The latest Seattle Police Aggressive Drivers Response Team report includes not only speeding citations from the West Seattle Bridge but also two West Seattle school zones – including 42 mph in the 20 zone by Roxhill Elementary – and a far-south stretch of 1st Avenue South. Details on SPD Blotter.
The 20mph zone at Roxbury needs to be signaled better. You get one set of blinking lights, but since it is two lanes, it is easy to miss this if a truck or bus is positioned in a way that it blocks your view of the blinking lights.
Just this morning, I was ticked off and had emailed the mayor’s Seattle.gov address with the following:
I believe that traffic fines, especially those for moving violations, are too *low* in Seattle. Almost daily, I witness aggressive drivers with a disdain for their own and anyone elses safety and I believe that the current schedule of fines has not been an effective deterrent. I also think that doubling, tripling, even quadrupling traffic fines to pay for city services, especially law enforcement, would be popular with other voters.
In short, I urge the mayor to support tapping Seattle’s vast fiscal resource that is irresponsible driving.
Thank you for your time.
NFiorentini: I’m with you! A few hours ago I was nearly t-boned by a red pickup truck that went speeding through the solid red light at Fauntleroy and Oregon. Just what is WITH all of the people who run red lights in this town?!
Truck or not blocking your view when you are in a visual block of a school you should slow down to 20 mph PERIOD! This is basic drivers Ed people and most likely was on your test to get your license!
Go get ’em!!
A guy passed me today on the bridge going east just past the plant. Wouldn’t be that big of a deal, except for the fact that he was waiting at the red light on Fauntleroy when I entered the bridge. How fast does someone have to go to be at a red light for about 2 minutes, then be able to pass me 3/4 of a mile away!?! Too GD fast! Next time, I will post car make/model/color and license plate.
Harpy, what part of the driver’s education and test was missed when one sees/knows and passes a school during school hours? No lame “I didn’t see this sign or that light”. IT’S THE LAW EVERY DRIVER IN THE U.S. SHOULD KNOW.
@NFiorentini: Traffic laws should not be used for revenue collection – it leads to laws being created and manipulated to increase revenue rather than safety. Beware the law of unintended consequences.
@Adam: I didn’t say anything about creating more laws; merely make the penalty for violating the existing laws sting a lot more. Additionally, if given a choice between a tax increase OR an increase in the fines for moving violations, I would choose the latter every time.
Changing the penalty *is* changing the law. Do you think that quadrupling moving violation fines wouldn’t have unintended consequences? Really?
If tripling the cost of a car racing through a school zone and killing my child will be a deterrent, then I’m all for changing the law.
If a life sentence for making up straw men in arguments and confusing the issue at hand would be a deterrent, then I’m all for creating the law.
Adam- It’s not a strawman at all. I’ll rephrase the argument in another way.
If you’ve ever studied economics, the first thing that gets drilled into you from Day One is: “People respond to incentives.” It’s why we work. It’s why we do some things but not others. Etc. It’s the basis of our economic system and of our society. I am arguing that the incentives to drive responsibly need to be strengthened.
Besides, studies have shown that doubling fines in construction zones is effective policy, and WA already has done that. This is simply a logical extension of that idea.
Increasing the ranges of possible fines for traffic and speeding violations, including automatic suspensions for no liability insurance, ridiculously excessive speeding, etc., would obviously serve as an additional deterrent. It will never stop idiots from being idiots, but that’s life. Have you ever slowed down and taken a little more caution in one of those ‘construction zone – fines doubled’? Sure you have.
I’m not opposed to proper incentives for correct driving. Hinging city revenue on the need to hand out tickets (as you’re proposing by saying that it’s better than a tax increase) will produce other consequences as well – some of which might be worse than the benefits. When I slow down in a construction zone it has nothing to do with the “fines doubled” part of the situation, it’s that construction zones often have people working right next to the road and I care about their safety. In the middle of the night when a construction zone is empty I do not think about the doubled fine at all. Can you link to the studies that show that doubling fines alone (without increases in signage, etc) was effective? I’m not doubting they exist, but I’d like to read them.
A school zone is a school zone. Slow down. Period. If you don’t get that, and can’t be bothered to slow the eff down, then perhaps you shouldn’t be driving. At the very least, you should be fined up the wazoo for being so incredibly daft to think YOU are exempt from following the law when driving through an area where LITTLE KIDS are present. What the heck is wrong with people? Signs or no signs. Clearly marked or not. How confused do you have to be to not get that? Sheesh.
The level of holier than thou in this thread is beginning to boggle my mind. “Signs or no signs. Clearly marked or not.” – how can you follow the law if it’s not clearly signed?!
I am not advocating for the removal of school zones, nor increasing the speed limit in them. I’m stating that as with almost everything in life, it’s much more complicated than “just fine the person $10,000 and the problem will go away”. There is no black and white, there is no universal solution. People aren’t speeding in school zones because they can afford the current tickets. In most cases, they probably can’t.
The current system gets a FAIL just do 60 on I-5 from seattle to Tacoma and see if any cars pass ya
I don’t think that Seattle takes its school zones seriously. If you ever drive in Portland during school times, there are very obvious flashing lights and people do end up driving 20 mph. I don’t have children so I’m not familiar with school locations, especially if they’re a block or two off the main arterial, with a wide school zone. All we generally get is a sign that says drive 20 mph when children are present. And we all know people don’t pay much attention to signs. If Seattle takes the safety of your children seriously, they should be more proactive about better signage/lots of flashing lights to alert drivers. But this is just another reason I leave for work before 7:00!
It’s about time the ADT was on Roxbury! The hill from Holy Family to 26th gets drivers up to crazy speeds. It’s so dangerous, it should be policed weekly. Or one of those speed signs (with the red slow down) should be installed!
WSGUY — Very Good Point, had to chuckle at that one because of how true it is.
As to increasing the fines…it’s not that easy for Seattle to just raise traffic fines since the State (R.C.W) dictates moving violation catagories and fines. Municipalities have to follow within those guidelines and can’t severely deviate from them. So, in order to change traffic fines you would have to do it at the State level. And if you think that it can easily been done, then while you are at it, get them to harshen the penalty for all DUI related violations, accidents and deaths.
WTF and others, people on blogs are so quick to rush to judgment. What I pointed out is that the signals are very easy to miss in this location for a number of reasons, its on a hill, and it is two lanes. The speed limit in only 20mph when students are coming and going, not when it is “school hours”. Unless you have a child in that particular school, you are not going to have any idea when the particular 20MPH zone will apply unless you either see children, or those blinking lights. I am not saying don’t give tickets, I am saying that if you want safe children, improve the signalization. If you merely want to be “right” then keep things the way they are and throw stones on the blogs.
To those saying that a lack of signalization is the problem: Get real. This town has radar-equipped signs that display a passing car’s speed and blink when that speed is over the limit. Despite certainly costing more than the standard signs, these high-tech signs are completely ineffective in slowing people down. Need convincing? Then please take a drive from the W. Seattle Bridge up Admiral where one of these signs is located. Going five over gets me the one-fingered salute every week or so; obeying the speed limit would probably incite full-blown road rage.
Also, I know of no two-lane streets in Seattle in which anyone should be driving faster than 35mph, regardless of the location being a school zone or not. Common sense would also tell most people to look out for *any* signage near a school and to slow it down, just for good measure. However, there aren’t many drivers in this city endowed with that trait.
I reiterate…someone who is driving 42mph in a school zone should be much lighter in the pocket book than under current law. I also think that they are probably too dumb to be allowed to drive at all, but I’d settle for their increased contribution to the city’s revenue base.
What about more enforcement of the traffic laws? The fines can be as high as $1,000000 but if no police officers are pulling people over for violations, people will continue to break the law. Thats why people speed and still use cell phones while driving, no enforcement.
@NFiorentini: How about linking those studies showing that doubling the fines in construction zones improved safety? (Preferably not created by the cities that directly benefitted from the increased revenue.)
Why not the Death Penalty, NFiorentini? It would solve a lot of our traffic issues. People would be so afraid to drive, we’d keep them off the road, making more room for the mayor’s bicycles. Speaking of which, if they had to buy license tabs, I might not mind them using a lane of traffic so much. Talk about a revenue stream for this area.
@Adam-You seem to adhere to some variation of naive libertarianism in which laws and their enforcement are bad and should be opposed. BTW, people live in cities; so why is it that studies “created by cities” are to be discounted? Oh…you’d rather not see evidence that contradicts your position and so you want to tilt the criteria for evidence in your favor. Confirmation bias much?
Spending an hour or so researching would be a waste of my time because you are not open-minded; rather, like so many people these days, you merely seek confirmation of your flawed worldview. Such a mindset is a one-way ticket to false beliefs and I have neither the energy nor the inclination to rescue you from the circularity of your reasoning.
Cheers.
Wow. That’s quite a tirade in place of the hard facts I was expecting. Believe it or not, I’m a liberal and nowhere near a libertarian. Just because I don’t approve of knee-jerk reactions and regulation in an attempt to OMG SAVE THE CHILDREN!!!!!11 does not mean that I’m not a liberal.
Another thing you wouldn’t expect is that I am quite open to studies that show a positive correlation between safety and increased fines. Just because I don’t currently believe what you feel is self evident doesn’t give you carte blanche to claim that I’m “not open-minded”, “seek confirmation of my flawed worldview”, and need rescuing “from the circularity of my reasoning”. You know what’s flawed reasoning? Expecting an entity with something to gain to produce unbiased reports that could harm said gain. As a liberal I’d expect you’d have seen this play out over the last decade with deregulation and the FTC and EPA.
The other thing I find remarkable is the prevailing “These people are bad and need punishment!” mentality at play. That’s a pretty conservative thought – a liberal would be empathetically trying to figure out how to modify behavior, not out to cause pain for others.
What do you think about the fact that red light cameras don’t decrease accident rates at intersections? How do you feel about towns that subsist off traffic fines by setting intentionally low speed limits on their main streets (that just happen to be a highway)? Anyway, I was asking for evidence for YOUR position, I have evidence of mine.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/10/03/AR2005100301844.html
@NFiorentini:
You know those radar speed signs that you claim “are completely ineffective in slowing people down”? Here’s a study from Bellevue with statistical evidence that they do work. I couldn’t find an independent study, so one from the city is better than nothing.
http://www.kirklandwa.gov/Assets/Public+Works/Public+Works+PDFs/transcom/archive/KTC+Other+Agency+Experience.pdf
This is an example of how gut feelings are often wrong, and why studying the effects of a change are important.
The “slow down” signs on Ambaum get me to slow down – every time! Same with the ones on 35th before Morgan. They work – I’m proof!
Adam-I don’t want to have a flame war here, so this will be my last message in this thread and you’ll get the final word that you seem to so desperately crave.
1) I just got home via Admiral. I did my usual five-over and, once again, I was the slowest person on the road. I stand by my assertion that the radar-speed limit signs are worthless for getting people to slow down.
2) I never said anything about redlight cameras. Valiant attempt to muddy the waters there!
3) If you’re a liberal (liberals are usually better at reading comprehension than you’ve demonstrated), then you understand that government at all levels is broke, and that there is very little fat that can be trimmed. College students just got huge tuition hike. The Seattle Public Library system just concluded cost-saving furloughs. The general state of roads here is deplorable. Etc. Government must generate revenue somehow. On the WSB main page, there are several stories about accidents resulting from carelessness…in addition to the stuff atop this page. There is also the cyclist in Capital Hill that was killed this week.
(BTW, DP, I’m not a cyclist. No lycra shorts in this wardrobe!)
To me, higher fines for traffic violations seem preferable to tax hikes, and as a by-product, would encourage responsible driving.
Finally, as the expression goes, I think ‘doth protest too much.’ Please drive safely out there.
Out.
I’m replying one more time – not to get the last word but to point out the hypocrisy in your argument. I’ll never reply to another post of yours because you’re not honorable in a discussion. Falling back on ad hominem attacks and refusing to concede a point you’ve clearly lost makes arguing with you a waste of time.
You said, in a bout of ad hominem: “not open-minded; rather, like so many people these days, you merely seek confirmation of your flawed worldview. Such a mindset is a one-way ticket to false beliefs and I have neither the energy nor the inclination to rescue you from the circularity of your reasoning.”
You also said: “Despite certainly costing more than the standard signs, these high-tech signs are completely ineffective in slowing people down.”
I posted real evidence to the contrary, the results of three studies on traffic patterns after these signs were installed. Your point of view afterwards? “I stand by my assertion that the radar-speed limit signs are worthless for getting people to slow down.”
Pot. Kettle. Black.
NFiorentini is absolutely correct. In NYC, they repossessed people’s cars if they were caught DWI. And guess what, drink and driving went down to nil. Look at Virginia’s new fines — if you drive more than 10mph over the limit, posted or not, you have to pay $5,000 or 15% of your adjusted income, whichever is higher. Radar detectors are also prohibited. Speeding and safety is paramount.
They need to put speed radar cameras by every school and put the limit at 15mph. Anything higher should be a $500 directly to the police officer issuing the ticket. That way will ensure he nails every ignoramus that drive fast.
@Adam, your posting of foolish news sources mean nothing. Just drive up and down the street and tell me if you slow down at stop signs? Lern to reed. I don’t listen to ugly people.
I’m for more enforcement. Of all laws. I see the wave effect here in WS. First one then another driver fails to stop or obey the speed limit. It soon becomes the norm.
I suggest to all; go to the DMV and get the latest driver’s guide, and read/study it. Some laws change, some are updated, it’s always good to keep current.
And, to all of you runners I see every day and everywhere, PLEASE stop completely at all stop signs and stop lights.
Obey the speed limits.
Please.
For others that are interested in traffic engineering, here are some really useful links:
Kirkland lists the traffic calming devices they have tried, with pros and cons: http://www.kirklandwa.gov/dynamic/Page784.aspx
Portland has posted some GREAT evaluations of school zone traffic calming: http://www.portlandonline.com/transportation/index.cfm?c=35930&
They also have detailed reports on many forms of traffic control and calming, including red light cameras: http://www.portlandonline.com/transportation/index.cfm?c=35934&
The red light camera reports are particularly interesting – the newest report (2009) shows a reduction in accidents. Another impressive thing is the revenue numbers – the city has only made $54,000 off 10 red light cameras in 4 years. They’ve paid over a $1 million to the camera vendor, however!
There’s also the Pedestrian Facilities User’s Guide: http://katana.hsrc.unc.edu/cms/downloads/PedFacility_UserGuide2002.pdf
I’ll note that I have not found any resource that points to a positive correlation between fines and safety. Enforcement? Yes. Increased penalties? Not sure.
Drivers can be slowed down by proper road design. People drive the speed they feel comfortable, whether that’s the speed limit, faster, or slower. Designing roads to achieve the desired results from drivers is the correct way to approach this problem.
Thanks for taking the time to back up your assertions with researched evidence Adam…nice to know there are still some reasonable-minded people in WS.
Although to be fair, knee-“jerk” hyperbole seems to be the order of the day nationwide, not just in our fair corner of the world.
Dammit…I’m probably OCD or something.
Adam (excuse the CAPS here…your reading comprehension…again): YOU ARE THE ONLY PERSON HERE BRINGING UP RED LIGHT CAMERAS. I NEVER SUGGESTED RED LIGHT CAMERAS. (Years ago when I lived in Austin, I actually wrote a city council member opposing red light cameras).
So what purpose does RED LIGHT CAMERAS serve in the argument for or against increasing fines?
Your links, if people actually read them (and exclude your irrelevant tangent on red light cameras) illustrate various traffic control measures including speed humps and traffic circles. You also suggested “Designing roads…”
Those are fine but, ADAM, HOW DO YOU PROPOSE PAYING for these things? Increasing fines potentially funds these ideas and provides an incentive to drive responsibly. It gives both funding AND teeth to traffic laws.
Finally, regarding “Drivers can be slowed down by proper road design,” you mean like the signs on the W. Seattle Bridge that clearly say 45mph, where SPD often writes citations to drivers in excess of 60mph? Or on stretches of 35th where the limit is 35mph and Seattlites living along it have nicknamed the road “I-35?” Or on Admiral in the example that I mentioned previously? Also, what kind of signage would have prevented the automobile/cyclist accident on the WSB’s front page or the accident in Capital Hill? Please cite a Seattle example where “proper signage” has resulted in obeying the speed limit laws.
Maybe I need to start an “Idiot Seattle Driver” YouTube channel or something.
I was goin 81 on West Seattle bridge. I was going in reverse so I think I confused Barney Fife. Anybody else in favor of turning Admiral hill into more of a ” speed limit is just a suggestion zone?
This just in… a speeder ( obviously, the devil ) swerved to miss a coyote, and went straight into the new Trader Joes!
@NFiorentini:
The point is that there is reasonable doubt whether increased fines have a significant effect on slowing down sign obedience.
For slowing down traffic, speed bumps do a much better job.
So do you want to have cops handing out extra beefy tickets to the dismay of drivers, or just have a sleeping policeman actually make the street safer?
i think the cheapest option would just be to let the roads deteriorate to the point that you have to drive 15mph. would get ride of some of the bicyclists that cant follow traffic law aswell.
=p
Sorry, comment time is over.
| 44 COMMENTS