Post navigation

Prev: (08/14/23) | Next: (08/15/23)

Seattle readying plans for expanded ‘full-time’ traffic cameras — including $75 crosswalk camera fines

The Seattle City Council is making plans for how the city will handle new traffic cameras allowed under expanded state law  — and the the tickets that come with them.

Tuesday morning, the council’s Transportation and Seattle Public Utilities committee will discuss legislation to update the Seattle Municipal Code to implement the automated camera enforcement provisions updated by state legislators last year including how to handle the use of warning notices and establishing the fees for violations like block-the-box and restricted-lane infractions.

Under the updated state law, Seattle can add cameras near school walk zones, parks, and hospitals as well as areas formally identified to the Washington Department of Transportation as safety priorities, areas with high collision rates, and areas designated for special street racing restrictions. Unlike existing school zone cameras, the new cameras will be able to operate 24×7, every day of the year.

“Infraction fees” could include red light, speeding, intersection obstruction, driving in the bike lane, and crosswalk camera violations.

The legislation under discussion this week will help get the administrative nuts and bolts of the system worked out for Seattle. But the plan for expanding the city’s cameras and getting them installed still needs to get pounded out. According to a memo on the current legislation, each camera costs about $4,000 a month to operate. But it can be money well spent. “Once citations start to be issued however, it is expected that the expanded enforcement program would be financially self-sustaining, and potentially revenue generating,” the memo reads.

Seattle officials are also hoping to keep the city’s cameras from adding to ongoing inequitable traffic violation enforcement under traditional policing in the city. “While the impacts of traffic violence are felt most acutely in communities of color, traffic enforcement of all kinds appears to be disproportionately concentrated in the parts of the city with higher concentrations of BIPOC residents and the punitive impacts are felt more harshly for lower income residents,” the council memo reads. “At the same time, camera-based enforcement can be less-biased than police-based enforcement without the same opportunities for violent escalation.”

Officials hope to mitigate concerns over equity by requiring issuance of warnings for first violations, “more deliberate deployment of cameras in an equitable manner based on public input, especially from BIPOC communities,” and reduced or income-based fines.

Seattle Municipal Court will also offer service in-lieu of fees or reduced fines for those experiencing financial hardship.

“Dedicating proceeds to safer infrastructure in BIPOC neighborhoods may also begin to make up for the historic inequities in investment that have resulted in higher crash rates in SE Seattle and other parts of the city with higher proportions of people of color compared with whiter parts of the city with far lower traffic deaths and serious injuries,” the city says.

 

HELP KEEP CHS PAYWALL-FREE
Subscribe to CHS to help us hire writers and photographers to cover the neighborhood. CHS is a pay what you can community news site with no required sign-in or paywall. To stay that way, we need you.

Become a subscriber to help us cover the neighborhood for as little as $5 a month

 

 

Subscribe and support CHS Contributors -- $1/$5/$10 per month

103 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Caphiller
Caphiller
1 year ago

Great news. But only $75 for some of these fines? There should be much higher penalties for anyone driving unsafely. Carpool lane violations on the highway are like $400

Capitol Hill Resident
Capitol Hill Resident
1 year ago
Reply to  Caphiller

Agreed, IMO the crosswalk fee. Blocking the crosswalk while waiting for a red. Should at least be $200. You shouldn’t be allowed to block the crosswalk. Then force pedestrians to walk into the road to get around you. It happens every time I take my dog down Denny to the Denny substation dog park.

Miller Playfield Turf
Miller Playfield Turf
1 year ago

”Even though we see more maimings / deaths caused by traffic violations in Communities of Color we don’t want to be called racists by placing cameras in some of these areas. At the end of the day, we believe virtue signaling is more important than actually protecting People of Color.”

Seattle!

Central District Res
Central District Res
1 year ago

Yeah you’re definitely someone who is serious about all of this.

Yup
Yup
1 year ago

!!!!

Nope
Nope
1 year ago

Hell no. I get that the aim is a noble pursuit, but has nobody read 1984 here? What the hell.

Also, each camera costs $4000 a month?!? What government contractor is ripping off the people of Seattle, and getting paid with privacy infringements? It’ll be interesting to see the reactions when people realize the constant flow of tickets for driving 27 mph in a 25 isn’t just $139, but increased insurance costs. All of this will be impossible to distribute evenly across the ethnic spectrum, so some group will be disproportionately affected.

Fuuuuuuuuhuhuuuuuuck SDOT and this city.

btwn
btwn
1 year ago
Reply to  Nope

Do you have an alternative you’d like to propose?

if a camera prevents one injury per month it’s easily paid for itself.
And $4000/mo actually sounds reasonable to operate something like this.

What do you think a fully-burdened police officer costs?

I’m a fan.

LeonT
LeonT
1 year ago
Reply to  btwn

The alternative is fairly simple: Cops in marked patrol cars cruising the streets.

Got lots of complaints about a given area (school zone speeds, crosswalk violations etc.) send out more patrols into that area.

In other words, send cops out to do their jobs.

Nicholas
Nicholas
1 year ago
Reply to  btwn

That’s a lot for a camera. They have a minimal power draw, maybe $50/mo on the high end. They need to send data back to a server so they need cellular data. If it’s somehow constantly sending 4k resolution, a reasonable contract might charge a few hundred per month. Throw in a weekly maintenance visit that takes 2 hours, maybe that’s $200. We’re up to around $1000 and that’s maxing out every estimate.

We’re getting ripped off. It seems like even when we’re not paying fines were still paying out the nose.

Central District Res
Central District Res
1 year ago
Reply to  btwn

Speed bumps and bollards are much cheaper and more effective than Big Brother cameras.

Nandor
Nandor
1 year ago

speed bumps are nearly useless – ask the ones that don’t stop people from speeding down my street in the slightest..

Yeah for cameras.

Central District Res
Central District Res
1 year ago
Reply to  Nandor

Undo your visual of current speed bumps and the ones I propose are taller and bigger. Cheaper still.

Neighbor
Neighbor
1 year ago
Reply to  btwn

On multiple occasions cops have ignored cars almost plowing me down in crosswalks. At 17th and Madison they literally stand there while cars block the crosswalks. Would be nice for humans paid to protect us prioritize ped safety before resorting to big brother tactics IMO.

MadCap
MadCap
1 year ago
Reply to  Neighbor

What cop “stands” at 17th and Madison? For what? When? Honestly never seen it.

Central District Res
Central District Res
1 year ago
Reply to  MadCap

See it near daily.

yyy
yyy
1 year ago
Reply to  Nope

Tickets from cameras don’t go on your driving record and so don’t affect your insurance.

Nope
Nope
1 year ago
Reply to  yyy

Fair enough. I do still take issue with filling the streets with this type of enforcement. Going 5, or even 10 mph over the speed limit isn’t always dangerous. This is obvious to a police officer, and it’s why “going with the flow of traffic” is often an exception afforded to the driver by a cop watching the “offense”. A camera doesn’t give two shits. The pearl clutchers in this town are going to make the presumption every time that any amount of speed over the speed limit is dangerous, and praise this nonsense, but let’s not forget that for decades, we all agreed that 35 mph was a totally reasonable speed limit, and the vast majority of the time, it is a completely rational and speed limit. Dangerous is stepping into a crosswalk and taking three steps before looking to see if someone sees you there. Dangerous is blowing a red light on your bike because … bikey bikes. Putting cameras up all over the place, overcharging taxpayers and dinging the shit out of people is overreach, plain and simple. We are losing our minds here.

Let's talk
Let's talk
1 year ago
Reply to  Nope

You make some very good points

Dan B
Dan B
1 year ago
Reply to  Nope

Dangerous is being three steps into a crosswalk when some dolt looking left turns right on a red trying to beat the greenlit traffic. Stop being in a hurry when you’re in a car!

Nope
Nope
1 year ago
Reply to  Dan B

“Stop being in a hurry” is an irrational request. When you are planning transportation in a city, you have to assume people are going to be in a hurry sometimes and make room for it. Similarly, we make room for pedestrians to be completely clueless when walking across a street, of cyclists to be cocky pricks, blocking traffic. We allow all types of humans to have a place in society because democracy. If you design a city around a single mindset, you are on the road to fascism. Like, literally.

Nandor
Nandor
1 year ago
Reply to  Nope

You need to stop driving.. You really think your need to be in a hurry is more important than everyone else and we all just need to get out of your way… Seriously… Wowee.. You are exactly why we need many, many more cameras.

Matt
Matt
1 year ago
Reply to  Nope

Cars are one of the leading causes of death in the US, whom has lost their minds here?!?

Let's talk
Let's talk
1 year ago
Reply to  Matt

Cars will be a permanent part of our transportation so the idea is how to integrate all forms into one system and a big part of that means everyone following the rules. And even when following the rules everyone needs to make the effort to watch out for everyone else and for themselves.

Matt
Matt
1 year ago
Reply to  Let's talk

Asking cars to obey safety laws meant to protect pedestrians is the very definition of figuring out how to make this system work. There’s plenty of evidence that speed is a major factor in severity of injuries and that every MPH matters, so speed cameras make sense to me to try to catch offenders without creating issues for other drivers that are able to follow the laws.

I would be all for more drastic measures like blocking cars from a network of streets around the city that would only be available to buses, emergency vehicles, and for deliveries/service vehicles.

Nandor
Nandor
1 year ago
Reply to  Nope

Poor whiney you won’t be able to do whatever you want in your car anymore. Boohoo.. I never blow lights on my bike and always look before crossing and yet, nearly get run over by **automobile drivers** blowing stop signs or lights (usually the nonexistent “free red”) often.

I’m more than pleased that the camera doesn’t give too shits about all the pearl clutching drivers who are freaked the hell out about getting to their destination maybe 30 seconds later than they would have if they had not sped and weaved from red light to red light and will give them tickets based solely on their behavior.

The only time some drivers act civilized is when they know they are going to get dinged for it, because there is a camera… AMAZING, how people will fly at probably nearly 2x the speed limit down 24th or on MLK, but suddenly be good little bobos when they hit the school zone with a camera. AMAZING.. We should have many, many more.

The only people I see losing their minds is drivers.

Nope
Nope
1 year ago
Reply to  Nandor

Your attitude probably explains your experience.

Nandor
Nandor
1 year ago
Reply to  Nope

What “attitude”… My mere existence somehow makes people speed like idiots and run stop signs and red lights when they think can get away with it?

People like you who make everyone else excuses for their crappy behavior are the reason for the cameras being needed. It’s all on you – your self-centered selfishness and thinking that you can do whatever you want to are why they are coming. Blame yourself, not everyone else Bub.

Nope
Nope
1 year ago
Reply to  Nandor

Oh, I get it now. Your trolling makes way more sense when I read it in a vampire accent. You’re doing parody!

Nandor
Nandor
1 year ago
Reply to  Nope

Couldn’t think of anything more intelligent to say than that… selfish and lame…

Yup
Yup
1 year ago
Reply to  Nope

Insane

Let's be real
Let's be real
1 year ago

The woke catechism recitation in the city council memo is almost self-parody at this point.

Richard
Richard
1 year ago
Reply to  Let's be real

A much funnier joke is people using the term “woke” pejoratively without realize it says a lot more about them than whatever they’re discussing.

Greg
Greg
1 year ago

Great to see it. Nearly complete lack of traffic enforcement in Seattle has resulted in speeding including down side streets and greenways, some drivers running stop signs routinely, and increased dangers and injuries for pedestrians, bicyclists, and other motorists. It’s only a fraction of drivers that are violating the law routinely, but without enforcement they won’t stop. Just look at the utter lack of progress on Vision Zero to see how much this is needed; traffic deaths have actually increased in Seattle in the last five years.

Your Neighborhood Socialist Nogoodnik
Your Neighborhood Socialist Nogoodnik
1 year ago
Reply to  Greg

The arrogance of the Seattle car owner is surpassed only by their ignorance. Replace drivers licenses with orange jumpsuits and we’ll finally achieve change. The objectivity of a camera and swift punishments are the only functional tools at our disposal. Abolish human policing and replace it with technology. Fuck privacy.

Miller Playfield Turf
Miller Playfield Turf
1 year ago

All car owners in Seattle are arrogant and ignorant, got it. Seeing as it’s probably a safe assumption that Nogoodnik does NOT own a car, let’s all take a moment to thank him for being such a good person.

I’m curious; where are the boundaries (if any) of your Fuck Privacy take? Are you also cool with allowing the cops monitoring protest zones ala CHOP? Or does your tolerance of living in an police state extend only to the things you don’t like?

Hillery
Hillery
1 year ago

Why doesn’t the council work on what’s actually broken first. They’ll waste the money from the new tickets anyway.

Richard
Richard
1 year ago
Reply to  Hillery

You don’t think pedestrian safety in this city is broken. Ok then.

Mike
Mike
1 year ago

Wow that is amazing but yet they can fix the road …. way to many pot holes and extremely rough road in alot of areas

Glenn
Glenn
1 year ago
Reply to  Mike

They like pot holed rough roads because they slow down cars. So you lose an occasional bicyclist in them. Small price to pay to restrain those evil killing machines called cars.

Real Talk
Real Talk
1 year ago
Reply to  Glenn

SDOT would never do anything to inconvenience a cyclist, let alone kill one. They are, however, too distracted with pet projects like closing streets unnecessarily and dreaming up new dumb ways to screw up transportation that they aren’t getting to the potholes, but this is a very old problem.

Matt
Matt
1 year ago
Reply to  Real Talk

You may want to change your handle to something like “Hyperbole” to more accurately reflect your commentary here 🙄

Nope
Nope
1 year ago
Reply to  Matt

Hey, good one, Matt. SDOT is literally mimicking a Dutch playbook with Vision Zero. They actually have the same name. One of the leaders of that movement once said in an interview that part of their plan was to make driving difficult so that people wouldn’t want to drive. I also have known people who worked in SDOT that have admitted as much. Furthermore, you can see it. Their decisions and policies are completely screwing up commuting in Seattle. The place is impossible to get around in, and they have created animosity between groups in doing so. I don’t know what your definition of hyperbole is, but it doesn’t apply here.

Matt
Matt
1 year ago
Reply to  Nope

Cripes, you all are full of hyperbole and histrionics 🙄 It is not impossible to get around in this city, you can drive just about anywhere within city limits in about 30-45 minutes and get there via transit and walking in 45-60 minutes, that’s pretty impressive for a city of nearly 800,000 people, and creating a network that works for all of those people is going to mean a lot of competing interests… and as for Vision Zero, were seeing an increase in traffic fatalities in Seattle and King County and speed is a major factor, so that’s probably a good goal to try trending for and doubling down on IMO but you know folks like to arrive a few minutes early or leave a few minutes late and try to make it up on the road and like to fight efforts to make the city they live in safer for everyone, including those whom are unable to drive 🤷🏻‍♂️

https://www.king5.com/amp/article/news/local/seattle/felony-traffic-unit-king-county/281-db7a78b9-8df6-460a-9a21-6c48d7f71914

https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/transportation/seattle-traffic-deaths-and-injuries-remain-high-in-2022/

Rela Talk
Rela Talk
1 year ago
Reply to  Matt

This is exactly right. SDOT is literally trying to make driving worse. It isn’t hyperbole.

Chris Lemoine
Chris Lemoine
1 year ago

If this helps prevent death and injury and makes up to a degree for SPD not doing any enforcement that anybody can see, I’m all for it. Especially the crosswalk cameras and fees. There is way too much bad driving on neighborhood streets. I have close calls almost every day, plus unpleasant and sometimes threatening run-ins with drivers who tell me things like “you moved into my neighborhood, so don’t tell me how I should drive.”

Real Talk
Real Talk
1 year ago
Reply to  Chris Lemoine

Wrongheaded. You get to live with unpleasantness because we have collectively decided we don’t want to live in a country where authorities punish you for being unpleasant. “Go fuck yourself” is something you’ll sometimes hear, for instance. Close calls are also something that will happen. The world is not without some degree of risk. Consider buffering yourself against this risk by vigilant awareness when you are in public. For many of us, this practice has been going on for decades. You get used to it. It’s not a big deal. Try not to stare at your phone while moving your body through space.

Chris Lemoine
Chris Lemoine
1 year ago
Reply to  Real Talk

I’m sure that righteousness feels marvelous. You’re welcome!

Richard
Richard
1 year ago
Reply to  Real Talk

How about stop whining and accept the risk that your a$$ is going to get nailed with a piddly little ticket when you drive like shit now, cuz it sounds like the one with an acceptance issue here is you. Try not to risk the lives of those around you, or accept the comparatively miniscule penalty when you can’t be effing bothered.

Gas-guzzling Manslaughterer
Gas-guzzling Manslaughterer
1 year ago
Reply to  Richard

It’s not gonna stop me from (safely) rolling through stop signs when no one is around and (safely) driving 35 in this town. I don’t care. I will pay the ticket if I feel like it, but I probably won’t. I also might (safely) only give a cyclist 5 feet of space and smile and wave while they give me 2 middle fingers. Gasp. The horror.

d.c.
d.c.
1 year ago

since police aren’t likely to catch and fine the moving violations I see every day on the hill, I support the cameras. But I agree with others about the costs… even if they’re cash positive, $4K per month?! If they put in 20, that’s a million dollars a year to operate them. Is that really the best bid we could get for these things? And yes, the image storage and usage should be tightly controlled.

Nicholas
Nicholas
1 year ago
Reply to  d.c.

Seriously, we’re getting so screwed. Who is approving this? $500 per month would be reasonable depending on a number of variables.

Matt
Matt
1 year ago
Reply to  Nicholas

You’re comfortable with a contractor charging $500/month handling your license plate information?

Matthew
Matthew
1 year ago

This is some serious Orwellian big brother bullshit! What’s next the fucking thought police.

Nicholas
Nicholas
1 year ago
Reply to  Matthew

Agreed, I don’t understand why half the comments are in favor of this. There’s got to be better ways to reduce traffic related injuries than to go nanny state on us.

Real Talk
Real Talk
1 year ago
Reply to  Nicholas

It’s Seattle. Nothing gets thought through beyond the immediate impulse. The good news is that when the consequences come, you can just blame cars and landlords and anyone that is not in your exact social plane, tax the crap out of them and then spend their money on a solution. The beauty of it is that it’s cyclical, so you can do it over and over again. If someone argues with them, pick an “ism” and slap it on them – shuts them up real quick. Now, go get your pitchfork!

Nandor
Nandor
1 year ago
Reply to  Nicholas

Maybe because just letting people do as they please sucks way worse… Nothing like having people nearly run you over then blame you for being in the way when **they** ran a stop sign. Drivers in this city way to often currently act like they are doing you some kind of huge freaking favor by begrudgingly allowing you to actually cross the street..

Real Talk
Real Talk
1 year ago
Reply to  Nandor

How is it that while cycle commuting for 10 years and walking the streets of Capitol Hill daily, I only encountered one or two truly “psycho” drivers, but Nandor seems to get menaced by angry, bloodthirsty drivers daily?

Nandor
Nandor
1 year ago
Reply to  Real Talk

You wander around in a daze and don’t notice all the idiots?

Matt
Matt
1 year ago

Finally! If you’re unable to follow basic traffic laws then you should not be allowed to drive, it’s pretty simple. It seems to be the same folks that think driving is a right that also seems to think housing isn’t…

Real Talk
Real Talk
1 year ago
Reply to  Matt

Ok, so can we say the same for pedestrians and cyclists?

Dan B
Dan B
1 year ago
Reply to  Real Talk

When was the last time you took a long walk in a city? You will have at least one attempt by automobile to end your life, if not more. Being forced around, or between cars to traverse a crosswalk is more than an inconvienience, it’s akin to attempted murder! Automobile drivers show entitlement over who they consider the less thans. Because it doesn’t succede doesn’t mean it isn’t an attempt. Leave the car at home, ride a bike, or take a long walk if you don’t believe what I’ve said.

Real Talk
Real Talk
1 year ago
Reply to  Dan B

Well, that’s bizarrely myopic/dramatic/uncharitable. I walk around Lake Union on the regular. Sure, occasionally something happens, but this is normal in big city landscapes. I have never been hit by a car, not because I haven’t been in harm’s way, not because a car hasn’t accidentally veered into my path, not because I haven’t spent time on the street as a ped, but because I pay fucking attention while I walk. You can’t eliminate all risk. Period. Save yourself, Dan B.

Also, stop with the demanding that nobody drives a car. It’s not yet feasible.

People in cars are people, and they aren’t trying to murder you any more than they are while checking out in a grocery store. Infrastructure that confuses and infuriates people will make an occasionally confused and/or infuriated populace. If you are remotely progressive, you’ll seek human empathy, full stop. Mistakes happen, and we shouldn’t be trying to control every granular action in society from external force or punishment.

Matt
Matt
1 year ago
Reply to  Real Talk

Last I checked, walking and biking doesn’t involve heavy machinery that has government required training in order to obtain the privilege to partake in those activities… People lose their minds when they start talking about cars 🤦‍♂️

Charles
Charles
1 year ago
Reply to  Matt

“…people lose their minds when they start talking about cars”

Nice self own there Matt.

Nope
Nope
1 year ago
Reply to  Matt

How tf is that relevant? Stay in your lane and keep your eyes open.

How come SDOT never posts data around the cause of the accident? Our laws about a pedestrian always having the right of way were introduced to guarantee that the car always pays the damages. It’s a reflection of the vulnerability of the pedestrian. It doesn’t mean that pedestrians have no burden, practically speaking, when it comes to preventing accidents. Publishing this data would go a long way to keeping this argument in check.

Let's talk
Let's talk
1 year ago
Reply to  Matt

That’s how it works. When you get too many violations or serious violations your license is suspended and in some cases revoked and your care is impounded but because of a lack of officers we don’t have patrols anymore.
As far as people thinking driving is a right and housing isn’t is pretty much made up. Neither is a right however everyone has the privilege to drive and everyone should have access to housing.

Matt
Matt
1 year ago
Reply to  Let's talk

The US and other countries crafted a UN charter claiming housing is a human right, so there’s some precedent for that, haven’t seen anything equivalent for vehicles and would be appalled to see it, but if it were to happen anywhere, it would be the US

Let's talk
Let's talk
1 year ago
Reply to  Matt

Vehicles are a privilege and can be taken away but that isn’t really relevant to the conversation. The basic premise is how do we make transportation by any method safer and enforcing the laws that surround that is an important aspect of that. It seems some think cars are going to go away which isn’t the case so think about how everyone can effectively work together.

Matt
Matt
1 year ago
Reply to  Let's talk

Okay, if you did change your name from Real Talk to Let’s Talk, which is what it seems like, your argument is as lame as your name change. Most of the actions proposed here have been shown with peer reviewed evidence to reduce the issues you’re worried about, so do you have something new you would like to complain about to “make your point”?

Rela Talk
Rela Talk
1 year ago
Reply to  Matt

pfffff

Matt
Matt
1 year ago
Reply to  Let's talk

Okay, so coming up with easy ways to enforce rules for those whom choose to apply for the privilege to drive seems like a good approach…

Let's talk
Let's talk
1 year ago
Reply to  Matt

I’ve always been let’s talk. Haven’t notice but I guess I must sound like Real Talk? I actually think we agree on the use of cameras to punish drivers or do you not? I was just addressing the issue of it’s not a right but a privilege that can be taken away and it sounded like you were proposing cars shouldn’t be part of the city’s transporation. Did I miss something?

Matt
Matt
1 year ago
Reply to  Let's talk

Sorry for that, but yes your talking points seem to have merged. I’ve never said that cars shouldn’t be a part of our transportation system, just that choosing to operate one requires undergoing necessary training and licensing, and it’s entirely within our rights to hold those whom apply for and utilize this privilege to obey the laws created in order to make these machines safe enough to operate in a dense urban area…

Real Talk
Real Talk
1 year ago
Reply to  Matt

We already train people to drive cars, but sure, we could potentially train more. From my perspective (and wow, maybe other people too), the issue is that SDOT has a myopic philosophical direction, one that solely aims to protect peds and cyclists. Protecting them is a good thing, I say! The fact that we do it isn’t a bad thing. The bad part is that we have sandwiched peds into harm’s way by making sure there isn’t a square foot in this city that they can’t step without thinking. My argument is primarily that we will only get close to protecting people by separating them. I’ve made the argument before many times, but let’s rehash. Demand new development increases parking spots to get cars off streets. Put arterials back to 35 mph (will reduce car commutes by 40%). Take (already slower) side streets, make them one way, kill parking on one side of the street, add two way cycle lanes. This will address transportation safety and efficiency.

It is a secondary concern of mine that the outcome of this policy is an entitled, angry, petulant chunk of the population that thinks the world must protect them from harm under any circumstances, even their own negligence. As such, I propose we run a public campaign to remind peds and cyclists that they are vulnerable and bear some (not all!) responsibility for their own livelihood. This will make Nandor find 12 new ways to call me a murderous fool, but I’m willing to take one for the team.

I remember, as a kid, there were commercials reminding people to look both ways before crossing a street. Bring it back.

Matt
Matt
1 year ago
Reply to  Real Talk

All of this has nothing to do with it being a good thing that we have speed limit cameras to help enforce our traffic laws, but please keep deflecting and trying to come up with a way to feel okay for wanting to speed through a city of nearly one million people for your convenience…

Matt
Matt
1 year ago
Reply to  Real Talk

Also, everything we have learned about automobiles is that creating facilities for them in a dense urban setting like this… whether it is parking, lanes, or other car transportation expansions, these end up inducing demand and creating the issues that everyone here complains about. Add on that we already have almost two parking spots for every person in this city and it’s easy to see how there is no automobile solutions out of this problem…

https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/transportation/study-shows-seattle-has-plenty-of-parking-so-why-cant-you-find-a-spot/#:~:text=Seattle%20has%201.6%20million%20parking,every%20household%20in%20the%20city.

Matt
Matt
1 year ago
Reply to  Real Talk

… but yes, please continue to find ways to make people who/whom make valid criticisms the problem while you clutch your pearls and think about how great things were when you were a kid and how these youngins have just ruined the world 🙄

Nandor
Nandor
1 year ago
Reply to  Real Talk

Not sure where you managed to get that from.. I’ve NEVER advocated for cyclists or pedestrians to be allowed to break the traffic laws.

I’m just totally sick of people like you who don’t know what the traffic laws actually are and think or at least act like it says somewhere that as a driver you are entitled to go as fast as possible and that you can plow through wherever and whomever you think someone is “in your way”.. I’m more than happy to see a system put in place that will teach people that they actually do have to stop for stop signs, that there’s not such thing as a “free right” on red and that there really is a crosswalk at every intersection, marked or not.

Real Talk
Real Talk
1 year ago
Reply to  Matt

Would you puhleeease stop mis-using “whom”? It leaves a sophomoric taste in my mouth. It’s like, every post. https://letmegooglethat.com/?q=who+or+whom

Matt
Matt
1 year ago
Reply to  Real Talk

🙄

Matt
Matt
1 year ago
Reply to  Real Talk

I’ll work on my grammar if you work on your facts 👍

LeonT
LeonT
1 year ago

Gotta put coins in the coffers somehow, eh?

Ccoz
Ccoz
1 year ago

Man if only bipoc could stop breaking every law there was we could still have helmets and be able to have police instead of cameras on every corner!

Mars Saxman
Mars Saxman
1 year ago
Reply to  Ccoz

Nobody is stopping you from wearing a helmet.

Glenn
Glenn
1 year ago

Can we set some cameras to fine pedestrians who enter crosswalks when the red hand is flashing please? While they may not cause collisions directly, they impede the flow of traffic and make our intersections more dangerous for everyone.

Real Talk
Real Talk
1 year ago
Reply to  Glenn

Do it and watch the privacy argument sky-rocket into relevance again.

Will
Will
1 year ago
Reply to  Glenn

nah

Central District Res
Central District Res
1 year ago
Reply to  Glenn

Car driving is the more dangerous thing so no

Dan B
Dan B
1 year ago
Reply to  Glenn

Pedestrians get fined everytime they need to use a crosswalk, between right hooks, or left hooks, or being forced out into traffic from the crosswalk being blocked. Are you saying you’re put upon by sitting on your ass for an extra second? How about every driver getting out of their cars at every stop, and running around the car doing the hokey-pokey?

Glenn
Glenn
1 year ago
Reply to  Dan B

I am saying rules and laws are more easily followed if we all obey them rather than picking and choosing which we will obey. You are choosing not to obey the pedestrian crosswalk rule because it is inconvenient for you, which undermines your argument that drivers should obey all the rules or be punished. And your statement above regarding attempted murder by entering or remaining in a crosswalk individual your complete lack of reasonableness on these issues.

Charles
Charles
1 year ago
Reply to  Dan B

I’m not sure what city you’re living in that is such a death trap every time you set a foot outside your door, but I’m sure glad it’s not Seattle.

Real Talk
Real Talk
1 year ago
Reply to  Dan B

Glenn’s comment appears to be a “thought experiment”, Dan B. It is intended to help you consider the extent of the argument. Their argument is reasonable to consider, if even only to help iron out your logic. Your argument kinda just makes you sound irrational.

zach
zach
1 year ago
Reply to  Glenn

Yes, Glenn!

Decline Of Western Civilization
Decline Of Western Civilization
1 year ago

All fines must be scaled for income.

Matt
Matt
1 year ago

Yes, this is critical!

Central District Res
Central District Res
1 year ago

So underrated

newyorkisrainin
newyorkisrainin
1 year ago

If only the revenue was then invested back into dedicated bus lanes (and hiring more drivers!), ped safety, etc. Install some real speed bumps and some freaking bollards already

Benjamin7
Benjamin7
1 year ago

Something to take into account with any traffic camera-sourced infraction – while it’s legal for the City of Seattle to photograph your car and its license plate, it is *not* legal to use the camera to identify the actual driver:

“There is a legal presumption that the registered owner was the driver at the time of the infraction. The reason for this is that police agencies are not allowed to preserve or use any photographic evidence of the driver. To protect the privacy of drivers, the legislature created a presumption of guilt (this is legal because of the non-criminal nature of the offense).

***The presumption of guilt can be overcome by registered owner filing an affidavit stating that he or she was not the driver at the time violation occurred.”***

Source: https://seahawklaw.com/red-lights-and-school-zone-camera-tickets.php

(The above site is just an example, google on your own for additional verification)

That last bit of the quote is the clincher: if, for whatever reason, someone other than you (the person listed on the registration for your car) were not driving the vehicle at the time of the infraction, you can sign an affidavit online to verify that you were not the driver, and the fine is waived:

https://www.seattle.gov/courts/tickets-and-payments/camera-tickets#:~:text=If%20you%20were%20not%20driving,at%20the%20time%20of%20violation.

I am absolutely *not* saying that anyone should use this as a “loophole” to getting out of paying a traffic camera infraction that did in fact occur while you were driving the vehicle in question. Just an FYI.

Real Talk
Real Talk
1 year ago
Reply to  Benjamin7

It’s fair to say that if your application of the law makes the majority of people feel unfairly targeted, they will use this to get out of a ticket. One might argue that we should then try to get rid of it, but it’s a critical component to preventing us from going full Orwellian nightmare, not that the youngest generations have ever given a damn about privacy. Look around the world. Moscow, London, all over India and China, governments are installing hundreds of cameras per square mile in order to identify the actions of private citizens and enforce whatever laws they have. Imagine this in the hands of a government you don’t like or agree with. Maybe even a corrupt one. That government consists of humans and humans occasionally do horrible things. Imagine that technology being used by Durkan during the BLM protests. Imagine the federal government forcing access under Trump rule to target citizens. No multiply this by recognition technology and the AI of the future. We need to maintain some degree of privacy and fight surveillance if you want to avoid these pitfalls.

Matt
Matt
1 year ago
Reply to  Real Talk

Now talk about MLK Jr being harassed by the FBI

Picture_this
Picture_this
1 year ago

This is a funny idea
Especially considering so many vehicles are unregistered due to the lax laws that the city council enacted.
Most offending car owners will never pay up.

Andrew
Andrew
1 year ago

What is a “crosswalk camera violation”?

Temie
Temie
1 year ago

Great ! but you have to separet light signal specialy left and right turen to people crossing line signal