Observations at Lynn St. & the Custis

[mstone]

@dasgeh 64354 wrote:

I never said it means “walk”. There are signs that mean other than “walk” and “don’t walk”. The VA Code could have been written to preclude such possibilities, but wasn’t. There also is no instruction manual printed on the side of that signal.

There’s at least one state where blinking red means you can enter the crosswalk, but it’s strictly illegal to be in the crosswalk on steady red. So if you start on blinking red and don’t make it across by steady red, you are violating the law. That’s not “don’t walk”. That’s not even “don’t start”.

In the places where I have seen instructional signs, they indicate that walking person = “walk”; blinking hand = “don’t start”; steady hand = “don’t walk”. Even in that case, blinking hand is different than “don’t walk”. I don’t know the authority for those signs, but as we all know, it’s perfectly possible for municipalities to put up signs that have no legal authority.

Note that the code’s definition of don’t walk says that people already starting can complete, so there’s no conflict between that and the blinking hand. We’re only talking about VA.

You’re basically arguing that there should be something else because you don’t want there to be just two states. I think the fact that assembly has chosen not to add additional states (the last revision was in 2008, so they obviously knew the possibility existed) shows clear legislative intent. The record of the work at the federal level which resulted in the decision not to recommend model legislation recognizing special rules for countdown timers can also arguably show some intent (the issue was raised and discarded with reason).

For what it’s worth, I think the entire concept of a blinking red is idiotic. It should be walk right up until it’s “don’t walk” and there shouldn’t be a blink. There should be a countdown timer so people know how much time they have and can make an informed judgment. All the hand-wringing about needing a blinking red so that people don’t get run down in intersections is absurd; instead, we could just make it clear that drivers aren’t allowed to run down people in crosswalks and simplify things immensely. Simple thought exercise: if someone is slower than average and can’t make it across the road during the cycle, is it ok to run them down? If “no”, the blinking red cycle is a waste of our time.

[oldbikechick]

I have no idea about the code and whatnot, but for what it’s worth, after reading this thread, I’ve now decided not to cross if it’s blinking. I’ll probably get rear-ended by a cyclist now. This morning I decided not to push through with about 5 seconds left and as it happened, no cars turned right since the drivers apparently thought that I would cross. They waited until I put my foot down.

[baiskeli]

@mstone 64454 wrote:

Well, I think everyone else was talking about the right turners. I rarely have any idea what you’re taking about but sometimes I forget to drop it.

I thought I was pretty clear. And I don’t think everyone else was talking about turns either. And I think you’re still not clear about what I’m talking about.

Miscommunication happens. I don’t mind that. I’ll work to clarify. Please don’t place all the blame for it at my feet though.

[Author]

Posts