A camera installed at the intersection of Broadway and Roy will be part of an “intelligent traffic system” being activated citywide, Seattle Department of Transportation spokesperson Peg Nielsen tells CHS. The Broadway camera is not online yet but will be use to detect congestion and accidents and monitor roadway conditions, Nielsen said.
Photo by: Matt Westervelt uploaded to flickr
“If we have a snow event, we can see what is happening this time,” Nielsen said. She said the cameras will be used for traffic monitoring only.
Nielsen said she will provide a list of additional cameras to be installed and said that eventually, the new cameras will be added to the roster of city traffic cams available for anybody to view. The citywide system is not expected to start being used until March 2010 with the cameras becoming available online in the “later phase” of the project, Nielsen said.
Nielsen is also looking into and will contact CHS with information regarding the budget for the program and how it is being paid for by SDOT. The department’s expenditures are under scrutiny as the 2010 city budget is being finalized and political campaigns kick into the homestretch before the November election.
Capitol Hill is no stranger to city surveillance cameras. In 2008, the mayor’s office authorized installation of cameras in Cal Anderson Park.
Recently, Medina added cameras to keep track of every car entering the tony eastside community.
In the original version of this post, the program was incorrectly referred to as an ‘intelligent transportation system’ by SDOT. We have corrected the post.
Seattle’s becoming a smaller, less worldly version of London. There is never an excuse for any type of CCTV camera in any public place aside from banks and bullion depositories and public safety installations such as jails, police stations and National Guard armories.
I hope the local avian fauna crap all over the lens.
Also makes a good spy cam!
What happens if there is a murder right in front of the camera? They aren’t going to use it to catch the person? And just to play the antagonistic role a little, cause I just can’t resist, how would Zan-O feel about the use of it to catch the suspect if the victim was his/her friend? Just askin’.
17 months into the park surveillance camera pilot program at Cal Anderson Park, SPD reported that they had not once used the cameras for detecting or investigating crime. The City Auditor’s report on the program is overdue and as of last week, expected to be released this week.
“What happens if there is a murder right in front of the camera?” —
Last year there were 34 murders in Seattle, 14 of which occurred outdoors and half of those happened in parks or areas off the street grid.
In other words, last year there were 7 murders in Seattle that occurred in the area that a traffic camera “might” capture.
There are 18,372 city blocks in Seattle.
Outdoor traffic cameras cost $60K each.
Even if traffic cameras solved all 7 of those murders it would cost $1.1 billion, or, $157 million per murder. Humans are worth $14 million each. That represents a minimum 1,000% overpayment by the city.
No need to negative vote me. Was just wondering; not getting on the CCTV supportive bandwagon. BTW: indifferent…don’t care either way because, ultimately, we all will cease to have any privacy in our ever more electronic and digital futures.
And all your fancy stats did not answer my question. Would you tell them not to use the camera to solve the crime (any kind) against yourself or your friend?
“And all your fancy stats did not answer my question. Would you tell them not to use the camera to solve the crime (any kind) against yourself or your friend?”
I didn’t answer it because it’s the singularly most stupid question anyone’s ever asked anyone in the history of asking questions. Were you educated in a public school or something?
Rational decisions are made with tempered detachment. Irrational decisions are made with passionate connection.
I gave you a rational answer and now you want me to provide you with an irrational one. Sorry, Zan-O don’t play that game, sweet ass.
Aww Zanadu…don’t get your panties in a bunch and start throwing insults. Oh, and yes, I was educated in a public school….and? Am I (and the majority of this country who did not grow up rich enough to go to your superior private school) a lesser human being than you for it? Thanks for enlightening me to your superiority complex.
Just answer the F’ing question…it’s not a game…just an honest question. Oh, and like I said: in the long-run, we will all lose our privacy…so stop hiding behind your handle, especially if you are going to be throwing insults for no good reason. I like to know who is insulting me for the next time I pass them on the street.
I have provided my first name and last initial. I’ll be happy to provide you my full name, as you requested, in exchange for your social security number and a scan of the metrics page in your passport. Stop hiding behind the anonymity of a common name, “wes kirkman”, coward. LMK, KTHX –
Oh Zan. Sorry if I wrongly assumed Zan was not your name. You caught me.
Well seeing as how our actions here are recorded in time forever, though no one in their right mind is reading this anymore except you and I, I am going to get out of this downward spiral of insults and hatred we seem to be following. I noticed here http://www.capitolhillseattle.com/2009/10/14/is-capitol-hill, you said you like this community blog. Well so do I. In the interests of keeping this blog decent, how about we refrain from jumping to petty insults? I will do my part.
Take care Zan.
I’m in my right mind, and still reading.Now that you two are finished spitting at each other: Zan-O made a good point with his fancy stats. Would you care to address it, Wes?
The fact that a murder might happen right in front of a camera doesn’t justify putting up a camera. Odds are that it *won’t* happen there, and putting up enough cameras to increase the chance that a murder will happen on-camera to a meaningful level is cost prohibitive.
Surveillance of people without warrant — even when they’re in public — is not a business our government should be getting into.
WES: “spiral of insults and hatred we seem to be following”
don’t use “we” when you should say “me”; I have been a perfect gentleman – only you have resorted to threats of violence
you basically suck, pretty much everyone dislikes you
PHIL: “Surveillance of people without warrant — even when they’re in public — is not a business our government should be getting into.”
yes; and not only government but also owners of private property if said property meets the definition of a ‘public place’ – the reason I refuse to go to Southcenter anymore (aside from the fact that it’s patronized by white trash)
“Only one crime was solved by each 1,000 CCTV cameras in London last year, a report into the city’s surveillance network has claimed.” http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/london/8219022.st
The cameras in Federal Way and Tukwila parks and high crime areas (Hwy 99, anyone? Federal Way Transit Center?) are used in crime investigations all the time. Just because SPD *hasn’t* doesn’t mean they *won’t*, or that the knowledge that the cameras are there isn’t a deterrent.
Do you have a source you could share with us that show they’re used “all the time” to “investigate crimes” or is your source just “gut instinct”?
Well, Zan, if you bother to look at my user info, you might see how I know.
Anyone would feel great if a murderer gets caught. Duh.
If a peeping tom saw a nude twelve year old girl get beat by her dad and called the cops that would probably be good but we’re still not going to endorse pedophile voyeurs.