Town Square

Post a New Topic

Red regulation

Original post made on Jul 31, 2009

Noontime at Santa Rita Road and Valley Avenue is the diet version of the intersection, as compared to commuters clogging the streets in the evening commute. Yet, with an average of 55,000 vehicles passing through that roadway on the average weekday, there are bound to be risky drivers at any given time.

Read the full story here Web Link posted Friday, July 31, 2009, 12:00 AM

Comments (4)

Like this comment
Posted by Resident
a resident of Pleasanton Valley
on Jul 31, 2009 at 3:04 pm

This is awesome. What a great use of technology to make us all safer and the officers life also safer. I still do not understand why camera's at lights are not installed to take a PIC of red light runners plates.

Like this comment
Posted by Resident
a resident of Foothill High School
on Aug 10, 2009 at 3:23 pm

Another waste of money from the City Gov't. The article makes it sound like the PD are stationed at these lights 24-7? What happens when they PD are not there? Of course, there's no enforcement at all.
It's not like the City Gov't is going to guaranty our safety at these intersections, anyways. The camera's enforce 24-7-365. The camera system deters by its' mere presence. I can't believe we can't afford them, no matter their costs. They pay themselves off plus create profit centers. This PDA system is just another scam being used to ensure the PD's presence at interesections instead of being present to stop REAL CRIME in our city. I'm not a believer. BTW - injury accident decreases can be DIRECTLY tied to traffic volume, which is down 33% because of the economic recession, NOT the PD's super cheap PDA system. Let's get real, not bias, opinions of our issues!

Like this comment
Posted by Red light runner
a resident of Pleasanton Valley
on Aug 10, 2009 at 3:29 pm

I agree with the above Resident. The traffic accident reduction is due to less cars out on the roads, not some super PDA gizmo. I can go across town in the rush hours(even stopping at red lights) in half the time as a year ago. Thanks, Resident from Foothill High, for setting us straight! We all don't drink the Kool-Aid the Gov't serves us.

Like this comment
Posted by Ken
a resident of Pleasanton Valley
on Aug 12, 2009 at 10:23 pm

I disagree with both readers above. I don't believe it is a waste of money and applaud any effort our PD does to combat running red lights. Although cameras may have reduced the amount of red light running at that particular intersection where the camera is present, plenty of studies show that there have been over 140% increase in rear end collisions at the same intersections where the cameras are installed. Just do a Google search and read all the DOT and other reports. And what good does a ticket sent by mail a month later? Before we scold people, we need to educate them, so we don't have to punish them. A ticket in the mail doesn't teach anything, however, I still remember the first (and only) time that I had to face an officer because of speeding. Since then I have that moment present in my mind and I am more careful when I drive, In addition, cameras are so easy to trick and get away with the ticket. Again, just do a Google search. Last, "Resident" is so off on the truth about cameras. Just read and don't criticize. Cameras cost close to 70 grand to install them (just one direction), and the city (yes, our taxes) have to contract with the camera providers for 2 or more years to pay expenditures of over 30 grand per year! And if the city doesn't get the money back, the city (we all) have to pay the deficit to the camera providers! Just check the California State Audit report on red light cameras program, or check this website. Web Link For both of you, just get informed first before you trash our people and PD!

Sorry, but further commenting on this topic has been closed.

GE's re-organization reaches San Ramon digital headquarters
By Tim Hunt | 3 comments | 2,018 views

Sound and Fury over Vile and Slur-ry
By Tom Cushing | 77 comments | 1,220 views

New state housing requirements could affect Pleasanton
By Jeb Bing | 5 comments | 491 views