Automated Speed Enforcement

Like many other areas, the Niagara Region started by adding Automated Speed Enforcement (ASE) cameras to four school zones – where they post speed limits at 40 km/h. Now, they are looking at doubling the ASE cameras.

These ASE cameras “sense” whether a vehicle travels above the speed limit and snaps a photo. Certified Staff in a Joint Processing Centre in Toronto “validates” the photo and speed, and mails the ticket to the vehicle’s owner.

The idea is that once people receive a ticket weeks later, they slow down the next time.

Expanding Near You?

After piloting the program for a couple of months with a few cameras, many cities expand their program.

Toronto started ticketing with 50 ASEs in school zones in July 2020. In February 2023 they added 25 new cameras.

Ottawa started with 15 speed cameras, increased it to 40, and will be adding an additional 20 in 2024. After initially using Toronto’s Joint Processing Centre to validate the tickets, Ottawa Council recently established their own 30,000 square-foot processing centre with 30 full-time staff.

Other areas – like Waterloo, Niagara, and Mississauga – are increasing their surveillance and some are also considering setting up their own validation centre.

Does It “Work”?

Well, it certainly must “work” because cities are actually expanding their use, right?

An April 2024 Niagara Region report outlines that preliminary results from three-months in 2023 indicate an average reduction of driver speeds by 7 km/h in school zones (from 54 to 47 km/h).

A joint Hospital for Sick Children and City of Toronto study found that during 2020 through 2022 vehicle speeds in their ASE zones dropped an average of “7.44 km/h in the 85th percentile vehicle speed.”

While – the authors admit – studied during the COVID-19 pandemic when people drove less and children weren’t often attending school, the drop in speeds were similar to Niagara.

Remove Flashing Lights?

As an interesting note, cities are currently removing the yellow “flashing beacons” from school zones.

Is this because they aren’t effective or because drivers don’t see them? No, it’s because the cameras don’t see the flashing lights:

“The removal of ‘flashing beacons’ is required as ASE is implemented as cameras do not capture that the beacons are active and that the lower speed limit was legally in place at the time of an infraction.” (Source: Niagara Region.)

Does this solve our problem? “Are speed cameras effective?”

ASE cameras seem effective at doing what their name implies: Automated Speed Enforcement. They detect vehicle speeds, take a photo of the vehicle, and, after validation, allow cities to fine owners of the offending vehicles.

Yet, the above studies only compared ASE cameras against the same area with no cameras. They didn’t compare ASE against other interventions – like adding cameras in one area and doing something else in another.

“Is this the best solution?”

“Are speed cameras the most effective solution to reducing vehicle speeds and increasing pedestrian safety in school zones?”

A comprehensive study by Mountain et al in "Accident Analysis & Prevention" of +150 speed management systems in Great Britain showed the answer to be “No.”

The Mountain study showed that road humps and speed cushions (what they call “vertical” changes) decreased personal injury accidents by 44% and fatal and serious accidents by 35%. It also dramatically reduced speeds – average speeds dropped 13.5 km/h with 85% of drivers slowing by 14.1 km/h.

The study identified “Horizontal” changes (mini-roundabouts, build outs, chicanes, hatching on the road, speed activated signs) as the next safest alternative. They reduced personal injury accidents by 29% and fatal and serious accidents by 14%.

These changes weren’t as effective at reducing speed as cameras or as “vertical” changes: average speeds dropped 5.3 km/h with 85% of drivers slowing by 6.1 km/h after horizontal changes.

Sadly, speed Cameras were shown to be the least effective for safety. Cameras reduced personal injury accidents by 22% and fatal and serious accidents by 11%.

Cameras were only half as effective as road humps and speed cushions and not even as effective as some paint on the road or flashing signs.

Vehicle speeds did drop a little more than “horizontal” elements; average speeds dropped 6.6 km/h and 85% of vehicles slowed by 8.5 km/h after installing cameras. But, again, cameras were only half as good as “vertical” elements like road humps and speed cushions at reducing speeds.

These results also indicate that by removing the flashing amber lights in school zones (so the speed enforcement cameras work better), cities actually make school zones less safe: by 32% for personal injury accidents and by 27% for fatal and serious accidents.