PSA: Crosswalk Law, stopping pre-emptively

Submitted by EmergencyYoung t3_126omqj in rva

I've noticed this a bit, but the law is to stop at crosswalks when someone is IN the crosswalk, not at the crosswalk.

Stopping preemptively, and also blocking view of them with the size of your vehicle, is going to get someone killed.

HB 1705, Actual bill text: Note the word 'Crossing', not waiting.

> A. The driver of any vehicle on a highway shall yield the right-of-way to any pedestrian crossing such highway by stopping and remaining stopped until such pedestrian has passed the lane in which the vehicle is stopped:

> 1. At any clearly marked crosswalk, whether at mid-block midblock or at the end of any block;

> 2. At any regular pedestrian crossing included in the prolongation of the lateral boundary lines of the adjacent sidewalk at the end of a block; or

> 3. At any intersection when the driver is approaching on a highway or street where the legal maximum speed does not exceed limit is not more than 35 miles per hour.

> B. Notwithstanding the provisions of subsection A, at intersections or crosswalks where the movement of traffic is being regulated by law-enforcement officers or traffic control devices, the driver shall yield according to the direction of the law-enforcement officer or device.

> No pedestrian shall enter or cross an intersection in disregard of approaching traffic.

0

Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

rattylight t1_jea01ql wrote

Thanks- this has always been a bit confusing to me. I'm not exactly sure why there needs to be a law to stop for people in a crosswalk. If you don't stop when someone is already in the crosswalk, wouldn't you kill them? Which is already against the law. So then that leads me to assume that this law means to stop for people who are about to enter the crosswalk.

Before I get downvoted, I'm just trying to understand the purpose of the law.

22

ExtremeHobo t1_jea0cgg wrote

You have to stop if someone is in the crosswalk and not directly in front of you.

For example in Carytown if someone is crossing and in the left lane but you are in the right you can't just wizz by them, you need to stop even though you won't hit them.

16

EmergencyYoung OP t1_jea2wrc wrote

Right, if they are IN the crosswalk, all lanes have to stop, and passing the stopped vehicle is illegal

9

Cactuscouch757 t1_jea68ar wrote

At almost every pedestrian crossing in Richmond you have to be IN the crosswalk(toe over the curb at minimum, but typically a parking space width) just to see traffic around parked cars. Cars should be stopping more often.

12

rockerchyc t1_jeb2pfm wrote

You do not know how many times I could not see a car approaching because of the cars that are parked on the side of the street. I live off of Cary, so I walk or sometimes scoot to classes considering how conveniently close everything is. The worst thing about living in the city without a car is definitely having to worry about the cars as a pedestrian/scooter.

2

FilthDropz t1_jea0kjd wrote

The way I understand it is that it legally establishes right of way to assign fault to the driver in case of an accident.

5

EmergencyYoung OP t1_jea30r4 wrote

It also stipulates that a pedestrian can't ignore traffic, interestingly.

2

foureyeswithbeard t1_jea2gel wrote

From a legal perspective, I think you're correct here but that pedestrian could choose to step into the crosswalk at any point; I think it is totally appropriate to preempt that in a car.

Even if they ARE in the crosswalk and I stop in my car, I would still be blocking the view of them from cars in other lanes; they should be driving slow enough and aware enough to perceive what is happening and react in time.

The onus should be on the folks wandering the city in multi-ton metal boxes to be as safe and cautious as possible.

18

EmergencyYoung OP t1_jea3eg9 wrote

But, The law says the pedestrian can't disregard traffic.

I see pedestrians standing there, who didn't feel comfortable crossing, now feeling compelled to cross busy street, because some guy in a tahoe stopped.

−14

adhforiwnabfit t1_jea4qir wrote

I think the point is that many people don’t know the law. Trust me, I can’t count the amount of times a friend has just jutted out in traffic while saying “don’t worry, they have to stop!”

From the perspective of a driver going through a dense area with lots of walkers, the risk of hitting a pedestrian just seems too great. Even if the law by definition is on your side, is that really going to comfort you if you do hit, injure, or kill somebody?

Also, I think some drivers stop to let people cross simply because there is a line of cars behind them and they think they are being polite.

So yeah, you’re not incorrect, but I really don’t foresee things changing the way they are.

10

Impossible_Bill_2834 t1_jebl2b9 wrote

I agree about the safety aspect, but on the flipside, there are some intersections I would never make it through without a kind soul specifically stopping for me. (Looking at you, Dock Street)

3

EmergencyYoung OP t1_jea5teh wrote

The politeness thing, if the pedestrian isn't ready, or comfortable crossing yet, then they end up crossing before they want to, also out of politeness to the driver who stopped, and maybe disregarding better judgment about traffic flow that day.

−10

rainbowbeluga t1_jeajr95 wrote

Regardless of how legally correct I think this is, I share this opinion—not due to concern over traffic flow but for the safety of the pedestrians. I don’t trust drivers behind me to notice that another car has stopped to let pedestrians to cross. The pedestrians would be semi blind to an adjacent lane because of the stopped car, and a careless, speeding person driving up that lane could easily hit them.

1

foureyeswithbeard t1_jea5m2n wrote

"The drivers of vehicles entering, crossing, or turning at intersections shall change their course, slow down, or stop if necessary to permit pedestrians to cross such intersections safely and expeditiously."

From https://law.lis.virginia.gov/vacodefull/title46.2/chapter8/article16/

And yes, I agree it says that pedestrians should not disregard oncoming traffic, and I agree there is mutual responsibility here, but again, the onus is on the multi-ton vehicle operator because if something bad happens, the potential for damage/death is SIGNIFICANTLY higher at their mass and velocity.

10

Cactuscouch757 t1_jea5tcs wrote

The person going around the Tahoe would be breaking the code you reference. Also the vcu police post a slightly longer version of the code you listed. Their B: says you cannot pass a car stopped at a crosswalk.

5

EmergencyYoung OP t1_jea6ijq wrote

Correct, issue is, especially in some parts of Carytown, is this person just stopped to park? or are they letting someone cross. Because, every few seconds a car is just stopping in Carytown, particularly to make a right, and waiting on that side crosswalk to open up.

−4

I_AM_RVA t1_jebfbvx wrote

This is perhaps the strangest worst take I’ve ever read about something.

9

travelngeng t1_jeady3e wrote

Thank you. I’m no longer in Richmond, but the number of cars that just chill at an intersection when I’m clearly not crossing makes me so uncomfortable as a pedestrian. And they won’t drive even when I wave them on, exasperated.

I don’t want to cross. I don’t trust any vehicle ever as a pedestrian. I wish cars would follow the law and be predictable rather than try to aggressively courteous to the point where it becomes an issue.

8

EmergencyYoung OP t1_jeb9yvw wrote

EXACTLY. I've encountered this 'aggressive kindness' as a pedestrian too and yeah, if I have my kid with me especially, I will cross when I feel safe.

Like going beyond the law, even with good intentions, is literally breaking the law. People don't seem to get that.

2

Clean-Independent129 t1_jebb0c8 wrote

Car=people surrounded by safety equipment and steel/aluminum/car structure material and able to injure/maim/kill humans even at low speeds

Pedestrian=people exposed to the elements, vulnerable to injury/maiming/death from cars/trucks/busses even at low speeds

Sure, traffic should flow and be predictable, but cooling your heels in your comfy car for a few seconds is not a great tragedy. I'd rather people in cars defer to pedestrians whenever possible.

6

EmergencyYoung OP t1_jebc7ut wrote

Of course, but were not talking about cooling ones heals.

Specifically, we are talking about Cars stopping to decide when people are walking, rather than yielding to people walking.

0

Clean-Independent129 t1_jebeb2k wrote

In my neighborhood, as a pedestrian and as a driver, I never assume that any traffic law is being obeyed. I've lived in lots of different places and this is the least predictable area traffic-wise that I have experienced (and I am an early genXer).

2

jeb_hoge t1_jea7j4j wrote

City needs to install crosswalk lights, plain & simple. Saw these implemented around Univ of Mary Washington a few weeks ago.

And I also think pedestrians need to be reminded/encouraged to GO to crosswalks at lights when they're available. I'm guilty of just rambling across a street rather than go to a corner because I didn't want to go 150 feet further and wait for a light to change, but I should know better.

2

EmergencyYoung OP t1_jeba4ta wrote

I think the crosswalk light thing is the actual only solution to this.

2

Impossible_Bill_2834 t1_jebmea1 wrote

Sometimes, the multi lane, multi light crosswalks are even more harrowing. Even a simple intersection like Grove and Thompson? Turning cars never look. People specifically gun it to make it through a red. I look five different ways before crossing there because I have almost been hit there from every direction. I can't even speak about the "crossing" of Thompson/Floyd that's on the highway side. I agree everyone should be predictable and respectful of the ways of the road, but these crossings need major help

2

RVADoberman t1_jec0d15 wrote

So, in heavy traffic, pedestrians are just supposed to stand there indefinitely? Or, they are supposed to risk their lives by actually stepping into the crosswalk (and oncoming traffic) hoping cars will stop?

2

EmergencyYoung OP t1_jec2ht3 wrote

What do you think the law says?

2

RVADoberman t1_jec5d7n wrote

What do you think it says?

0

EmergencyYoung OP t1_jec792d wrote

Well if pedestrian can't disregard incoming traffic, I'd say they would have to wait to cross. If it was that high of traffic, they could wait there indefinitely. Or, they could walk towards a stoplight and using the crossing light, there.

4

vhanudux t1_jea1vca wrote

Thanks! Didn't know that.

1

CarComprehensive1948 t1_jeb1vas wrote

“wElL OfFicEr, hEr Toe MaY hAvE bEen OvEr thE cUrB BuT ThE lAw StAteS tHaT sHe CaN’t jUsT IgNorE onCoMinG TrAfFic”

“She may not survive..”

“BuT thAt cLaUsE abOu…”

….

Just stop for pedestrians and don’t speed past cars stopped at crosswalks? Pay attention while you’re driving, especially in pedestrian heavy areas (hint: these are areas with lots of crosswalks in which other vehicles may stop in order to let people cross).

0