Sponsored by
Are they worth it? Sheffield speed cameras failing to cut accidents
Speed Camera on Sheffield Parkway
SPEED cameras have failed to cut accidents at almost half of all sites where they have been installed in South Yorkshire.
Cameras operate at 56 different locations around the county and road safety campaigners say they are an ‘exceptionally effective’ tool in reducing accidents.
But data from South Yorkshire Safety Camera Partnership reveals accidents where people were killed or seriously injured fell at only 27 of the camera sites – and actually increased at 24.
The partnership is one of only 46 of 151 authorities around the UK to release accident figures for each of its camera sites.
The biggest positive difference achieved by speed cameras has been on the A616 Stocksbridge Bypass where there were 36 accidents where people were killed or seriously injured between 1990 and 2002, but only nine after average speed cameras were installed in 2002.
Locations in Sheffield where cameras have been ineffective include the A625 Ecclesall Road South, Banner Cross, where there was only one accident in the eight years before the camera was installed – but six serious collisions in the 13 years afterwards.
At three other sites in Sheffield, statistics from the Safety Camera Partnership show increased collisions after cameras were installed.
There were two serious collisions in the nine years before a camera was installed on the A57 Sheffield Parkway approaching Victoria Quays in 1998 – but three in the nine years after.
And there were two serious crashes after cameras were installed on the A61 Penistone Road at Grenoside, compared with one in the years beforehand, while on the A6135 at Birley Moor Road, Sheffield, there were three serious accidents before the cameras were installed and four after.
The number of serious accidents was identical in the years before and after speed cameras were installed on the A57 at Manchester Road, Crosspool, and on the A61 Penistone Road, Neepsend.
South Yorkshire Safety Camera Partnership’s figures show accidents each year at each site, from 1990 onwards. Cameras were installed at different sites in 1996, 1998, 2002 and 2007.
During the period covered by the statistics, at four sites there were no fatal or serious accidents before a camera was installed, then several incidents immediately after.
Figures also suggest differing effectiveness of cameras across South Yorkshire. In Barnsley, accident rates had increased at 16 of the 23 camera sites, fallen at six and stayed the same at one, whereas levels have fallen at all three sites in Doncaster where cameras have been installed.
At Sheffield’s 16 camera sites, accident rates have fallen at 10, risen at four and stayed the same at two. In Rotherham, accident rates fell at eight of 14 sites, rose at four and stayed the same at two.
Email to a friend
Print this page
Looking for...
Featured advertisers
Jobs
Search for a job
Motors
Search for a car
Property
Search for a house
Weather for Sheffield
Saturday 26 May 2012
Today
Sunny
Temperature: 9 C to 21 C
Wind Speed: 17 mph
Wind direction: East
Tomorrow
Sunny
Temperature: 11 C to 21 C
Wind Speed: 14 mph
Wind direction: East
Comments
There are 24 comments to this article
Page 1 of 2
Los Blancos Galactico Rossoneri Mancunian
Wednesday, August 31, 2011 at 12:53 PMMore CCTV to tackle offences committed behind the wheel! When the driver denies the offence, they'll be shown the CCTV that catches them red handed!
Woodseats Sammy
Wednesday, August 31, 2011 at 10:22 AMSpeed cameras should be moved to new locations. Try the Glossop RdHanover Way crossroads in town, or the Manor Top junctions - they'd nick loads of arrogant fools roaring through the lights at red.
educated bloke
Saturday, August 27, 2011 at 06:03 PMWhy has the Star removed my posting (17) ?. It simply told my views on the boxer jailed for 16 years as it seems we are banned from posting on that story. I'm puzzled !
Rincewind
Saturday, August 27, 2011 at 03:59 PMWhy the censorship? Nothing said in my comment that is not true and yet my opinion is not allowed - perhaps it put the Star journalists to shame because I can spell.
Mike.
Saturday, August 27, 2011 at 09:05 AMCameras are fantastic. The revenue that they generate keeps my taxes lower. The £60 fine is a tax on idiots, ignorant and drivers who are not paying attention. Brilliant bit of kit! Fit more of them, optional idiot taxes are the way to cut the countries debt.
Rincewind
Saturday, August 27, 2011 at 08:56 AMComment removed by moderator
Los Blancos Galactico Rossoneri Mancunian
Friday, August 26, 2011 at 08:07 PMYes well educated bloke! Just because he's a boxer doesn't mean he has the right to go round punching people! They should put him in a cell with Scum Naz!
educated bloke
Friday, August 26, 2011 at 07:36 PMComment removed by moderator
Los Blancos Galactico Rossoneri Mancunian
Friday, August 26, 2011 at 07:25 PMNo they are not there to get money from motorists! They are there to keep the speed down and to punish speeding motorists and racers who think that no-one else is on the road! Also speeding is not the only cause for accidents! Other causes are: not in full control ie both hands not on wheel, not checking mirrors or blind spots, not using indicators, red light offending, pulling out in front of motorists who has the right of way and priority and driving on the wrong side of road which is very dangerous if oncoming traffic is approaching! Another way to punish motorists is to stamp very hard on them! In other words harsher sentences!
Sir Taxedalot
Friday, August 26, 2011 at 06:13 PMCameras installed at locations where there are no accidents can only be there to raise revenue. That's what we've always suspected. Now we know. No surprise that they don't cut accident rates when there were never any accidents to start with. How much cash have these so called "safety cameras" raised?
seenitall
Friday, August 26, 2011 at 04:20 PMTo be really effective why do we have to warn motorists of their presence? Speeding ...then you should expect to be caught and fined and banned if necessary. Despite Jeremy Clarkson and his like pleading the case for higher speed limits...speeding kills!
pendingmoderation
Friday, August 26, 2011 at 02:57 PMGerimo, I just can't believe you're talking sense. But you are. Good grief, you'll start wearing red and white stripes soon if you carry on in this grown-up vein!
Gerimo
Friday, August 26, 2011 at 02:46 PMIf everyone drove sensibly speed cameras wouldn't "generate" any income at all.
pendingmoderation
Friday, August 26, 2011 at 02:08 PM"They're worth it. More than half of Sheffield's speed cameras cut accidents" But that headline wouldn't sell so many papers, would it?
d128
Friday, August 26, 2011 at 01:30 PMLast week travelling past Wortley Road towards Rotherham from Thorpe Hesley, I was overtaken by a guy in a black astra, he went on the wrong side of the road and then pulled back in, having to immediately brake due to the speed camera he was approaching. I was travelling at about 35 mph and had to brake because of his actions Once through the camera he again set off at warp 10. Obviously speed cameras dont stop him or many others from speeding.
Page 1 of 2
Your view
Please sign in to be able to comment on this story.