USE OF AUTOMATED ENFORCEMENT FOR RED LIGHT VIOLATIONS by Karl A. Passetti Professional Mentors Joseph M. McDermott, P.E. Illinois Department of Transportation and Thomas Hicks, P.E. Maryland Department of Transportation Prepared for CVEN 677 Advanced Surface Transportation Systems Course Instructor Conrad L. Dudek, Ph.D., P.E. Department of Civil Engineering Texas A&M University College Station, Texas August 1997 SUMMARY Traditional police methods cannot safely and efficiently address the increasing frequency of drivers violating (running) red lights. The use of automated enforcement systems offers the potential to decrease the number of red light violations and improve the safety of intersections. Despite the potential benefits of automated enforcement for red light violations, few jurisdictions in the United States have implemented such programs. Included in this report is an evaluation of the operating conditions where automated enforcement was effective, a study of the legal, legislative, and social issues needed to implement a program, a review of the current technology being used for automated enforcement, and a review of previous and current automated enforcement of red light applications in the United States and abroad. A strategy to create and implement an automated enforcement program for red light violations was established. The implementation strategy was then demonstrated using a hypothetical application. A state-of-the-art literature review was conducted to establish background information on the use of automated enforcement for red light violations. In order to provide more recent and site specific data that are not available in the literature, a diverse group of professionals were interviewed and a survey was conducted. The professionals contacted were automated enforcement program representatives, law enforcement officials, manufacturers of automated enforcement technology and systems, and research engineers and scientists. The interviews and survey were completed through a combination of telephone conversations and fax transmissions. The results of the survey and the information presented in the literature were incorporated into this report and were used to develop the following strategy for implementing an automated enforcement program for red light violations: & Demonstrate a need for the program; & Establish institutional arrangements; & Review applications in the United States and abroad; & Create a public education and awareness campaign; & Establish legislation to allow for the use of automated enforcement technology and processes; & Advertise a Request For Proposal (RFP); & Undertake a demonstration project; & Evaluate the demonstration project; & Implement selected vendor system; and & Expand the program. Based on the results of this study, the use of automated enforcement systems provided police departments and jurisdictions with the ability to consistently enforce red light violations without placing the total responsibility on police departments. By following the strategies presented in this report, agencies will be able to implement an automated enforcement program that may improve the safety of intersections. The automated enforcement program will also be acceptable to law enforcement agencies, highway and traffic engineers, supporting governments, and the general J-iii public. J-iv TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION .......................................................... J-1 Problem Statement ...................................................... J-2 Objectives ............................................................. J-2 Method of Study ........................................................ J-3 Literature Review .................................................... J-3 Data Collection ..................................................... J-3 Organization of Report .................................................. J-4 BACKGROUND ........................................................... J-5 LEGAL AND SOCIAL ISSUES ............................................... J-7 Constitutional and Privacy Issues ......................................... J-7 Admissibility Issues ..................................................... J-8 Enabling Legislation .................................................... J-8 Public Education and Awareness ......................................... J-10 Public Opinion ........................................................ J-13 TECHNOLOGY .......................................................... J-14 35-mm Cameras ....................................................... J-15 Video Cameras ........................................................ J-20 Digital Cameras ....................................................... J-20 Ticket Processing ...................................................... J-21 STUDY DESIGN .......................................................... J-22 APPLICATIONS OF AUTOMATED ENFORCEMENT PROGRAMS ............ J-24 New York City, New York .............................................. J-24 Public Involvement .................................................. J-25 Legislation Enacted ................................................. J-25 Technology ........................................................ J-25 Data Processing .................................................... J-26 Operational Problems ............................................... J-26 Program Results .................................................... J-26 Polk County, Florida ................................................... J-26 Public Involvement .................................................. J-27 Legislation Enacted ................................................. J-27 Technology ........................................................ J-27 Data Processing .................................................... J-27 Operational Problems ............................................... J-27 Program Results .................................................... J-28 J-v Howard County, Maryland .............................................. J-28 Public Involvement .................................................. J-28 Legislation Enacted ................................................. J-29 Technology ........................................................ J-29 Data Processing .................................................... J-30 Operational Problems ............................................... J-30 Program Results .................................................... J-30 San Francisco, California ............................................... J-31 Public Involvement .................................................. J-31 Legislation Enacted ................................................. J-32 Technology ........................................................ J-33 Data Processing .................................................... J-33 Operational Problems ............................................... J-33 Program Results .................................................... J-34 Lincoln, Nebraska ..................................................... J-35 Public Involvement .................................................. J-35 Legislation Enacted ................................................. J-35 Technology ........................................................ J-35 Data Processing .................................................... J-36 Operational Problems ............................................... J-37 Program Results .................................................... J-37 Ontario, Canada ....................................................... J-37 Political Issues ..................................................... J-37 Victoria, Australia ..................................................... J-38 Technology ........................................................ J-38 Data Processing .................................................... J-38 Program Results .................................................... J-38 Summary of Applications ............................................... J-40 IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES ......................................... J-42 HYPOTHETICAL APPLICATION .......................................... J-47 CONCLUSIONS .......................................................... J-52 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ................................................... J-54 REFERENCES ............................................................ J-55 APPENDIX ............................................................... J-58 J-vi INTRODUCTION The use of automated enforcement is providing governments and police departments with an alternative to address the increasing problem of red light violations. Although each state specifies its own traffic laws, a red light violation is commonly defined as when the front wheels of a vehicle enter the defining boundary of an intersection (usually the stop bar or crosswalk) after the traffic signal changes to the red phase and the vehicle proceeds through the intersection while the signal is red. The common phrase used to describe when vehicles proceed through an intersection after the traffic signal turns red is running a red light. Drivers who “run” red lights pose a danger to both other drivers using the facility and to themselves. Traditional means of using police personnel to enforce red light violations have several problems. Often, police departments have very limited resources and personnel. Decisions usually are made to allocate resources to other areas of need before supporting