Since the Board meeting and Get the Scoop session on Monday, September 19, we have heard more than a few expressions of interest and differing viewpoints about the possibility of speed cameras as a method of enforcement of the speed limits within the Seabrook Island Development. So we wanted to take an opportunity to let you know where things stand.
- In July 2016 the Board asked a consultant in safety and security to spend a few days observing how SIPOA works. Among the recommendations the consultant made were that we should strongly consider eliminating both traffic stops and pursuit as methods of enforcement for speed limits and other moving violation infractions to the Rules and Regulations. The consultant also suggested that we look into the use of movable speed cameras as an alternative to enforcement of speed limits.
- It is important to emphasize that no decision one way or the other has yet been made about whether to use speed cameras.
- In determining how to put the consultant’s recommendations in place, a committee established within the Board has drafted a number of recommendations that will be discussed in greater detail by the full Board of Directors in an upcoming Executive Session.
- In that session, we hope to get a sense of the Board’s reactions and a consensus on what makes sense for safety and security on Seabrook Island, taking into account the wide variety of visitors we have to accommodate. Again, however, no decision will be made in Executive Session and no votes will be taken.
- One of the ways to eliminate traffic stops is to install speed cameras. The kind that we have been considering are movable cameras using an internet connection and their locations established through GPS, and capturing location, speed and vehicle identification information in real time. The video would then be reviewed and determinations made about issuing citations for speeding.
- Speeding has been identified as a primary concern of property owners on surveys over the past decade.
- Our security consultant, as well as law enforcement professionals generally, identify ‘traffic stops’ as one of their most dangerous tasks because of the inevitable adversarial implications of the stop and the unpredictable nature of the personal interaction between the officer and the occupants of the vehicle that is stopped. While the situation here on Seabrook may not be as dangerous, we also know that our security officers are frequently exposed to aggressive and unruly responses when making a traffic stop.
- Additionally, pursuit is also a risky event because of the potential for increased speed and the attention that a pursuit often draws.
- There are several advantages to the use of speed cameras
- The speed cameras we are investigating are portable: they can be set up in different locations on a single day, which promotes deterrence throughout the Island roadways.
- Having our security officers use radar devices and then making traffic stops to cite violators for speeding has not significantly reduced speeding in our community because the vehicles and officers are readily identifiable and limited to one location.
- Use of a mobile speed detection system frees up at least one security officer and a patrol vehicle for other duties and is much more cost-effective.
- Other alternatives, such as speed bumps or humps, are generally opposed by a significant number of persons because of the potential for vehicle damage and the interference with normal driving.
- While there is a South Carolina statute that prohibits the use of speed cameras on publicly maintained roads, the statute was intended to prohibit local governmental agencies from setting up speed traps for profit, and does not apply to the private roads of Seabrook Island. We expect that a speed camera system that might be employed here would be cost-neutral, but it would not be employed as a tool to increase revenues, but only as a method of enforcement.
It is also important to remember that the speed camera alternative is only one of and complementary to a number of approaches to improving the overall safety, security and well-being of the members of our community, which is a responsibility that is given to the Board under the Covenants and Bylaws. After the Board has reached a consensus about how to proceed on this and other safety and security measures affecting the Seabrook Island Community, we then expect to make presentations available for public comment before adopting any new policies.
Please let us know if you have comments or questions.
– submitted by Janet Gorski, President, SIPOA Board of Directors
Yes, I am asking everyone to cooperate with the initiative which will be a set of recommendations regarding Security tasks and procedures. Once the project is completed and the associated recommendations are made, please cooperate and review those recommendations. Please then send in your feedback and attend the public forum(s).
Not to belabor the point because it may not become an issue, but we’re not talking about criminal citations or even a citation that goes against anyone’s driving record. The issue is a community fine for an action violating community rules. Bylaws provide that the property owner is ultimately responsible for behavior of others residing on the property and for guests.
As you know, other options are also being discussed and statistics are being reviewed. Again, no decision about any of this has been made. Board is continuing to review Security tasks and procedures generally.
Ed,
Thanks for your feedback.
Phyllis-
This would be prohibitively expensive and destroy much of the beauty of the island.
Thank you for your feedback. A number of ‘speed calming’ devices including speed bumps, humps and stop signs are also being discussed.
Thank you again for your response. As you know, speed bumps, humps, and stop signs are also being discussed.
Warning sirens for lightning are not a SIPOA project. There is a great deal of information published about ripcurrents which are an issue nearly all the time. The 15 mph speed limit at the gatehouse exit will be reviewed. Board understands that everyone does not agree with this rate of speed. Pedestrian traffic near current gatehouse depends greatly on season and time of day.
Cost of moving a camera is the same as the cost of moving the mobile speed indicators we have now.
Leasing cameras is not on the table. We are a small community with narrow, twisting roads. Speeds should be under 30 mph throughout the community.
Obviously, more so in the summer because there are more people on the island. But we have speeders all the time.
Firstly, the cameras being considered don’t function this way. Secondly, this is a very small portion of a review of Security related tasks and procedures. Thank you for your feedback.
Statistics are being compiled. Also reviewing other options. Mostly reviewing tasks and procedures used with respect to Security generally. Speed related issues are actually just a small part of the review.
Numbers are being compiled.
This is being worked on.
Sure hope we don’t have such accidents.
Yes, these and other options will be discussed. Focus of review is much more on tasks and procedures associated with Security generally.
Ratio is about 1/3 property owners, 1/3 contractors and 1/3 visitors-guests. Collection from visitors-guests depends on many factors – many pay, some do not.
Yes, speed bumps/humps are two of several other scenarios Board is discussing. Board is more focused on a range of tasks and processes associated with Security.
First, no decision about speed cameras has been made. Second, no decision about speed cameras has been made. There are many ways to modify or enhance enforcement of traffic rules in general. Third, the President’s letter needs to be submitted to The Seabrooker more than two weeks in advance of publication. A lot has happened in the past two weeks. Finally, the Board asks that the community carefully review materials when they are are published and participate in discussions. Then, when the procedures are solidified and implemented, please be cooperative; change is hard. We’ll get through this together.
Less than two hours ago, I received an email from the POA in which President Janet Gorski discussed changes in the gatehouse and a “refined” role for “the Security force” on Seabrook. In the same paragraph she states, “Various mechanisms for enforcement of local traffic rules will also be enhanced.” She then states, “I urge everyone to cooperate with these initiatives”, even though they are really not spelled out. This leads me to strongly believe that the traffic camera on Seabrook is a done deal.
What concerns me is that this intrusive, highly controversial law enforcement “mechanism” will likely be implemented on our rather sedate community without one shred of empirical evidence being presented that speeding on Seabrook is a significant or unusual problem. Especially to the degree it would warrant such a drastic measure. As I stated previously, I think the longer we live in the tranquil environs of Seabrook, the more we tend to forget the “outside world” is a much faster paced, more dangerous place than our community. If this “mechanism” is not allowed in many communities where speeding and reckless driving are chronic problems, then it should not be allowed here.
I’m a bit puzzled at the legality of a traffic violation being the responsibility of someone totally uninvolved. Extend the concept. A renter/guest is involved in a hit and run on property (for instance, a parked car), or worse yet, an individual, killing that person. Is the Property Owner liable for that crime, in terms of potential jail time and financial ramifications?
To Ms. Reid: the Bylaws and Covenants make Property Owners responsible for their guests, including rental guests. I think this is Article 3.2.8 of the Bylaws.
So, an owner gets a speeding ticket, has to pay it, a guest of an owner gets a ticket, has to pay it, but a renter gets a ticket and they nor the rental owner have to pay it? Is this true?
Ed Dear says, Consider Guests may get 3 or more tickets and not realize it till they get their home mail. Then say “Screw Seabrook” and not return and NOT pay. So the POA goes after the home owner, not good. End result word gets and Seabrook is the loser!
Copy of my email to Ms. Gorski, with a cc: to the Board. Hope others will let the Board know their thoughts about this issue.
Ms. Gorski:
I would like to first thank you and your colleagues for your service to the Seabrook community. Having personally served as the President of an HOA, it is often a difficult (and mostly thankless) job. However, every good community needs good leaders, and I know our family appreciates your and your colleagues’ efforts.
I hope you will allow me to pass along some input on an item in the most recent Seabrook newsletter. I would like to express our disappointment in hearing about the possibility of speed enforcement cameras. While the newsletter piece states that the issue is still in the preliminary stages, the article fails to mention any negatives associated with speed cameras, so I must assume that you and others on the Board at this point think they are a good idea and are trying to rally support for them. Our family would instead argue that the last thing Seabrook needs is another divisive issue to cause friction. We would firmly be in the camp of being opposed to speed cameras.
As background, we live in Charlotte, NC but are in the process of building a home on Seabrook. Having living in Charlotte for two decades, we have personally seen the use of enforcement cameras, as well as other speed dampening devices like speed humps and stop signs. We no longer have enforcement cameras, because they were universally despised, and I never heard one positive comment about them from anyone outside of government.
Unlike enforcement cameras, we have had very good experiences with speed humps, speed dampening cross walks and stop signs. We live in a close-in area of Charlotte that often serves as a cut-through area when traffic piles up on the major roads. Even though every day I must go over a series of speed bumps, it has essentially eliminated speeding in our neighborhood. It is simply not possible to speed over the humps, so you essentially have 100% enforcement without infuriating people with a ticket.
In contrast, I would view speed cameras as having many negatives, which unfortunately are not addressed in the newsletter:
1. They are ugly (in the newsletter, the survey is cited and the predominant quality that Seabrookers treasure is the Island’s beauty).
2. The receipt of a ticket from what amounts to essentially as a “robocop” will only serve to anger and alienate residents and guests alike. We need to work on making our island less divisive and more friendly to buyers and guests. Even if we didn’t receive a ticket, we would be much less likely to buy property on Seabrook knowing that a simple slip up in speed by us, by our children or by our guests at the wrong moment would result in a ticket. And if we did receive a ticket during our visit, I can assure you that we would not be back as a guest or buyer, particularly when no other island in SC has them.
3. Speed cameras would add to the already perceived notion of the island being over-regulated.
4. The state legislature in SC (and NC) has banned them, so why would we do something that is banned by the state of SC and couldn’t be done but for our status as a private island? There is a reason policy makers have banned them.
5. Apps on phones (and in some cars) which notify drivers of speed traps and speed cameras will defeat the effectiveness of the tool over time.
6. Seabrookers shouldn’t need to use cruise control to drive around the island. One’s speed is going to be above and below the speed limit as part of natural driving. A speed camera doesn’t recognize that natural fluctuation.
7. Residents and guests would need to monitor anyone that ever uses their car, and often, it would be impossible to remember who was driving the car on that particular day that a ticket was issued. I’m certainly not going to remember that a month later.
This debate distracts from the larger issue like the importance of bike and walker paths and trails, which would certainly increase the safety of the community for drivers and walkers/bikers alike. Also, could security determine how much of a problem this even is (i.e., have they done a study of what drivers are actually doing on the island as far as speed and where the speed problems are, if any)?
Also, has there been a survey for the speed cameras? We have done surveys for items such as motorcycles. Certainly an item like this would warrant the input of the broader SI community. If residents are opposed to speed humps, I am sure even more would be opposed to speed cameras. Perhaps a survey question could be posed like this. Do you feel speeding is a significant problem on the island? If so, would you call for greater enforcement by security, speed dampening devices such as speed humps and more stop signs and/or speed cameras?
Thanks again for your service to the community, and I hope you will take our family’s comments into account.
Mark Horn
While I have witnessed people speeding on the island (never raised to the level of requiring speed cameras), I strongly feel that inserting speed cameras as a means of traffic control will quickly sour visitors on the thought of Seabrook as a destination. While not renting our villa at this time, we hope to in the future. Researching that desire, we have scouted online websites to see how properties are reviewed, so as not to make the mistakes others have made. When you find common complaints across various properties, that raise a red flag about the destination, not just a specific unit, it gives one pause. Given the range and type of complaints, from ridiculous to legitimate we have noted about Seabrook and it’s many properties, there is no question speed cameras would be mentioned. How many of us have avoided towns known to have speed traps? This is often perceived as a means of generating revenue, regardless of intent and can only hurt perceptions of the Island.
If speed is genuinely an issue, I would encourage the installation of more stop signs–I spearheaded such an approach in my own Virginia neighborhood, to slow down rush hour traffic, which helped a great deal. Or, consider the installation of traffic calming “crosswalks”, not speed bumps. The precedent has been established on Seabrook Island for the latter, with the traffic circles at the beach and golf club. While these accomplish the objective, they are attractive and not inflammatory, unlike speed cameras. In Fairfax City, VA (among other locations), these have been built, which are slightly raised brick crosswalks (in appearance, not truly crosswalks–they are about a car width wide and span from curb to curb). When going the posted 25mph speed limit, it’s like crossing a slight rise–I know, I drive over them all the time and have never “bottomed-out” my car, because it’s designed for 25mph. If going faster, it’s more of a jolt, but could not possibly damage a car, unless someone was going so fast as to be reckless.
The bottom line is whether or not the SIPOA board wants to be responsible for tarnishing the reputation and perception of Seabrook Island to our visitors, let alone the owners, by installing speed cameras?
Sincerely,
Bob Reddersen
P.S. To date, I have never received a ticket from either a speed or red light camera.
Just saying….Now that our Island has built up,maybe we need to get rid of the islands in the middle of the road. It would be safer for the bikers. Times change!
While I have witnessed people speeding on the island (never raised to the level of requiring speed cameras), I strongly feel that inserting speed cameras as a means of traffic control will quickly sour visitors on the thought of Seabrook as a destination. While not renting our villa at this time, we hope to in the future. Researching that desire, we have scouted online websites to see how properties are reviewed, so as not to make the mistakes others have made. When you find common complaints across various properties, that raise a red flag about the destination, not just a specific unit, it gives one pause. Given the range and type of complaints, from ridiculous to legitimate we have noted about Seabrook and it’s many properties, there is no question speed cameras would be mentioned. How many of us have avoided towns known to have speed traps? This is often perceived as a means of generating revenue, regardless of intent and can only hurt perception of the Island.
If speed is genuinely an issue, I would encourage the installation of more stop signs–which I spearheaded in my own Virginia neighborhood, to slow down rush hour traffic, which helped a great deal. Or, consider the installation of traffic calming “crosswalks”, not speed bumps. The precedent has been established on Seabrook Island for the latter, with the traffic circles at the beach and golf club. While these accomplish the objective, they are attractive and not inflammatory, unlike speed cameras. In Fairfax City, VA, these have been built, which are slightly raised brick crosswalks (in appearance, not truly crosswalks–they are about a car width wide and span from curb to curb). When going the posted 25mph speed limit, it’s like crossing a slight rise–I know, I drive across them all the time and have never “bottomed-out” my car, because it’s designed for 25mph. If going faster, its more of a jolt, but could not possibly damage a car, unless someone was going so fast as to be reckless.
If the board makes the unwise decision to install these cameras, please confirm for the readers, unequivocally, that owners would not be liable for traffic violations of their visitors/renters. That would be unconscionable. Furthermore, it would indicate that the desire is not to control speed, but to generate revenue.
The bottom line is whether or not the SIPOA board wants to be responsible for tarnishing the reputation and perception of Seabrook Island to our visitors, let alone the owners, by installing speed cameras?
I truly hope POA board members and town officials alike are reading the response to this and reading and discussing the emails they are receiving on this same issue.
If you take out a few “information seeking” responses here, the others are almost entirely against speed cameras.
13 states have banned the use of speed cameras. Many more seriously restrict their use. SC is one of the states banning them on public roads.
As suggested, more stop signs at strategically located intersections; speed pass-overs/bumps and another serious look at how to expand the bike/walking paths on the island should all be seriously considered, not the extremely unwelcomed prying eyes of hidden cameras.
The following addition to Seabrook’s welcome sign probably won’t add to the appeal of our beautiful island: WELCOME TO SEABROOK, HIDDEN SPEED CAMERA CAPITAL OF SOUTH CAROLINA.
What will prospective Seabrook investors think about our priorities and the livability of our Island.
A $700,000 gate house to welcome you and then speed cameras to make sure you follow the rules. Evidently, you have no self control.
Some of our Board have some pretty interesting phobias, including the perseption that the area around the gate house is ‘ a heavy use pedestrian area’ and we need to not exceed 15mph.. Have you ever seen “heavy” pedestrian use ?
What would make sense for safety, real estate values, and enjoyment would be bike lanes and trails. Flags to inform beach goers of Ocean conditions should also be on the list. Certainly warning of rip currents is at least as important or more important then warning sirens for lighting.
My 30 something son just adores Seabrook and visiting the island with his family, but he complains that “they” have what he calls “rules for rules”. A big brother traffic camera will not assuage that perception.
I think we’re providing a fix without a problem. I agree with Ms. Mikula that speeding just does not seem to be a major issue on Seabrook. Not that it doesn’t happen, but generally it seems most people respect the speed limit. Sometimes it’s easy to lose perspective. On the street where we live full time, the speed limit is also 25 m.p.h. It is a fairly high density, residential neighborhood with a school a block away and children walking to and from the school. Now here there is a real issue with speeding and safety. Not so much on Seabrook.
I agree
I agree;well said
Yes,you are right on.
Remember, speed cameras are expensive, typically leasing for $3,000 per month per camera. They will return profits above their own high costs ONLY when the posted limits are set at least 10 mph below the safest levels – the 85th percentile speeds of free flowing traffic under good conditions, rounded to the nearest 5 mph interval. Example: If 85% of the cars are at or under 43 to 47 mph, then the safest limit to post for the fewest crashes is 45 mph – NOT 40 or 35 or 30 or 25. You would find a speed cameras in such a place ONLY if the limit is improperly and less-safely set at 35 mph or lower.
James C. Walker, National Motorists Association
Do speed cameras take driver’s license identifications to ensure the right person is being charged? Cars are occasionally loaned and youths not to mention seasoned citizens are prone to deny guilt or admit driving faults and errors. This has been a problem in Europe, and elsewhere, I suspect. I would also be interested in joining legal action against the POA for such intrusion and Big Brother actions. What is the cost of moving the cameras around, as the Tidelines will be filled with info on the latest locations to watch and avoid. What a waste of time and money and a perfect way to upset everyone who lives here or visits. Idiots!
Wondering if the speeding issue is a seasonal one (i.e. Summer months) or year round?
I believe speed cameras would be a detriment to Real Estate sales. Who would want to buy or build a new home knowing they are being watched every time they leave their home. We want Seabrook to appeal people who are vibrant and concerned about their safety and not project an image of an island of too many rules and regulations.
No speed bumps,no camera’s. Lets not reinvent the wheel just because we have a new face on safety. Let a few people complain and the Sky is Falling. I have been here from the beginning of the Island of Seabrook. Yes we sometimes have speeders,some people may get a bit touchy,all in all our security has been able to do the job they were hired for.. Someone is making a big deal out of nothing. I have seen far too many people going 15 mph. I saw one speeder this summer. Hope many speeding tickets were written. Today I saw the first speeding ticket of the year given out. Let the men do their work. Please
I agree that data is needed about the number of speeding violating and accidents. Otherwise we have no supportable information to inform a decision.
as soon as someone is hit by a speeding car they will sue the town for not enforcing the law.
Michael R Hoffman
________________________________
A cost effective way to slow people down would be to put more stop signs,especially at through streets. The Haulover and High Hammock on both sides of Seabrook Island Road should be 3-way or 4-way stops. I’m sure there are others too!
I’m curious about the ratio of out of state guest vs property owners that receive speeding violations and SIPOA’s ability to collect the fine once the guest leaves Seabrook. If the ability to collect from out of state guest is low then mostly residents would be forced to pay the fines. And that may be OK since they were speeding. Just a thought.
Speed bumps are cheaper, low maintenance and effective. When driving over them slowly and carefully, no damage should occur to vehicles.
with all this interest in speeding, how many accidents have occurred? If you’re going to use the reason for speed control, there should be a significant accident rate to justify it. Otherwise, maybe increasing the speed limits should be considered.