PBOT announces location of first distracted driving enforcement action

Posted by Jonathan Maus (Publisher/Editor) on July 14th, 2011 at 5:46 pm

The City of Portland has announced the first location for enhanced enforcement of distracted driving. PBOT will work with the Portland Police Bureau to conduct an “enforcement mission” at the intersection of SW Barbur Boulevard, SW Taylors Ferry Road, and SW 41st Avenue this coming Wednesday (7/20).

The effort is part of the “StreetSmart: Go Safe” campaign, that PBOT launched last month.

PBOT data shows that this intersection is a high-crash location. It was also selected because of citizen complaints of motor vehicle operators disobeying the “No Turn on Red” and driving in bike lanes to maneuver around stopped cars.

The enforcement action will take place from 5-7:00 pm. PBOT has also unveiled a new website for the StreetSmart campaign.

This heightened enforcement effort comes as a just-released Federal Highway Administration study showed that two distracted driving enforcement — when coupled with an awareness campaign — showed significant reductions in cell phone use and texting while driving.

See PBOT’s new StreetSmart website for more details on this campaign.

Front Page, News
distracted driving

North St. Bags moving to larger location in Hawthorne District March 6, 2018
What you should know about Oregon's new distracted driving law October 16, 2017
Universal Cycles will close Portland retail location and move to Beaverton January 6, 2020
PBOT announces early end to Better Naito September 4, 2018

NOTE: We love your comments and work hard to ensure they are productive, considerate, and welcoming of all perspectives. Disagreements are encouraged, but only if done with tact and respect. If you see a mean or inappropriate comment, please contact us and we'll take a look at it right away. Also, if you comment frequently, please consider holding your thoughts so that others can step forward. Thank you — Jonathan

28
Leave a Reply

newest oldest most voted

Guest

Chris I

Is there a law or policy saying they have to announce these activities? Seems like it ruins the element of surprise…

Guest

Jonathan Maus (Publisher/Editor)

No law, it’s just their adopted policy. They say the point isn’t to give out a bunch of tickets, but rather, to raise awareness of the issue.

Guest

marshmallow

These enforcement actions are supposed to raise awareness among all drivers everywhere, not just the ones that happened to get caught at that spot on that day — like how they announce for ladd circle. Sure it’d be nice to see folks get surprise tickets, but that wouldn’t help up public safety and magnify compliance, though the effectiveness of these actions is debatable.

Guest

Bike Right

Drivers? As in anyone operating a vehicle that moves? I rely daily, not to mention heavily that all vehicles big and small out on the cities roads to comply with the ordinances concerning the movement of traffic. So far the more distracted are the other cyclist around me with their South Park like “I Can What I Want!” attitude. Ok fine but please don’t hit me you silly scofflaws! Bike Right.

Guest

captainkarma

A. there will still be no shortage of fools getting caught
B. I think it helps make a more airtight case against those who would say “entrapment”.

Guest

John Mulvey

I’m not sure what people think “entrapment” means, but I’d love to witness some poor sap trying to raise the issue in court.

“As I approached the corner, the officer was standing by the side of the road, writing tickets for every car that ran that stopsign. His lights were flashing and there were orange flags and a big sign that said “Enforcement Action.”

I also read about the action in the paper that day and saw it on tv the night before and heard about it at work.

Believe me, Judge Judy, I normally stop at that corner, but that day, the Police Bureau FORCED me to blow right through it!”

Guest

marshmallow

Someone should be standing at the previous corner with a phone strapped to their head with a giant rubber band and swerving all over the place as a pantomime driver.

Guest

Hugh Johnson

I’m just glad they are doing SOMETHING. I still see so much phone abuse in cars.

Guest

captainkarma

The only way for this to be effective is for it to happen regularly, like at least once a week every week. That’s not even enough. People will just play the odds if they don’t believe they will be busted consistently. It’s just so hard to give up that constant chatting about who said what to who, what are you going to wear tonight, and such more important stuff than my life or permanent injury. Sigh. Cell co’s need to go back to charging by the minute, that *might* help, a little.

Guest

John Mulvey

Rampant lack of compliance breeds even more noncompliance.

Guest

simon

ride your bike by to show support

Guest

marshmallow

You’re nutz. That intersection is dangerous. Didn’t you read the memo?

Guest

Jeff

“…and driving in bike lanes to maneuver around stopped cars.”

In Portland!? Never, I refuse to believe it.

Guest

are

hey, i am going to be biking through that very intersection tomorrow afternoon. a few days early, but maybe someone will be driving with a cell phone just for me.

Guest

Jack

The idea of an announced enforcement action just seems to reinforce the idea that on any other day, you’re probably not going to get a ticket for breaking the law.

Still glad they’re doing something, but I’ve yet to have anyone explain to me why we can’t greatly ramp up enforcement of all traffic laws at all times. Shouldn’t the enforcement effort pay for itself through citations? And if not, shouldn’t we just raise the price of the citations to accurately reflect the crime’s cost to society?

Guest

wsbob

“…Still glad they’re doing something, but I’ve yet to have anyone explain to me why we can’t greatly ramp up enforcement of all traffic laws at all times. …” Jack

What’s to explain? It costs money to use cops to work these details. This whole arrangement of rules of the road and traffic regulations hasn’t been set up so cities can assign police officers to issue citations in some kind of far fetched revenue generating scheme.

Communities pretty much have got to have some kind of roadway system. In order for that system to keep from turning into some kind of hell, people have to consciously, voluntarily make a decision to at least try to minimize distractions to to safe road use while they’re using the road, whether it be in a vehicle, on a bike, or on foot.

Presently, human cops in cars doing these details seems to be one of the most practical ways to get the reminder out to road users, that they’ve got to try not allow themselves to be distracted. Maybe in future, in-car monitors will keep an eye on people’s activities as they drive their vehicles. Visual display panels and audio might be activated when the monitors see the people stuffing their face with burgers, yakking on the cell phone, whacking the kids, generally being distracted.

The ‘On-board Friend’ would announce ‘Knock that off and keep your eyes on the road!’. If that warning didn’t work… .

Guest

Jack

I know enforcement costs money. What I’m asking is why can’t that enforcement effort pay for itself. If we as a society decide that speeding should be illegal, why can’t we employ as many people as it takes to enforce that law, and then set the price of a speeding ticket high enough to pay for that enforcement?

Your response is the response I often get, “enforcement is too expensive.” But, no one ever explains why we can’t set the price of citations to match the cost of enforcement. That way it doesn’t cost anything for the law-abiding public and we all get the safer streets we desire.

Guest

wsbob

“…What I’m asking is why can’t that enforcement effort pay for itself. ..” Jack

I believe that basically, the idea of adjusting citation amounts to directly cover costs of enforcement, is contrary to the purpose of traffic law enforcement. With citation amounts, all we, as a society, community, are seeking to do, is encourage people using the roads, to become more alert, conscientious, responsible drivers, bikers, and walkers. That’s so our roads can be part of a livable, usable community, instead of something like roads in the movie, Road Warrior.

Too direct a connection between costs of enforcement and citation amounts allowed could invite corruption and dysfunction into traffic enforcement; example: speed traps that some towns have been found to use as a way of balancing the municipal budge. Some citations are already expensive enough. What is it for blowing a stop sign? ? Between $200-300?

For some people, the citation amount will be part of an adequate deterrent against future violations. Other people have so much surplus money, that the money wouldn’t be any deterrent at all to future violations. Charge the latter more money though, to cover enforcement costs, and watch the cries of ‘UNFAIR’, come forth.

Guest

bumblebee

Jonathan Maus (Publisher/Editor)
No law, it’s just their adopted policy. They say the point isn’t to give out a bunch of tickets, but rather, to raise awareness of the issue.

Then the whole thing sounds like a publicity stunt. “Raise awareness”? How many car owners have been living in a cave?

Guest

marshmallow

Not a cave, a cage. Free bears live in caves, trapped ones in cages.

Guest

Spiffy

So a cop will be sitting on their butt waiting for somebody to come by them breaking a specific law that they feel like enforcing at the time?

Business as usual.

I wish I had a car so I could drive by with a candy cell phone to my head just to prove what a waste of their time this is.

Guest

brian

The FIRST enforcement action for distracted driving. the FIRST! Disgusting. Distracted driving is something that kills many more Americans than terrorism. Wish people would take this more seriously.

Guest

david

why don’t they ever do sting operations for bike theft.

Guest

Roger Averbeck

Anybody posting above actually visited or rode through this intersection lately? If not, come on out to my neighborhood this Wed. July 20, 5 – 7 pm, or any weekday pm peak rush hour, let me know, I’ll meet you there and we can have a good discussion.

For more info on the enforcement action:

http://www.portlandonline.com/transportation/index.cfm?c=40390&a=355663

For a closer look at the intersection:

http://www.portlandmaps.com/detail.cfm?action=Photo&propertyid=&state_id=&address_id=&intersection_id=74834&dynamic_point=0&x=7632831.132&y=659614.514&place=SW%20BARBUR%20BLVD%20%26%20%20BARBUR%20TC%20&city=PORTLAND&neighborhood=MULTNOMAH&seg_id=150950%2C194519&Year=2010&Size=2%27&StreetAnno=no&AddressPoint=No&Taxlots=No

This is right next to the Barbur Transit Center and the excellent Barbur World Foods market, within the “West Portland Crossroads”, a Metro designated town center that remains auto centric; not far from Capitol Hwy, where a fatal pedestrian crash occurred in Sept. 2010.

ODOT & PBOT are cooperating on a safety evaluation of the area, some improvements are complete, others are ongoing or planned such as a curb extension or the location in the air photo (white van using the bike lane as a right turn lane).

roger.averbeck@gmail.com

Guest

Pete

The white van may be using the bike lane to turn, but my understanding of Oregon law is you are supposed to have your wheels as far to the curb as possible on a right turn, and the bike lane may be used for this as long as no cyclists are present. In California the law actually states the distance drivers are supposed to start moving to the right (and merging with cyclists present) and the fog lines become dashed here to denote that. I remember there was debate over changing the Oregon law to mirror the California law when I lived up there because it was such a grey area. When I took Ray Thomas’s class there was discussion on driving in the bike lane – it is technically not illegal.

Can anyone in the know correct me or add insight? Thx.

P.S. I like the way it works here in Cali, actually. The dashed merge lines seem to add legitimacy to me merging or taking the lane when approaching a red light to allow drivers to turn to the right of me. In Oregon I would sometimes get honked at (once told to “get on the sidewalk”) when doing that. Here it seems part of normal traffic flow to ride nearer or on or even over the fog line at right turns, an assertion technique that seems to reduce right hookage (in my experience anyway).

Guest

wsbob

“The white van may be using the bike lane to turn, but my understanding of Oregon law is you are supposed to have your wheels as far to the curb as possible on a right turn, and the bike lane may be used for this as long as no cyclists are present. …” Pete

Here’s what I understand: Oregon’s laws relating to use of bike lanes do not allow people operating motor vehicles to merge into bike lanes as part of a right turn maneuver. That’s why Oregon’s bike lanes, as they approach intersections, are solid rather than dashed. An interest in reducing the possibility of right hooks is why Oregon doesn’t have the dashed bike lanes at intersections that Cali has decided to use.

In Oregon, when the proposed design of a bike lane ending at an intersection poses a significant problem for persons operating motor vehicles in negotiating right turns, traffic engineers will end the bike lane some distance back from the intersection, accompanied by signs informing road users ‘Bike Lane Ends’. This traffic management strategy has some problems…it means people riding bikes have got to go through the process of merging into the main travel to travel through the intersection or lead up to a right turn.

I did a very brief search to find a Ray Thomas/Swanson-Thomas-Coon article that touches on what you’re thinking of (it’s an old article…’98, but info may still be valid):

http://www.stc-law.com/bikelanes.html

He cites the following Oregon statute:

ORS 811.440 provides as follows:

A person may operate a motor vehicle upon a bicycle lane when:
(a) Making a turn;
(b) Entering or leaving an alley, private road or driveway; or
(c) Required in the course of official duty.
An implement of husbandry may momentarily cross into a bicycle lane to permit other vehicles to overtake and pass the implement of husbandry.

Guest

wsbob

Okay…after having posted, and looked at the ORS again, let me step back a bit from what I just wrote.

ORS 811.440 in part, says: “A person may operate a motor vehicle upon a bicycle lane when:
(a) Making a turn; …”

So that wording is vague enough to perhaps allow people to interpret that it allows people operating motor vehicles in the process of right turns, to cut a radius across the bike lane where it meets the intersection.

Personally, I’d disagree with such an interpretation. If there’s a solid line, motor vehicle operators are supposed to stay out of the bike lane in a road-to-road turn. Interesting: (a) may be associated with another vague element of Oregon law having to do with the presence/question of existence of bike lanes in intersections, where bike lanes don’t have lines indicating presence.

So if, as I imagine many people do, it’s assumed that bike lanes exist in intersections, motor vehicle operators could “…operate a motor vehicle upon a bicycle lane when: (a) Making a turn; …”, in a road-to-road situation…in the intersection itself. Not though, across the solid line of the bike lane on the road they’re traveling prior to the intersection.

Guest

Paul Johnson

Glad to see they’re finally doing something about driving while Californian, even if it does seem a tad bit “too little too late”

PBOT announces location of first distracted driving enforcement action

Related Posts

28
Leave a Reply

Subscriber Login

Latest Headlines

The Monday Roundup: E-bike grants, #BanWhiteUrbanism, racist traffic signals, and more

‘Better Red’ light rail project includes new bike paths near airport, Gateway

New volunteer program aims to recruit ‘Slow Streets Superheros’

The Gorge is healing with less ‘invasive motor vehicle traffic’

Bike Loud to host Angie Schmitt, author of new book on race, class and pedestrian deaths

Special Sections

Hot Topics

Recently Commented

Upcoming Events (cancelled unless virtual)

PBOT Bicycle Advisory Committee Meeting

Foster Night Ride

Oregon Transportation Commission (OTC) Meeting

Bike Loud PDX July General Meeting

Joint Policy Advisory Committee on Transportation (JPACT, Metro)

Job Listings

Job: Shipping Specialist – Velotech, Inc.

Job: Certified Bike Tech – REI Hillsboro

Job: Shipping Specialist – Velotech, Inc.

Job: Full Time Mechanic – The eBike Store, Inc

Job: Sales Associate – West End Bikes

Job: Bike Mechanic – Vancouver Cyclery

Support Our Work

Upgrade your Inbox

Business Supporters

BikePortland on Twitter

Related Posts

28 Leave a Reply

Subscriber Login

Latest Headlines

Special Sections

Hot Topics

Recently Commented

Upcoming Events (cancelled unless virtual)

Job Listings

Support Our Work

Upgrade your Inbox

Business Supporters

BikePortland on Twitter

28
Leave a Reply