Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity
Transportation Home  |  Discussions  |  Traffic  |  Columns  |  Q&A     |      Twitter |    Facebook   |  phone Alerts
Posted at 9:30 AM ET, 01/18/2011

Red-light cameras active in Falls Church

By Washington Post Editors

Drivers who run red lights in Falls Church will begin receiving citations at two locations in the city beginning today.

The cameras have been installed at the eastbound and westbound approaches at Broad and Cherry streets and at Broad Street and Annandale Road, according to city officials. The cameras are part of the "Falls Church Focus on Safety Program."

The warning period was in force from Dec. 19 through Sunday. According to a city Web site, owners of vehicles that are pictured running red lights will be fined a minimum of $50.

Officials say that the images (the cameras produce photographs and video) will be confirmed by the police department before a citation is issued.

[This post will be updated]

By Washington Post Editors  | January 18, 2011; 9:30 AM ET
Categories:  Commuting, Driving, Northern Virginia  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Metrobuses on snow emergency routes
Next: Flying today? Check with your airline


Red lights cameras! The gubmint! It's all a scam for money!

Or maybe it really is about making us all just a little safer.

Posted by: krickey7 | January 18, 2011 9:50 AM | Report abuse

That's a shame. Those cameras cause accidents, according to the Virginia Transportation Research Council:

Can't we, in the Commonwealth, read our own reports??!

Posted by: afsljafweljkjlfe | January 18, 2011 10:57 AM | Report abuse

This has nothing to do with safety. It is all about the money.

Posted by: asdf9876 | January 18, 2011 11:16 AM | Report abuse

they should install speed cameras on rt 50. people drive like complete idiots

Posted by: slick3 | January 18, 2011 11:28 AM | Report abuse

Please visit:

Northern Virginia’s network of roads have been and will continue to be in a state of change for many years. Urban sprawl from Washington, D.C. has led to these significant changes. According to Census data, the combined population of the counties of Arlington, Fairfax, Loudoun, and Prince William (and independent cities within) make up nearly 27% of Virginia’s population. Although many within the population utilize modes of public transportation, a vast amount remain daily motorists. As the population (and number of motorists) is sure to grow, the physical landscape of the area is sure to change. A number of road projects have either already been completed, are in the process of being built, or are scheduled for groundbreaking in the ensuing months and years.

The purpose of this blog is to inform the public of driving routes that can be utilized in order to bypass delays correlated with route-time, construction, accidents, rubbernecking, and general volume. The reported routes will not guarantee that you will be delay-proof, but they are worth knowing about. After living and driving in Northern Virginia for many years, I have come to terms that there is inevitably nothing neither you nor I can do to be gridlock-free, but being knowledgeable about routes in the area can be that first step to a less stressful commute.

I welcome public input and suggestions for the blog. Please email them to me at

Posted by: smartroutenova | January 18, 2011 12:07 PM | Report abuse

Saying that the 2007 Virginia Transportation Research Council study found that red-light cameras cause accidents simply is not true. The study found that red light running crash rates over the entire study area decreased by 42%. Specifically in Falls Church, the study found that the change in rear-end collisions was "statistically non-significant." And collisions resulting from red light running fell from 67 before camera installation to 38 after.

Posted by: RobertM468 | January 18, 2011 12:50 PM | Report abuse

"Or maybe it really is about making us all just a little safer."

If they really wanted to make us all just a little safer, they'd actually post police officers at the intersections which appear to be the biggest problems and instead of just sending a fine to the person, which is the only thing the camera does, actually pull the person over and not just give them a fine but also a citation that will likely lead to points on their license.

Norther VA doesn't enforce traffic safety laws, they only raise revenue. If this was actually about traffic safety they'd put patrols on the streets to cite violators. These cameras do nothing aside from fine the OWNER of the vehicle (not the driver in all cases - for those of us that have kids who drive). If this was really a traffic safety issue, then the police should do something about it instead of the city/county just putting up cameras.

Posted by: mika_england | January 18, 2011 1:05 PM | Report abuse

Fine by me. Sometimes seems like a free for all out there on the roads these days, so anything to remind people that there are laws to be followed is a good thing.

Posted by: wilson78 | January 18, 2011 1:06 PM | Report abuse

@asdf9876 It is about safety if it gets drivers to pay more attention. And doesn't it make more sense to have the system if it lets the police worry about more serious things?

Posted by: Loopla | January 18, 2011 1:11 PM | Report abuse

The best thing about this article is the publishing of the locations of these systems. Its all about enforcement.

Posted by: gordon514 | January 18, 2011 3:32 PM | Report abuse

So glad to see these go up. People always say its all about the money. Although it may be part of it, safety is definitely a major reason for the installation of these cameras. If it was all about money, they would be up on every street corner. But they are just at intersections where most accidents happen.

Posted by: homerz | January 18, 2011 3:49 PM | Report abuse

They have to install cameras because police won't do their jobs.

Posted by: getjiggly1 | January 19, 2011 11:43 AM | Report abuse

i liked the other reporter's piece that had an environmental correlation..little more substance - not just informative

Posted by: YumYum1 | January 19, 2011 3:24 PM | Report abuse

Post a Comment

We encourage users to analyze, comment on and even challenge's articles, blogs, reviews and multimedia features.

User reviews and comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions.

characters remaining

RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2011 The Washington Post Company