Video shows extremely low compliance at Ladd Circle stop signs – Updated

A reader just sent in a new video shot by local community news site Neighborhood Notes that shows blatant disregard of stop signs at the SE Ladd Ave entrance into Ladd Circle. Watch it below…

Ladd Circle from Neighborhood Notes on Vimeo.


The video comes as local debate and dialogue heats up about how to deal with lack of compliance with stop signs at this location.

For what it’s worth, the video shows only a few cars going through the intersection — all of which fail to fully stop. At least three of the bicycle operators in the video come to a complete stop (one of them to let someone walk across the crosswalk). One of them — who obviously noticed the filming taking place — put his foot down and demonstratively looked both ways before pedaling again (it’s hilarious).

As I watched the video, I wasn’t concerned or outraged at the blatant law-breaking. Instead, it makes it even more clear that something needs to be changed. This many otherwise law-abiding and upstanding citizens can’t be wrong — and they certainly wouldn’t choose to willingly put their lives in danger (notice that all types of people roll through, not just crazy scofflaw daredevils).

This video will likely give new strength to those who favor yield signs in this locations instead of stops.

This reminds me of another situation where an ill-advised stop sign was located. On SE Caruthers near OMSI, people on bikes frequently disobeyed the stop sign. Upon review of the situation, PBOT decided it shouldn’t be there and they took it out. The sky has not fallen.

We look forward to more coverage of this issue from Neighborhood Notes and to results of the evolving conversation around this intersection.

UPDATE: As many have pointed out, it’s obvious the footage has been edited, so it’s hard to determine how many people actually did stop. I think it’s safe to say though, that the footage was done over the course of a few hours, which proves that compliance is low.

UPDATE 2, 2:50pm: The person who took the video explains how it was edited:

I shot the video Monday June 27 between 4:45 and 5:45 PM. It’s for a story that will be published on Neighborhood Notes. We’re having a little technical issue and waiting until that is resolved before posting.

The video is definitely edited. If I included all the video clips I took yesterday the video would be too long. But I was careful to include behavior that was in line with what I saw. I’m comfortable stating that it is an accurate representation of yesterday’s behavior. I included the cars because I wanted to show all behavior at the intersection. Some cars did come to a complete stop, but they were in clips that were edited out.

The video was not one single recording because I was using a point and shoot camera that does video. It can record 10 minute clips. This was not meant to be a scientific study, but rather to illustrate the issue an give a reasonable representation of behavior. I had one hour to shoot and then a couple hours to edit to meet a deadline.

There was another person shooting video from the center of the circle. He is a neighbor who is documenting the behavior.

I hope that clears up any questions about how this was put together. Look for our story later today!

Subscribe
Notify of
guest

186 Comments
oldest
newest most voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
craig
craig
11 years ago

No surprise, since those signs are completely in appropriate.

Nick V
Nick V
11 years ago

That dude at around the 1:45 mark had to know he was on camera. Nice work.

abby
abby
11 years ago
Reply to  Nick V

The cameras were really, really obvious (to me at least). There was also a guy in a lawn chair in the circle staring right down the street, with a camera on a tripod next to him.

esther c
esther c
11 years ago

Wouldn’t yield signs be much more appropriate for entering a traffic circle with this amount of traffic in it.

Robin Canaday
Robin Canaday
11 years ago
Reply to  esther c

I wanted to say this also.

Paul Johnson
Paul Johnson
11 years ago
Reply to  esther c

Not only is it more appropriate, it’s what it should have per federal requirements.

Scott Batson
Scott Batson
11 years ago
Reply to  Paul Johnson

Paul, please cite your ‘federal requirements’.

Paul Johnson
Paul Johnson
11 years ago
Reply to  Scott Batson

US MUTCD, chapter 3.

Scott Batson
Scott Batson
11 years ago
Reply to  Paul Johnson

Chapter three is markings. Chapter 2 is signs, but citing signing and striping requirements for modern roundabouts is meaningless since Ladd Circle does not conform to the geometric and operational requirements of a Modern Roundabout. Modern roundabouts are designed to operate at about 20 mph. Modern roundabouts do not have parking in the circular roadway. Modern roundabouts do not have parks in the middle, and by state law do not permit pedestrians to cross the circular roadway. Single lane modern roundabouts are not typically larger than 120 ft in diameter (outside curb) with circular roadways of about 20 feet curb to curb. It’s a traffic circle.

Many people confuse older styles of circular intersections with modern roundabouts. Rotaries are not modern roundabouts. Traffic circles (Arc D’Triumph) are not modern roundabouts. European Vacation was not a modern roundabout. New Jersey/Europe are not removing modern roundabouts. Visit http://www.ksu.edu to see the differences. http://www.fhwa.dot.gov has a video about modern roundabouts that is mostly accurate (http://tinyurl.com/3hjrqus ).

sabernar
sabernar
11 years ago
Reply to  esther c

Yes, they would probably be more appropriate. But the fact is, they are NOT currently yield signs. They are stop signs. Which means that everyone. should. stop.

wsbob
wsbob
11 years ago
Reply to  esther c

“Wouldn’t yield signs be much more appropriate for entering a traffic circle with this amount of traffic in it.” esther c

No yield signs would not be more appropriate than stop signs at traffic circles in quiet, residential neighborhoods. The streets of this neighborhood, Ladd’s Addition, are not supposed to be major thoroughfares required to handle huge volumes of traffic, for which roundabouts are sometimes put into use as a means of avoiding huge backlogs of traffic motor vehicle traffic.

If roundabouts are such an excellent idea, why is Portland not proposing they be installed at, for example…7 corners? (That’s 20th and Division.) It would be a lot of work to put them in, would require the city buying easements from property owners for room to build it, but if one was there, as road users, people would no longer have to stop at stop signs or stop lights. Correct?

Just yield signs, which means pedestrians wanting to cross the street, are saddled with the extra burden of having to flag down roundabout bound vehicular traffic.

By the way…Scott Batson…very nice bit of research on roundabouts in your July 5, 2011 at 11:02 am post, responding to esther c and Paul Johnson and their consideration that the Ladd Addition traffic circles, unaided by stop signs, would somehow be more appropriate.

BURR
BURR
11 years ago

so where’s the problem? A cyclist yielded to the one pedestrian using the cross walk, and there were no conflicts between cyclists entering the circle and motorists or other users already in the circle.

This whole thing is a non-issue and the stop signs should have been replaced by yield signs years ago.

craig
craig
11 years ago

The only conflicts I’ve observed there are 12-mph bikes nervously jockeying with 20-mph bikes in the circle itself.

Charlie
Charlie
11 years ago

These should be yield signs not stop signs.

Bob_M
Bob_M
11 years ago

Motorists stopped less than cyclists. Still traffic flowed smoothly and the pedestrian got the respect and bike stopping they warrant.

big non issue.

davemess
davemess
11 years ago

And every car shown did the exact same thing.
Pack mentality definitely is going on for the cyclists.
i agree, the one pedestrian was stopped and yielded for.

Oliver
Oliver
11 years ago

That’s because stop signs are un-necessary at roundabouts.

John Mulvey
John Mulvey
11 years ago
Reply to  Oliver

Maybe on a freeway that would be true, but in a residential area they’re a necessity. I don’t think pedestrians should be expected to dodge cars or bikes just to get where they’re going.

Lillian Karabaic
11 years ago
Reply to  John Mulvey

I don’t think that pedestrians should be required to expected to dodge cars or bikes, either, but I do think that stop signs are inappropriate at roundabouts like this. Why? Because legally pedestrians have the right of way at crosswalks (and every corner is a crosswalk) in Oregon. This means that while I FULLY believe that bicycles/motorists should be halting for crossing pedestrians, I don’t believe that stop signs at a roundabout in Ladd’s circle are the way to get there. This video makes that even more clear- the one pedestrian was yielded to, but it wasn’t the stop sign that made that happen. There is no reason to believe that stop signs make this intersection safer.

single track
single track
11 years ago

+1

John Lascurettes
11 years ago

Perfectly said Lillian

John Mulvey
John Mulvey
11 years ago

I think you’re wrong, Lillian. Stop signs are intended to force a vehicle to slow and then stop in order to look both ways before proceeding. In theory, cars and bikes should do this anytime there’s a pedestrian trying to cross, even if there’s no stop sign, and even if there’s no crosswalk. But lots of people don’t, including cars, bikes, and everything else.

Tools like stop signs and painted crosswalks, all the way up to signals and other treatments, are effective in increasing compliance. That’s a fact.

Chris I
Chris I
11 years ago
Reply to  John Mulvey

Using your logic, there should be a stop sign at every crosswalk. That is not why we have stop signs.

Have you seen how traffic circles work in the rest of the world? They are appropriate for roads of all speeds, from quiet neighborhood streets, to busy boulevards. They reduce the chance of high speed collisions for all road users.

craig
craig
11 years ago
Reply to  John Mulvey

That’s a fact? Really?

ME 2
ME 2
11 years ago
Reply to  John Mulvey

There is also mounting evidence that no stop signs can be safer as cars, bikes, etc. are forced to pay attention to their surroundings. I see this alot in my NE hood where cars blindly speed from stop sign to stop sign, but drive slower and more attentively in sections where there are uncontrolled intersections. The circle seems like an ideal location to remove the stop sign.

Troix
Troix
11 years ago
Reply to  John Mulvey

“Have you seen how traffic circles work in the rest of the world?”
Exactly – outside of here (and one absolutely crazy intersection in San Sabastian, Spain) I have NEVER seen a roundabout with stop signs. It makes ZERO sense. My wife is from Vail, Colorado and after 13 years here still can’t fathom these versions of roundabouts. The stop signs negate the whole reason they exist in the first place.

was carless
was carless
11 years ago

+1
+they also get a zebra-striped crosswalk!

Paul Johnson
Paul Johnson
11 years ago
Reply to  was carless

Which is better known as a “school crossing.”

fatmidwesternwhiteguy
fatmidwesternwhiteguy
11 years ago

Thanks Lillian. You said it better than I could have.

Paul Johnson
Paul Johnson
11 years ago
Reply to  John Mulvey

If you believe that, then you should be advocating the removal of the roundabout. Or installation of stop signs at intersections that already have traffic signals. Redundant devices are redundant.

craig
craig
11 years ago

Note that “traffic circle” and “roundabout” mean different things to traffic engineers.

BURR
BURR
11 years ago
Reply to  craig

and ‘traffic engineer’ is an oxymoron

next….

craig
craig
11 years ago
Reply to  BURR

??

Oliver
Oliver
11 years ago
Reply to  craig

Traffic engineers main priority is efficient traffic management. The record shows that pedestrian injury is not a problem here. The video shows there isn’t even pedestrian/traffic conflict. These stop signs continue to exist because of a few folks with loud voices.

A.K.
A.K.
11 years ago

I don’t have speakers at work. Does this video include a soundtrack of the world’s smallest violin playing?

PDXbiker
PDXbiker
11 years ago

Enough already. Put in the yield signs.

Thane
Thane
11 years ago

It would be nice if they had the balls to go the route that Drachten did and just remove all the signs.

John Mulvey
John Mulvey
11 years ago

Part of me wants to defend the rolling stops because, let’s face it, it’s exactly what the vast majority of cars do. But I hope we’d set our standard a little higher.

I wish bikers were more conscious of pedestrians and I think it ought to be a priority for us to stop EVERY time there’s a ped trying to cross. Not just “kind of” stop, or slow down and go around them, but REALLY stop.

My fear is that a Yield sign instead of a Stop sign makes it even less likely that bikers will be alert for peds.

(Cars? F them.)

-John

lyle
lyle
11 years ago
Reply to  John Mulvey

Conscious of pedestrians? Riding into this stop, you can see both approaches to the crosswalk probably 30-40 yards before you approach it, and the line of sight is perfectly clear in both directions. Unless you are approaching it from Hawthorne full speed with no intention of reducing your speed at all, you can be completely aware of pedestrians (or the lack of them in the vast majority of cases), and still proceed without stopping while not putting anybody at even a slight risk.

John Mulvey
John Mulvey
11 years ago
Reply to  lyle

Do they think they’re at no risk, or is that just what you think?

dweendaddy
dweendaddy
11 years ago

I agree that there should be yield signs, but I also think that the sidewalk should come out further into the lane to make pedestrians more visible so that when they are there, people do, in fact, yield to them.

dan
dan
11 years ago
Reply to  dweendaddy

That’s an excellent idea that would go a long way towards fixing that blind spot behind the hedge at the right as you come up to the stop sign.

I do think that it’s poor road manners to roll through the stop sign at full speed, particularly on the right side of the road where a pedestrian could conceivably surprise you. More people did that than I would have guessed.

Carl B.
Carl B.
11 years ago

How many dozens of people who did stop were edited out? There was an edit every few seconds. No way to tell from this what proportion do stop.

But does make it very clear that there is no good reason to stop other than the potential for a ticket.

A.K.
A.K.
11 years ago
Reply to  Carl B.

My thoughts too. Who knows what was edited out. For a true, unbiased sample I think you need to film for 5 or 10 minutes, WITHOUT CUTS.

9watts
9watts
11 years ago

What I noticed about the first part of the film is that visibility is really good. The person on a bike can see whether a pedestrian is approaching. No need to have everyone stop when there are so obviously no pedestrians about.

When the man approached the sidewalk, one or two of the folks on bikes could have stopped rather than ignore him, but as I said in an earlier discussion that is a matter of courtesy not safety.

Jacob
Jacob
11 years ago

lol, that guy at the end was hilarious!

dmc
dmc
11 years ago
Reply to  Jacob

ahaha! Yeah. He was extra safe. 🙂

gumby
gumby
11 years ago
Reply to  dmc

would have made fire marshal Bill proud!

dmc
dmc
11 years ago
Reply to  gumby

o.m.g. The more I watch it the more I laugh. I know someone else is finding this man’s genius as hilarious as I!!!

Alan 1.0
Alan 1.0
11 years ago

Jonathon wrote: “At least three of the bicycle operators in the video come to a complete stop (one of them to let someone walk across the crosswalk).”

The only complete stop I saw was the guy clowning for the camera. For the pedestrian, the rider slowed and yielded but did not stop. That still goes to show that yield signs would work just fine as long as traffic (bike and car) respects pedestrian crossings.

kww
kww
11 years ago

I have a few thoughts on this. No.1 is that roundabouts (as opposed to traffic circles) are originally designed to eliminate stop signs and improve traffic flow. There is confusion about what Ladd Circle is. Since there is a stop sign there, it is a traffic circle.

Second, is the law is the law, and I have no sorrow for these cyclists who will get $300+ tickets for blowing through the stop signs. It’s the law – follow it.

Third, one car blowing through a stop sign has enough kinetic energy to kill a pedestrian at even 5-10mph.

Paul Johnson
Paul Johnson
11 years ago
Reply to  kww

It doesn’t matter, traffic circles are no longer an approved traffic pattern in the US. Existing ones are being removed or converted to roundabouts.

Mike Fish
Mike Fish
11 years ago
Reply to  kww

There are moral and immoral laws. There are smart and stupid laws. Use your head! I saw the guys with the cameras when one guy was camped out in the middle. I rolled my eyes, stopped, put my foot down and went on my merry way. If they do a sting there, I think I’ll notice. Total non-issue.

Forseti
Forseti
11 years ago

So this is visual proof that the motorists who complain about bicyclists running stop signs are just complete hypocrites.

And I hope it’s clear to the bike haters that no amount of random stings is going to change the perfectly safe behavior of cyclists who slow and look before entering the intersection. When the law is a joke, you change the law, not keep whining about harmless violations.

middle of the road guy
middle of the road guy
11 years ago
Reply to  Forseti

You are going to base that assertion on one short, edited film at one intersection?

q`Tzal
q`Tzal
11 years ago
Reply to  Forseti

What ultimately proves that these stop signs are superfluous and unneeded is the manner of enforcement: on complaint only.

If it is only enforced when bicycle hating residents complain loudly enough to get a police officer off of productive duty then we have the police force’s tacit admission that there is no danger here.

The video above only serves to show that there is uniform non-compliance and still there is not enough actual danger to warrent police attention until someone whines.

indy
indy
11 years ago

I could setup camera around council crest and see the same noncompliance rates up there. This is unsurprising.

Burk
Burk
11 years ago

I think people are missing the point. There are only two stop signs at that intersection. Clearly the number of stop signs needs to be increased and the problem will sort itself out.

dirt_merchant
dirt_merchant
11 years ago

This video proves nothing. I’ve observed the stop sign near my house, and NO ONE stops completely unless there is another car/bike coming.

There is a great difference in recognizing the spirit of the law (not hitting someone) and the letter of the law (complete cessation of forward movement).

velvetackbar
velvetackbar
11 years ago

I was there, I saw the guy on the lawnchair, even talked to him, and I call bogus, and here is why:

from the video: 44 bicyclists, most not stopping.
4 cars, none stopping.

You see cars in the background all over the roundabout, but no sight of them going into the traffic roundabout.

The only cars you see are those that arrive along with the bicyclist, and I KNOW there were more cars in that circle. I WAS THERE.

I remember seeing some of the cars in the video *myself* (although *I* was edited out of the video–I stopped as I always do)

This video was clearly edited to remove cars.

This video was VERY VERY selectively edited. Show uncut, and I might have some credibility.

jeff
jeff
11 years ago

I saw those guys last night. Rolled by them. came to a complete stop. proceded on my way. I must have hit the edit room floor….

Bob
Bob
11 years ago

Yeah, so???

TonyT
tonyt
11 years ago

A couple points.

Stop signs at roundabouts are like belts with suspenders. Totally pointless.

The other thing is that if we had “speedvision” and were able to see what speed cars were doing, we’d see some pretty blatant disregard for speed limits.

Not that that makes railing a stop sign okay, but the most common outcome of a video like this is the old “cyclists are all scofflaws.”

Slow down, yield to peds, yield to other traffic at stop signs, don’t be a *%^#,

GlowBoy
GlowBoy
11 years ago

Sure looked to me that there were two cyclists in the video who FAILED to yield to a pedestrian.

I also couldn’t help but notice a number of times in the video where a cyclist at least bothered to slow down quite a bit — only to be passed by a faster cyclist on the left. That, and “12-mph bikes nervously jockeying with 20-mph bikes in the circle itself,” show how getting orderly flow out of cyclists is like herding cats.

I completely agree that asking cyclists to always STOP for this very low-traffic circle is completely ridiculous, and that the the STOP signs need should be replaced by YIELD signs, along with making the other design changes to increase deflection prescribed by PBOT. But we DO have a behavior problem too.

Fortunately, better roadway design can help improve the behavior.

BURR
BURR
11 years ago
Reply to  GlowBoy

Neither enforcement nor engineering will improve behavior here, but education might.

John Mulvey
John Mulvey
11 years ago
Reply to  BURR

How ’bout we try enforcement sometime?

BURR
BURR
11 years ago
Reply to  John Mulvey

already done and failed

John Mulvey
John Mulvey
11 years ago
Reply to  BURR

Occasional stings done for PR purposes are not the same as real, consistent enforcement.

BURR
BURR
11 years ago
Reply to  BURR

real, consistent enforcement should be done where there is a documented safety problem, and not because a bunch of NIMBYs have their panties in a wad over a non-issue

A.K.
A.K.
11 years ago
Reply to  BURR

I agree with BURR… I’d rather see real, constant police enforcement in the neighborhoods which are having all the SHOOTINGS right now, rather than the nice, safe ones where all those crazy outlaw cyclists are causing so many problems…

bjorn
bjorn
11 years ago
Reply to  BURR

The only failure was that enforcement resources have ever been allowed to be wasted in Ladd’s addition. It is arguably the safest place in the entire city to cross a street. At least 2 people have been killed trying to cross Sandy within a mile of my house in the last year, to my knowledge no one has ever died in any traffic related incident anywhere within Ladd’s, let alone at the central traffic circle. Enforcement resources are far below what we need in this town and so they need to be targeted at the areas where people are actually being hurt and killed due to non-compliance, not at the areas where a couple of kooks with video cameras scream the loudest.

Psyfalcon
Psyfalcon
11 years ago
Reply to  GlowBoy

Isn’t the law still that you have to be proceeding through a crosswalk to signal that through traffic needs to yield?

He was standing back from the curb, two went through, he stepped to the curb, and the cyclist yielded. Can’t see the violations there.

Chris I
Chris I
11 years ago
Reply to  Psyfalcon

You have to break the plane by placing a part of your body in the roadway. Thus, no one failed to yield in this case.

Spiffy
Spiffy
11 years ago
Reply to  Chris I

exactly… the only cyclist that legally needed to yield did so…

GlowBoy
GlowBoy
11 years ago

Thanks, velvetackbar, for the real-world info on how this video was put together. If they’re editing out all the cyclists who did stop, then the whole video is BS.

The noncompliance rate in the video did seem a bit higher than I usually observe.

So now one of us needs to go to Ladd Circle with a video camera, and record all the CARS who fail to stop for the stop sign. (I.e., almost ALL of them).

velvetackbar
velvetackbar
11 years ago

TO BE CLEAR: I didn’t video tape the circle so I have nothing to compare it with.

There is no justification for a claim that they edited out all the cyclists who stop –that clearly is not the case, given the presented video–at least one cyclist was on video coming to a complete stop.

This just doesn’t jibe with my memory of what was going on, nor the facts presented elsewhere in the video itself.

ac
ac
11 years ago

the video is a fail if the director wanted to edit for cyclists unsafe behaviours. it shows a pretty safe intersection and argues for a dumb stop sign location.

that guy at the end with the over the top stop is freakin awesome…i almost spit my drink over my monitor

Bob R.
Bob R.
11 years ago
Reply to  ac

I have no idea how that particular video was edited, but I can suggest how to do it in an unbiased fashion (should anyone care to) … I made a similar video for my own neighborhood association to document the interactions of ALL road users at the NE 60th Ave. MAX station. The camera was set up at an angle where all activity could be seen from multiple directions (may not be possible with a circle, of course), with a wide angle lens, and then run for a full hour without interruption.

Counts were made of all users, and then a spreadsheet was prepared documenting the quantity and nature of “violations” and “risky behavior” for each travel mode. An edited highlight reel was given to PBOT along with the spreadsheet, but it was made clear that if anyone (with a need) wanted to inspect the full-length unedited version, it would be made available.

SJ
SJ
11 years ago

What’s embarrassing is that there are stop signs at all–typical American answer to what should be a simple traffic roundabout. Go to Spain, France, or Italy and watch as everyone–from slow grandmothers on scooters to fast playboys in Ferraris and retirees on bikes–negotiates traffic circles (roundabouts) with no help from lights or stop signs. At best, there are a few directional signs. In a rental car, I loved it: the freedom to take responsibility for my own safety while not wasting time or gas stopping and waiting. And these were fairly high-traffic areas. Ladd’s?! You can see traffic coming at relatively slow speeds for, what, 60, 80, 100 feet? Cars roll, bikes blow through. Legal? No. Right in the sense that it is asinine to stop in the first place? Yes.

Adams Carroll (News Intern)

I don’t think it really matters if the video was edited. Sure, maybe more people actually stopped and they were edited out of the footage… but it seems clear that the video was taken in the same general time period and there are a lot of illegal movements going on.

To me, the point is that there are so many people not stopping.

Psyfalcon
Psyfalcon
11 years ago

The point? We all know stop sign compliance is low.

No one got run over, no one buzzed a pedestrian, no one terrified a group of children walking to the park. Why can’t that be the point?

Adams Carroll (News Intern)
Reply to  Psyfalcon

there can be more than one point psyfalcon. i think the ones you make are important as well.

BURR
BURR
11 years ago

but how do we know that if the video is highly edited? A devils advocate could easily say that they edited out the 90% of cyclists who did stop.

velowocky
velowocky
11 years ago

Take out the stops since they aren’t working and focus on speed control and sight improvement at the cross walks. Mandate a 10 or 15 mph zone approaching and navigating into and around the circle and enforce it.
I really think cyclists (most) would respond by reducing their speeds and with some higher visibility enforcement and pedestrian watch signs the problem, such as it is, should nearly disappear.

Paul Johnson
Paul Johnson
11 years ago
Reply to  velowocky

There’s no need to reduce the speed to alleyway or slower speeds here, and I’m pretty sure ODOT (who sets the speed limits) agrees on that point.

BURR
BURR
11 years ago
Reply to  Paul Johnson

the posted speed limit on SE Ladd heading southeast towards the circle is 20 MPH

BURR
BURR
11 years ago
Reply to  BURR

when cyclists aren’t present most motorists not only run the stop sign but also exceed the speed limit here

OnTheRoad
OnTheRoad
11 years ago
Reply to  BURR

Cyclists = movable traffic calming devices.

velowocky
velowocky
11 years ago
Reply to  Paul Johnson

The need to reduce speed is based on the fact that so many cyclists are proceeding through way too fast- putting other riders, pedestrians and auto traffic at unnecessary risk. Many people have commented that the speed differential between bikers is what is dangerous. In a lot of that footage it looks like if a bike had stopped at the sign they could have easily been run over by other cyclists from behind. It’s not like it would cost anyone more than a couple seconds to slow to ‘alleyway’ speeds.

was carless
was carless
11 years ago

Ironically, except for the stop signs, this is one of the safest, best-engineered traffic intersections in the State of Oregon.

Although the vegetation could be trimmed back near where the sidewalk and crosswalk meet, so that bikes and cars are less likely to run peds over,

MeiLin Miranda
11 years ago

As it happens I had “Waltz of the Snowflakes” on my iTunes as I watched it, and it synched up in unexpected ways.

This is nothing I haven’t seen every single time I’ve ridden through Ladd’s, which is often. Cars are as great offenders as bikes. I stop because it would be my luck to get caught, though I don’t always put my foot down, preferring to teeter precariously. High speed bikers blowing past me and the stops *have* been dangerous in those situations, especially since I can neither see nor hear them until they’re practically on top of me. A little courtesy to slower bikers please, guys.

I agree with the yield signs, btw, and maybe some signage reminding ALL traffic that pedestrians have the right of way.

spare_wheel
spare_wheel
11 years ago

traffic interacting safely and efficiently! whats not to like?

John Mulvey
John Mulvey
11 years ago

Chris I
Using your logic, there should be a stop sign at every crosswalk. That is not why we have stop signs.

Not every crosswalk, just the ones where painted stripes haven’t been effective in ensuring a reasonable level of compliance.

Compare the circle at Glisan and 39th: Ever tried crossing the street on foot? Pretty dangerous, but do-able. How about if we took out the stop signs? Your argument seems to be that the danger to pedestrians would be no worse with or without the signs, and I happen to disagree.

Requiring cars and bikes to come to a stop allows them to see pedestrians trying to cross. Eliminating the stopsigns would ensure that the right-of-way of pedestrians will be ignored.

Paul Johnson
Paul Johnson
11 years ago
Reply to  John Mulvey

Glisan and the street formerly known as 39th Avenue haven’t ever intersected. But both do intersect Coe Circle.

John Mulvey
John Mulvey
11 years ago
Reply to  Paul Johnson

That’s helpful, Paul.

Chris I
Chris I
11 years ago
Reply to  John Mulvey

Interesting that you mention that one, because I live right by it. I typically cross 39th a few blocks south on Couch, where there is a painted crossing. I would say the 2/3 to 3/4 of the cars stop immediately when they see me about to step out. When I’m riding, it’s probably 20% (they aren’t required to stop for bikes). Is there something fundamentally different about the traffic circle from a driver’s perspective? It seems to me that drivers around here are pretty good about stopping for pedestrians, in general.

craig
craig
11 years ago
Reply to  Chris I

Road users ARE required to stop for any legal user of the crosswalk (marked or unmarked, whether they’re on foot, bike, scooter, etc. They are NOT required to stop for bikes that are in the traffic lane waiting at a stop sign.

chad
chad
11 years ago

“Upon review of the situation, PBOT decided it shouldn’t be there and they took it out. The sky has not fallen.” Ha, nice one, Jonathan. I doubt the sky would fall if these stop signs are removed or replaced. There are many traffic circles or roundabouts (whatever you want to call them) in Portland that have stop signs when they are not called for (39th and Glisan comes to mind.) Maybe the city needs to review all of them and take appropriate action so there is consistency.

kevin
kevin
11 years ago

I think the most important lesson to take from that video is that bikes outnumber cars 10-1 in that area.

That’s the point the (selective) editor was trying to make, right?

Jim Lee
Jim Lee
11 years ago

Ha!

ALWAYS I pull a traffic stand there just to obstruct the “I’m too good to stop” hipsters freewheeling on through. Surprises the heck out their precious little egos too.

Also, ALWAYS i stop there when riding the No. 10 bus. Somehow the No. 10 bus got relegated to the cutting room floor. There is a bus stop there, people!

Jonah
Jonah
11 years ago

Stopping for pedestrians is a city-wide issue, not something that is an anomaly in Ladd’s. We should place some cameras on any street in Portland and see how many cars drive by before a pedestrian asserts themselves enough to get a chance to cross.

John Mulvey
John Mulvey
11 years ago
Reply to  Jonah

And bikes?

Spiffy
Spiffy
11 years ago
Reply to  Jonah

whenever I assert myself after waiting for a dozen cars to go by I get buzzed, honked at, and flipped off… I think bikes get more respect…

John Landolfe
11 years ago

The City has actually been very proactive in taking out unnecessary stop signs on major bike routes (hello Going St!) if we ask nicely and make a good case.

Whenever people complain to me about how many bicyclists blow stop signs, I note that it’s probably within the ratio of number of drivers who drive after a couple or more drinks. That pretty much silences the “bicyclists don’t obey traffic law” argument. Though, that also demonstrates how low compliance is, on its own, not a good argument for change.

Paul
Paul
11 years ago

The crosswalk is in the wrong spot for a regular roundabout. It should should be painted further from the approach, not along the circle where it is now. Yank the stop signs and move the crosswalks back and I don’t see any problems happening.

Scott Batson
Scott Batson
11 years ago
Reply to  Paul

More info on modern roundabouts: Visit http://www.ksu.edu and http://www.fhwa.dot.gov has a video about modern roundabouts that is mostly accurate (http://tinyurl.com/3hjrqus ).

Ken
11 years ago

Hey Everyone,
I shot the video Monday June 27 between 4:45 and 5:45 PM. It’s for a story that will be published on Neighborhood Notes. We’re having a little technical issue and waiting until that is resolved before posting.

The video is definitely edited. If I included all the video clips I took yesterday the video would be too long. But I was careful to include behavior that was in line with what I saw. I’m comfortable stating that it is an accurate representation of yesterday’s behavior. I included the cars because I wanted to show all behavior at the intersection. Some cars did come to a complete stop, but they were in clips that were edited out.

The video was not one single recording because I was using a point and shoot camera that does video. It can record 10 minute clips. This was not meant to be a scientific study, but rather to illustrate the issue an give a reasonable representation of behavior. I had one hour to shoot and then a couple hours to edit to meet a deadline.

There was another person shooting video from the center of the circle. He is a neighbor who is documenting the behavior.

I hope that clears up any questions about how this was put together. Look for our story later today!

velowocky
velowocky
11 years ago
Reply to  Ken

Appreciate your reply. Look forward to reading your story.

Spiffy
Spiffy
11 years ago
Reply to  BURR

the article talks about safety but there’s no safety issue at Ladd’s… I’m confused…

Paul Johnson
Paul Johnson
11 years ago
Reply to  Ken

Not sure 10 or 15 minutes would be too long to watch. Plus, you can always speed up the video for a time lapse.

Ken
11 years ago
Reply to  Paul Johnson

The complete set of clips is closer to 35 minutes. I thought about speeding it up but then you can’t judge the actual speed at which bikes travel through the intersection. Again, it’s not scientific, I’ll leave that to PBOT or others, I wanted to illustrate the issue for our readers on Neighborhood Notes who aren’t familiar with the intersection and reasonably represent the behavior at the intersection. Thanks!

Paul Johnson
Paul Johnson
11 years ago
Reply to  Ken

The idea of showing the complete footage isn’t to be more scientific, but to demonstrate good editorial faith.

dachines
dachines
11 years ago

The circle is small beans in the Ladd’s area when it comes to bad or potentially dangerous bike behavior. The real problem is at SE Harrison and SE 20th.

It seems that people misread the signage on SE Harrison (heading west) as it intersects 20th. There is nothing about that signage that says that it is okay for bikes to not stop, and unlike the circle, not stopping here is dangerous. Yet bikes roll this stop sign all of the time and often at a decent clip.

(The signage only indicates that bikes do not have to make the mandatory right turn that motor vehicles must make, but stopping is still mandatory.)

http://maps.google.com/maps?q=portland,or&hl=en&ll=45.508456,-122.645053&spn=0,0.002427&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=39.507908,79.541016&z=19&layer=c&cbll=45.508483,-122.644924&panoid=cJP87K9vMnytYZwZ6WMLoQ&cbp=12,311.95,,0,4.67

dan
dan
11 years ago
Reply to  dachines

It is discourteous to other road users and foolish (depending on strangers’ reflexes and goodwill to protect you from harm) to roll through the stop sign at SE 20th and Harrison. I’m surprised because I don’t see that behavior very often. In any case, it’s likely to be self-correcting, as I suspect that if you make a habit of running this one, the error of your ways will be brought home to you rather forcefully.

BURR
BURR
11 years ago
Reply to  dachines

have you ever paid attention to how many motorists don’t stop at SE 20th and Harrison?

or wondered why PBOT in it’s infinite wisdom didn’t line the westbound curb cut in the divider at SE 20th and Harrison up with a cyclist’s normal line through that intersection and instead off set the curb cut though the divider requiring cyclists there to make a dangerous maneuver in the intersection and turn on top of a potentially slippery metal manhole cover?

dan
dan
11 years ago
Reply to  BURR

I assume the offset is to encourage cyclists to stop or at least slow down. I commute on an MTB, so I can ride over the median strip comfortably enough, but I usually don’t because I don’t really have trouble with the offset. I’ve never noticed the need to turn on a manhole – I would agree that’s a potential issue if a lot of people are going down there.

Tomas Quinones
11 years ago

PLEASE put in either Yield signs or “Except bicycles” at these intersections. The amount of time and effort put into this “conflict” must be ridiculous. We have more pot-holes to fix than a handful of signs at an intersection that has seen very few accidents.

How about addressing the problem of wet street-car tracks?

Corndog
Corndog
11 years ago

The sad thing is you could do this at just about any stop sign in the city and you will see cars roll through these stops all day long. I ride a bike everyday, including commuting through Ladds and in my 15 mile round trip commute I see cars breaking the law on every trip. The fact is nobody obeys the rules, pedestrians cross on red, cars run stop signs and red lights and bikes do the same. At least if I bike runs an intersection and hits someone, they don’t die.

I am pretty sure at least 3 days a week I see a car run the stop sign at 20th ad harrison as I am entering into Ladds. I get so annoyed by motorist who love to complain about bikers running stop signs but don’t seem to ever notice all the speeding cars, running lights and stop signs.

Shetha (aka NIMBY)
Shetha (aka NIMBY)
11 years ago

I think it may be a more behavioral thing than an infrastructure thing. In my mind, the real failure is that road traffic is one way, but foot traffic is 2 way. Road users look left, see approaching traffic, and speed through the intersection to get into the flow. I’ve been buzzed MANY times (with 3 kids in tow) only to have the person apologize as they zoom past. They never even saw us there. So, when I want to cross, I yield. Unless I’m certain the cross traffic will stop. My kids aren’t of the age where they can gauge speed and determine whether or not it’s safe to cross. That’s where our discomforts lie. I agree with JM that it shouldn’t take a crash to define a need for change.

Kris
Kris
11 years ago

Maybe the neighborhood assoc should apply with PBOT to have HAWK beacons (High-Intensity Activated crossWalK beacons) installed at those spots where most bikes and cars enter and exit the traffic circle.

David Parsons
11 years ago
Reply to  Kris

If I lived in Ladd’s addition and discovered that the city was going to make it more difficult for me to cross the streets in my neighborhood, I would have kittens. Why should the onus be on the pedestrian to notify road users of their presence?

John Mulvey
John Mulvey
11 years ago

Shetha:
You’re not a NIMBY for advocating for better pedestrian facilities in your neighborhood. Some people carelessly toss that label around. You can and should fight for livability in your neighborhood because nobody else will.
-John