8
9
2.8
6
1.3
4
1.2
11
2.3
4
1.2
5
1.1
3
0.9
7
1.5
5
1.5
7
0
st
Violations
1.5
1 3 months after
camera installation
1083
June 1, 2015 thru

August 31, 2015
800
All types of crash rates have decreased along with violations (approximately 26.1%) at the
Brown/Broad intersection.
13
November 2014
Updated March 2016
Traffic Study
Intersection:
Camera location(s):
Total Crashes
Total Injury
Total Right Angle
Total Rear End
Violations
Lyell @ Murray, Go Live Date: 9/30/11

Pre-Camera
Post-Camera
1/01/07-9/30/11
9/30/11-12/31/14
Total
Crash Rate
Total
Crash Rate
27
5.7
12
3.7
9
1.9
2
0.6
3
0.6
2
0.6
2
0.4
1
0.3
24
5.0
10
3.1
2
0.4
0.4
1st 3 months after

camera installation
June 1, 2015 thru

August 31, 2015
685
633
Crash rates have decreased at Lyell and Murray during the study period and violations
have decreased slightly from 685 to 633 (7.6%).
Intersection:
Camera location(s):
Westbound
Total Crashes
Total Injury
Total Right Angle
Total Rear End
Violations
Maple @ Saxton, Go Live Date: 9/30/11

Pre-Camera
Post-Camera
1/01/07-9/30/11
9/30/11-12/31/14
Total
Crash Rate
Total
Crash Rate
4
0.8
1
0.3
2
0.4
1
0.3
1
0.2
1
0.3
0
0
1
0.3
3
0.6
0
0
0
0.3
1st 3 months after

camera installation
June 1, 2015 thru

August 31, 2015
73
25
Based on the available data at Maple and Saxton, there were very few crashes during the
pre and post-camera periods. Violations have decreased significantly from 73 to 25
(65.8%).
14
November 2014
Updated March 2016
Traffic Study
Intersection:
Camera location(s):
Southbound
Total Crashes
Total Injury
Total Right Angle
Total Rear End
Violations
Norton @ Hudson, Go Live Date: 10/17/11

Pre-Camera
Post-Camera
1/01/07-10/17/11
10/17/11-12/31/14
Total
Crash Rate
Total
Crash Rate
39
8.1
14
4.4
7
1.5
5
1.6
12
2.5
3
1.9
5
1.0
1
0.3
27
5.6
11
3.4
5
1.0
0.2
1st 3 months after

camera installation
1425
June 1, 2015 thru

August 31, 2015
832
All types of crash rates have decreased during the study period at the Norton/Hudson
intersection with the exception of the total injury crash rate which remained
approximately the same. Violations have also decreased by 41.6%.
Intersection:
Camera location(s):
Eastbound
Total Crashes
Total Injury
Total Right Angle
Total Rear End
Violations
Broad @ Ford @ W Main, Go Live Date: 10/31/11

Pre-Camera
Post-Camera
1/01/07-10/31/11
10/31/11-12/31/14
Total
Crash Rate
Total
Crash Rate
47
5
7
3
40
9.7
1.0
1.5
0.6
8.3
15
3
1
0
14
4.7
1.0
0.3
0
4.4
1.2
0.6
1st 3 months after

camera installation
4871
June 1, 2015 thru

August 31, 2015
1976
All types of crash rates have decreased at Broad and Ford. Violations have also decreased
significantly from 4,871 to 1,976 or 59.4%.
15
November 2014
Updated March 2016
Traffic Study
Intersection:
Camera location(s):
Total Crashes
Total Injury
Total Right Angle
Total Rear End
Violations
W. Ridge @ Ridgeway, Go Live Date: 11/23/11

Pre-Camera
Post-Camera
1/07/07-11/23/11
11/23/11-12/31/14
Total
Crash Rate
Total
Crash Rate
18
3.7
24
7.8
4
0.8
8
2.6
5
1.0
9
2.9
2
0.4
4
1.3
13
2.7
15
4.8
2
0.4
0.7
0.2
0.3
1st 3 months after

camera installation
June 1, 2015 thru

August 31, 2015
1680
803
Based on the available data at W. Ridge and Ridgeway, all types of crash rates have
increased since installation of the cameras. Although violations have decreased 52.2% from
1,680 to 803.
Intersection:
Camera location(s):
Total Crashes
Total Injury
Total Right Angle
Total Rear End
Violations
Lake @ Driving Park, Go Live Date: 12/12/11

Pre-Camera
Post-Camera
1/01/07-12/12/11
12/12/11-12/31/14
Total
Crash Rate
Total
Crash Rate
58
11.7
31
10.1
10
2.0
10
3.3
8
1.6
9
2.9
2
0.4
3
1.0
50
10.1
22
7.2
2
0.4
1.0
0.2
0.7
1st 3 months after

camera installation
1688
June 1, 2015 thru

August 31, 2015
1986
At the Lake and Driving Park intersection, all types of crash rates have decreased with
the exception of right angle and right angle injury crash rates which have increased.
Violations have increased from 1,688 to 1,986 (an increase of 17.7%).
16
November 2014
Updated March 2016
Traffic Study
Intersection:
Camera location(s):
Northbound
Total Crashes
Total Injury
Total Right Angle
Total Rear End
Violations
Lake @ Ridgeway, Go Live Date: 12/12/11

Pre-Camera
Post-Camera
1/01/07-12/12/11
12/12/11-12/31/14
Total
Crash Rate
Total
Crash Rate
54
10.9
35
11.4
11
2.2
5
1.6
22
4.5
8
2.6
7
1.4
3
1.0
33
6.7
27
8.8
12
2.4
1.0
0.4
0.7
1st 3 months after

camera installation
June 1, 2015 thru

August 31, 2015
1275
1681
The total crash rates, rear end crash rates, and injury crash rates involving disregard of a
traffic control device have increased. All other crash rates have decreased. In addition,
violations have increased from 1,275 to 1,681 or 31.8%.
Intersection:
Camera location(s):
Eastbound
Total Crashes
Total Injury
Total Right Angle
Total Rear End
Violations
W. Ridge @ Bonesteel, Go Live Date: 1/12/12

Pre-Camera
Post-Camera
1/01/07-1/12/12
1/12/12-12/31/14
Total
Crash Rate
Total
Crash Rate
42
8.3
22
7.4
6
1.2
3
1.0
3
0.6
2
0.7
2
0.4
1
0.3
39
7.8
20
6.7
2
0.4
0.2
1st 3 months after

camera installation
June 1, 2015 thru

August 31, 2015
739
440
All types of crash rates have decreased at W. Ridge and Bonesteel with the exception of
right angle crash rates which have approximately the same crash rate before and after
camera installation. Violations have decreased 40.5% from 739 to 440.
17
November 2014
Updated March 2016
Traffic Study
Intersection:
Camera location(s):
Eastbound & Southbound
Total Crashes
Total Injury
Total Right Angle
Total Rear End
Violations
Mt. Read @ Lyell, Go Live Date: 2/12/11

Pre-Camera
Post-Camera
1/01/07-2/12/11
2/12/11-12/31/14
Total
Crash Rate
Total
Crash Rate
45
7
2
0
43
11.0
1.7
0.5
0
10.5
45
9
4
1
41
11.6
2.3
1.0
0.3
10.5
0.5
0.3
0.3
1st 3 months after

camera installation
918
June 1, 2015 thru

August 31, 2015
366
Overall there is no significant change in the crash rates at Mt. Read and Lyell. Violations
have decreased significantly from 918 to 366 or 60.1%
Intersection:
Camera location(s):
Total Crashes
Total Injury
Total Right Angle
Total Rear End
Violations
Mt. Read @ Emerson, Go Live Date: 4/04/12

Pre-Camera
Post-Camera
1/01/07-4/04/12
4/04/12-12/31/14
Total
Crash Rate
Total
Crash Rate
32
17
19
13
13
6.1
3.2
3.6
2.5
2.5
15
5
3
0
12
5.5
1.8
1.1
0
4.4
1.5
0.4
1.3
1st 3 months after

camera installation
2982
June 1, 2015 thru

August 31, 2015
762
Overall crash rates have decreased at Mt. Read and Emerson with the exception of rear
end crash rates which have increased. Violations have decreased significantly, 74.4%, from
2,982 to 762. It is noted that NYSDOT extended the clearance interval at this intersection
after the cameras were installed to correct a programming error.
18
November 2014
Updated March 2016
Traffic Study
Intersection:
Camera location(s):
Total Crashes
Total Injury
Total Right Angle
Total Rear End
Violations
N. Goodman @ E. Main, Go Live Date: 8/10/12

Pre-Camera
Post-Camera
1/01/07-8/10/12
8/10/12-12/31/14
Total
Crash Rate
Total
Crash Rate
66
13
4
2
62
11.8
2.3
0.7
0.4
11.0
20
3
0
0
20
8.3
1.3
0
0
8.3
1st 3 months after

camera installation
June 1, 2015 thru

August 31, 2015
1528
1016
Overall crash rates at N. Goodman and E. Main have decreased since the cameras were
installed. Violations have also decreased slightly from 1,528 to 1,016 or 33.5%.
Intersection:
Camera location(s):
Westbound
Total Crashes
Total Injury
Total Right Angle
Total Rear End
Alexander @ University, Go Live Date: 12/07/12

Pre-Camera
Post-Camera
1/01/07-12/07/12
12/07/12-12/31/14
Total
Crash Rate
Total
Crash Rate
39
6.6
6
2.9
19
3.2
0
0
22
3.7
4
1.9
16
2.7
0
0
17
2.9
2
1.0
14
2.4
0.5
11
1.9
st
Violations
1 3 months after
camera installation
120
June 1, 2015 thru

August 31, 2015
255
All types of crash rates have decreased significantly, 56.1% for total crashes, at Alexander
and University. However, violations have increased significantly from 120 to 255 or
112.5%.
19
November 2014
Updated March 2016
Traffic Study
Intersection:
Camera location(s):
Southbound
Total Crashes
Total Injury
Total Right Angle
Total Rear End
Violations
Chestnut @ Court, Go Live Date: 12/07/12

Pre-Camera
Post-Camera
1/01/07-12/07/12
12/07/12-12/31/14
Total
Crash Rate
Total
Crash Rate
19
3.2
9
4.4
4
0.7
4
1.9
11
1.9
7
3.4
3
0.5
4
1.9
8
1.3
2
1.0
2
0.3
1.0
0.2
0.5
1st 3 months after

camera installation
June 1, 2015 thru

August 31, 2015
286
339
Based on the available data at Chestnut and Court, all types of crash rates have increased
since the cameras were installed with the exception of rear end crash rates. Violations
have also increased from 286 to 339, 18.5%, during the study time periods.
Intersection:
Camera location(s):
Northbound
Total Crshes
Total Injury
Total Right Angle
Total Rear End
S. Goodman @ 490, Go Live Date: 7/31/11

Pre-Camera
Post-Camera
1/01/07-7/31/11
7/31/11-12/31/14
Total
Crash Rate
Total
Crash Rate
37
8.1
18
5.3
3
0.7
4
1.2
21
4.6
6
1.8
3
0.7
3
0.9
16
3.5
12
3.5
12
2.6
0.6
0.7
0.3
st
Violations
1 3 months after
camera installation
June 1, 2015 thru

August 31, 2015
2571
2032
All types of crash rates have decreased at the S. Goodman and 490 intersection with the
exception of injury crash rates. Violations have also decreased 21%.
20
November 2014
Updated March 2016
Traffic Study
Intersection:
Camera location(s):
Total Crashes
Total Injury
Total Right Angle
Total Rear End
Violations
Lake @ W. Ridge, Go Live Date: 11/23/11

Pre-Camera
Post-Camera
1/01/07-11/23/11
11/23/11-12/31/14
Total
Crash Rate
Total
Crash Rate
63
12.9
53
17.1
10
2.0
4
1.3
18
3.7
11
3.6
7
1.4
3
1.0
45
9.2
42
13.5
10
2.0
2.6
1.0
0.6
1st 3 months after

camera installation
2493
June 1, 2015 thru

August 31, 2015
2021
The overall crash rate and rear end crash rate have increased at the Lake and W. Ridge
intersection. Violations have decreased slightly from 2,493 to 2,021, 18.9%.
Intersection:
Camera location(s):
Southbound
Total Crashes
Total Injury
Total Right Angle
Total Rear End
Violations
Mt. Read @ Driving Park, Go Live Date: 4/04/12

Pre-Camera
Post-Camera
1/01/07-4/04/12
4/04/12-12/31/14
Total
Crash Rate
Total
Crash Rate
26
9
4
4
22
4.9
1.7
0.8
0.8
4.2
9
1
0
0
9
3.3
0.4
0
0
3.3
0.6
0.6
1st 3 months after

camera installation
1666
June 1, 2015 thru

August 31, 2015
378
All types of crash rates have decreased at Mt. Read/Driving Park. Violations have also
decreased significantly, 77.3%, from 1,666 to 378. NYSDOT made two changes at the Mt.
Read/Lexington and Mt. Read/Emerson intersections to extend their clearances to correct
programming errors. No other clearance interval timing changes were made.
21
November 2014
Updated March 2016
Traffic Study
Intersection:
Camera location(s):
Total Crashes
Total Injury
Total Right Angle
Total Rear End
Violations
St. Paul St. @ Pedestrian Crossing,

Go Live Date: 6/03/11
Pre-Camera
Post-Camera
1/01/07-6/03/11
6/03/11-12/31/14
Total
Crash Rate
Total
Crash Rate
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1st 3 months after

camera installation
June 1, 2015 thru

August 31, 2015
622
265
No crashes occurred at this location during the study time period. It is noted that this
location is a pedestrian crossing and not an intersection. Therefore the traffic signal is
activated by a pedestrian pushing a button. Any crashes that would occur at this location
would be rear end crashes, vehicle/crossing pedestrian crashes, or vehicle/crossing bicycle
crashes. Violations have decreased from 622 to 265, 57.4%.
Intersection:
Camera location(s):
Southbound
Total Crashes
Total Injury
Total Right Angle
Total Rear End
Violations
Mt. Hope @ Elmwood, Go Live Date: 9/03/13

Pre-Camera
Post-Camera
1/01/07-9/03/13
9/03/13-12/31/14
Total
Crash Rate
Total
Crash Rate
Crashes
(crashes/year) Crashes (crashes/year)
114
16
9
3
105
17.1
2.4
1.3
0.5
15.8
21
4
4
2
17
15.8
3.0
3.0
1.5
12.8
0.8
0.3
1st 3 months after camera

installation
1023
June 1, 2015 thru

August 31, 2015
765
Overall crash rates and rear end crash rates have decreased between the pre- and postcamera time periods at Mt. Hope & Elmwood while other types of crash rates have
increased. Violations have decreased from 1,023 to 765 or 25.2%.
22
November 2014
Updated March 2016
Traffic Study
V. COST ANALYSIS
Traffic crashes cost society billions of dollars every year. The costs associated with crashes
exceed the costs of congestion in every metropolitan area studied by the Texas
Transportation Institute in the annual Urban Mobility Report in 2012. The New York
State Department of Transportation Office of Modal Safety & Security Planning &
Development Bureau develops average accident cost information for State highways. The
most recent NYSDOT data (includes period from August 1, 2011 through July 31, 2013)
has been used to determine the average reduction in costs associated with the reduction
in crash rates that have resulted since installation of the red light cameras in the City of
Rochester. Table V summarizes the cost reductions.
TABLE V -
COST SAVINGS
Crash Type
Change in Yearly
Crash Rate
NYSDOT
Average
Accident Cost*
Cost Savings
Total Crashes
49.4 crashes/year
NA
NA
Total Injury Crashes
11.2 crashes/year
$93,500
$1,047,200 per year
Total Non-Injury Crashes
38.2 crashes/year
$3,800
$145,160 per year
Total Cost Savings Per Year
$1,192,360 per year
* Average Crash Costs typically include economic losses such as medical costs, lost time at work, costs
associated with emergency response, and vehicle repair costs.
The total cost savings of $1,192,360 per year is a benefit that stems from the reduction
in crashes as a result of the red light cameras.
VI. CONSIDERATION OF CAMERA REMOVAL
A review was conducted to determine if cameras should be removed at any of the current
intersections in the program. Rates for rear end and right angle crashes were evaluated.
Eight intersections experienced increases in rear end crash rates after the cameras were
installed. Three of these included the triangle of Lake Ave/Ridgeway/West Ridge Road,
which was discussed previously. Of the five remaining intersections, State & Jay also
experienced an increase in the right angle crash rate. Clinton & Andrews saw a right angle
crash rate reduction of approximately 10% per year. The other three intersections (Mt.
Read & Emerson, State & Allen, and St. Paul & Upper Falls) experienced improved right
angle crash rates in the range of 21% to 69%.
The only intersection identified for potential camera removal is Maple & Saxton since the
crash rate is less than 1 crash per year both before and after the camera was installed.
The other intersections did not experience clear patterns that would indicate removal of
the cameras would not result in future decline.
23
November 2014
Updated March 2016
Traffic Study
It is noted that there were no crashes at the St. Paul Street/pedestrian crossing location.
However, given the sole purpose of the traffic signal is for pedestrian crossings, removal
of the red light camera at this location is not recommended.
VII. CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS
The analysis of crash rates before and after the installation of red light cameras indicates
that the number and severity of crashes is reduced at the majority of the study
intersections. The following list summarizes findings and recommendations resulting from
this study:
1. Overall, the total crash rate (right angle and rear end) on approaches with red
light cameras has been reduced by 20.9%.
2. The crash rate for crashes involving disregard of a traffic control device has been
significantly reduced (a 53.2% decrease between before and after camera
deployment).
3. The total number of red light camera violations has decreased by 44% when
comparing the first three months of violations after the camera was installed to
the latest three months of data available (June 1, 2015 through August 31, 2015).
4. Eight intersections experienced increases in total crash rates while twenty-three
experienced decreases in total crashes and one location remained unchanged.
5. Right angle crash rates increased at nine intersections, decreased at twenty
intersections, and stayed the same at three locations.
6. Rear end crash rates increased at eight intersections, decreased at twenty
intersections and stayed the same at four intersections.
7. Violations increased at nine intersections, decreased at twenty-two intersections
and stayed the same at one intersection.
8. The three intersections of West Ridge Road/Lake Ave/Ridgeway have experienced
increased crash rates. Based upon review of the detailed accident data,
improvements should be evaluated to reduce driver confusion at the intersections.
A roundabout may be one possible solution.
9. It is estimated that the red light cameras are currently providing a total cost savings
(crashes prevented) of approximately $1,192,360 per year.
10. One intersection has been identified for consideration of camera removal: Maple
& Saxton.
Based upon the results of this study, the red light camera program has reduced the overall
crash rate, the severity of crashes, and related crash costs. Therefore, it is our
recommendation that the City continue the red light camera program.
24
November 2014
Updated March 2016
Average
Total
Intersection
WestAmes
ClintonNorton
MapleSaxton
MonroeAlexander
CulverEast
AlexanderUniversity
DeweyRidgeway
W.MainBroadFord
NorthClifford
NortonHudson
AlexanderBroadway
LyellMurray
S.GoodmanI490
Mt.ReadDrivingPark
W.MainBrownGenesee
N.GoodmanE.Main
BrownBroad
StateAllen
LakeDrivingPark
W.RidgeBonesteel
ClintonAndrews
Mt.ReadEmerson
Mt.HopeElmwood
LakeRidgeway
Mt.ReadLyell
N.GoodmanClifford
StateJay
St.PaulUpperFalls
LakeW.Ridge
CourtChestnut
W.RidgeRidgeway
St.PaulPedXing
7.6
6.0
20.9%
TotalCrashRate
Post4 %Change5
2.9
0.8
72.4%
5.9
2.0
66.1%
0.8
0.3
62.5%
10.6
4.4
58.5%
11.7
4.9
58.1%
6.6
2.9
56.1%
13.5
6.5
51.9%
9.7
4.7
51.5%
5.2
2.7
48.1%
8.1
4.4
45.7%
6.7
4.1
38.8%
5.7
3.7
35.1%
8.1
5.3
34.6%
4.9
3.3
32.7%
6.1
4.2
31.1%
11.8
8.3
29.7%
3.8
2.8
26.3%
12.4
10.5
15.3%
11.7
10.1
13.7%
8.3
7.4
10.8%
3.7
3.3
10.8%
6.1
5.5
9.8%
17.1
15.8
7.6%
10.9
11.4
4.6%
11.0
11.6
5.5%
3.2
4.0
25.0%
3.4
4.3
26.5%
6.5
8.3
27.7%
12.9
17.1
32.6%
3.2
4.4
37.5%
3.7
7.8
110.8%
0.0
0.0
Pre3
Pre
2.4
1.7
29.3%
RightAngleRate
Post
%Change
0.7
0.0
100.0%
1.7
0.3
82.4%
0.2
0.3
50.0%
4.7
1.5
68.1%
4.9
2.6
46.9%
3.7
1.9
48.6%
3.9
1.6
59.0%
1.5
0.3
80.0%
3.1
1.0
67.7%
2.5
1.9
24.0%
5.2
3.1
40.4%
0.6
0.6
0.0%
4.6
1.8
60.9%
0.8
0.0
100.0%
1.1
1.1
0.0%
0.7
0.0
100.0%
2.3
1.2
47.8%
7.9
5.6
29.1%
1.6
2.9
81.3%
0.6
0.7
16.7%
2.9
2.6
10.3%
3.6
1.1
69.4%
1.3
3.0
130.8%
4.5
2.6
42.2%
0.5
1.0
100.0%
0.9
1.8
100.0%
1.0
1.5
50.0%
1.9
1.5
21.1%
3.7
3.6
2.7%
1.9
3.4
78.9%
1.0
2.9
190.0%
0.0
0.0
5.2
Pre2
2.3
4.2
0.6
5.9
6.8
2.9
9.7
8.3
2.1
5.6
1.6
5.0
3.5
4.2
5.0
11.0
1.5
4.6
10.1
7.8
0.7
2.5
15.8
6.7
10.5
2.3
2.3
4.6
9.2
1.3
2.7
0.0
4.3
16.7%
RearEndRate
Post3
%Change4
0.8
65.2%
1.8
57.1%
0.0
100.0%
2.9
50.8%
2.3
66.2%
1.0
65.5%
4.9
49.5%
4.4
47.0%
1.7
19.0%
3.4
39.3%
1.0
37.5%
3.1
38.0%
3.5
0.0%
3.3
21.4%
3.1
38.0%
8.3
24.5%
1.5
0.0%
5.0
8.7%
7.2
28.7%
6.7
14.1%
0.8
14.3%
4.4
76.0%
12.8
19.0%
8.8
31.3%
10.5
0.0%
2.2
4.3%
2.9
26.1%
6.8
47.8%
13.5
46.7%
1.0
23.1%
4.8
77.8%
0.0
1.7
Pre5
0.9
1.7
0.4
1.1
2.0
3.2
2.2
1.0
1.8
1.5
2.6
1.9
0.7
1.7
1.8
2.3
1.3
2.6
2.0
1.2
1.7
3.2
2.4
2.2
1.7
0.4
0.3
2.1
2.0
0.7
0.8
0.0
1.3
21.8%
InjuryRate
Post6
%Change7
0.0
100.0%
0.3
82.4%
0.3
25.0%
0.0
100.0%
0.8
60.0%
0.0
100.0%
1.3
40.9%
1.0
0.0%
0.7
61.1%
1.6
6.7%
0.7
73.1%
0.6
68.4%
1.2
71.4%
0.4
76.5%
0.6
66.7%
1.3
43.5%
1.2
7.7%
2.9
11.5%
3.3
65.0%
1.0
16.7%
1.8
5.9%
1.8
43.8%
3.0
25.0%
1.6
27.3%
2.3
35.3%
0.7
75.0%
1.0
233.3%
3.0
42.9%
1.3
35.0%
1.9
171.4%
2.6
225.0%
0.0
Average
Total
Intersection
WestAmes
ClintonNorton
MapleSaxton
MonroeAlexander
CulverEast
AlexanderUniversity
DeweyRidgeway
W.MainBroadFord
NorthClifford
NortonHudson
AlexanderBroadway
LyellMurray
S.GoodmanI490
Mt.ReadDrivingPark
W.MainBrownGenesee
N.GoodmanE.Main
BrownBroad
StateAllen
LakeDrivingPark
W.RidgeBonesteel
ClintonAndrews
Mt.ReadEmerson
Mt.HopeElmwood
LakeRidgeway
Mt.ReadLyell
N.GoodmanClifford
StateJay
St.PaulUpperFalls
LakeW.Ridge
CourtChestnut
W.RidgeRidgeway
St.PaulPedXing
1.0
0.6
37.5%
1.4
0.6
53.2%
RightAnglewithInjuryRate
CollisionwithDisregardofTCDRate
Pre6
Post7
%Change8
Pre8
Pre82
%Change
0.5
0.0
100.0%
0.2
0.0
100.0%
0.7
0.0
100.0%
0.7
0.0
100.0%
0.0
0.3
NA
0.0
0.3
NA
0.6
0.0
100.0%
2.3
0.7
69.6%
0.7
0.3
57.1%
2.7
0.8
70.4%
2.7
0.0
100.0%
2.4
0.5
79.2%
1.5
0.3
80.0%
2.4
0.5
79.2%
0.6
0.0
100.0%
1.2
0.0
100.0%
1.6
0.7
56.3%
2.1
0.5
76.2%
1.0
0.3
70.0%
1.0
0.0
100.0%
2.6
0.2
92.3%
3.9
2.2
43.6%
0.4
0.3
25.0%
0.4
0.0
100.0%
0.7
0.9
28.6%
2.6
0.6
76.9%
0.8
0.0
100.0%
0.6
0.0
100.0%
0.9
0.6
33.3%
1.1
0.3
72.7%
0.4
0.0
100.0%
0.0
0.0
NA
1.1
0.9
18.2%
1.5
0.0
100.0%
2.2
2.1
4.5%
4.1
2.1
48.8%
0.4
1.0
150.0%
0.4
1.0
150.0%
0.4
0.3
25.0%
0.4
0.0
100.0%
1.7
1.5
11.8%
1.5
1.8
20.0%
2.5
0.0
100.0%
1.5
0.4
73.3%
0.5
1.5
200.0%
0.8
0.0
100.0%
1.4
1.0
28.6%
2.4
1.0
58.3%
0.0
0.3
NA
0.5
0.3
40.0%
0.4
0.7
75.0%
0.6
0.4
33.3%
0.0
0.7
NA
1.0
0.5
50.0%
1.3
0.6
53.8%
1.3
1.6
23.1%
1.4
1.0
28.6%
2.0
2.6
30.0%
0.5
1.9
280.0%
0.3
1.0
233.3%
0.4
1.3
225.0%
0.4
0.7
75.0%
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.6
0.2
60.2%
InjurywithDisregardofTCDRate
Post9
Post10
%Change2
0.0
0.0
NA
0.5
0.0
100.0%
0.0
0.3
NA
0.6
0.0
100.0%
0.2
0.0
100.0%
1.9
0.0
100.0%
1.2
0.0
100.0%
0.6
0.0
100.0%
0.8
0.5
37.5%
0.2
0.0
100.0%
2.3
0.2
91.3%
0.4
0.0
100.0%
0.7
0.3
57.1%
0.6
0.0
100.0%
0.9
0.0
100.0%
0.0
0.0
NA
0.0
0.0
NA
2.0
0.9
55.0%
0.2
0.7
250.0%
0.2
0.0
100.0%
0.7
1.0
42.9%
1.3
0.0
100.0%
0.3
0.0
100.0%
0.4
0.7
75.0%
0.0
0.3
NA
0.4
0.0
100.0%
0.0
0.5
NA
0.8
0.6
25.0%
1.0
0.6
40.0%
0.2
0.5
150.0%
0.2
0.3
50.0%
0.0
0.0
Average
Total
Intersection
WestAmes
ClintonNorton
MapleSaxton
MonroeAlexander
CulverEast
AlexanderUniversity
DeweyRidgeway
W.MainBroadFord
NorthClifford
NortonHudson
AlexanderBroadway
LyellMurray
S.GoodmanI490
Mt.ReadDrivingPark
W.MainBrownGenesee
N.GoodmanE.Main
BrownBroad
StateAllen
LakeDrivingPark
W.RidgeBonesteel
ClintonAndrews
Mt.ReadEmerson
Mt.HopeElmwood
LakeRidgeway
Mt.ReadLyell
N.GoodmanClifford
StateJay
St.PaulUpperFalls
LakeW.Ridge
CourtChestnut
W.RidgeRidgeway
St.PaulPedXing
1346.9
42376
Pre4
3176
619
73
242
892
120
595
4871
383
1425
1172
685
2571
1666
563
1528
1083
2969
1688
739
174
2982
1023
1275
918
222
2210
1431
2493
286
1680
622
757.5
23746
43.8%
44.0%
Violations
Post2
%Change2
764
75.9%
891
43.9%
25
65.8%
325
34.3%
411
53.9%
255
112.5%
896
50.6%
1976
59.4%
474
23.8%
832
41.6%
414
64.7%
633
7.6%
2032
21.0%
378
77.3%
474
15.8%
1016
33.5%
800
26.1%
356
88.0%
1986
17.7%
440
40.5%
259
48.9%
762
74.4%
765
25.2%
1681
31.8%
366
60.1%
222
0.0%
459
79.2%
426
70.2%
2021
18.9%
339
18.5%
803
52.2%
265
57.4%
Intersection
StateAllen
StateJay
Mt.ReadDrivingPark
WestAmes
Mt.ReadEmerson
St.PaulUpperFalls
MapleSaxton
AlexanderBroadway
Mt.ReadLyell
W.MainBroadFord
St.PaulPedXing
CulverEast
W.RidgeRidgeway
NortonHudson
W.RidgeBonesteel
N.GoodmanE.Main
BrownBroad
Mt.HopeElmwood
S.GoodmanI490
LakeW.Ridge
W.MainBrownGenesee
LyellMurray
N.GoodmanClifford
LakeDrivingPark
CourtChestnut
NorthClifford
LakeRidgeway
MonroeAlexander
ClintonNorton
ClintonAndrews
DeweyRidgeway
AlexanderUniversity
Average
Total
Pre4
2969
2210
1666
3176
2982
1431
73
1172
918
4871
622
892
1680
1425
739
1528
1083
1023
2571
2493
563
685
222
1688
286
383
1275
242
619
174
595
120
1363.1
42376
Violations
Post2
%Change2
356
88.0%
459
79.2%
378
77.3%
764
75.9%
762
74.4%
426
70.2%
25
65.8%
414
64.7%
366
60.1%
1976
59.4%
265
57.4%
411
53.9%
803
52.2%
832
41.6%
440
40.5%
1016
33.5%
800
26.1%
765
25.2%
2032
21.0%
2021
18.9%
474
15.8%
633
7.6%
222
0.0%
1986
17.7%
339
18.5%
474
23.8%
1681
31.8%
325
34.3%
891
43.9%
259
48.9%
896
50.6%
255
112.5%
757.8
23746
44.4%
44.0%

Red Light Camera Effectiveness Evaluation

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Red Light Camera Effectiveness Evaluation

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Red Light Camera Effectiveness Evaluation

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Red Light Camera Effectiveness Evaluation

3495 Winton Place