Note: This is a copy of a letter sent to Oak Ridge City Council on Thursday.
The well-placed red light cameras have had an excellent effect on reducing speed and red light violations. Please vote to renew the contract.
In the past there have been complaints about the “intrusion” into people’s rights to disobey posted speed limits. Two come to mind:
- Man says it’s impossible to go down the Illinois Avenue hill and across Robertsville road at less than 55 miles per hour.
- Woman says that if she is to maintain a 35 mile per hour speed limit, she’d have to be constantly looking at her speedometer instead of the road.
And because of this, they threaten to not shop in Oak Ridge. Face it, council, we don’t need their dollars at the expense of our safety and our childrens’ safety.
On top of the improvement in safety, the city has some extra bucks.
Nancy England
Oak Ridge
Jason Allison says
I second her
Harry Pruitt says
Ms.England seems to be one of Oak Ridge’s citizens who believes that if you don’t like our speed cameras, stay out of Oak Ridge. I wonder how Kroger and the other business owners feel about that.
Joshua Hamilton says
I agree with this, it is possible to go down illinois ave without breaking the sound barrier, and one should pay attention to their speed. However, because I’m absent minded and do sometimes go a tad over the speed limit, I’ve solved the problem for myself by just not driving on those roads. Something for everyone to keep in mind is that the cameras *do* shift the local traffic flow to the backroads, where sometimes it is noticeable that there is an increased amount of traffic. This is probably why the numbers show reduced tickets at the speed cameras from locals, because us locals have learned to avoid them. However, I still stand by the fact that a much better solution at the high school would be to build a bridge, much like Karns. That in my opinion would reduce the injuries at that area to zero 🙂
johnhuotari says
I think the estimated $1 million cost of the pedestrian bridge is one reason it hasn’t advanced very far. See this 2010 story in the News Sentinel: http://www.knoxnews.com/news/2010/nov/25/idea-for-pedestrian-bridge-over-highway-revived/
Still, there are people who have advocated the idea over the years. But I’m not sure I’ve heard it brought up much since about 2010. I guess that was not long after the cameras were installed.
Philip W Nipper says
John, the real cost of such a venture in 2014 or 2015 dollars is probably closer to $2 Million or so. Considering such items as design costs, built to be ADA compliant, win TDOT approval, utility work costs, etc. However, I too feel that a foot bridge from the ORHS parking lot to the Civic Center is an idea that needs to become a reality. Maybe some of the monies generated from continued use of traffic cameras good be ear marked for the project. I think the city manager and council should make this one of their priorities. Another poll perhaps?
Dave Smith says
Joshua, I find it remarkable that you have the presence of mind to take an alternate route yet at the same time are too absent-minded to maintain the speed limit. Would you care to give a example of a route you take to avoid the traffic cameras? I’m curious how that works.
When you say locals are driving the “backroads,” I assume you mean they are driving the residential streets to avoid Robertsville, Illinois and the Turnpike. Almost every residential street in Oak Ridge has a 25 mph limit, which is 10 to 20 mph lower than that of Illinois Ave and the Turnpike. I find it much more difficult to drive at the 25 mph residential limit than at the 35 or 45 mph main road limits, plus it takes more time to drive the “backroads” at reduced speeds than simply driving the speed limit on the main roads.
Even if the COR built a bridge to connect ORHS to the Library and Civic Center we would still have a reduced speed school zone on the Turnpike adjacent to ORHS.
There has never been a time when I was driving along the Turnpike in front of ORHS and I thought to myself, “What we need right here is another traffic light to further impede the flow of traffic.” I sure hope we keep the speed camera and forgo the traffic light.
Cindy McCullough says
Personally, I do drive the turnpike all the time. I honestly think a traffic light at the Civic Center/High school wouldn’t be a good idea, or at least the light that already exists should have more pedestrian crosswalk features. I think one side of Tulane has a button for pedestrians to push, the other side, the library side, does not. This makes it a harder intersection for pedestrians to cross. High school students could cross there if it was made easier to cross on their side. Whether they would or not, I don’t know. But a traffic light might not be bad either, as I avoid that exit from the high school, as I am always trying to turn left out of the high school, so I go the other exit to Tulane and turn there. I will be recommending the same to my high school student when he starts to drive, as turning left across traffic there can be difficult at some times of day.
Cindy McCullough says
In my second sentence, I meant a red light there wouldn’t be a bad idea… IE I like the idea for turning there and for pedestrians.
Joshua Hamilton says
woah buddy, i think you read into that too far. My days of speeding are long gone. However, it is easy to go 40 in a 35 and not realize it, especially when your son is taking in one ear and the baby is yelling in the other. I can’t say much, seeing as how I have never received a violation from any of the cameras in oak ridge. However, It is my personal experience if you are going a few mph over on the back roads, the police tend to give a bit of leeway, so long as you’re not one of the people going 55+. I’ve always preferred backroads around town, not as many red lights, and less chaos. I have noticed though since the cameras’ have gone up, there is a lot more traffic on the artery back roads. That was the point I was trying to make. And trust me, compared to other places I’ve lived or visited, we neither have a real problem with speeders or roads around here. We have it nice! There’s roads in Greeneville that make a man feel quite uneasy attempting to do the posted speed limit. The bridge across from the HS to the Civic center would merely avoid any chance of a pedestrian injury. I have no qualms with the speed limit or school zone. Regardless, I was just posting my opinion and observation of the cameras, and I do not appreciate you trying to read into my comment and make a personal assumption of myself, seeing as you do not know me. Not everyone who opposes the traffic cameras are law breakers 😛
Kay Williamson says
John, I think it’s crap that you let the replies likes, but not give them the disagree side,, really….
johnhuotari says
Kay,
This is the only letter we have received on traffic cameras. We are happy to look at letters from both sides, but we haven’t received any letters from camera opponents.
Thank you,
John
James Allison says
It’s a small gain in the “improvement of safety”, i.e. the area directly around the camera, and if its going to be played as an improvement in safety, why are they not located in lesser traveled but, IMO, higher demand for safety, like EVERY school zone and neighborhood, oh yeah, because those roads are mostly traveled by locals who will be aware of when to slow down and speed back up to avoid the ticket, and not by the “out of towners” who may not be as aware and therefor more likely to be ticketed and ultimately generate most of the revenue, not increase safety. Also, is it an increase in safety if you can both hear and see people slowing down just prior to and accelerating just after the sensor points??? Face it, they are what they are, revenue generators that provide minimum safety for brief periods.