Bike accident at Glebe & Fairfax?

@baiskeli 50883 wrote:

Saw a bike lying next to an ambulance at Glebe and Fairfax this morning. Didn’t see a car that might have been involved, just a bike, which was in the median/island, not the street. Hope our brother or sister is okay. Bike didn’t look damaged so that’s a good sign.

There were a couple collisions last night I heard about on the radio between cyclists and cars, they were reminding folks to be safe and aware or something along those lines. I saw a kid standing near a bike, teenager, car with flashers on, and a cop talking to the two of them at 14th and Courthouse around 7pm. Looked like maybe the car had slowly bumped the bike, but it was hard to tell.

@GuyContinental 50897 wrote:

(Also goes for WOD at Lee/Washington)

I believe that is actually Fairfax/Washington/Lee? The most useless left turn arrow in the DC area. There are almost NEVER any cars turn left off Lee Highway and nothing moves in the intersection for 30 seconds because the Lee/Washington intersection north of I-66 has a left turn arrow for drivers heading north on Lee Highway. At best it should be an on demand arrow, afterall, W&OD trail users don’t get a walk light without pushing a button there.

@consularrider 50899 wrote:

I believe that is actually Fairfax/Washington/Lee? The most useless left turn arrow in the DC area. There are almost NEVER any cars turn left off Lee Highway and nothing moves in the intersection for 30 seconds because the Lee/Washington intersection north of I-66 has a left turn arrow for drivers heading north on Lee Highway. At best it should be an on demand arrow, afterall, W&OD trail users don’t get a walk light without pushing a button there.

Yup that one- I think that it needs a right arrow for the I66 traffic during the existing left and maybe a red arrow during the ped crossing, as is cars and peds pile up during the stupid left cycle. My problem is that WB riders/runners illegally cross and prevent an otherwise safe right on red for the cars (which becomes illegal because of jaywalking peds/riders still count under “no right turn when pedestrians are present”). Then cars can’t get through during the green cycle because of the legit crossers. Later in the walk cycle frustrated cars barely slow down for the right turn- I’ve nearly been squished because of that numerous times.

@GuyContinental 50902 wrote:

Yup that one- I think that it needs a right arrow for the I66 traffic during the existing left and maybe a red arrow during the ped crossing, as is cars and peds pile up during the stupid left cycle. My problem is that WB riders/runners illegally cross and prevent an otherwise safe right on red for the cars (which becomes illegal because of jaywalking peds/riders still count under “no right turn when pedestrians are present”). Then cars can’t get through during the green cycle because of the legit crossers. Later in the walk cycle frustrated cars barely slow down for the right turn- I’ve nearly been squished because of that numerous times.

Um, the cars can’t turn right when there is a “no right turn when pedestrians are present” whenever pedestrians are present, regardless of whether they are jaywalking. In other words, if the pedestrians were simply standing on the corner waiting to cross, the car still could not legally make that turn.

@mstone 50908 wrote:

Um, the cars can’t turn right when there is a “no right turn when pedestrians are present” whenever pedestrians are present, regardless of whether they are jaywalking. In other words, if the pedestrians were simply standing on the corner waiting to cross, the car still could not legally make that turn.

Oh boy- legal semantics wrangling approaching (crosswalk cutouts anyone?)… USDOT refuses to take a stand on the definition of that particularly idiotic sign except to say that its meaning is too ambiguous (http://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/resources/interpretations/2_635.htm) and VA interprets it as it feels like. Frankly, it’s only relevant as another data point on that crappy intersection- ambiguity causes accidents. Riders/peds blundering into that intersection does not help, especially when they then run through SB traffic and leave cars stranded in the intersection (another thing I see daily).

I’m not exactly a relaxed rider in general, but I’ve channeled my inner Dirt and become very zen about afternoons on the WOD. Maple, Gallows, Washington/Fairfax and lights the length of Fairfax blvd in Arlington all get to run their full cycle before I’ll cross. The lack of angst is sort of liberating.

@GuyContinental 50918 wrote:

Oh boy- legal semantics wrangling approaching (crosswalk cutouts anyone?)… USDOT refuses to take a stand on the definition of that particularly idiotic sign except to say that its meaning is too ambiguous (http://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/resources/interpretations/2_635.htm)

Agreed that a simpler restriction (no turn on red ever) would be better, but there’s no political will for that. You take what scraps you can get.

@mstone 50921 wrote:

Agreed that a simpler restriction (no turn on red ever) would be better, but there’s no political will for that. You take what scraps you can get.

Heck, the actual danger there is not from rights on reds but from the rights on green at high speed when the intersection is full of bikes and peds. If I was the mighty hand of traffic I would red arrow on green EB and green arrow on the silly left cycle. Regardless, my original point was that the scofflaws create an extra level of confusion at an already confusing and dangerous intersection.

@mstone 50919 wrote:

It’s really simple: just stop the damn car and wait for the green rather than arguing about semantics.

Why do we need these signs? Because a significant fraction of motorists will blow through the right turn on red while pedestrians are waiting to cross, and then when the light changes, another significant fraction of motorists (already moving) will zoom through on green “because the pedestrian isn’t really in the crosswalk, so I don’t have to stop”. End result: pedestrians never get to cross, or must take a leap of faith and start walking in front of moving cars (possibly moving cars coming from behind them, so there’s no possibility of eye contact). By taking away the turn on red, the pedestrians can claim the crosswalk before the cars get there on the green. Downside? Someone in a car, on exception, might have to stop at a red light to increase pedestrian safety. Boo hoo. Of course, a non-significant fraction of motorists will look for excuses to justify ignoring the sign and blowing through the right turn on red anyway…

Those pedestrians “waiting” to cross Fairfax while South to Westbound right turning cars are trying to mow them down when there is a left turn arrow from westbound Fairfax to SB Glebe are facing a don’t walk sign. Sorry, I don’t see why cars can’t turn right on red in this situation if the pedestrians are not illegally in the crosswalk.