Deprecated: Function create_function() is deprecated in /www/wwwroot/ on line 2
Traffic knowledge – trafficcameraweb

Category Archive : Traffic knowledge

Securing Pedestrian Safety

As the American population continues to grow, cities throughout the U.S. see a population influx in many regions. As more people congregate in urban environments, economic forces in these areas often see a substantial increase in many aspects, and there are many benefits from this ongoing population trend.
As cities grow, so do the benefits that many sectors of a city experience. Everything from entertainment, hospitality, and economic drivers like jobs benefit from larger urban cities.
However, as cities continue to grow and attract more residents, the number of pedestrians hurt or killed in these densely populated areas increases too. As cities continue to grow, the number of people living, working, and spending time in downtown locations increases too.

This makes traffic accidents involving pedestrians one of the leading forms of death in the United States today.Technology: The Problem Or The Solution?
There is no debate whether mobile technology is increasing the rates of accidents involving pedestrians. From playing Candy Crush while walking to browsing through Facebook or even texting, interaction with our smartphones is becoming one of the leading causes of traffic accidents.
As this technology continues to be a driving force for accidents, mobile technology is also becoming integrated into existing traffic equipment to help make city streets safer for pedestrians and drivers alike.
There are plenty of technological advances that you can find in the city streets. Everything from sensors that communicate with each other, to smart traffic lights, and even advanced public transportation is being used to help make public roads safer in urban environments.

Along with making our streets safer for pedestrians and drivers, advanced technology is also making an impact on improving air quality and efficiency for commuters. Let’s take a look at how some cities across the globe are utilizing technology to make their streets safer today!1. New York City
New York City is known for the grid-lock traffic, frequent pedestrian activities, and one of the most popular non-stop entertainment spots in the world. However, as New York and surrounding cities continue to grow, so does the incidents of traffic accidents involving pedestrians.
To help improve the safety of their streets, Manhattan is implementing a million dollar program called Midtown In Motion. This initiative will integrate cameras, field sensors, and FRID readers at intersections to communicate real-time data about a given area to residents and a central command center.
While this initiative is not new, it is part of a growing effort to make Manhattan safer for all visitors. One of the most innovative pieces of Midtown In Motion is that real-time data won’t only be available to traffic engineers, but this data will also be accessible to drivers.
This means that drivers will be able to choose the best routes based on actual street-level data as they navigate NYC.

The New York State Energy Research and Development Authority sponsored KLD associates to come up with software that can be used in the metro area. As their efforts expanded, KLD ended up creating a software system that modifies signal patterns according to the change in traffic volumes, and this improves the traffic flow.
2. Curitiba, Brazil
One of the fastest growing cities in the road sits outside of the United States, but city planners here in the U.S. are taking note of some initiatives being used in Curitiba, Brazil. When it comes to urban planning, there is a widespread belief that any city with over one million residents should consider installing a subway to avoid traffic congestion.
However, as Curitiba hit the million person mark in the 1970’s, they weren’t ready for a subway because of the $300 million price tag that came along with it. As an alternative, Curitiba officials looked to an innovative bus system called the Rapid Bus Transit system to help make a smarter rapid transit system.
Unlike many other bus systems, the Rapid Bus Transit has exclusive traffic lanes throughout the city to help reduce the number of traffic jams caused by bus stops. Along with improved traffic lanes, the Rapid Bus Transit also communicates with smart traffic lights to help the buses easily transport more people with less delay throughout the day.
Today, the Rapid Bus Transit systems services over 2 million people each year, and due to the success of the system city officials are looking to overhaul the aging fleet with over 500 new 92-foot buses to run biofuels. Brazilian officials are excited for the economic and environmental improvements that these buses will bring, as fewer people will be driving3. Sydney, Australia
The geography of Australia is unique, as it has to push large pockets of residents together to build large cities in specific areas of Australia. As more people have congregated in these cities, Australia has taken innovative efforts to improve pedestrian safety throughout the urban environments.
One of these initiatives is the Sydney Coordinated Adaptive Traffic System (SCATS) and was first produced by computer engineers in the 1970’s. This innovative approach to traffic safety uses sensors and cameras on sidewalks to monitor traffic volume in a specific location at specific times.
As these systems collect information about intersections throughout the city, a comprehensive real-time map of city traffic is created. This allows a central control system to find the right timing of lights to help coordinate pedestrian and vehicle traffic.
SCATS has been improved to integrate other advanced technologies, but the system itself has proven itself as a useful tool to prevent pedestrian deaths. This method is being used around the world in large cities, including Shanghai, Hong Kong, Sydney, Mexico, Kuala Lumpur, Tehran, and Dublin.
The most recent news about this is that PTIPS, a new SCATS feature, is being used in Sydney as a way to prioritize the late buses and make sure that everything is flowing smoothly.
Based on the reports gathered, the use of SCATS has some benefits, and some of which are listed below:
    The total stops decreased by 21%    The travel time reduced by 37%    There has been a 6% decrease in total carbon dioxide emissions    There has been a 5% decrease in total nitric oxide emissions    There has been a 10% drop-off in PM10 emissions
That’s not all, SCATS continue to evolve, and the experts behind this system are looking for ways on how it would be able to meet the growing need in traffic administration while being able to benefit from the recent advancements in traffic technology to enjoy maximum efficiency.There are plenty of notable developments include the following:
    Windows supported- Integration to in-car GPS that allows vehicles to be dispatched around accidents or traffic    Better traffic control algorithms that promote overall efficiency and reduces delays    Integrated functionality made for highway on-ramps to guide traffic even on the highway.
4. Farmington Hills, Michigan
Michigan is one of the leading states implementing advanced technology to improve traffic safety throughout cities. One city, in particular, Farmington Hills, stands out as the leader in the advancement of pedestrian and traffic safety systems.
Utilizing a network of modifiable and “smart” LED lights, city planners are making a connected system that talks to each other and optimize traffic flow. This interface is known as Intellistreets and continues to prove that improved traffic flow can drive economic factors of a city while also increasing safety and efficiencies across the city.

The street lighting operates in a coordinated effect where each pole comes with its very own microprocessor that could work on its own, but could also line around a non-functioning unit. This system of smart LED lights allows authorities to project any message to help guide first responders and keep crowds safe around disaster areas.
These poles also contain sensors and cameras capable of monitoring traffic flow that could tell which lights should brighten or dim down.The street names are visible in LED lights, as well as banners that could be modified to preview anything– this could range from traffic warnings, Amber Alert, directions, or even advertisements. Best of all, you can configure this in real time, and have it ready right away, making it ideal for events.
Despite that the Intellistreets work well with traffic, its primary purpose is energy saving. It was created with pulse width transmission to ensure its energy efficiency when being used. For instance, dimming the lights of the Intellistreets would allow you to save 25% of energy and 25% less heat. Although you wouldn’t experience its benefits right away, after a time, it’s a wonderful investment as compared to a typical traffic light.Using Technology For A Safer Tomorrow
As cities continue to grow, city planners must think of new and innovative ways to improve the safety and efficiency of commuting for pedestrians and drivers. Leveraging emerging technology and integrating these technologies into existing traffic equipment can keep drivers and pedestrians safe. The future of city living and commuting looks bright as authorities continue to implement advanced technology on our city streets!

The Benefits of Mobile Video Surveillance for Job Site Security

Deploying mobile video surveillance cameras for security and asset protection at job sites and compounds, as either an alternative to or compliment for security guarding services, offers multiple benefits.
From significant cost-savings and speed of installation through to quality and convenience, WCCTV’s clients are already benefitting from reliable, unmanned, 24/7 protection of high‑incident areas, transportation routes, construction sites and critical infrastructure
Below WCCTV outlines some of the headline benefits associated with its Rapid Deployment Pole Cameras and Mobile Solar Surveillance Trailers when used for real estate, commercial and residential construction job sites, freight yards, rail yards and remote sites.Cost Effectiveness
The cost of employing security guards can be incredibly expensive for clients seeking a site security solution.

A typical unarmed guard will cost between $12 – $20 per hour depending on state with an armed guard costing $18 -$25 per hour.*
This price does not include external factors such as the requirement for multiple guards to cover sites, the need for training, vetting, rest facilities and vehicles pushing hourly rates ever upwards – even before public holiday premium rates are taken into consideration.
As a cost-effective alternative, many are switching to mobile video surveillance cameras for site security. Systems such as WCCTV’s Mini Dome Solar Trailers are often anywhere up to 87% cheaper than the cost of security guards without compromising on quality or results.
WCCTV provides its rapid deployment solar trailers on a sale or rental basis, meaning clients are able to choose a package that is most financially beneficial for their projects, regardless of the duration.

Quality and Reliability
Video surveillance provides a more accurate and detailed overview of incidents on site than a security guard presence could.
This includes being able to identify intrusions in the lowest lighting conditions. Technology such as infrared, thermal imaging and video analytics allow cameras to see things a human eye would find impossible to detect.

A surveillance camera can also view a much wider area than a security guard, and with the use of multiple passive infrared (PIR) detectors, they can proactively identify any intrusion across a whole site and all points of ingress.
Surveillance cameras are always attentive, they are ready to stop and catch thieves, vandals and other would-be criminals 24/7. They don’t suffer lapses in concentration or attention fatigue. Surveillance cameras remove the element of placing trust in the alertness, motivation and ability of security personnel.   
From a technology perspective, WCCTV Dome Solar Trailers, fitted with WCCTV’s 4G Mini Dome Cameras, represent the next generation of unmanned site security in terms of convenience, flexibility and quality.
The WCCTV Mini Dome Solar Trailer is an autonomously-powered mobile video surveillance system that can be rapidly deployed at practically any location, providing security for remote sites, short-term events or off-grid locations on a temporary or permanent basis.
The trailer is fitted with up to 4 of WCCTV’s 4G Mini Dome pole cameras that have been specifically designed to deliver live and recorded video securely and efficiently via 4G LTE networks.
The units are extremely power efficient, meaning that they can do more with less power.  They don’t rely on gas generators removing the need to refuel or maintain in the field – this also offers a heavy cost reduction which we pass onto our end users.
Live and recorded footage can be accessed via wireless networks including 4G LTE, 3G and Wi-Fi connectivity, allowing users to remotely view and download the video via mobile devices (smartphone, tablet, laptop or PC) or via an existing video management system.

A Proactive and Visual Deterrent
The ideal result for anyone looking to secure a site and their valuable assets is to prevent intrusions or break-ins before they occur.
The WCCTV Mini Dome Solar Trailer stands 20ft high, providing an unmistakable visual deterrent for a would-be trespasser – they are proven to prevent criminal activity.Risk Mitigation
It’s often suggested that a benefit of using security guards is that, should they discover an intruder onsite, they can intervene and prevent a robbery from occurring.   
However, in most cases, security guards are trained not to approach a potential intruder, for concerns over safety. Options, therefore, become very limited.
Usually, in such instances, security guards ensure their own safety, before calling out Law Enforcement, the same as any normal member of the public.
Using a mobile surveillance camera system such as the WCCTV Mini Dome Solar Trailer could not only ensure a quicker response as they can be streamed to a video monitoring center, it also prevents putting a human into a risky situation where their safety could be threatened.
Rapid deployment and flexibility
It takes just minutes to install the WCCTV Mini Dome Solar Trailer at your locations, and it can easily be moved to new locations as your sites develop or applications change. It is an ideal surveillance solution for locations without any fixed infrastructure for power or video transmission.
They can also be moved around the site as they develop, meaning blind spots can be mitigated and the most appropriate areas of risk remain protected at all times.
Its completely autonomous powering means it can be installed practically anywhere providing immediate security without any infrastructure requirements for power or video transmission.

Additional Benefits
Using a WCCTV mobile video surveillance system provides a number of other onsite benefits. One major benefit is the cameras can be used to provide project overview footage and assist with health and safety applications.
As the cameras provide a 24/7 video feed, it allows clients to:
    Conduct remote site audits
    Review working procedures remotely and/or retrospectively
    Manage site access (vehicles/pedestrians)
    Manage access across site boundaries
    Issue audio alerts
Another added benefit is all WCCTV’s video cameras are time lapse video ready. The system will capture high definition images of your construction, demolition or refit projects which our team will

Best dash cam 2019: 8 car-ready cameras for peace of mind

Picking up one of the best dash cams isn’t merely for capturing footage of an asteroid strike or an escaped herd of cows causing havoc on the M4 – the imagery captured by these diminutive devices can be essential in the unfortunate event of an insurance claim and can even help lower premiums.
There is an enormous amount of choice currently on the market and finding the best dash cam for your needs can seem exhausting, with myriad features and price points making the decision to splash the budget feel pointless when there are cheaper options that appear to do exactly the same thing.

Nextbase 522GW bundle: £219.99 £159.99 at the top-rated Nextbase 522GW dash cam with rear camera and you’ll also bag yourself a 32GB memory card and a carry case, saving £60 in the process. It will ensure your car is well covered in the event of an accident or incident on the road.

But the reality is, the more you spend on a top quality dash cam, the more built-in features you receive. These include auto record and save functionality, a CCTV mode when the vehicle is parked, and even the ability to control other smart devices via Amazon Alexa skills.
We’ve sifted through a number of the best performing dash cams on the market to decide which brands really offer the best of the best, covering a number of price points and built-in features that should appease an array of budgets and requirements ahead of Black Friday and Cyber Monday.
Best dash cam 2019 at a glance:

    Nextbase 522GW   

 Garmin Dash Cam 66W    

Kenwood DRV-830   

 Thinkware TW-F770   

 BlackVue DR900S-2CH   

 Vantrue N2 Pro  

  Cobra CDR 840  

  YI Smart Dash Camera

    Don’t get lost again: here are the best sat navs of 2019

The tech is already available on a few models in foreign markets.

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration takes a step into the motoring future by announcing a test of how side-mounted cameras could replace conventional mirrors. The agency specifically wants to know how the tech affects driving behavior and lane changes, according to Reuters.
Sideview camera systems are already available on a few models in Europe in Japan, but regulations currently keep the tech off of American roads. NHTSA doesn’t yet offer a time frame for when the agency could modify the rules to allow them in the U.S.

The Lexus ES is among the models available with side-view cameras outside of the U.S. The company’s solution puts five-inch screens for displaying the outward view on each side of the cabin. The cameras’ view adapts to the driver, including zooming out during lane changes. The system also brightens the exterior image during night driving for better visibility.


Traffic Light Cameras: Speeding and Red Light Violations
The basics of red light and speed cameras and how they’re used to enforce traffic laws.
In many jurisdictions, cameras are used as a tool to enforce traffic laws. Cameras are also sometimes used to catch drivers who fail to pay tolls, don’t stop for school buses, or disobey railroad crossing signals. But this article discusses two of the more common examples of traffic cameras—red light and speed cameras.

What Are Red Light and Speed Cameras?
Red light cameras. Red light cameras are set up at intersections to catch drivers who run the signal. A sensor estimates the speed of the vehicle as it approaches the intersection. If the vehicle is going a certain speed and won’t be able to stop when the light turns red, the camera is triggered to take a picture and/or video. The red light camera captures the date, time, and location of the violation and the vehicle’s license plate number.
Speed cameras. Speed cameras—which utilize radar equipment that is linked to the camera—are usually set up near school zones or areas where drivers often exceed the speed limit. When the radar detects a vehicle that is exceeding the speed limit, the camera is triggered to take a picture of the vehicle. Speed cameras record the speed of the vehicle, along with the details of the violation (date, time, and location) and the vehicle’s plate number.How States Use Traffic Enforcement Cameras

Laws regarding the use of traffic enforcement cameras vary by state: Some states prohibit their use entirely, the laws of other states don’t address the use of traffic enforcement cameras at all, and many states allow traffic cameras but impose certain restrictions and requirements for their use. For example, Texas allows red light cameras by city ordinance, but speed cameras are prohibited. Many other states allow the use of traffic enforcement cameras but limit their use to certain areas, such as school or construction zones.
In states that allow the use of traffic enforcement cameras, typically, there must be warning signs posted indicating that compliance with traffic laws is enforced with cameras. Generally, these signs must be placed in conspicuous areas, within a certain distance of the signal or along the route where the camera is located.
In states that permit the use of red light cameras, the law normally requires yellow traffic lights to remain yellow for a specific minimum length of time.How Traffic Citations Are Issued
Generally, the police officer who reviews the photograph or video of a violation must sign the citation. The citation is mailed to the registered owner of the vehicle within a certain period of time after the alleged violation. The registered owner will typically receive the citation within ten to 90 days. The citation is sent to the address associated with the vehicle on file with the Department of Motor Vehicles (“DMV”). The registered owner then has a period of time (usually 30 days) to respond to the citation.
Typically, there’s a presumption that the registered owner of the vehicle was the driver when the citation was issued. However, the laws of most states give the registered owner an opportunity to provide evidence that he or she was not the driver. For example, the registered owner might provide an affidavit stating the name and address of the person who was driving the vehicle at the time of the alleged violation. Or, if the vehicle was stolen prior to the alleged violation, the registered owner might provide a police report of the theft.
In some jurisdictions, sending a sworn affidavit to the court is sufficient to have the citation dismissed. Other states require the defendant to appear in court to dispute the ticket.Traffic Camera Citation Penalties
The penalties for a red light or speed camera ticket are typically less severe than for a non-camera traffic citation. Generally, a traffic violation conviction based on a camera enforcement system will result in a fine of $100 or less. And in most states, no points will be added to an offender’s driving record.

3-Texas Is Latest State to Pump the Brakes on Red-Light Cameras

On a recent morning in May, Carlos Barrientos drove up to a Belt Line Road intersection on his way to work in Grand Prairie, Tex. His breakfast sandwich, sports drink, backpack and papers were arranged around him and on the seats, so Mr. Barrientos, 23, tried to avoid making sudden moves.
Suddenly a yellow traffic light flickered overhead, followed seconds later, he said, by a red light. A camera flashed, catching his license plate when the vehicle edged close to the crossing or continued through it, he said. Days later, he received what will soon be a thing of the past for thousands of drivers in Texas: a $75 ticket for going through a red light based on the automated camera snapshot.

“It does not give you any warning,” Mr. Barrientos, who works in real estate investing and marketing, said in an interview. “All of a sudden, two seconds to brake in a whole intersection. Go over the white line, you will still get that ticket.”
With the signing of a bill last weekend, Gov. Greg Abbott made Texas the latest state to ban red-light traffic cameras.

It joins at least seven other states — Maine, Mississippi, Montana, New Hampshire, South Carolina, South Dakota and West Virginia — that already have statutes prohibiting the cameras, the National Conference of State Legislatures said. Around 20 more do not have automated traffic enforcement systems on public roads.
“Each state is responsible for prioritizing what devices go on their roadways,” the Federal Highway Administration said in an emailed statement.

The Texas ban takes effect on Sept. 1, but it allows communities more time, if needed, to complete their contracts with the private companies that operate the cameras — and get a flat fee or share revenue from the tickets.
The changes mean an end to the bane of cameras that drivers say pop into action too quickly, capturing an image of a license plate on a vehicle that has edged into a crossing while waiting to turn, only to be stuck at the moment the light changes to red. Others say the cameras are set off even if a car strays inches over a line marking the intersection, but then stops at the very last moment.
These and other frustrations were shared on social media as police departments across Texas announced this week that they were starting to deactivate their red-light cameras to comply with the new law. The Frisco Police Department said on Twitter on Monday that it would stop processing violations that it had been working on. The Haltom City Police Department said it had terminated its contract with Redflex Traffic Systems, the company that provided the cameras.

Mr. Barrientos, the driver who was given a ticket in Grand Prairie, was among the nearly 200 people who wrote to the Grand Prairie Police Department when it announced this week that it was ending enforcement action. Some said the cameras could be put to better use, or wondered whether to pay current tickets and if they would be reimbursed for tickets they already paid.
“Donate the cameras to Keep Grand Prairie Beautiful to catch those litter bugs !!!!!” one person wrote on the department’s Facebook page. Another resident suggested the cameras be repurposed in places “where our neighborhoods continue to get robbed.”
In Plano, a city of about 300,000 in North Texas, there was an average of about 17 traffic crashes a day before the red-light camera program was started in 2006. Chief Gregory W. Rushin of the Plano Police Department said in an interview on Friday that accidents decreased by about a third since cameras, under a $2 million contract with Redflex, were placed at intersections with the highest number of red-light runners and accidents.
Drivers or vehicle owners can contest the video and snapshot evidence sent to them with the citation, he said. Revenue from the tickets goes to trauma centers and to future traffic safety programs. “It’s not a money grab,” he said. “We are trying to save lives.”

The use of red-light cameras in the United States started in New York City, which tested one in 1992 and then turned on more of them over the years. Other state and city governments gradually adopted them, and in 2018 there were about 400 communities in the United States that operated red-light camera programs, according to the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety.
But more red-light cameras have been discontinued than added since 2012, the institute said.
In 2017, 890 people nationwide were killed in crashes that involved running a red light, over half of them pedestrians, bicyclists and people in other vehicles, the insurance institute said. There were about 827 such deaths a year on average, the safety administration said.
Supporters say the payments for the tickets contribute to government coffers, and use of the cameras reduces serious traffic accidents, such as front-into-side, or “T-bone,” collisions, according to studies cited by the insurance institute.

Opponents say that the cameras contribute to rear-end collisions caused by sudden braking and that the enforcement is not transparent. They also complain that the cameras are overseen by private companies that share the revenues from the tickets they generate, creating an incentive to place the cameras in high-traffic areas.
The annual report for  Suffolk County, N.Y., shows that revenue from the red-light cameras was about $28.9 million in 2017, with about $9 million of that paid to the vendor. Rear-end crashes rose at red-light camera intersections by as much as 21 percent in 2016 compared with 2009, the last year before the cameras were installed, it shows.
“One of the provisions is that the vendor chooses locations based on their discretion, not on accident location,” said Hector Gavilla, who is running for a seat as a Republican in the Suffolk County Legislature and maintains an anti-camera platform that publishes county contracts and other documents.
“They look for how many tickets it could issue,” he said.
A program in Los Angeles that started in 2004 encountered criticism that the cameras did little to improve public safety or reduce red-light running. A city study found that the cameras were generally installed at intersections thought to have the highest likelihood of producing revenue, rather than the highest incidence of traffic accidents stemming from running lights. In 2011, the City Council voted to end the cameras’ use.
In Arizona, the attorney general’s office issued an opinion in 2016 that the cameras’ private contractors should be subject to private investigator licensing requirements, according to a copy of the ruling.
Objections have also centered on constitutional grounds. In Congress last month, Representative Ron Wright, a Republican from Texas, introduced a bill that would force states to prohibit the use of automated traffic enforcement if they want federal highway funding.
“This presumption that the registered owner is the driver impermissibly shifts the burden of proof,” Mr. Wright said in an emailed statement.

One activist was Kelly Canon, 60, who had successfully lobbied her city, Arlington, to end the use of red-light cameras after she was given a ticket while making a right turn in 2013. She and other activists then moved on to state legislators in Austin, citing a 2017 Case Western Reserve University study that used 12 years of data in Houston to find that the cameras changed the composition of accidents, but did not reduce them.
“We pushed with lawmakers and pulled contracts,” Ms. Canon said. “It took six years of our lives to get this done.”

Crossed the White Line at a Red Light Camera Intersection and Stopped

Today, my wife had stopped at a red light in a left turn lane along with a number of other cars that were ahead of her at a red light camera intersection. The light turned green and the cars ahead were all turning left. By the time she had approached the white line of the crosswalk to turn left behind the other cars, the light had already turned yellow and she decided to simply stop rather than continue. But by the time she had fully stopped, she had gone past the white line and had entered into the crosswalk with her tires and the light had turned red.

It is hard to determine from recall whether 1. she had already crossed the white line and after that the light turned red and–still in motion–she finally stopped in the middle of the crosswalk or 2. the light turned red before she had crossed the white line and she proceeded to cross the white line with the light being red and she stopped in the middle of the crosswalk, of course, just past that white line. At any rate, we shall see whether or not a ticket will arrive in the mail for that. My wife does not believe that a ticket will show up in the mail. As for me, I don’t know what will happen because I have heard such crazy stories about these things. I suppose time will tell.
Lastly, I suppose the key issue is how a ticket is generated in this situation: whether a ticket is generated based upon a technicality–that is, crossing the white line on a red light–or whether a ticket is generated based upon something more meaningful–actually crossing the the white line at a red light and continuing on through the intersection to complete the turn. It seems that common sense dictates that running a red light should be the violation and not simply stopping at the crosswalk on a red light.