Studies fault photo red for rear-end crashes

Installing cameras at intersections to catch red-light violators may increase safety, but it doesn’t necessarily reduce the number of collisions, according to federal and state studies. Spokane leaders are considering using a red-light camera system at the city’s most dangerous intersections. Owners of cars photographed running red lights would receive a $101 fine by mail. Signs would be posted to warn drivers and violations would not be on a driver’s record.

Supporters have pointed to statistics showing drastic declines in crashes in cities that have started camera programs.

But a 2005 federal study says many analyses of red-light cameras have been flawed. The report compared crash data between equal periods before and after installing cameras in seven jurisdictions and found that while collisions caused by drivers running red lights decreased by 379 with the cameras, rear-end crashes increased by 375.

Even so, the data still show that the cameras have an overall safety benefit because rear-end crashes tend to be less serious than the side-impact crashes caused by red-light runners, said Doug Hecox, Federal Highway Administration spokesman.

Cars are better engineered for rear-end collisions because of headrests, seat belts and other factors, said Spokane Police Lt. Bill Drollinger, who oversees the traffic unit.

In a rear-end crash, “there’s more vehicle between you and the other item you’re impacting,” Drollinger said. The same Federal Highway Administration study that found virtually no change in total collisions reported a decline of 23 in the number of total crashes with injuries.

A 2005 study of red-light cameras by the Virginia Transportation Research Council, however, reported that injury crashes increased by about 15 percent after cameras were installed in Fairfax County as a rise in rear-end collisions more than wiped out the decline of side-impact crashes. The council is a branch of the state’s transportation department.

John Miller, a research scientist who participated in the study, said the reason for the increase in rear-end crashes was not studied, but many speculate it’s because drivers conscious of the cameras are more likely to make sudden stops.

Despite the increase in crashes with injuries, the Virginia report noted that some intersections saw significant declines in crashes and recommended that the state continue allowing camera use.

“It potentially could be good and potentially not,” Miller said. “It depends on the intersection.”

Spokane Mayor Dennis Hession supports using red-light cameras. So does Councilman Al French, who is running against Hession. “The good part of it is you actually see a reduction of red-light running throughout the system,” Hession said.

The camera idea received initial support from the City Council’s public safety committee in December. The council won’t vote on the proposal for at least a few weeks.

Drollinger said the department continues to study the idea and is aware of the Virginia and federal studies.

Last week, Spokane City Council passed an ordinance requiring money generated from the cameras outside program costs should be used toward pedestrian and traffic safety projects.

The sponsor of the resolution, Brad Stark, said the city’s motive for installing the cameras would be to increase safety, not revenue.

Bob Apple, Nancy McLaughlin and Joe Shogan voted against the measure, saying it was premature since council hasn’t even approved installation of the cameras. Stark, French, Rob Crow and Mary Verner voted yes.

“It might be the cart before the horse, but what is the harm?” Crow asked.

Hession said he opposes the funding requirement because the money may be needed for other things.

A camera program “has never been analyzed from my perspective on the basis of whether it made lots of money for the city,” Hession said. “It was analyzed on the basis of safety.”