There will be a one-month grace period, during which offenders will get off with a warning. After that, violations are Class C misdemeanors that could result in a $500 fine. Here are some answers to questions about the law.

How will the ban be enforced?

With difficulty. Officers will make stops based primarily on erratic driving, said Austin Assistant Police Chief Al Eells. Beyond that, police will have to catch a driver in the act to make a traffic stop. Because dialing a cell phone can look like texting, an officer will need to watch a driver for a “prolonged” period of time to make sure he’s actually texting, said Cmdr. Stephen Baker, who heads up Austin Police Department’s highway enforcement command.

Moreover, since the violation must also occur while the vehicle is moving, the observing officer essentially will have to be driving alongside a potential offender. Thus, for safety reasons, the opportunity to view driving-and-texting scofflaws will occur mainly in slower, city driving. “It’s going to be a lot of officer discretion,” Baker said.

What about the surfing/scrolling/e-mailing part of the ban: How will that be enforced?

Lightly. It will be difficult to distinguish whether a driver is, say, looking up a contact to dial (legal) or reading e-mail (illegal). “If a person is just holding a cell phone up in front of his face and reading it, we don’t make that stop,” Baker said. “There’s no way we’re going to be taking those to court.”

Will police take my cell phone and read my texts?

While prosecutors say such searches would be legal, Baker said Austin police won’t search anyone’s phone.

What if I’m from out of town and haven’t heard about the law?

Driver beware. Eells said the city will place informational brochures at places such as the airport and convention center. “Will that capture the guy traveling through Austin on I-35? Probably not,” he said.

Will anyone be arrested?

Not unless the driver refuses to sign a citation. A texting violation won’t go on the driver’s record, either.

How big is the problem locally?

Austin police report that since the beginning of the year, there have been 129 serious collisions in which cell phones have been implicated and 12 involving texting while driving.

Why is texting banned and not cell phones?

We’re not ready to give up driving and dialing. This year the Texas Legislature considered more than a dozen bills to restrict driving while chatting, but settled on only one: no cell phone usage in school zones.
“Our cars are different in Texas,” Rep. Joe Pickett, D-El Paso, told The Dallas Morning News in April. “We want to be able to carry guns, spit, chew, call on our cell phones or sharpen our knives while driving.”

Why have any bans?

Driving distractions have always been a problem, said John Lee, who literally helped write the book on the subject: “Driver Distraction: Theory, Effects and Mitigation.” He recently attended a conference where a presenter showed a video of a trucker talking on two cell phones and smoking while steering through a work zone with his knees. The current problem, said Lee, a University of Wisconsin professor, began when cell phones turned into computers. Unlike time-honored distractions such as adjusting the radio or screaming at the kids, texting and surfing mix cognitive, visual and physical demands that make it difficult to drive responsibly at the same time. “On the face of it, I can’t imagine why anyone would try to drive while doing it,” he said. Plenty of people do, though. On Tuesday, the U.S. Department of Transportation unveiled a Web site on to the issue: www.distraction.gov. Starting Wednesday, federal employees will be prohibited from texting while driving government vehicles. Eighteen states and the District of Columbia have banned texting and driving. Four of those bans also include prohibitions on Internet browsing and GPS navigation.

Is texting really dangerous?

Most likely. Stories abound of drivers jabbing at cell phones while drifting in and out of their lane – what police call “pinballing.” Some of the most avid texters – teenagers – are statistically horrible drivers anyway.
That’s why, in addition to the 18 states with outright bans, eight others – including Texas – prohibit young drivers from texting while behind the wheel. In July, a Virginia Tech Transportation Institute study that placed cameras in long-haul truckers’ cabs pegged the risk of texting while driving at 23 times greater than when not texting. A couple of weeks ago, a University of Utah study found that teenagers driving a laboratory simulator had a six-fold risk of crashing when they texted.

Still, “there’s a whole lot we still don’t know yet,” said Anne Fleming, a spokeswoman for the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, a nonprofit research organization funded by insurance companies. For example, she said, though studies show that texting while driving increases risky behavior, that doesn’t necessarily mean more crashes.

She points out similar gaps in cell phone research. Federal statistics show that at any given time, 11 percent of drivers are using phones. The Insurance Institute studied crash records and found a four-fold risk of serious crashes among drivers using phones. Taken together, those findings would suggest a big rise in overall accidents. But, said Fleming, such stats haven’t shown up yet.

Am I part of the problem?

Not according to you. A 2008 American Automobile Association report revealed that 82 percent of motorists rated distracted driving as a serious problem. But more than half also admitted to talking on a cell phone while driving; 14 percent said they texted behind the wheel. Translation: “I’m a perfectly fine driver. The problem is with all the other nuts out there,” said Bernie Fette, public affairs officer for Texas A&M University’s Texas Transportation Institute.

Are other types of drivers prohibited from texting?

Under an emergency order issued in 2008 by the Federal Railroad Administration following several high-profile rail crashes, locomotive engineers cannot text while on duty. “We don’t have a steering wheel in locomotives,” said Connie English, state legislative director of the United Transportation Union of Texas. “But you still have to be observant.”

Don’t other activities distract drivers, too?

Sure. A Virginia Tech Transportation Institute study found 80 percent of all crashes could be linked to driver inattention, which includes distraction and fatigue. The institute has produced a continuum of distractions, from less risky to more, such as: checking your speedometer, talking on your CB radio, reading a book, personal grooming, looking at a paper map and using a calculator.

What about eating?

Potentially hazardous, depending on the comestible. In 2002, Hagerty Classic Insurance, which insures owners of classic and collectible automobiles, analyzed the issue after it kept hearing that “police reported seeing pizza or hamburger splattered all over the cars and accident scenes,” said McKeel Hagerty, the Michigan company’s CEO and founder. Its findings, based on statistics and interviews with law enforcement officials: Foods that spilled easily were more perilous because drivers reflexively try to clean up – particularly owners of collectible cars. No. 1 on the list was coffee. But the top 10 also included barbecue, chili and cream-filled doughnuts. No. 2? Hot soup. “Go figure,” said Hagerty.

How about talking with other passengers?

Distracting, at least for the young and chatty. Virginia Tech’s continuum showed talking to be low-risk. But when Texas A&M’s Texas Transportation Institute used a driving simulator to measure how teenagers drove while using cell phones or chatting with passengers, it found the latter to be more distracting. Why? “The driver was physically turning to talk to the other guys,” Fette said.

Dogs?

Possibly distracting, politically untouchable. In 2008 the California Legislature passed a bill prohibiting drivers from keeping pets on their laps, however, the so-called Paris Hilton bill was vetoed by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger.

Do laws restricting the use of distractible devices work?

Possibly. An October 2009 study by the Insurance Institute concluded that states with cell phone bans showed marked and sustained declines in the rate of use among drivers. That said, many drivers continued to use their phones illegally and others simply might have switched to hands-free devices – which research shows are nearly as dangerous.

Are there better solutions?

Rather than targeting a handful of the endless focus-diverting activities, Lee and others are working to develop in-vehicle sensors which, by tracking head or eye movements, activate an alarm whenever a driver is distracted.

Under Austin’s new law, can I use my fabulous new iPhone app to read the Statesman while driving to work?

Not legally.

Can I continue to read the indispensable print version while commuting?

Yes.

Source: Austin American Statesman

I work in Austin, TX near Metric and Braker. During one of my breaks from work, I made a quick trip to purchase an air compressor from a Craigslist seller. He lived near Lamar and North Loop. On my way back, I was going north on N. Lamar approaching Hwy 183. At the stop light at Morrow street, I was in the left lane. Intending to turn north on 183, I realized that I needed to be in the right lane (the green arrow on the map). So, when the light turned green, I pulled through the intersection, used my turn signal, and smoothly moved over two lanes. There was only one vehicle, several car lengths to the right-rear of me; and, I was never close enough to him to be in any way reckless.

Anyway, in my move to get to the right lane, I drove over the solid white line that delineates the regular lanes from the “exit” lane (where the little red arrow points). I continued on, through the next couple of lights, turning onto the northbound access road. Then, flashing red & blue lights caught my attention. I was being pulled over by an Austin cop. But, for what?! I thought maybe I had clipped through a yellow light at one of the signals or something.

I pulled into the Capital Metro Park-n-Ride, turned off the ignition, turned ON the interior light, rolled my window down, put my keys on top of the cab, and my hands on the steering wheel. When the officer approached, he asked if I knew why I had been pulled over. I said that I did not. “You crossed over the white line back there,” he said. I said, “Huh? Where?” I thought he was talking about a stop limit line at a stop light; but, I never go past those thick white bars. He explained what he was referring to, then told me to sit tight until he came back. While he was gone, I was thinking, “there weren’t any prohibitive white markings back there!” The satellite picture above is a little outdated. Below is a more current view, showing only a single white line, and no chevrons in the wider part where it splits.

So, the cop came back with a citation for “crossed solid white line”. He said he could give me a ticket for “unsafe lane change”, but he was giving me this one because it’d “be a little cheaper”. I thought, “That’s good, because ‘unsafe lane change’ is a legitimate charge. ‘Crossed solid white line’ is NOT!” So, I accepted my ticket for something that isn’t even illegal and went on back to work.

Now here’s a little explanation of what all the different lane markings mean:

The official meaning of lane markings in Texas is not detailed in the Transportation Code. Instead, section 544.001 of the Transportation Code requires that the state adopt a manual that details all the specifics of signs, signals, and markings. The manual that has been adopted is the Texas Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (Texas MUTCD); and, this manual is the “law” when it comes to all traffic control devices, including lane markings. The meaning of the various devices described in the MUTCD is enforceable.

Many people aren’t sure exactly what particular lane markings mean. Heck, some people don’t even know why some lines are white and some yellow! So, here’s a little guide, showing what the lines/markings mean.

So, I’ve plead “not guilty” on my ticket, and am waiting to hear from the court regarding an arraignment date. We’ll see how it goes; and, I’ll keep you updated.

Comments? Post away!

Join the forum discussion on this post - (5) Posts

Call : http://www.ci.austin.tx.us/council/default.htm
E-Mail: http://www.ci.austin.tx.us/council/groupemail.htm
Agenda: http://www.ci.austin.tx.us/council_meetings/public_meetings.cfm

Red light cameras present several constitutional issues (due process, privacy statutes and possibly the 14th Amendment/equal protection clause) and they are ineffective.

• Studies nationwide show rear-end collisions have risen anywhere from 8-81% where implemented, and the drivers who cause the worst collisions are shown to be the least likely to account for the cameras’ presence.
• The programs are open to corruption: private vendors profit from fines levied spawning illegal and unethical measures to increase fines; they have access to private information without any public accountability.
• Prevention is easier and less expensive: instead of lowering yellow light times to increase fines, upping them one second can decrease collisions by 40%!

Red light cameras are: invasive, ineffective and potentially illegal. Don’t let City Council use your money to install cameras that threaten your constitutional liberty.

Prevention is easier and MUCH less expensive. A study by the Texas Transportation Institute reported that adding an extra second of yellow light time can cut accidents by 40%+ (1) . There are other, simple alternatives that don’t violate liberties such as: retiming lights to synch at consecutive intersections, installing counters to visibly display when the light will change, adding an all-red clearance interval (a brief period where the lights in all directions are red), and improving visibility by installing larger lights or metal backers ALL contribute greatly to the reduction of red light-running. (2)

Virginia has already ceased their red light camera programs-banning them based on increased accident rates, and the Florida Attorney General has ruled against them. Many other states have been rejecting the systems in their legislatures.

Unequal application of the law violates our civil liberties. In Texas, the lowering of the camera-issued tickets to a civil fine vs. the criminal misdemeanor of a standard officer-written ticket, risks being in violation of the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment to the US Constitution. The civil charge though, in this case, has the most punitive aspects of a criminal charge (proof of burden, etc.) with none of the protections.

The systems target the car’s owner, NOT the driver, and the government should not have the right to accuse anyone of violating the law if they cannot face their accuser. They are currently suing Davenport, Iowa for being in violation of a state law that requires the identity of drivers receiving a ticket to be proven and have already won similar cases in Minneapolis, MN and Albuquerque, NM.

Reports are showing the systems regularly ticket innocent people: just because a picture of a car has been taken doesn’t mean that the person sent a ticket did anything wrong. California issued nearly $10,000 in bogus red light camera tickets (not including court costs to correct matters).

• A study of Washington, D.C.’s 45 intersections with red-light cameras found injury and fatal crashes climbed 81%, and broadside wrecks — considered among the most dangerous — increased 30%
• From a study of a red light camera intersection in Ft. Collins, CO: 64% more citations were issued but accidents increased of 83%
• Philadelphia showed a 20% increase in accidents at red light camera intersections.
• The Virginia Department of Transportation increased the length of the yellow-light cycle by 1.5 seconds at an intersection with red light cameras resulting in a 94% drop in citations at the intersection. Virginia has ceased use of the cameras.
• In Ft. Collins, an intersection’s yellow light time was lengthened by one second, resulting in a 60% decrease in citations issued, and a 57% decrease in accidents.
• In 2001, Mesa, AZ, lengthened the time for yellow lights by one second, resulting in a 73% decrease in the number of citations issued by red light cameras.

Studies utilized by Council member Kim and proponents that cite either a decrease in accidents or red light running are all traceable to the corporations that produce and market the systems. The multitude of reports showing an increase in rear-end collisions and negligible decreases in red light running are done independently through government and traffic-safety entities.

The U.S. Department of Transportation said in a report: “In many ways, the evidence points toward the installation of red light cameras as a detriment to safety.” Numerous agencies have published findings that cite red light cameras not only increase rear end collisions (driver-panic) but that there are many other proven solutions that would increase safety at intersections for much less money and no room for error, such as increasing yellow light times and installing counters to alert drivers when the light will change. Findings show that people aren’t running red lights because they are choosing to, they are doing it because yellow light times are too short and short yellow light times are the major cause of collisions at intersections! (3)

The Federal Highway Administration, a reluctant proponent of the systems, still advises cities that they should at the least be used in conjunction with other proven measures as a secondary supplement, not as a first, lone fix. As it stands now, there are NO other options being discussed by the City.

Footnotes:

1. For more information: Bernie Fette, TTI Public Affairs Officer, (979) 845-2623, b-fette@tamu.edu
2. National Motorists Association compilation of alternatives
3. US House of Representatives Office of the Majority Leader report

Source: ACLU of Texas – Chapters.

Mayor Bill White defended the use of the cameras, which he has favored, saying they prevented even more wrecks. Critics, however, said that the city-financed study supports their contention that the cameras are more about generating revenue than making streets safer.

Violators photographed running red lights at the 50 intersections monitored by cameras get $75 tickets in the mail. Since September 2006, the cameras have led to at least 387,000 citations and generated more than $20 million in revenue.

“There is no scientific, documented proof that collisions are reduced with the red-light camera program,” said Mike Sullivan, a Houston city councilman who opposes the cameras. “I’ve maintained all along that the program was flawed.”

White said a 40 percent reduction in citations in October compared with the same month a year ago is “proof in the pudding” that drivers are heeding the cameras.

“Our goal is to reduce the number of people who are running red lights,” he said in Tuesday’s online edition of the Houston Chronicle.

“Collisions are going up all over the city,” Bob Stein, a Rice University political science professor and one of the report’s authors, said Monday. “But red-light cameras have held back that increase at approaches where they have been installed.”

The mayor and the study’s authors are recommending more cameras at some intersections for additional research but acknowledged that comprehensive citywide vehicle crash data are not available.

Stein also acknowledged that Houston police figures show that the accident rate is down since 2004 but said those data are unreliable because police don’t file reports on every crash.

Researchers plan to look at insurance industry data to bolster their findings. Those results are expected sometime next summer.

Austin has seven red-light cameras. Police statistics on four of the cameras show that accidents increased at two locations and remained the same at two. Accident information was not available for the other three cameras.

Source: Austin American Statesman

It took only 18 minutes for the camera at 11^th and Interstate 35 to snap a potential red-light runner, according to information obtained by KXAN Austin News.

The camera, operated by a third-party company, was turned on at midnight, May 23rd. In just one week, it captured 80-plus images. Of those images, about 30 have been reviewed by the vendor and the Austin Police Department. Of those 30, only four violations have been mailed out.

KXAN Austin News issued a public information request for this data and the photographs the camera snapped last Friday.

If you run a red light, and the camera catches you, you could expect to see the ticket in the mail in about two weeks, the city says.

In the first 24 hours the camera was turned on, 15 photos were snapped. Those 15 photos then went to the third-party vendor that operates the camera.

The vendor looked at the photos, the city says, and determined eight of the 15 vehicles captured did not actually run the red light.

APD then looked at the seven remaining images and determined four more did not violate the red light.

Of the three left, only one citation was actually issued. The city spokesperson KXAN Austin News spoke with Friday said they are taking a closer look at those final two photos.

The city is still talking with its lawyers regarding our open records request to determine if the images can be released (??), and how.

Admin note: It doesn’t sound like these cameras are very discerning, does it? Lack of accuracy? Multiple officials needed to review pictures? Twelve out of fifteen motorists photographed didn’t really run the red light?? Bad system! And, of course the photos can be released!

Red Light Camera Locations

View Larger Map

Click on camera icon for more information

As of Memorial Day 2008, they’re live, recording violators and sending that information to the city of Austin, so they can mail those unfortunate drivers a little surprise in the mail.

Everyone knows that you shouldn’t “run a red light.” Doing so is VERY dangerous, and can cost you your life — Or, worse yet, the life of someone else. But, just what constitutes a violation, and potential ticket? A little over a week ago, someone poised just that question in a Letter to the Editor of the Austin American-Statesman. The editor chose to publish the question, but offered no comment or explanation! THAT’S helpful!

To answer this question, I refer to a publication that most, if not all, drivers in Texas have studied at one point or another. It’s the standard for driving schools and driver’s education classes all across Texas – the Texas Drivers Handbook. I also will refer to the Texas Transportation Code, Section 544.007 to see what the state of Texas has to say about the subject.

Here’s what the Texas Drivers Handbook has to say about red lights:

Steady red Light

Stop before entering the crosswalk or intersection. You may turn right unless prohibited by law. You may also turn left if both streets are one way unless prohibited by law. You must yield to all pedestrians and other traffic lawfully using the intersection.

Just what exactly does “before entering the … intersection” mean? Well, for clarification, we can refer to Section 544.007 of the Transportation Code. It states:

§ 544.007. TRAFFIC-CONTROL SIGNALS IN GENERAL

(a) A traffic-control signal displaying different colored lights or colored lighted arrows successively or in combination may display only green, yellow, or red and applies to operators of vehicles as provided by this section.
(b) An operator of a vehicle facing a circular green signal[...]
(c) An operator of a vehicle facing a green arrow signal [...]
(d) An operator of a vehicle facing only a steady red signal shall stop at a clearly marked stop line. In the absence of a stop line, the operator shall stop before entering the crosswalk on the near side of the intersection. [...]

So, we can infer from (d) above, that if your bumper crosses either the stop line or the beginning of the crosswalk AFTER the signal has turned red, you have violated the law (unless you’re legally turning right on red). But, what if there is no line or crosswalk? Well, then, it’s just gonna be up to the judgement of the driver and/or the law enforcement officer. I will tell you, though, that if there’s a red light camera installed, there WILL be either a stop line or a crosswalk, or both.

By the way, stop lines and crosswalk rules apply for stop signs as well.

APD is able to devote thousands of hours to traffic enforcement thanks to a federal grant. A half a million dollar grant pays officers overtime to look for speeders and red light runners.

And, it seems, officers have their favorite areas for catching speeders. It’s pretty apparent that the 7300 block of Hwy 290 E is a favorite hot spot. Better watch out, too, if you’re traveling in the 1700 block of Riverside. Do you drive in the 5200 block of E. Ben White, or the 1500 block of W. Anderson Lane? Well, you’re likely to get a ticket in all of those areas if you’re a little heavy footed, or just not paying attention.

Below is a list of the top 20 speeding ticket hot spots in Austin. This list, provided by the Austin Police Department, shows the number of tickets issued in 2007 for the areas listed. As you can see, the first three on the list are really high-profile areas, and are quite likely to be enforced more so than other areas of town.

Be careful out there!

Tickets Block & Street Name

4856 7000-7600 HIGHWAY 290 EAST
2001 1500-2000 RIVERSIDE EAST
1949 5100-5400 BEN WHITE EAST

866 1200-1900 WEST ANDERSON LANE
745 1000-2200 CONGRESS AVE SOUTH
729 8200-8500 MANCHACA ROAD
677 3000 WINDSOR ROAD
674 4000-4900 FM 2222
539 10800-10900 RESEARCH BLVD
511 1400-1800 ENFIELD
477 4300-4500 SLAUGHTER LANE
459 100-400 BRAKER LANE
372 7200-7400 BEN WHITE EAST
350 100 SOUTH 1ST STREET
297 3900-4100 AIRPORT BLVD
290 3700-3900 SPICEWOOD SRPINGS ROAD
270 5300 WESTGATE
254 13000-13800 RESEARCH 183 NORTH
217 2200-2600 BARTON SPRINGS ROAD
205 3700-4000 MANCHACA ROAD

View Larger Map with MORE Austin Speed Traps!

The Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) is using traffic signals to create the level of frustration to a point where the public is forced to accept toll roads. Earlier this month in Austin, TxDOT added an extra traffic signal on State Highway 71 to coincide with the opening of the third segment of the State Highway 130 toll road. Residents interviewed by News 8 Austin complained that the change made already bad traffic much worse on nearby free roads.

“At its worst it’s about a two-hour wait,” Daniel Villegas said. “Traffic just accumulates and accumulates.”

Likewise, those driving on US 183 Liberty Hill are diverted onto a frontage road with a new traffic signal that generates significant congestion that can only be avoided by taking the 183A toll road.

“It has become obvious to me that this whole toll road system has less to do with improving mobility and more to do with lining the pockets of private toll road investors and property developers along the old and new routes,” resident Malcom Terry wrote in a complaint to the Central Texas Regional Mobility Authority in February. “We were sold a bill of goods.”

Often state agencies enter into “non-compete” agreements with private companies that operate toll roads. The provisions of these agreements require not only that nearby competing free roads remain unimproved, but also that various obstacles such as lowered speed limits and traffic signals be used to generate additional congestion, as happened on the Colorado E-470 and Sydney, Australia’s Cross City Tunnel.

Source: (News 8 Austin (TX), 9/27/2007)

“There is a problem here in Austin,” said Austin Communications Director Gene Acuna. The city is planning to activate the cameras during the Memorial Day weekend.  There will be no grace period.

According to Austin Police Department statistics, there were 1,300 accidents as a result of red light running.

Nine intersections will have cameras. But the city won’t say just yet which will be switched on first.

You’ll find them at I-35 and 11th Street; I-35 and 15th street; the northbound and southbound sides of Mopac and Wells Branch; both directions at Lamar and Ben White; Mopac and 290; Riverside and Pleasant Valley Road; and I-35 and MLK.

“The goal of the program has been always has been safety,” said Acuna.

Wayne Krause is Legal Director of the Texas Civil Rights Project.   He doesn’t think red light cameras make us any safer.

“We just had studies come out of England that show that there is no or very little safety advantage to having cameras out there,” he said.

He wonders if we’re giving up our rights for what the city calls safety.

“You really ought to ask the citizens if it’s what they want and whether their security and their rights are at stake,” Krause said.

Motorists we talked to about the city’s red light camera plan had mixed reactions.

“It’s too much surveillance too much big brother”, said motorist Steve Gillus.

Heather Shelby thinks it’s a good idea.

“I stop when it starts to turn yellow and I know a lot of people don’t. It causes accidents and raises our insurance,” she said.

The city will release a PSA on Monday, May 12th.

Travis, who stated he hadn’t had a ticket in well over five years, got a surprise when he was cited for speeding in that area. Then, to add insult to injury, he got another just nine days later, even when he knew about the danger around that area and, “was trying to be careful.” Sorry, Travis.

Also in that area, there are often motorcycle cops along the small feeder roads to MoPac. Such as, westbound Enfield after turning left onto Winsted Lane. This is basically a residential road that is a feeder approaching MoPac. Keep your speed down here, as it is easy to get going too fast in your anticipation of entering the onramp.

Travis, thanks for your tip. Sorry that you’re having to deal with these unfortunate tickets; but, perhaps your experience will help others to avoid the same misfortune. Anyone else that knows of a especially nasty speed trap area, please email us. Even if it’s somewhere outside of Austin, let us know that too! We’re wanting to make the speed trap map as comprehensive as possible.

View Larger Map with MORE Austin Speed Traps!