 |
In other locations where I’ve seen a light-up right-turn arrow with a red line through it, I have always assumed that meant “No right on red, even if it would otherwise be permitted.” (By contrast, if a traffic signal has red/yellow/green right-pointing arrows and the red arrow is lit up, that still means you can turn right on red after coming to a stop.) But I’ve never seen one lit up at the same time as a green right arrow, which I have always assumed meant “You have the right of way to turn right no matter what.” This seems like a potential safety issue. In all places that I’ve seen an on-and-off “No right on red” arrow with a line through it, it’s been at a bicycle crossing where the bikes had their own signal. I assume the reason is that at a normal pedestrian crossing, before you can make a right on red you can check that there are no pedestrians about to cross. But bicycles can come out of nowhere much faster, so rather than asking cars to “check”, you simply tell them not to turn right on red when the bikes have a green. However — if there is also a light-up green arrow, cars are likely to ignore the no-right-on-red and turn anyway! In the wide shot you can see that the bicycle signal has a red. So at least in this specific moment, the traffic signals were not telling bicycles that they could go, at the same time they were telling cars they could turn right. However, presumably there is supposed to be a rule that says “Don’t light up the green right arrow and the no-right-on-red arrow at the same time”, and we know that rule is not implemented correctly. So maybe the “Don’t light up the green right arrow and the green bicycle arrow at the same time” rule is not implemented correctly either. submitted by /u/bennetthaselton |
