Lake Forest Park Police Department Memorandum
Date: August 7, 2014
To: Mayor Mary Jane Goss, City of Lake Forest Park City Council of Lake Forest Park
From: Chief C. Stephen Sutton
Subject: Photo Enforcement Survey
The Lake Forest Park Police Department conducted a citizen survey regarding our current photo enforcement survey. The following are the results of the survey:
Question #1 - Do you think the photo enforcement program is of value to the City of Lake Forest Park?
Yes 135 No 104 Grand Total 239
Question #2 - Do you think the city would benefit from expanding the photo enforcement program to the locations identified?
No 130 Yes 109 Grand Total 239
Question #3 - Do you have other locations that would be more beneficial to the photo enforcement program?
No 196 Yes 31 Grand Total 227
Attached to this document you will find all of the responses to each of the questions. It is the goal of the police department to work with internal stakeholders (Public Works, Engineering, and the Mayor’s office) to review the responses and develop a list of items within the system that can be changed to better serve the public. We will also take this opportunity to educate our public about the system advantages that make it a good fit for the City.
The Police Department will be developing a proposal in the near future to increase the capacity of our photo enforcement program, by adding one additional location at Bothell Way and NE 170th. If you have any questions, I will make myself available.
CSS:css
1
LAKE FOREST PARK POLICE DEPARTMENT PHOTO ENFORCEMENT SURVEY COMMENTS
QUESTION #1 Do you think the photo enforcement program is of value to the City of Lake Forest Park?
#1 Please Explain Yes It makes the school zones safer for the students. Yes People are paying more attention to school zone. I have children walking and it's important for drivers to slow down and keep our kids safe.
Yes Too many drivers in a hurry- many blind corners, intersections and driveways in LFP Yes It does slow people down right before the sensor - people who speed know where the sensors are and slam on their brakes right before then.
Yes Its a safety thing. Yes I believe that it creates a safer environment Yes Slow down excessive speeding. Yes Slows drivers down in critical, high-pedestrian areas Yes It deters people from going dangerously fast where children are at play. (Sadly, a lot of people won't slow down to protect children but will slow down to avoid a fine.)
Yes Helps driver to be aware of school zones. Generates revenue. Potentially reduces car accidents. Yes Vehicle speed on 178th has been reduced, Hooray!! Why not keep it on 24/7 ?? Yes SAFETY FOR PEDS AND CARS ALIKE! Yes If this prevents even one accident (children) it is worth it. Yes It's a revenue stream that tends to tax non-residents who aren't aware of the cameras, and it gets locals (who are likely the predominant users of the roads in question) to slow down near schools, protecting our children. Yes The ones near Lake Forest Park Elementary are not of value since no collisions have happened there and they're not that close to the school. The one on Bothell Way is of value. At Brookside, the hours of operation could be limited to before and after school since going at such a slow speed when no children are present is just aggravating.
Yes Drivers need to obey the speed limit. Yes Photo enforcement is a valuable deterrent and has some income benefits for the city of Lake Forest Park. Yes Because it generates revenue for the City. LAKE FOREST PARK POLICE DEPARTMENT PHOTO ENFORCEMENT SURVEY COMMENTS
QUESTION #1 Do you think the photo enforcement program is of value to the City of Lake Forest Park?
Yes However, I think the photo enforcement program in front of the schools is on for far too long of a time. The elementary schools don't start until 9 am but the enforcement starts at 7 am. It's rather ridiculous driving by at 20 mph at 7 in the morning and the school is empty and there aren't any cars there. It makes it look like the city is just trying to make money rather than enforce the safety of children. These over-long hours discredits the "reasons" for them and undermines the integrity of the police department. Also, the photo enforcement signs should be covered during the summer so that people are not convinced that they will be ticketed during the summer when school isn't even in session. I have no problem at all with more photo enforcement if it's for more reasonable and honest hours.
Yes It has slowed traffic down passing along 178th.
The police used to do it about 10 years ago. Yes I've read through the data outlining costs, revenue, etc. and I believe these are a good idea. Yes average speeds have been reduced by it. Yes Slows vehicles down in school zones and reduces the risk of accidents both pedestrian and vehicular. Yes The problem is people think the cameras are always running so they drive at a very IRRITATING 15-20 MPH ALL the time past Brookside. So irritating in fact, I've seen people pass illegally thereby making the situation much more dangerous. The signage that informs drivers the zone is in effect ONLY while the yellow light is flashing (or while children are present) would be ideal. And then update the flashing yellow lights with something from this century. There are plenty of low cost solar powered VERY bright LED lighting options much more visible than the rinky dink type that are in place now. And they need to bet properly aimed at the roadway so drivers can tell they're actually on and see them from further away so that drivers slow down from further away. A lot of people also know exactly where the sensors are so once they get past them, they step on it. Radar traps just outside these zones should be in effect far more often than they are instead of relying on the camera completely.
Yes Likely has value in the immediate vicinity of schools but otherwise is only of value as a source of revenue. But it should NOT be run by an out-of-state entity.
Yes I think it's valuable in school zones, and hopefully provides some extra income for the budget Yes Something must be done, and this is far more cost effective then keeping an officer on site at each location. Yes Deters speeding Yes 522 is a very busy hwy and I think it has stopped alot of the congestion and people that run the red lights on 165th.
The school zone areas really are irritating to be quite frank. I understand slowing down but sometimes the areas are not posted early enough to be aware of the zone requirements. They did improve the ones in place now but when first put in one couldn't tell it was approaching and didn't have time to slow down. I like the fact that they have posted hours now instead of all day. LAKE FOREST PARK POLICE DEPARTMENT PHOTO ENFORCEMENT SURVEY COMMENTS
QUESTION #1 Do you think the photo enforcement program is of value to the City of Lake Forest Park?
Yes Helps law enforcement keep track of drivers in the community and makes school areas safer Yes Inadequate number of on duty police officers to enforce speeding and traffic light laws. Yes It has improved safety in the brookside school zone. Cameras should operate 24 hours a day. Yes I wonder if City has liability issues with poor quality of signing that has been done for the school speed zones. Signing does not appear to meet Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) standards. Certainly there is value to program, but there could be problems for improper signing of zones. I am an expert on Standards in MUTCD, and would be interested in working as a paid consultant to the City to address signing issues. I previously worked for King County Department of Transportation (Traffic Division) and provided technical assistance to the City of Lake Forest Park.
Yes Vehicle speed reduced! Hooray Yes Only problem is I tend to watch my speedometer rather than looking out for the kids ads I don't want a ticket. Yes Obviously - reading the full survey the city is especially interested in the FINANCIAL aspect of the program. Yes It has definitely slowed down traffic, however, as someone who lives across the street from the 40th Pl. camera, it malfunctions frequently and flashes into every window in my house. Very, very annoying, especially in the middle of the night (when it's malfunctioning). I have not been happy with this camera since it was installed.
Yes I think the red light camera is good at Ballinger and 175. I think the school cameras outside of regular school hours are not helpful.
Yes I would like to know how much revenue is collected and what percentage goes to the firm supplying the service. Yes Can provide some safety improvements under the proper circumstances. Yes It does have the effect of slowing traffic flow Yes It is of value because it raised money for LFP. It is set for too long on 35th as I hardly ever see children there when light if flashing. Should be when children present not that long.
Yes Drivers slow down, otherwise fines are imposed and revenues go up. Yes It help raise the money our city Residence refuse to pass a taxes to support programs:-( Yes I helps slow people down in areas of concern LAKE FOREST PARK POLICE DEPARTMENT PHOTO ENFORCEMENT SURVEY COMMENTS
QUESTION #1 Do you think the photo enforcement program is of value to the City of Lake Forest Park?
Yes However, it appears from the stats provided that the cameras are not helping reduce the number of speeders in the school zones- there is no trend. Also, I would like to know how many accidents involving school children occurred in the 5 years preceding the cameras- were there really injuries to children, or just concern about the potential for that to occur? I am concerned about the issue of privacy- there is a trade off here, and not one that is easily valued with money. The information presented makes it clear that there is an incentive for LFP to place and keep these cameras, while the issue of civil rights is left unexplored. I urge you to be extremely vigilant about this program.
Yes Especially important in the school zone areas Yes Safety Issue Yes I do think that all streets that access a photo enforced area should have reminder signs. My dead end street access onto 178th behind Brookside Elementary has no sign indicating you are entering a photo enforced area. Since I am rarely home during the hours of photo operation I have forgotten and had to pay the ticket. One of the signs with the hours would be helpful.
Yes When drivers believe that an intersection has photo enforcement they might pay more attention when crossing through. Yes Esp. the speed cameras. They do slow folks down. That said, the time periods they are on are too broad. Yes It makes the city a lot of money Yes It is useful in proximity to schools DURING time school is in session. Yes I think it discourages people using it as an I designated highway and keeps it feeling pedestrian friendly. We like walking our dog without drivers blazing through our community like they're on a race track. Yes I do understand the need for reduced speeds in school zones. However I do get concerned that Photo enforcement draws the drivers attention to their speedometer more then to the pedestrians Photo enforcement is supposed to aid Yes Originally, I believe the City Council stated that the school cameras were for safety and not revenues. The majority of the time the cameras are active there is not a child to be found. And, although I don't have figures in front of me, I believe there were very few incidents around the schools prior to the cameras. Thus, their installation wasn't mainly about safety; these cameras are primarily about raising revenue and are of value in that light. Besides the excessive times, the hours of operation signs are very hard to read, with too much information in too small an area; this actually negatively impacts safety. Because of the inability to read the sign, this leads to many people driving at 20 mph at all times with some frustration to locals. There is also nothing regarding the blinking lights which sometimes blink at times other than the hours posted. The HOURS signs should be replaced with a simple "20 MPH when blinking"!!! The challenge, then, is to notify people entering the control zone from a street within the zone that the light is blinking.
Yes It is effective at restricting speeds in front of Brookside and makes me feel that it is safer for the kids. LAKE FOREST PARK POLICE DEPARTMENT PHOTO ENFORCEMENT SURVEY COMMENTS
QUESTION #1 Do you think the photo enforcement program is of value to the City of Lake Forest Park?
Yes The intersection of Bothell Way and 170th Street is VERY DANGEROUS!!! You have crazy bikers on the trail running the stop light, cars turning left out of the shopping center heading east damn near running over people crossing the street, and an insane number of cars on running the red light. The red walking flags are a good idea but not enough. A camera for both speeding and running a red light would be great. Ideally, an overpass for people crossing bothell way would be the wonderful. I've seen numerous pedestrians almost get hit corssing the street
Yes The red-light camera at 165th & Bothell Way has definitely made drivers pay attention to the red light. In prior years, it was taking your life in your hands if you stepped off the curb before the last of the red-light runners zipped past you. I would have been dead many times over if I had not waited several seconds after the light changed before starting to cross Bothell Way. Now the cars actually come to a halt at the red light. But--one thought on the timing of the yellow/red light. It would help to have an additional second or two of the yellow light before it changes to red. I get nervous coming up on the green light, never knowing if it will change to yellow and then quickly to red, and if the road is busy and cars are just behind me, if I stop too quickly, I'm afraid someone will rear-end me. And if I'm afraid to slam on the brakes for fear of being rear-ended and the light quickly changes to red, I'm in for a ticket. Another second or two of yellow light would be helpful to avoid rear-end crashes.
Yes I believe in photo enforcement of school zones; I disagree however with red light cameras. Yes From my personal experience, car drivers respect speed limits in photo enforcement zones much more than in non-photo zones. Sometimes folks drive 5 or rarely 10 mph below the speed limit.
Yes It is good to have speeders like me slowed down during school hours. Yes I know the photo enforcement program is personally a deterrent to me, and I assume I can't be alone in that and that it has a wide beneficial affect.
Yes 1. It reduces speed through areas where safety is important 2. It relieves officers having to monitor areas with their presence. They are free for other duties and the city saves money for overtime costs or additional officers. 3. This particular intersection does not have good visibility, particularly on the lake side; plus the hill is steep which further complicates matters. The camera factor will serve to put motorists on alert and in compliance with the traffic light. Yes Commuters cut through LFP in the AM and PM to avoid the Bothell Way, 145th Street Mess. Many are non local and speed dangerously down 37th Ave. Especially at the corner of 156th and 37th Ave NE. Dangerous! Yes Helps keep the speed down in school zones especially when there are no sidewalks Yes It deters future inattentive driving. Yes Especially in school zones Yes It helps drivers to remember the speed zone LAKE FOREST PARK POLICE DEPARTMENT PHOTO ENFORCEMENT SURVEY COMMENTS
QUESTION #1 Do you think the photo enforcement program is of value to the City of Lake Forest Park?
Yes I believe the cameras are effective and the extra revenue generated, especially from the 80% non-LFP residents, is good for our city. I also hope the cameras free up time for officers to spend more time protecting LFP homes from criminal activities like burglary and theft.
Yes It gets people to slow down around schools. Yes greater efficacy of public safety hours Yes Love the slower traffic near brookside Yes However, it is my understanding that the enforcement camera @ 40th Pl and 186th St is often (consistently?) off line. Please provide data that this camera has been functional over what percentage of the 2013-2014 school year. Yes Only in direct school zones, not at intersections or other non-school locations Yes Yes. It provides revenue for the city and helps to free up the officers to go out and patrol the city. Yes I feel it slows down speeding in LFP and makes it a safer place for school children and all citizens. It also should help with accidents; hopefully making drivers slow down.
Yes It encourages compliance with the law, frees LE for patrols, adds safety to the community Yes It makes people aware (threat of fines) of school zones to slow down and also to pay more attention on Bothell Way to avoid running red lights.
Yes I personally don't mind enforcement of the school zone speed limit. I would prefer that we had more officers to patrol and write tickets but the camera is cost effective and much friendlier than a real ticket from an officer. Some positive things of camera speed enforcement are that you always know it is there - no mystery, the enforcement times and days are clearly posted, there is a yellow flashing light and signs warning you well in advance, it is set to trigger around 24MPH (I have been told) which is a friendly margin of error and only 1 MPH below the regular speed limit, and the ticket is similar to a parking citation as it does not impact your driving record. Seems much more speeder friendly than an officer hiding behind a mailbox where you have no warning that he is there and whose ticket does impact your driving record and insurance rates.
Yes Photo enforcement is important, especially on SR522, which many drivers treat like a freeway. Also would like to see photo speed enforcement on sections of SR522 in LFP, not just "red light camera" enforcement. Yes I think it slows traffic in the vicinity of schools, when school is in session. It also produces revenue. The cost/benefit ratio is greater for the company providing the service, because it has nothing to lose. The City, though, loses some of its goodwill with the citizenry.
Yes It is of diminishing return. Never saw numerical justification or injury data for later comparison. Do not expand. But relocate to problem locations. LAKE FOREST PARK POLICE DEPARTMENT PHOTO ENFORCEMENT SURVEY COMMENTS
QUESTION #1 Do you think the photo enforcement program is of value to the City of Lake Forest Park?
Yes It slows traffic at strategic school crossings. Yes Yes, I think photo enforcement is very important. Yes Where the cameras are currently placed on NE 178th Street reminds drivers that they need to stay at or below the 25 MPH (20 in school zone) speed limit - something drivers on that hill rarely do. It absolutely makes our roads safer - not only for pedestrians and cyclists, but for other drivers (exiting or entering streets or driveways along that road).
Yes It generates revenue but more importantly it serves to get people slowed down in these critical school zones. Yes creates revenue Yes I presume the program generates revenue for the City, so it has value in that regard. Yes I think this program only has value in the school speed zones, NOT as red light enforcement. These lights cause people to slam on breaks and congest traffic trying to make right on red turns.
Yes I do think that locals do become very cautious as they drive in these zones, that being said everyone makes mistakes and the fine is a very stiff penalty to someone like myself, a single parent of 4. I, going 25-30 MPH maximum am probably not your target audience anyway... is there a chance fees could be assigned based on speed?
Yes Slowing down cars in school zones is important and appreciated. Yes I have a child that has to wait for his school bus located on busy Ballinger Way and the drivers can be aggressive about getting to their destination.
Yes Photo enforcement program increases the safety around school zone. Yes The police department makes money hand over fist Yes I think if the photo enforcement program is used as a safety tool it is valuable, but not as a revenue generator for the city. Yes In School Zones during limited hours Yes I definitely think it slows drivers down near the school, which is where we're most familiar with it. Yes I see vehicles slow down in the photo enforcement areas. It is a tremendous deterrent for speeders! I do a lot of walking around our town and it seems that this is the one thing that slows down all of the fast cars (walking kids, blind corners, dogs, people, posted speed signs, even "children at play" signs aren't nearly as effective!)
Yes Depends on the location. I support school zones during certain times. Other areas seem like a way for the city to make money and do little for it.
Yes My children walk to school through the photo enforcement site on 40th. It does help to slow down SOME of the cars. I'm in favor of anything that improves safety through that area.
Yes I prefer to only have photo enforcement in the areas affecting schools. The 2 near LFP and 1 near Brookside are adequate. LAKE FOREST PARK POLICE DEPARTMENT PHOTO ENFORCEMENT SURVEY COMMENTS
QUESTION #1 Do you think the photo enforcement program is of value to the City of Lake Forest Park?
Yes It keeps traffic speed down in the areas used No I think photo enforcement and camera surveillance should be banned - not just in LFP, but nationwide. Allowing cameras everywhere is a giant step toward a police state, and they haven't even proved to be effective. If an area is a likely crime area, there should be in-person law enforcement.
No It is about money not safety No Living right by one of the photo enforcement lights I do see people slowing down considerably during school hours but I do not feel that it makes the road safer during any other time. I see cars "flying" up and down 178th at all times of the day and there are no repercussions for that either. It feels like it is just a fund raiser for the city and not a safety issue.
No I think "traffic calming" and/or "control" is important, but I hate the fact that a large portion of the money collected goes to an out-of-state for-profit company. If the money stayed local --and wasn't a "profit-making" system for a company-- I would be less opposed to the cameras.
No I've seen more near-accidents on Bothell Way due to the red-light enforcement than prior to installation. I can't tell you the number of times I've seen someone slam on their brakes and skid to the middle of the intersection. The ones in front of the schools are fine during school hours (we have students at Brookside), but beyond that...adding more would probably be too much. People end up driving 10 miles an hour through those school zones even when the cameras aren't on...so it gets pretty irritating to drive through there at times. I've seen cars speed around the slow drivers due to those speed cameras.
No The only value the photo enforcement program has to LFP is the fact the city makes a lot of money off of people
who get caught on the cameras. No It creates revenue by setting traps. But this is not "value" for LFP residents. No If you can write $1m a year in tickets with the existing locations and only get to keep $300k of it, why not just hire additional officers instead of using a photo system and keep a larger percentage of the profits? No Of course it is of value. It makes money. No Blinker on 35th Ave NE remained partially on for nearly a year. This camera location has also gone off in the evenings and been problematic. Also, since drivers are not photographed, too easy to get out of tickets. No The times on the school are way to broad and are not realistic. No I do not think it improves safety, particularly near the school zones. Actual enforcement by officers would provide real-time safe conditions for students. The hours for school enforcement cameras are not linked to the times children are near the schools.
No Safety is not based on money made. The intersections noted need improved traffic flow management. LAKE FOREST PARK POLICE DEPARTMENT PHOTO ENFORCEMENT SURVEY COMMENTS
QUESTION #1 Do you think the photo enforcement program is of value to the City of Lake Forest Park?
No City Hall sees value in it as a revenue source. The citizens see it for what it is, a cash cow for City Hall. Photo Enforcement has nothing to do with public safety.
No I think the program is a great financial value to the City of Lake Forest Park but I don't think the program is a value to the citizens of Lake Forest Park. Within the Brookside camera zone on NE 178th, the school zone is "live" long before children are gathering at the school and I find that the zone is often amber lighted on Saturdays and other times when school is not in session. That doesn't give me a great deal of confidence that by expanding to additional streets and intersections that these "glitches" in the system won't be compounded. In addition I have found that in approaching the NE 165th & Bothell Way intersection (both N & S and E & W) that there is a danger that exists in cars getting an amber light as their car enters the intersection and then increasing speed to get through the intersection before the red light camera engages. While a case is made that this intersection has had fewer collisions, it raises the question of how many of the collisions that are happening are the result of the intersection being photo enforced.
No I think it is a mistake to outsource police powers to a private company. No Its completely excessive. It causes traffic to go 20 mph even when school is not in session. 25 is slow enough! Its also an invasion of privacy and unwarranted data collecting.
No The photo enforcement cameras do not promote safety and several larger cities such as Redmond, WA has removed them based on surveys and costs associated with running the cameras.
No The red light stops CAUSE accidents. People brake hard to avoid the red and rear end collisions result. Also the yell ow light is way too short. The counter has been removed so drivers have no warning when the light will change. No Seems to not operate properly. Might be better to install speed bumps and less expensive. No These cameras do not allow for situational exceptions, and you are effectively unable to contest them in court. Outside of revenue generation, I do not see the value of this program. A patrol car along the side of the road would be a better deterrent, and allow a human to use proper judgement when dealing with infractions.
No If you are going to get me speeding, have a person write me a ticket. No King County has the poorest, untrained Department of Traffic Engineers, most unlicensed. They have violated the US Department of Transportation regulations regarding signage in the City of Lake Forest Park and the City of Lake Forest Park relies solely on the County to provide traffic engineering services The District Court handed down a judgment "Did not Commit" where the defense was based on the traffic signage within the City Limtis LAKE FOREST PARK POLICE DEPARTMENT PHOTO ENFORCEMENT SURVEY COMMENTS
QUESTION #1 Do you think the photo enforcement program is of value to the City of Lake Forest Park?
No I don't think there was a speeding problem on 35th NE. Those cameras are so annoying and there's no accountability. You get something in the mail, they snapped a picture saying you were going 23 miles/hr and now you owe a bunch of money and you don't have a thing to say. Seems like a frustrating demoralizing way to raise revenue. How much is the city making anyway? Is it just a way for out of state companies to make money? It's more dangerous. I'm more likely to not see a child because I'm looking so closely at my speedomenter.
No It must certainly be a money-maker. No I do not believe that photo enforcement increases safety but rather is a way of producing revenue. No While I understand the purpose, the sad truth is, there has yet to have been a time of operation when I have actually seen children. I am also aware of how much of the city budget depends on this, so I'm not a fan. No I see this type of enforcement as nothing more than a way to garner more money. I'm just not a believer that the statistics really show this kind of enforcement creates a much safer environment.
No Very seldom do I see children walking to and from school along 35th!!!! Why not camera's in front of school on 37th? No I believe the system is of monetary value to the city, but not necessarily one of safety or social value. Although I believe speed restrictions and traffic control through the use of traffic lights are necessary, undue focus on speed and traffic light enforcement makes motorists too concerned with trying to maintain a specific speed and/or not run a red light. This takes motorists' focus of the larger environment around them which is necessary in order to drive safely. For example if a motorist knows they are approaching a zone controlled by speed cameras they may pay too close attention to their speedometer to ensure they are not going to get ticketed and miss a pedestrian crossing their path. I'm also opposed to speed/red light cameras because they create a "police state" situation where the public expects their local official to dictate how they are to behave and do so for fear of punishment. This reduces an individuals ability to think for themselves and choose to act in a safe manner for the greater good.
No I am opposed to traffic enforcement cameras of any kind. I believe they are used to generate revenue and I have been ticketed wrongly (and won in traffic court) for a right turn on red that the camera auto-ticketed. I believe cameras are fundamentally flawed and prefer organic feedback methods of traffic safety like roadside speedometer signs urging speeders to slow down. They are non-punitive and lead to safer roads. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8397665
No Only monetarily LAKE FOREST PARK POLICE DEPARTMENT PHOTO ENFORCEMENT SURVEY COMMENTS
QUESTION #1 Do you think the photo enforcement program is of value to the City of Lake Forest Park?
No Both of the questions in this survey are biased based on the three-year report. While I enforce traffic enforcement, I resent the suggestion that this about safety for "\kids" when the report is so heavily weighted toward ticket/fine revenues - even if the report is pleased to report that the system is "catching" non-residents. If it is/was about student safety, why are photo enforcement cameras turned on at 7 a.m.? This is a full 90 minutes before students arrive. They turn off at 4:30 p.m. - one hour after classes are released. Students who remain on campus are supervised and released to parents far away from these speed traps. If it's about the revenue, please just say so. Stop being disingenuous just to make money.
No It drives revenue for the city by mulcting money from residents. It does not increase safety, and may actually reduce it according to some studies.
No I appreciate having the opportunity to provide input on this issue of traffic cameras. For the record, In am strongly opposed to traffic enforcement cameras of any kind. I believe most municipalities install them to generate revenue and not to increase public safety. In fact in many situations such systems decrease safety due to motorists being too focused with maintaining a speed or not running a red light and thus not paying attention of the overall conditions around them. I also don't wish to live in a "police state" of sorts that watches over my every move. I prefer to live in a city where citizens act and drive responsibly by choice and not by threat. Personally I feel for myself that speedometer signs do more to reduce traffic violations that cameras. An unobtrusive reminder is the best remedy.
No the intersection of Ballard and 25th is just a confusing intersection with the hills at 3 of the 5 sections and the varying speeds of the 5 intersections. It is hard to see everyone from all directions. A red light camera will do nothing to alleviate this. No I believe they only produce revenue, but do not enhance public safety. No Program is a revenue source and has nothing to do with safety. No It is just"Big Brother" controlling the mindless robots. Typical of small town police departments trying to make money and not catching the real murderers, rapeists, burglars, etc.
No These systems are generally illegal & I think they can detract from safety rather than improve it. Better to put the mph electronic signs at the various locations. Those serve to slow people down on their own. The photo enforcement program seems to be set up more for making money for the city than really improving safety.
No I am wholeheartedly against the idea of expanding the photo enforcement program. Even though I am a very safe driver with an excellent driving record, I have on more than one occasion been forced to make judgement calls that I believe resulted in unsafe actions due to panic stopping in wet conditions. I actively avoid towns like Lynwood that are completely covered by traffic cams in their busiest traffic corridors. I do not like the feeling of driving through these areas, knowing that my every move is being watched. Please do not proliferate this attitude and turn Lake Forest Park into another Lynwood. LAKE FOREST PARK POLICE DEPARTMENT PHOTO ENFORCEMENT SURVEY COMMENTS
QUESTION #1 Do you think the photo enforcement program is of value to the City of Lake Forest Park?
No We have police for law enforcement No Red-light running is very far down the list of traffic safety issues in Lake Forest Park, especially at 170th and Ballinger Way. To improve safety it'd be more effective to post the 170th-to-Bothell Way right turn as no-right-turn-on-red (which I realize isn't the Police Department's call), as the combination of bike traffic on the trail and the limited vision down the bus lane make right turns out of the Sheridan Beach neighborhood hazardous even on green.
No Though traffic cameras may have some impact on traffic safety they also give the impression of an ever-present and overseeing police state watching our every move and this diminishes the general quality of life in Lake Forest Park which is why we choose to live here.
No Studies show that these camera-enforced zones are for income only. Many communities have outlawed them. No Reduces tendency to exceed speed limits in school zones No I would rather see the funds spent on more left turn lights, for example leaving the LFP mall on the 47th street exit (both directions onto Ballinger), more cross walks with overhead flashing walk lights for the safety of pedestrians and to alert drivers at a distance that a pedestrian is in the cross walk.
No I live directly before a camera behind lfp school. While I understand the desire to ensure the kids safety. The only reason to have a camera cop there is to make money.
No I think it's as unsafe constantly looking at your speedometer, keeping eyes off the road, as it is slowing to 20 mph. No We feel that people drive more dangerously with a fear of being sighted therefor breaking all to aggressively and Slowing down when approaching a photo in forced intersection such as the case on 165 and Bothel way, ultimately preventing traffic flow.
No I think the data you've shown doesn't make a compelling case for these cameras. While speed violations in the school zones appears to have decreased immediately after installation, the number remains relatively constant after that. If these cameras change behavior, then why haven't citation numbers continued to decline? Despite the speed cameras, the number of collisions at Brookside actually increased during the time period you selected to highlight. Further, while there has been some decline in traffic accidents at the intersection with a red light camera, violations there have not declined over time. If these were changing behavior, I'd expect to see a decline in citations - that's not the case. More philosophically, I don't want cameras used to monitor citizen compliance with laws. If people have concerns about speeding or red light running, then it's appropriate to have your officers do emphasis patrols in these areas. I am also uncomfortable with handing this data over to a third-party private business. Once that data leaves the City's control, there's really nothing guaranteeing how it's used. LAKE FOREST PARK POLICE DEPARTMENT PHOTO ENFORCEMENT SURVEY COMMENTS
QUESTION #1 Do you think the photo enforcement program is of value to the City of Lake Forest Park?
No City only get fraction of monies collected. Causes resentment. Better to have living humans interact. much as an old time beat cop. They may well learn something about their city inhabitants. I DO like it when you post the "this is your speed" digital sign. No The photo enforcement program takes an overly expanded view of what constitutes a school zone. No This program is coarse tool for traffic enforcement. Being entirely computerized and mechanical, it has no capacity for exercising appropriate judgment whether the driving is safe and prudent in the observed conditions. Too many tickets are given to drivers who are, e.g., going 25 mph on a clear day with perfect visibility in a zone in which there are no pedestrians, let alone children, present. It is basically a funding source for the city and the private contractor that operates it, not a fair traffic control and enforcement device.
No The speed camera is more of a distraction than anything else. I feel like I'm forced to focus more on my speedometer than the road. I would prefer speed bumps or one of those road signs that clocks vehicle speeds and displays it. Also, it's been reported that red light cameras cause more accidents. Here's the first source I found:
http://www.motorists.org/red-light-cameras/increase-accidents No I believe the program raises serious issues of privacy and should be discontinued. It creates a "big brother" atmosphere. I have heard of our city being referred to as "Lake Fascist Park."
No I think it is a good thing if done properly. As it is done now, I think it is poorly implemented. The hours of the school zone photo enforcement are ridiculous. The Brookside and LFP cameras start 7:30 am. School doesn't open until 9. Same for the afternoon times. People see the photo enforcement as a cash cow for the city. If it was truly about safety, the hours would reflect the real school schedule. I have also gotten tickets during days school is not in session due to teacher professional days. I totally understand the need to slow drivers down for schools. But this program isn't about safety. It's about making money for the city. And everyone I know hates it.
No I would have to say both yes and no. I believe that these camera's do encourage greater safety but I would discourage their use as solely a revenue generator. I have seen figures on the Brookside camera on 178th and have been quite surprised. I would also believe that all locals are aware of these locations. If that is true, as I have observed, than it is only getting those "cutting thru" our community. One thing these cameras do not do is to "catch" the repeat offenders, those driving without license or insurance, or those who have a warrant out, perhaps for a DUI. There is nothing that will replace the utmost safety as an actual human officer.
No Unfair and the money does not flow to LFP but rather to some firm in Arizona. LAKE FOREST PARK POLICE DEPARTMENT PHOTO ENFORCEMENT SURVEY COMMENTS
QUESTION #1 Do you think the photo enforcement program is of value to the City of Lake Forest Park?
No It has caused a permanent slow down on 175th past Brookside - all days and all times people go 20 or less and that is dangerous. Also, the times that the programs operate make no sense as kids are not on the street that early in the morning and they are in school at 2:00 - there is no value at having the cameras operate at that time.
No there is no epidemic of kids getting ran over in front of schools, this is all about lining the pockets of corporations and city hall with average citizens hard earned money!!
No It's basic purpose is to generate revenue for the city. It only does this marginally if all of the internal city overhead costs are taken into consideration. The City could (and should) get to the same fiscal end point by controlling expenditures, including public safety, more wisely. Additionally there does not appear to be any analysis of what the alternatives to traffic cameras might be.
No I think our city resources could be put to better use, rather than increasing the number of penalties we give out for minor infractions.
No The whole system seems be a way to generate revene at the expense of the tax payer. The data provided to support hiring a outside company seems very questionable. Whats wrong with having police around the schools at times. No Is there any empirical evidence the program saves lives or causes fewer auto collisions? I suspect the company operating the camera system and the city generate significant revenue without any evidence that citizens are safer. No To me, it is not really about safety, it is about raising money for the city. The photo enforcement program is an unfair tax on people who live near school zones and have to drive past them frequently- usually no children are present. No At 2/year, the statistics do not show a significant decrease in number of events over the three year period. The number of events is too small to even support this kind of cost for benefit. All we see is an increase in number of citations. No There's not enough room here to explain. But in this short space I will say that the school related lights aren't needed and just make money for the city. If there are people around schools, people drive well. Bothell Way needs the camera to stop people speeding up to go through the yellow lights.
No I don't know, exactly, where and/or how the $$ from violations goes or is used to benefit LFP. Someone explain and then I can better answer the question. What I know is that most people think it is of no value, and it's never a conversation with positive discussion and/or feedback.
No I think it is a way to raise funds for the City of LFP. No Poorly placed, ill-conceived waste of time and money. It's transparently obvious that "photo enforcement" is actually "revenue generation" and any public safety benefit raised is purely a pretext for an underhanded tax increase. You want more money, maximize the sales tax cut. LAKE FOREST PARK POLICE DEPARTMENT PHOTO ENFORCEMENT SURVEY COMMENTS
QUESTION #1 Do you think the photo enforcement program is of value to the City of Lake Forest Park?
No This is more of a Yes and No answer. I believe having the cameras operating during school hours is a deterrent to speeding and does a good job of keeping kids safe, however, Red light cameras do NOT and in fact, cause more accidents then they are supposed to deter.
No Extra photo enforcement not needed. No It's another tax No I think it's driven by a desire for more revenue. No The time should be limited to 30 min before school begins and 30min after school ends. Most of the time there are no children and vehicles going ridiculously slow.
No I believe the role of the Police Department should be to serve and protect. The photo enforcement program is more about revenue generation than protection. I am unaware of any statistical evidence that shows the streets near LFP Elem. or Brookside are any more or less safe due to the program. The published report shows unmeaningful safety data. The red light camera data shows a "36% decrease" from roughly 7/year to 5/year. A reduction of 2 is not statistically meaningful. In any given year you can have more or less depending on a variety of facts and circumstances (e.g. snow) that are completely independent of the cameras.
No The "photo enforcement program" is a legalized shakedown. When the state legislature approved these cameras back in 2006, they were very clear that the average ticket should be the same as the average parking ticket ($20 or so). But money-grubbing local governments like LFP cynically used a loophole to get around that limit so that they could price-gouge. Given the above, claiming that this program is for "pedestrian safety in our school zones and collision reduction" is a pathetically transparent lie. It is obviously seen and used as a revenue generator. The city of LFP even admits this in its own budget-related powerpoint slides on the city website. If they ever bother to wonder why people view them with such contempt, consider examples like this as Exhibit A. I don't know if the city politicians think that we're so stupid that we don't understand the situation, or they're so arrogant that they simply don't care that we know. Either way, they shouldn't think that they can be so contemptuous of us and the spirit of the law, and not be viewed with equal contempt and disgust. Because issues like this are exactly why people cannot stand politicians. Do they want to prove that they're not a bunch of gangsters in suits? Then follow the spirit of the law. Until then, they can all FOAD.
No I think our wonderful police force does an outstanding job as it is. The traffic cameras seem unreliable to me, with camera lights flashing even when going the speed limit.
No Takes money from citizens LAKE FOREST PARK POLICE DEPARTMENT PHOTO ENFORCEMENT SURVEY COMMENTS
QUESTION #1 Do you think the photo enforcement program is of value to the City of Lake Forest Park?
No I'm a teacher with Northshore School District. We do not have photo enforcement and it works because of two things: 1) Solar powered "Flashing" school crossing lights are in the right place for all drivers to see and 2) the signage is simple and easy to read
No Lynnwood has photo enforcement in quite a few areas and, despite being a good driver that obeys the laws, I avoid lynnwood knowing that any honest mistake I make can, and very possibly may, result in a ticket in the mail. I don't think it is good for a city to have photo enforcement. People don't want to be overseen by electronic cameras, getting a surprise bill in the mail to ruin your day. Most people prefer that one-on-one contact. To be immediately corrected for the wrong you have done (by a police officer in the place it was committed) will better teach the lesson needed for that person to avoid doing it again. We have 3 children. If we do not discipline them immediately after the wrong has been done, then they forget what deed they did that they are getting reprimanded for, and will probably do it again because they have not made the connection from what they did wrong to what they are getting disciplined for. People are a lot like children sometimes.
No I am unaware of any benefits except for revenue generation and I am not convinced that is enough reason to maintain the program.
No It seems to function solely to bring in extra funds. The hours of enforcement are way longer than necessary. I don't think this actually impacts the safety of the kids or the community.
No often they are not accurate No Please do not turn into the city of Lynnwood. I absolutely loathe driving down 196th because I am in fear of running a red light or stopping so fast and getting rear ended. Never have I heard anybody saying "gee what a great idea these were". I believe the only group who might think these are wonderful are the police departments. I also would like to know why the school zone cameras are operating during non school hours.
No I live near one of these zones. I have observed that traffic just speeds up prior to the zone and immediately after. Since so many kids walk home significantly further than the reduced speed zones, it actually makes it more dangerous. I have seen cars flying down the road and slam on the brakes as they reach the zone. I have almost been rear-ended multiply times as I approach the zone as well. The area covered by the reduced speed already has a crossing guard. It would be more helpful to make it safer for the kids walking home further away from the school. How about some sidewalks??
LAKE FOREST PARK POLICE DEPARTMENT PHOTO ENFORCEMENT SURVEY COMMENTS
QUESTION #2 Do you think the city would benefit from expanding the photo enforcement program to the locations identified?
Yes Definitely in front of Brookside Elementary. Yes I do think that Brookside needs an expanded school zone area. Currently, 178th is not safe for children to walk. As it has turned into a major through way to access I-5.
Yes Helps in keeping all drivers safe, with a teenager that is beginning to drive I feel that it will benefit her as well. Helps with obeying the law.
Yes Yes- 37th Ave NE newar brookside has a hill, too many drivers take it 35-40 MPH upto the school zone. Yes I think more sensors around the schools are important. I'm sure it's a great revenue generator, too. Yes Once again its a safety thing. To many people are speeding and need to slow down. My husband takes the bus on BotHell way and has almost been hit many times from speeders and people not paying attention. Yes Especially in front of Brookside, where I work. Yes Slows drivers down in critical, high-pedestrian areas. Would also lessen red light runners and these high volume areas where people cross a busy intersection
Yes The safer, the better, especially on the winding, sidewalk-free roads of LFP, where children play and old people walk. Yes WE HAVE ALOT OF PEOPLE JUST PASSING THRU WHO ARE NOT RESPECTING OUR CITIZENS Yes I have concerns about the Ballinger Way and Bothell camera. The timing of that light seems to be incredibly poor. If the timing is fixed to give more time for turning onto/off of Ballinger then I would be more supportive of having a camera at that location. Yes See above. Yes It makes our community safer. Yes I like the location on Bothell Way a lot. Traffic light cameras could help to get people to slow down at the intersection and pay more attention. I don't know the other location that well, so I have no comment. Yes The City will always benefit from more revenue generation. Yes See above. Only for the schools if the hours are more reasonable and justifiable. For the red-light enforcement--absolutely as long as the yellow lights are on long enough to get through an intersection at 40 mph when the light changes to yellow and you can't stop in time. Yes Except for the 37th ave the photo red light additions would add to the safety of those intersections. THe cars on 37th go fairly slow anyway. The T intersection and stop sign in one direction slows cars down, while the need to turn onto 37th starts cars off slow and when kids are present, so too are the crossing guards. At least you are proopsing something that is actually near the schools unlike the ones for LFP Elementary. At the moment, I will not cross at 170th until every car comes to a stop. The red light is not good enough.... cars keep coming. I'm unfamiliar with the bothell-ballinger intersection, but I assume it has a similar problem. Yes It will reduce running through red lights. LAKE FOREST PARK POLICE DEPARTMENT PHOTO ENFORCEMENT SURVEY COMMENTS
QUESTION #2 Do you think the city would benefit from expanding the photo enforcement program to the locations identified?
Yes Vehicles would travel more cautiously tbrough our neighborhood. Yes Only 37th in front of Brookside Yes This must be approched in a reasonable manner. Many of my fellow residents fear that the driving factor behind this program is to generate revenue, not improve public saftey. It is critical that we see statistics showing that this program is actually improving public saftey, not just generating revenue.
Yes It is important to monitor driving in the city Yes Make LFP a safer place Yes It has improved safety in the brookside school zone. Cameras should operate 24 hours a day. Yes I have always thought it strange that the photo enforcement was not used on 37th and also at Bothell and Ballinger Yes Must be careful with signing for School Zone on 37 Ave NE. Current signing is poor. Yes In front of Brookside school is very important. Cars fly thru there daily. always have.
The 2 locations on Bothell Way are crucial!!! I live in between the 2 locations, so you can just imagine what I witness every day (either on foot or in my car). And when the sun comes out, whoa, so scary. Bikers are crazy, people pushing strollers don't look to see if they have the right of way-just see the light turn green and then go. And the teenagers...they absolutely don't look out for cars. they r all about fun and their cell phones! Yes Yes in front of Brookside, except don't have it start so early. Why not at 8:00? Also that is a really steep hill and will need some lead time to get folks trained to slow down. I suggest you have a break in or grace period as we get used to it. Yes red light at 170th and Ballinger as well as the lead in from 522 where people try to not yield needs better enforcement.
I'm not opposed to action where there is a problem, but I fail to understand how if there ARE no children present why we need to slow down to 20 mph. If children are present, of course we have an obligation. Yes Either safety or revenue enhancements. Yes It should improve safety, but will have an adverse impact on traffic flow during rush hours. Yes I favor the photo enforcement method of monitoring with consequences, overall. I would favor expanding it on major streets, 24 hours per day. Speeds will fall and safety will increase. LAKE FOREST PARK POLICE DEPARTMENT PHOTO ENFORCEMENT SURVEY COMMENTS
QUESTION #2 Do you think the city would benefit from expanding the photo enforcement program to the locations identified?
Yes On Ballinger Way and Bothel Way, if cameras reduce accidents and injuries then I am in favor of them. If it is simply a question of speeding, then I need more information to make that decision. At present I am not in favor of the cameras in school zones, partly b/c of a lack of information and partly b/c I suspect that the modern "helicopter" parents are over reacting to all perceived threats to their children. I have been to several town meetings where parents complained that there children could not walk to school (though very close) b/c there were "no sidewalks", thus it was deemed "unsafe". This is absurd, and highlights the issue at stake with the school zone cameras.
Yes Bothell Way is heavily travelled at a fast speed--often cars do not slow as light turns red Yes Safety Issue Yes I live at 170th and Bothell Way and have witnesses several serious accidents and numerous close-calls at this location involving both vehicles and pedestrians. This intersection would benefit from *anything* that would encourage drivers to pay more attention to what they are doing, such as red light photo enforcement.
Yes More money Yes I live in the area and see the need to enforce the speed limit and more cautious driving. Yes If there is shown to be excessive speed in those zones Yes My belief is that the red light cameras ARE primarily about safety as they don't impede safe traffic flow in any way and can cut down on red-light violators, as indicated by the decrease in accidents at Ballinger and 165th. Running a red light can lead to very serious consequences, often because drivers speed up to get thru the light. I am all in favor of installing the cameras at both SR 520/SR 104 and SR 520 / NE 170th.
Yes I've seen cars making turns before crosswalks are completely cleared or just as the crossers reach the center lane.
I've seen cars dart out to turn only to realize walkers are stepping out into the crosswalk - worries me! Yes particularly 170th & Bothell way. This intersection is treacherous for pedestrians. As a mother of 2 boys I am nervous every time I cross there that a car turning onto Bothell way from the town center is going to hit someone. Very Dangerous. There needs to be tickets issued for cars turning through the cross walk when there are pedestrians are in it. I am thrilled this is being considered! Thank you. Yes Bothell Way and Ballinger is an intersection where I have personally witnessed/heard many crashes (while at the Civic Club). This is both dangerous and disruptive. I also see pedestrians/bicyclists disobeying the crosswalk lights at that intersection and I worry there will be an pedestrian/car accident at the road leading to the Civic Club/waterfront houses. I know photo enforcement wouldn't stop jaywalking, but maybe if cars are not cutting red lights, etc. the affect will be a safer environment for people on the sidewalks as well. LAKE FOREST PARK POLICE DEPARTMENT PHOTO ENFORCEMENT SURVEY COMMENTS
QUESTION #2 Do you think the city would benefit from expanding the photo enforcement program to the locations identified?
Yes Clearly a good source of revenue. Easy to maintain once set-up. I would be curious about factoring in frequency and expense to city when a driver challenges an LFP photo ticket in court in the overall revenues to LFP. Yes I have not personally witnessed a high incidence of red-light running or speeding at the listed possible additions to the program, but I have heard parents mention that speeding in front of Brookside is a problem. I would hope the City has done its research before installing additional cameras.
Yes Absolutely. It will greatly aid those vehicles coming up from the lake side. It will help pedestrian safety for those crossing the highway. It will create important revenue for the city in both traffic violations and relieving patrol costs. . Yes As above...helps to ensure speed limits are actually enforced...police can't be everywhere. Yes If there is a history of problems there, then let's wake people up! Yes Same answer as above... Except I am NOT in favor of enforcement cameras in non-school areas. Yes Especially in school zones Yes It will probably bring in more revenue into city budget Yes What locations are you identifying? Yes I am beginning to believe the more cameras the merrier. HOWEVER, I do think the city should negotiate a better deal with ATS. I'd think we have some leverage if we are looking at adding cameras. If they won't negotiate, I would hope there would be a company out there which would provide a much more competitive rate. If not, the city of LFP should consider going in to the automated traffic cam business.
Yes Only in direct school zones, not at intersections. Yes NOT ALL LOCATIONS - Just the locations proposed along SR522. As the report suggests, there has been a 12% increase in traffic over this road over the past three years. Let's start tolling drivers running red lights and speeding. Yes All school areas need to be covered Yes I am pleased with the idea of more red light cameras on Bothell Way because I have seen many accidents and almost hit myself. There is a lot of pedestrian traffic in this area and kids crossing back and forth- kids tend to look more at the walk sign but not look to see if all traffic has stopped. I am not sure about the area of Brookside for another speed camera. I do not like the speed camera on 35th- it is not even in front of the school (or within 2 blocks) and more kids are walking to school on 37th where there is no camera. I am sure it is there to collect $ from people commuting to work vs. need for safety.
Yes Look at the stats, people slow down and it does for habitual speeders to slow in the school zones. If somebody is concerned about privacy, there are many alternate routes to take which will bypass the well documented and advertised locations of the cameras. Same with the Red Light cameras. LAKE FOREST PARK POLICE DEPARTMENT PHOTO ENFORCEMENT SURVEY COMMENTS
QUESTION #2 Do you think the city would benefit from expanding the photo enforcement program to the locations identified?
Yes The sooner the better Yes Monetarily at Ballinger and BOTHELL way. Citizen ire at becoming Lynnwood, no. Yes As the adult Safety Patrol advisor, you would be making my dreams come true. Yes I offer a qualified yes since I haven't seen the data supporting the programs or locations. I believe that these types of programs should only be implemented in response to very strong, clear safety data.
I think the "school zone" practice of reduced speed limits based on strict hours without regard to student presence and without blinking lights is very problematic. No one who doesn't specifically know the area would expect to have reduced speed at 4:20pm without a blinking light to highlight it. Also, given our lovely trees, the signs are often not super visible. So, I strongly feel that a school zone reduced speed w/out the blinking lights that most communities use is a mistake. Please consider adding a blinking light to school zones.
Yes Anything that deters drivers from speeding/running red lights will be of benefit to our city. Yes I'm not certain if those are the right spots, but if neighbors want them and the police have seen a high incident of violation or accidents there, my answer is a solid yes.
Yes Any added slowdown in school zones is always beneficial in my opinion. I also think that the amount of pedestrian traffic on Bothell Way @ 170th and Ballinger would benefit from increased caution due to red light surveillance. Yes I believe that it would get these reckless drivers to drive more safely. Yes Around Brookside school zone is good idea. Yes In certain areas such as in school zones and on side streets that do not have sidewalks it would be very valuable to have photo enforcement if that is the only available option. Traffic circles and speed bumps would be better methods of speed control without turning LFP into another Lynnwood.
Yes I think it seems like an effective, efficient, and safe way to encourage people to drive the speed limit in those areas! Yes I think an area right by a school is a very logical place to put photo enforcement. Yes If it provides additional revenue and improves safety. Yes I live on Brookside and although it is 25MPH, practically no one observes the speed limit. I have seen 2-3 cars go through the red lights at both 170th and at Ballinger Way
No Bothell way is fine. In School area of 37th Ave reduced speed can be achieved at much lower cost to residents by incorporating speed breakers on road and clear signage.
No I think the city would benefit from trusting its citizens to behave properly and self-police. If an area is a problem, there should be an officer posted there. Videotaping me is a violation of my civil liberties. No No but the company who sells the cameras will LAKE FOREST PARK POLICE DEPARTMENT PHOTO ENFORCEMENT SURVEY COMMENTS
QUESTION #2 Do you think the city would benefit from expanding the photo enforcement program to the locations identified?
No I think our community has a bad reputation because of these lights and that we feel more like a police state with big brother watching. I wish we could find other ways to make our traffic issues more manageable. No There should be NO expansion of the traffic cameras until the administration of the program is reformed (see above). No Not really. I'm in front of Brookside every morning during school for drop-offs and people are careful through there during school hours. Not opposed to it in front of the school though. I am also at the Ballinger/Bothell Way intersection several times/day and have never felt that running red lights is an issue there (other than buses). Visibility is pretty clear both directions. I think the other one proposed on Bothell way will lead to more people slamming on their brakes (potentially causing collisions) like they do at the other unnecessary red-light camera.
No Stick to school zones. No Based on the Recommendation document (http://wa-lakeforestpark.civicplus.com/DocumentCenter/View/1610):
1. Red Light enforcement site at Bothell and NE 170th (based on collision data, the increase of traffic on Bothell Way since tolling began on SR520 and the overall safety of pedestrians crossing Bothell Way at this busy intersection.) If this is a the crossroad near the gas station (Arco), north of it there is already a Red light next to Starbucks. If not, please review your doc and make it clear where this Red Light enforcement is intended to take place. Please add a map or a link specific to the location. 2. Speed zone enforcement site on 37th Ave NE between NE 178th and NE 170th (based on the lack of sidewalks and citizen complaints of speed and safety concerns). This location already has speed enforcement with a camera monotoring the traffic flow speed next to the school. Build a sidewalk if necessary. No No. I think the city only has these photo enforcement locations to make money. I do not think it has anything to do with the safety of our children.
No I'm fine with having it around schools. But highly travelled intersections are just a trap. You don't want to become like Lynnwood and have every intersection in town monitored. It causes people to race for lights which is a bad response. No If the problem is a lack of sidewalks near the school, why not install sidewalks instead of ticket cameras? No They would make more money though. No Bothell way cameras will increase rear end collisions. School zone location has more potential benefit. No Absolutely not. In the case of LFP Elementary, the cameras are not on streets that actually border the school. The enforcement cameras are a revenue generator that are not as effective as an officer.
No Flow management is needed. More backed up traffic from afraid to lroceed drivers is goi g to help nothing. LAKE FOREST PARK POLICE DEPARTMENT PHOTO ENFORCEMENT SURVEY COMMENTS
QUESTION #2 Do you think the city would benefit from expanding the photo enforcement program to the locations identified?
No Now that's funny. If you want to obtain the answer you want just direct your questions to our elected officials and government bureaucrats. I think they would just love more locations.
No On demand solar powered illuminated crosswalk signs would provide more safety. There have been zero ped vs car accidents in LFP yet one fatality on 61st in a non-illuminated cross walk in 2014. A combination photo/speed radar unit at Bothell & Ballinger Wy would be an asset. That way if people speed on Bothell Wy, they get nabbed, if they run the light they get nabbed, and if they speed to run the light, they get nabbed.
No Actually a bit unsure the two locations on Bothell Way I have never seen those as area where speeding through lights occur (too much traffic to speed) or accidents. If there were data proving these two areas have higher than usual rates of red light running and accidents then it might be worth pursing.
No From the financial projections, I think the City would definitely benefit from additional revenues but I don't think the citizens will benefit. If this is a way for the City to raise additional revenue over tax increases, stop the foolishness and have the courage to raise taxes.
No The red light caneras cause fear of incurring a ticket and are therefore a reckless distraction when drivers need to be alert to other potentially distracted drivers, pedestrians and cyclists or unanticipated emergency situations. Also large (and loaded) trucks tend to break harder than is safe when they see a light changing for fear of infraction. It's bad enough out there with drunks, cell phones, anger, ever increasing bike lanes, various lane delineations and signage. The last thing we need in this exponentially stress expanding country is the additional distraction of "Gotcha" implements from our civil servants. American government was originally intended to serve people. Proposals such as this always look suspect of benefiting unfunded future liabilities. Maybe we could lower property taxes and therefore people wouldn't be in such a hurry to make things happen (ends meet) and thereby reduce traffic a host of risks.
No I don't think the data supports the tradeoffs and I don't think it is appropriate to depend on revenue from this source. Police powers are not an atm.
No Red light cameras are unconstitutional No The photo enforcement cameras do not promote safety and several larger cities such as Redmond, WA has removed them based on surveys and costs associated with running the cameras.
No Cameras sometimes do not reflect what really happens. However, I am all for it when people blatantly go thru red lights. No How many accidents in school zones has there been in the last 10 years ? Few to none I would guess. Waste of time and useless safety program.
No See above LAKE FOREST PARK POLICE DEPARTMENT PHOTO ENFORCEMENT SURVEY COMMENTS
QUESTION #2 Do you think the city would benefit from expanding the photo enforcement program to the locations identified?
No Since the survey does not include a specific box for 'general comments' on the program here are mine.
Lights by schools - ok; BUT the light on 165th is WRONG for the reason there is no 'warning' to drivers of impending light change. Ie, no 'walk signal' that indicates a 'stale' green light about to change. THAT aspect needs to be changed. If the city is truly concerned about SAFETY, install a walk signal.
If concern is primarily REVENUE ENHANCEMENT, then you've certainly found that. No In a small community like ours, we would like to deal face to face with our law enforcement officers. This keeps them feeling human, and promotes mutual respect.
No I find the red light camera on 165th & Bothell Way to be very annoying. If you are traveling at 40 mph and the light turns yellow, it can be difficult to slow down in time. The light flashes regardless.
No How would the city benefit? More revenue? This is punitive. No Not with the traffic in violation of the US Department of Transportation. No It's awful enough as it is No Not clear what locations are being referred to.. No The city would benefit financially but it would not benefit the drivers caught in the net. No I don't believe the red light photo enforcement would increase safety. There has been an increase in traffic and because of the congestion there may be motorists that would be in the intersection when the light turned red but could not avoid the situation. No The second site at the school is not necessary based on collisions one collision over three years does not justify the placement. People are hypersensitive around the schools. it does not mean it's unsafe. Try putting in sidewalks it would help. No Just move existing cameras around No See above. No Again, I do not find photo-enforcement to be valuable. No Folks driving down hill on 37th should be slowing for the stop sign anyway. That might be appropriate if in fact there have been rear end collisions or car-pedestrian accidents. But not up hill.
For red light, maybe for cars travelling through on Bothell Way but NOT for cars entering/crossing BW from Ballinger or 170th. The problem is that the lights "in favor" of traffic on Ballinger or 170th are already on the short side so if/when traffic on Bothell Way continues into "deep yellow" territory it shortens the actual time available even more. Especially NOT for eastbound traffic on Ballinger turning (north) or crossing Bothell Way. Since that approach is down hill, if someone slams on their breaks for fear of getting a red light ticket you will have rear end collisions for sure. LAKE FOREST PARK POLICE DEPARTMENT PHOTO ENFORCEMENT SURVEY COMMENTS
QUESTION #2 Do you think the city would benefit from expanding the photo enforcement program to the locations identified?
No No. We should limit such surveillance as much as possible. I'd like you to demonstrate from your perspective that there is a substantial need-- not simply ID areas in which you hypothesize an increase might be beneficial. No I support it's use only in school zones No Expanded photo enforcement systems are proven to create distrust in communities. Just look at Lynnwood and Monroe. No It does not increase safety, and may actually reduce it according to some studies. Anyone driving a photo enforcement program for either red lights or speed needs to be aware of the research into the matter, let alone the ethical issues. No Not sure--how many red-light runners do you get at the other locations? How many rear-end crashes might you get if people slam on brakes at the yellow light?
No They cause a lot of extreme stopping with is not safe and can easily cause rear end collisions. No I think the "panic stops" and otherwise behavioral changes in driving habits are only to adjust to the presence of the cameras, and actually hinder real life safety. In other words, they actually distract drivers and make safety worse in addition to being annoying. No Again, the program is all about revenue and nothing to do with safety No Expansion should be limited to school zones only. The city should not invest in additional red light cameras that may or may not actually increase safety.
No No, just put the electronic mph signs up at all locations that are deemed to be in need of additional safety features. No need to issue tickets unless they are issued by a law enforcement officer in person. No I don't remember the "locations identified." if not near schools, NO! No I feel that while the City of LFP may benefit financially, the city itself would suffer. I am proud to live in LFP, and would be very disappointed to have my town turn into another victim of excessive traffic cam utilization. I appreciate the efforts that have been made to bring the processing into the city and in stopping collections contracting with ATS. I just feel that revenue-generating traffic cameras are a huge conflict of interest for the city and the police department.
No It makes the city a unwelcoming with a big brother is watching complex No Photo enforcement has a number of problems I'm not sure have been adequately addressed, from reductions in yellow-light duration, to dubious "public-private partnerships" involving revenue sharing with camera manufacturers, to the simple fact that studies have yielded mixed results on safety improvements due to cameras at intersections. In statistics, ordinary random variations give rise to large relative fluctuations when the numbers are as small as they are, and cherry-picking is always a concern. For instance, I'd need to see both more granularity and more historical data on red-light collisions at 165th before concluding that the camera really had any beneficial effect. Basically, red-light running is not a big concern in this area, and has never been as far as I'm aware. Right-of-way conflicts with pedestrians and bikes are much more prevalent. LAKE FOREST PARK POLICE DEPARTMENT PHOTO ENFORCEMENT SURVEY COMMENTS
QUESTION #2 Do you think the city would benefit from expanding the photo enforcement program to the locations identified?
No For the same reason as I've stated above. We are quickly becoming the 1984-like society with cameras watching citizens everywhere. Sure, the justification sounds quite reasonable in the beginning, for safety, but I'm sad to see it coming and fear that the next generation will soon come to accept it as "normal."
No I guess I would wonder about the Brookside location, only because I thought there was allready photo enforrcement along that route No I do not approve of the program at all. No Photo enforcement is always set up at major intersections where it only distracts drivers from all the other things going on....and never on neighborhood arterials where drivers may speed on residential streets where speed limits are posted but not enforced. Seems there is a greater safety issue on a residential street than in a large intersection, and definitely slower driving in residential areas maintains a more neighborly atmosphere.
No No more camera cops! No Only in terms of revenue. It appears that one of the reasons put forth for adding these cameras (and keeping existing ones) is the net revenue for the City. Police powers shouldn't be seen as an ATM for the City's general fund. The more we rely on these cameras for general fund revenue, the harder it will be to get rid of them and the more likely it will be that we'll install them simply for revenue instead of public safety reasons. God help us if the State Legislature ever authorizes these for general speed monitoring - we'll have them on every road in the City.
No see above explanation. No The entire program should be eliminated, not expanded. No No, I'm not a fan of this type of enforcement. In many situations it's been abused as well, with cities lowering yellow light duration gain more revenue. Even if the current people in charge won't do that, we would be putting the infrastructure in place for later abuse. No I believe the program is ill advised and is contrary to the character of our community. No I am one of those 80% non-LFP residents who must travel through your city every day. I HATE the light at 165th--I can never figure out how to approach it to avoid the traffic camera, especially when I have tailgating commute traffic on my bumper if I try and slow down there while the light is green. The light at 170th is horribly timed. After waiting endlessly at Ballinger for a green, then going that short distance to 170th, you inevitably hit 170th JUST as it turns red. If you'd put the traffic ticket money into timing all the 522 lights in LFP, I'd consider it worthwhile. But until then, I think it's nothing but a high tech speed-trap like you see in the old movies!
No We have enough already. No Please see answer to first question. If the city does add an enforcement zone at Ballinger and lake City way, the light exiting from the Civic Club should be adjusted. It has a VERY short duration allowing at times, only one vehicle at a time. This could cause more effort for the city as residents and club members contest these impersonal citations. LAKE FOREST PARK POLICE DEPARTMENT PHOTO ENFORCEMENT SURVEY COMMENTS
QUESTION #2 Do you think the city would benefit from expanding the photo enforcement program to the locations identified?
No Unfair practice. I highly dislike and object to this style of traffic enforcement. No I don't really know, not around those intersections much No We do not live in a police state! No another way to fleece tax payers for going 2 MPH over the speed limit No What other measures can be taken, what is their cost? (178th intersection is apparently already scheduled for improvement.) Seems like more cameras will only increase the City's reputation as a speed trap. No See previous answer. No I think the additional locations represent over-reach, on the City's part. No If the above evidence is the justification, it fails to demonstrate a cost/benefit. I would also not like to see LFP get the reputation for being a high camera and money hungry town - it just isn't the reputation we should have. No There is no evidence of value, except for the city to make profit. The process alienates the majority of the people from Big Brother. No Focus on school safety. Other areas will be viewed primarily as a money-making scheme. No I believe it would only increase frustration. No Definitely not. Need safer areas to walk. More sidewalks not not more photo enforcement. Safety not money generation should be the priority.
No See above, the only benefit is financial, which I don't think justifies using robots to monitor the public. I will admit, I do like the lack of speed traps our city used to be known for.
No Red light cameras are all about the city collecting revenue and have nothing to do with safety. No It is already a mess down on 522 by Towne Center. I do like the one on 37th Ave though - people speed through there alot. No I would prefer the City invest in traffic calming strategies that are focused on enhancing safety as opposed to generating revenue. I would also prefer that Lake Forest Park's reputation not be that of a "Speed Trap" town that is best avoided. No Same as above. No Is the goal to emulate Lynnwood or North Korea? No It's going to make more people angry with our local government. No I'm not sure. I am not aware of speeding as a big problem in our community. But right in front of Brookside Elem. makes total sense. No Define value. Financially, sure. Install the cameras up and down Ballinger and cite everyone that exceeds the speed limit and send them a ticket. You might be able to get more than one ticket per traverse of the road through the city. If the argument was that a problem existed as demonstrated through facts and then a correlation between the facts and the cameras being a solution could be drawn then yes. The true beneficiary of the program is ATS who is simply leasing our streets and using our laws and rules to turn a profit. LAKE FOREST PARK POLICE DEPARTMENT PHOTO ENFORCEMENT SURVEY COMMENTS
QUESTION #2 Do you think the city would benefit from expanding the photo enforcement program to the locations identified?
No I do not think the cost outweighs the benefit and it bothers me that the company that operates the cameras makes money on each ticket. Seems like the wrong motivation to me.
No The areas around the schools are covered well enough, would rather see funds go into crime and drug enforcement programs. No This is just a money maker for the company taking the photos and the city of LFP. You want to improve community safety, put speed bumps in!
No See above No The location in front of Brookside would be appropriate but the locations on Bothell Way are unnecessary No I am unaware of any benefits except for revenue generation and I am not convinced that is enough reason to expand the program. No Why not just just raise taxes instead? That would at least be even across the residents. I don't think this type of enforcement is beneficial unless you're honest that they're there to make more money. Selling this as safety only is a sham. No this isn't about safety it's about revenuw No Don't do it. No I think you should take down the ones you have and add sidewalks. Plus, the timing is all wrong. The reduced speed ends at 4:30pm, exactly when kids who do after-school programming are leaving.
LAKE FOREST PARK POLICE DEPARTMENT PHOTO ENFORCEMENT SURVEY COMMENTS
QUESTION #3 Do you have other locations that would be more beneficial to the photo enforcement program?
Yes Other locations along NE 178TH and Brookside Avenue. Traffic has increased substantially and with it excess speeds due to 520 toll. This is particular noticeable during rush hour.
Yes Yes, N.E. 47th St; which turns into N.E. 184th St. which turns into 53rd St. N.E. is a really dangerous street. There are no sidewalks. And during the school year, there are seven bus stops at three different times (high school, middle school and elementary school.) In addition, it is heavily travelled by both pedestrians and bicyclists. The road is steep with blind corners. Unfortunately, the cars travel as fast up the hill as down the hill. We would love to see, speed zones and crosswalks to make it safe for those that use the street side every day.
Yes Ballinger way from 35 to the towne center Yes Speed camera at the intersection of Perkins Way and Perkins Pl. If that's not LFP proper, then place as close to that spot as possible. At least twice per week I almost get hit because a car is exceeding the speed limit of 25mph. Yes I don't know about "more" beneficial, but 32nd Avenue NE (and other LFP locations) have hidden driveways and blind curves, around which people come ripping, often texting or talking on their phones as they do! For some especially self-absorbed folks, only a speed bump or the threat of a fine will wake them up and slow them down.
Yes On Ballinger, anywhere from 19th NE down to the Mall. Yes Full time speed camera on Ballinger Way. I drive with a radar detector so I happen to know radar is used very little in LFP, especially on Ballinger Way. Probably because there aren't many good places to set-up. People speed on Ballinger Wy where there are many hidden driveways making it a higher degree hazard than some of the others identified.
Yes Forest park drive - speed enforcement please Yes 47th Ave NE up via NE 187th St Yes Bicycles at the entrance to the civic club do not obey the light. Yes Perkins Lane, Ballinger Way. Yes Around other areas on 178th. I feel like once cars are past Brookside they speed up. You can hear lots of engine noise as the do so too. Yes If a need for reduced vehicle speeds is: pedestrians , bicyclist, narrow roadway and limited shoulders and sight distances. Then Perkins Way would be a perfect fit LAKE FOREST PARK POLICE DEPARTMENT PHOTO ENFORCEMENT SURVEY COMMENTS
QUESTION #3 Do you have other locations that would be more beneficial to the photo enforcement program?
Yes 1. The photo camera on 40th Place is near my home. I believe this camera does NOT identify most violators, as the camera is not positioned for the maximum street view in either direction on 40th Place (even worse, there's a large tree blocking most of this camera's north view). Consistent with this belief, your data report shows that the 40th Place camera identifies significantly fewer violations. If the camera were on the opposite (west) side of the street, this problem would likely be solved. Drive by and take a look at this camera's view - it's ridiculous. 2. Despite the single 40th Place camera, I frequently see cars traveling well over 30 mph on 40th Place between Ballinger and 197th Street (I walk around my neighborhood a lot), especially between 197th and 45th Pl NE, where the blind child crossing is found. 3. Also from my walks, I frequently observe many southbound cars skipping the stop sign at the bottom of the hill on 46th Ave NE, coming down hill from Horizon View Park. Probably this stop sign isn't worth a traffic camera, but intersection would benefit from police occasionally observing traffic. 4. Last, during morning commute times (I don't know about evening commute), cars use the north-south alley behind LFP mall like a street. The cars usually travel too fast, and sometimes startle truck drivers trying to unload their goods. Again, this probably isn't worth a traffic camera, but this alley would benefit from some police presence.
Yes I'm not certain where but certainly review of past enforcement issues should be done to see what other areas would benefit. I am aware of those who object to the cameras, using the privacy argument but I it is usually from those who received a camera citation in the past which disqualifies their claim. Any process the city can implement that serves to reduce speeding, provide safer use for vehicles and pedestrian and do so without the use of an officer physically stationed to create compliance...I am totally for.
Yes The corner of 156th and 37th NE. Also, by the rear entrance to the cemetary. Highschoolers run the stop sign, tailgate and speed past Briarcrest.
Yes 178th and 25th at the city limit to slow cars down... 178th has no sidewalks and limited pedestrian walkway when walking either to North City and or Lake Forest Park to catch a bus or do shopping.
Yes Drive-through traffic on NE 178th, east of 47th Avenue. The road is supposed to be closed to "through traffic". Yes Some intersection in Las Vegas. I remember learning that the company that operates the cameras is located in Las Vegas and I'm sure they are making a mint off locals here, so they should be able to afford cameras on every block in their neighborhood. Just keep them out of Lake Forest Park!
Yes I would rather see speedbumps along 37th Ave. I live on this street and there are more children moving in on this street. People slow down for speed bumps. They may blow off getting a ticket, but they preserve their cars. Currently, people come flying down the hill and not infrequently run the stop sign by my house. I dont want to see my daughter, or my neighbors children hit by these crazy drivers, and I think well placed speedbumps on 37th ave(preferably by my house, where there is a concentration of small children and speeders) will fix this problem more effectively and potentially save lives. All tickets do is bring money in to the city. I dont want my child, or my neighbors children getting hurt. LAKE FOREST PARK POLICE DEPARTMENT PHOTO ENFORCEMENT SURVEY COMMENTS
QUESTION #3 Do you have other locations that would be more beneficial to the photo enforcement program?
Yes see comment on #2 Yes 37th in front of LFP Elementary Yes School zones should be the priority. Yes On 178th between 33rd and 28th- many speeders as they come down the hill Yes The intersection of NE 165 and 37 Ave could use s stop camera. Yes I have not done any studies, but I'd love to see one enforcing the 30MPH on Ballinger Way. Maybe one near Eastbound approaching LFP Elementary and one West (North?) bound near around the 18000 block. It's tough to pull out of a driveway or side street with limited visiability when traffic is flowing at 40 instead of 30.
Yes In front of the school on 37th. If safety is issue and not $ Yes Ballinger way and 40th pl NE, this is a tricky road to take left turn from Ballinger to 40th PL, speeding cars here can cause accidents Yes 40th Ave NE and NE 182nd St. Cars use these streets as a cut through to avoid traffic on Ballinger Way and I personally see cars going in excess of 40 mph on both streets. Children are always walking these streets and they have no sidewalks. It is only a matter of time before some kid gets hurt or killed by a speeding driver.
Yes I would like to see photo enforcement on 37th just north of LFP elementary too where there are always vehicles speeding. If this is truly for a kids' safety then it would make sense that photo enforcement be on the road where the school is. People drive on 37th to avoid 35th where the speed traps are and then they zoom up/down the hill where kids are walking (and the sidewalk ends). It ends up we have more fast traffic on the road with more kids because of the current deterrent on 35th. A round about or speed bumps in conjunction with the photo enforcement would be effective in slowing down these heavy footed folks! Something needs to change on 37th north of 187th because it seems that the vehicles have no regard for posted speed signs or people/children walking on the road. My hope is that something changes before a child gets killed by a fast moving vehicle. Please help! Thank you for your attention to this very important matter.
No They should be nowhere. No see above No I would love to see more actual police presence on 178th during school hours. We walk to school every day and we rarely see a police car slowing drivers down higher up on 178th, where there are no guardrails or sidewalks. We come from 29th Ave NE and cars frequently speed - at least 10 miles over the speed limit. LAKE FOREST PARK POLICE DEPARTMENT PHOTO ENFORCEMENT SURVEY COMMENTS
QUESTION #3 Do you have other locations that would be more beneficial to the photo enforcement program?
No No - I don't want to live in Lynnwood with a camera light at every corner. I do think it's important to keep the school zones safe. Otherwise, I simply haven't seen a huge benefit to the Bothell Way light. If I saw some stats, perhaps I'd feel different. I'd rather see the city spend time and money on other things...like improving/installing nice sidewalks in highly walked areas, perhaps adding nice visible crosswalks...think of the brick crosswalks and landscaping they have in downtown Edmonds (adding a crosswalk near 178th on Ballinger would be helpful - I always see people running between cars there) or improving the overall look of Ballinger, 178th, and Bothell Way with a new landscaping plan, putting electrical underground (with all of the trees, how did THAT not happen a couple years ago when they did that big piping project on Ballinger?)...things that will actually add value to the community and improve the look/civic pride of Lake Forest Park.
No APPROVAL OF ALL LOCATIONS MENTIONED! No The most beneficial are the ones that don't exist No This is the worst survey I have ever seen. The person responsible knows nothing about surveys and I would be happy to educate him or her.
No Only the highest traffic locations will generate the most revenue for the City. SR 522 is the highest volume arterial in the City and therefore would target the highest number of violators. An added benefit is that most violators are traveling through the City, so LFP benefits whether they stop in the City or not.
No I think it's embarrassing that our city has red light and school zone cameras.We should end the program and quit enriching American Traffic Solutions.
No a photo enforcement wouldn't work, but the stretch of 28/30 from 178th to Grace Cole park frequently has people driving at VERY HIGH rates of speed --I would assume around 50 mph in a 25 mph zone. No Most of the photo enforcement cameras are located on streets that are not crossed by students and are outside of the legal distance from a school. If you must have cameras place them along the street in front of the school. How about a referendum or an initiative to get rid of the dam things.
No The city needs to elect new leadership to rid the city of these cameras No What the city has identified seems fine to me No The photo enforcement cameras do not promote safety and several larger cities such as Redmond, WA has removed them based on surveys and costs associated with running the cameras.
No Most people obey the speed limit in LFP. No I think these lights are a bad idea. No We really need a circular round about at the corner of 34th and 163rd. It is so dangerous how fast people speed down this small street. No I think the most important locations are around schools, which is where you have them located already. LAKE FOREST PARK POLICE DEPARTMENT PHOTO ENFORCEMENT SURVEY COMMENTS
QUESTION #3 Do you have other locations that would be more beneficial to the photo enforcement program?
No Blinking lights during school hours and a flashing light would still deter cars from speeding. $126 for going two miles an hour over is ridiculous.
No The City of Lake Forest Park needs to hire a licensed Traffic Engineer No NO No Please - Schools are enough! No I would hate to see this expanded. It is bad enough to see police hiding in citizen's driveways waiting for someone to speed coming down a hill. LFP had a reputation for this long before I moved here. Why not spend more time looking for drunk and impaired drivers (texters)?
No I do not believe that photo enforcement increases safety. No I'm not involved in other areas, so can't speak to that. No I believe in general that red light cameras wind up being revenue tools more than safety tools and that increasing the length of yellow lights would reduce the number of red lights that get run as much or more than the cameras. Too often, red light cameras become used primarily as revenue sources for the sponsoring municipality. If the goal is truly safety and increasing compliance, post the monitored intersections as having cameras to help encourage compliance. For school zone speed monitoring, the issues are different and I am in favor of fairly strict enforcement there. However, I do not think that speed limits should decrease while on a downhill grade. That is difficult to comply with and again seems like a revenue enhancement tool instead of a safety tool.
No Whoa!! I am not the least bit interested in living in a community like Lynnwood that is nothing but law enforcement traps. Give me a break. How much revenue do you need?
No Again, I do not find photo-enforcement to be valuable. No The school zone trap on 35th is a couple of blocks from the school and you never see any kids walking there. My daughter got a ticket for failure to stop at the light on Bothell way and 165th she sped through the light at 1/10 of a mph. Spend the money well. No No photo enforcement please, but do consider better enforcement of vehicular traffic that ignores crosswalks. No Because I would prefer policing in the neighborhood, schools rather than relyingj on a camera. No I would much rather that electronic speedometer signs be installed in these locations instead of traffic cameras. No I would like the ones we have to go away No I think the addition of stop signs at certain locations (like on 178th Ave. N.E.) and the addition of street lights, would add safety to our streets in our neighborhoods.
No Use funds for an extended left turn lane from ballinger way (104) on to bothel way, this would help flow during rush hour. No No - stop putting cameras around the City. I don't want them. I'd like to get rid of the ones we already have. No Obviously LAKE FOREST PARK POLICE DEPARTMENT PHOTO ENFORCEMENT SURVEY COMMENTS
QUESTION #3 Do you have other locations that would be more beneficial to the photo enforcement program?
No I believe the program should be canceled. No We have enough already. No No, but it may be good to put signs further up 178th from the current Brookside speed camera to scare non-residents in to slowing down earlier. There is a semi-blind corner as drivers turn on to 178th or cross over from the Hillside/creek side of 33rd. Also, adding fake cameras around town might be good too.
No No - Just along SR522. No We do not need cameras at all. We have rules and signs. No Not sure No complete waste of resources No Focus on school safety. No I think the machines that are randomly placed around the community which tracks MPH is of more value . . . . as drivers, we can readily see if we are exceeding the speed limit.
No I dont think that the school zone photo enforcement on 35th is necessary at all. Wouldn't it be more beneficial by the school, on Ballinger Way, and not 2 blocks away.
No We are such a small city with very few dangerous thoroughfares. Maybe Perkins Way around some of those blind turns needs attention, but otherwise I think you've covered.
No NONE. No just can't think of any. No I like the displays that show the speed limit and also display the current speed of the approaching traffic. These, I believe, are good reminders for drivers without being punitive.
No Same as above. No We should get rid of the ones we have now. No I am not aware of any other areas that would benefit from photo enforcement. No Please find a better way to increase safety without having automatic photos. This is especially true for people who don't know our neighborhoods. It's a sneaky way to make enemies, especially if you're not endangering anyone after school as already started....you can get a ticket all the way up to 9:30. Students are in their classrooms by 9:10. Talk about revenue maker!
No They should go away. No NO.