In a significant legal development, the Oregon Court of Appeals has reinstated a $5.9 million lawsuit against the city of Portland, revolving around safety issues at intersections due to parked cars obstructing visibility.
This ruling mandates a reevaluation of how Portland manages parking regulations near intersections, which could lead to increased accountability and changes in public safety measures.
The case stems from the tragic death of motorcyclist Elijah Coe, who suffered severe injuries in a crash in May 2019 and died five days later.
Coe was riding east on East Burnside Street when another driver, unable to see due to parked vehicles, turned into his path.
Attorney Scott Kocher, representing Coe’s estate, argues that the parked cars violated city regulations and state laws prohibiting parking within 20 feet of intersections.
Despite a city code aimed at improving intersection safety, many neighborhood streets lack clear markings indicating parking restrictions, leading to frequent violations.
The appellate ruling brings the lawsuit back to Multnomah County Circuit Court, where the city faces renewed scrutiny over its practices and potential liability.
“This is a game changer,” Kocher emphasized, highlighting the city’s long-standing awareness of visibility problems at intersections and the need for actionable solutions.
The city had previously claimed immunity from liability, asserting to Multnomah Circuit Judge Shelley Russell that it lacked awareness of specific dangers connected to parked cars.
However, the appellate court countered this argument, pointing out that Portland has other options for improving safety, such as enhancing traffic signals or lowering speed limits.
Portland Bureau of Transportation spokesperson Dylan Rivera noted that the city had already made sightline improvements to 350 intersections since 2021, with another 200 projects in the pipeline.
The ruling has the potential to set a precedent, encouraging citizens to pursue legal action for similar safety concerns, potentially leading to a broader reevaluation of city policies around vehicle parking at intersections.
Kocher hopes that the city will explore alternative strategies that don’t compromise much-needed parking spots but still enhance safety for drivers and pedestrians alike.
“Other cities have implemented parking setbacks on a much broader scale to provide safety, and the sky has not fallen,” he stated.
This case underscores the ongoing struggle between urban planning, public safety, and community needs as cities like Portland grapple with maintaining effective transportation systems while ensuring safety for all road users.
The city now faces urgent pressure to address these long-ignored safety issues head-on, facilitating a much-needed dialogue about urban infrastructure and safety regulations.
It remains uncertain whether the city will seek to appeal the appellate court’s decision, but it is clear that Portland’s approach to intersection safety is under significant scrutiny.
As the case moves forward, it highlights a crucial relationship between local government practices and the potential for policy change aimed at preserving life and ensuring safety on the roads.
image source from：oregonlive
