More DPD Surveillance Cams are Coming. And Here's a List of Where They're Needed.

By Robert Wilonsky, Monday, Apr. 20 2009 @ 8:34AM

Categories: Crime and Punishment

The Dallas City Council's committees have plenty on their plates today -- everything from establishing a trust fund related to the NBA All-Star game to checking in on the Lancaster Corridor, which is in serious need of some upgrading, to parsing over crime stats (according to the Dallas Police Department, homicides are down; so too are all other criminal activities). But for those wondering which areas of the city are identified as having the highest crime rate, check out the end of the Public Safety Committee's briefing dedicated to discussing surveillance cameras.

The doc's got plenty of interesting stats: where the next round of surveillance cameras are going downtown and in Jubilee Park near Fair Park, who else wants them, who's going to pay for them. And it raises the suggestion that DPD doesn't have enough eyeballs on the cameras: Studies show officers can only effectively watch 25 cameras at one time, but at the moment the two officers on duty per shift are being forced to cover 100 -- and that's before the expansion expected by month's end.

DPD offers one solution: Prioritize the so-called Targeted Action Area Grid areas suffering the highest crime. Which are? Well, for starters, the Northwest Highway-Harry Hines Boulevard area tops the pops with 50 violent crimes reported since January 1, followed closely by Forest Lane-Audelia Road with 48. Rounding out the Top Five: the Jefferson Corridor (46), Camp Wisdom Road-Chaucer Place and Cedar Springs Road-Wycliff Avenue (both 44) and Ross and Bennett Avenues (41). The 26 so-called TAAG areas represent 32 percent of the city's crimes. Oooh, look, more Harry Hines -- at Walnut Hill Lane! Like a VH1 I Love the '80s special.

Comments (9)

Write Comment

Related Content

More About:

Comments (9)

Avi S. Adelman says:

There's an easy - and free - way to put more eyeballs on these cameras...

Open the network so Dallas residents can watch the videos while sitting in the comfort of their home.

Some technical explanation is required here. Many companies offer video systems for neighborhood associations, whose members watch feeds from public streets and alleys (not private homes) after taking a DPD sponsored CrimeWatch class. Since the images are always recorded to a DVR, gaps in watching are covered. The cameras are in a fixed position - no zooming, no wandering eyes.

The DPD cameras are different than the neighborhood cameras. The resolution is a little higher, and they can be zoomed or spun around in their box from the control center.

If the DPD would let the public see the raw feeds - minus the ability to control the camera's movement - thousands of extra eyes belonging to residents in the area could (after appropriate CrimeWatch training) could get a password and watch their own streets.

They might not catch everything that happens, but they could fill in the gaps when an officer is not looking at the monitor.

Posted On: Monday, Apr. 20 2009 @ 8:44AM

John M says:

They are going up in Uptown right now, I noticed one at the corner of McKinney and Lemon this weekend.

Posted On: Monday, Apr. 20 2009 @ 9:00AM

chad says:

I agree with Avi but for a different reason, I think the feeds should be a matter of public record and made available to everyone.

Posted On: Monday, Apr. 20 2009 @ 9:10AM

DL says:

feeling a little paranoid?

Posted On: Monday, Apr. 20 2009 @ 9:17AM

I plead the 5th says:

Avi, what would your reaction be to a guy pulling in an alley between a couple of high fences, stops his car, gets out and takes a leak. Then, sits in his car smoking something for 5 minutes.

Or alternatively, someone who pulls in one of those useless M-streets alleys and takes a 30 minute nap?

Just wondering...

Posted On: Monday, Apr. 20 2009 @ 10:04AM

Toots says:

I can see Avi now, writing speeding tickets from the comfort of his own couch......

Avi, get in shape and become a cop already.

Posted On: Monday, Apr. 20 2009 @ 11:15AM

Tom Hendricks says:

I think this surveillance stuff can and will be carried too far. Put one on the Mayor's house for example.

To insure some semblance of sanity for us regular people, I would say that no matter what the city surveys, the citizens should be able to see too. That means that wherever these things are being monitored - that place be open to all so we can monitor the monitors and see what they are seeing too.

Posted On: Monday, Apr. 20 2009 @ 4:44PM

Homer says:

I recommend we install one of these in Zona Rosa just to make sure no one is smoking. The pan/zoom feature would be appreciated.

Thx

Posted On: Monday, Apr. 20 2009 @ 11:07PM

G. David says:

Funny, just today the DMN has a story about how the number of cameras might actually decrease, due to lack of monitoring funds.

Posted On: Tuesday, Apr. 21 2009 @ 1:09PM