Red arrows

[US71]

^ The up arrows were (are?) the MoDOT standard where left turns from the opposite direction were protected only or nonexistent.

Seems like Bus 65 in Springfield has (or used to have) a bunch of 4 lens signals: R-Y-G(UP)-G (Right)

[Ian]

Are green up arrows not common? I seem to find them everywhere in the northeast...

[Bryant5493]

I asked GDOT about turning right against a red arrow. In short, as long as the way is clear it's okay, unless there's a sign prohibiting a turn against a red arrow. There should be some kind of standard nationwide, though, due to differing laws. I think of the red arrow of more directing you in the direction that you must turn, not that the turn is prohibited. But I do know, if I drive in California, a red turn arrow means no turns are allowed. :-)


Be well,

Bryant

[roadfro]

Nevada law makes no distinction between a circular red and a red arrow. Thus, a right turn on red arrow is technically permitted.

However, of all the red right arrow installations in the Las Vegas and Reno areas, I can't think of a single time where red right arrows are installed without "no turn on red" signs installed as well (generally, red arrows are installed at locations with two or more right turn only lanes where the volume won't benefit much from RTOR anyway). Thus, the 'de facto' rule in Nevada is that you can't turn right on a red arrow.

[realjd]

Are green up arrows not common? I seem to find them everywhere in the northeast...

I've only ever seen them in the St Louis area.

EDIT: I completely missed the previous page's discussion on Missouri using them. But yes, I've only ever really seen them in St. Louis.

[US71]

When I was in High School, I went on tour with the HS Church Choir. One of our stops was in St Louis and as the bus took us through town, the Choir Director commented on how fortunate we were to get so many green signals without having to stop. Of course, I don't think he realized that V (down arrows) were not traffic signals 

[1995hoo]

One note for 1995hoo:  given the location, this signal installation would be under the city of Alexandria's purview, instead of VDOT's.  I only know of two VDOT left red arrow installations statewide (and no red right arrows)...one in Spotsylvania, the other in Fairfax Co (US 1 at Beacon Hill).  If one sees a red arrow in Virginia (in either direction), it's most likely because one is in one of the Independent Cities, who are responsible for their own non-Interstate maintenance instead of VDOT.  VDOT's standard has long been circular reds for turn signals.

Hmm, interesting point. Obviously I'm well aware that intersection is in the city (funny thing, Van Dorn doesn't have one of the usual signs telling you when you've entered the city limits), but I never really considered the point about the independent cities (plus Arlington and Henrico counties) maintaining their own roads and signals. I kind of assumed–and I know it may not necessarily be a valid assumption–that to the extent Virginia law, or some standard VDOT practice, applies, they'd demand that the independent cities follow those as well. "Standard VDOT practice" here would refer to things like prohibiting turns on red from other than the curb lane, as the statute allowing for rights and lefts on red doesn't impose that sort of restriction.

But I suppose two things cut against my assumption–(1) the independent cities have done their own thing from time to time in the past, such as Alexandria' adoption of the flashing yellow left-turn arrows at several lights on Duke Street near Cameron Station and Foxchase long before they were used elsewhere in Virginia; (2) VDOT itself doesn't necessarily show a lot of consistency in some of their signage for the turns on red (I can think of at least five different styles of signs to that effect just within two miles of my house, all with different wording, different sign shapes, different positioning, etc.).

Off the top of my head I can't picture the red arrow at Beacon Hill. I may have to swing past there this afternoon or later this week. I used to go through that area fairly often on my morning commute downtown as a way of bypassing the springtime daily backup on Van Dorn Street, but since I no longer work downtown I no longer go that way.

[Brandon]

Red arrows seem to be common in Illinois excluding District 8 of IDOT, which uses a louvered red ball that is only visible from the left turn lane.

Gotta love IDOT.  Each district seems to go its own way with regards to signals and signage.

[mightyace]

Tennessee also makes no distinction between red balls and red arrows for right turn on red.

http://www.tntrafficsafety.org/htm/Laws/ped110.htm

______________

There's also a bill in the state legislature to remove the stop provision on ROTR to make it a YIELD.  (This is what most Tennesseans do anyway.)

Bill Text: http://www.capitol.tn.gov/Bills/107/Bill/SB0425.pdf

Status: http://e-lobbyist.com/gaits/TN/SB0425

[1995hoo]

....

Resurrecting this thread from May because I noticed yesterday that the light shown above has been changed: The curb lane now uses a red ball indicator while the second lane retains its red arrow. The sign about right on red being allowed only from the curb lane remains. I was rather startled to see the change, but (as is clear from my original comments) I think it was logical.

[kphoger]

Here's a GMSV view of an upward-right pointing red arrow.  This is a special kind of intersection, where a two-way frontage road becomes one-way with no room to spare.

http://goo.gl/maps/nOFNF

[MASTERNC]

I have noticed two instances (one in Philly and one in Bel Air, MD) where red arrows are used for two right turn lanes at an intersection but both have signs indicating the curb lane can turn on red after stopping, while the inside turn lane cannot.  I was also under the assumption that a red arrow, as quoted in the PA driver's manual, means you cannot turn, but I guess a sign can override it to the affirmative (as "No Turn on Red" overrides to the negative).

[roadman]

This has always been one of my pet peeves with the MUTCD and the UVC.  In one case (red ball), you are allowed to make a right turn on red unless a sign is posted.  In the other case (red arrow), you can't make the same right turn on red UNLESS a sign is posted.

Unless, of course, you live in a state (like Massachusetts) where the law permits RTOR on any "red indication" (arrow or ball) uless a sign is posted.

So much for uniformity in traffic control.

[kphoger]

I didn't even know that no right on red arrow was the norm.  I would naturally treat it the same as a red ball.

[PurdueBill]

I didn't even know that no right on red arrow was the norm.  I would naturally treat it the same as a red ball.

Conversely, in Massachusetts I was taught that  red arrow specifically means no turn on red which is opposite what roadman said.  I wonder if they were going off of something from out of state when they said that? 

Delaware is known for using side-by-side ball and arrow reds, with the arrow lighted meaning No Turn On Red, usually with a sign posted to the effect of "no turn on red arrow".  Usually that happens when there is a pedestrian phase or protected turn that they don't want turns on red interfering with.

[agentsteel53]

under California law, red ball means that right on red is allowed, unless signed otherwise - and red right arrow means "no right turn allowed at this time".

[Takumi]

Virginia just places a "no turn on red" sign next to the signal where it's prohibited.

[roadman]

I didn't even know that no right on red arrow was the norm.  I would naturally treat it the same as a red ball.

Conversely, in Massachusetts I was taught that  red arrow specifically means no turn on red which is opposite what roadman said.  I wonder if they were going off of something from out of state when they said that? 

Delaware is known for using side-by-side ball and arrow reds, with the arrow lighted meaning No Turn On Red, usually with a sign posted to the effect of "no turn on red arrow".  Usually that happens when there is a pedestrian phase or protected turn that they don't want turns on red interfering with.

While the Massachusetts Driver's Manual states that you shall not turn right on a steady red arrow, current state law permits RTOR at any red indication (ball or arrow) unless a sign indicating otherwise is posted.

From the Massachusetts General Laws - Chapter 89, Section 8:

  At any intersection on ways, as defined in section one of chapter ninety, in which vehicular traffic is facing a steady red indication in a traffic control signal, the driver of a vehicle which is stopped as close as practicable at the entrance to the crosswalk or the near side of the intersections or, if none, then at the entrance to the intersection in obedience to such red or stop signal, may make either (1) a right turn or (2) if on a one-way street may make a left turn to another one-way street, but shall yield the right-of-way to pedestrians and other traffic proceeding as directed by the signal at said intersection, except that a city or town, subject to section two of chapter eighty-five, by rules, orders, ordinances, or by-laws, and the department of highways on state highways or on ways at their intersections with a state highway, may prohibit any such turns against a red or stop signal at any such intersection, and such prohibition shall be effective when a sign is erected at such intersection giving notice thereof.

MassHighway (now MassDOT) attempted to correct this discrepancy in 2003 in their MUTCD amendments by requiring that all new right red arrow installations also include a "No Turn On Red" sign.  For some reason, this language has since been omitted from the 2009 MUTCD amendments - although the RTOR language in the state law remains the same.

As evidenced by other comments on this thread, it remains my opinion that the MUTCD and UVC "red ball-OK without sign, but red arrow - not OK without sign" conflicting rules do nothing but add confusion for drivers and unnecessarily slow down traffic flow.

For the record, I've lived in Massachusetts all my life, and was aware of this discrepancy between the Driver's Manual and state law even when I first got my learner's permit in 1977.  And, no, I'm not a lawyer (nor do I play one on TV).

[Mr_Northside]

Slightly related, but the people that irk me sometimes are the people that assume that a simple "Right Turn Signal" signal, with just a red ball (but a green arrow at times), also denotes a "No Turn On Red" situation.  Which I've encountered a good bit over the years.

In my experience, a right-red-arrow is pretty rare in PA.  In fact, Left-Red-Arrows still seem very uncommon here as well.  (Though I can't vouch for the eastern half of the state)

[1995hoo]

I've encountered some people, usually elderly, who simply WILL NOT turn right on red no matter if you blow the horn. I know nobody is ever required to turn right on red, but it sure is annoying when that happens and there's no real reason for it. (If visibility around the corner is bad or traffic is heavy, then sure, you err on the side of safety.)

I'm willing to give foreigners more of a pass on this issue because not all countries allow turns on red. Several European friends have said to me that they are reluctant to turn on red when they visit the USA because it's illegal in their countries and it's just very hard for them to overcome that. I guess I can understand that sort of thing–especially the Brits who are already adjusting to driving on the wrong side of the road when they come here.

[kphoger]

I've encountered some people, usually elderly, who simply WILL NOT turn right on red no matter if you blow the horn. I know nobody is ever required to turn right on red, but it sure is annoying when that happens and there's no real reason for it. (If visibility around the corner is bad or traffic is heavy, then sure, you err on the side of safety.)

I'm willing to give foreigners more of a pass on this issue because not all countries allow turns on red. Several European friends have said to me that they are reluctant to turn on red when they visit the USA because it's illegal in their countries and it's just very hard for them to overcome that. I guess I can understand that sort of thing—especially the Brits who are already adjusting to driving on the wrong side of the road when they come here.

You mean you blow your horn at people who don't turn right on red?  Wow, that would totally piss me off if I were the one not turning.  It's a RED LIGHT!

[Scott5114]

Yeah, but you have to agree that blocking the way for others when there is little reason for you to do so is a dick move.

[NE2]

One might even call it... cock blocking.

[kphoger]

Yeah, but you have to agree that blocking the way for others when there is little reason for you to do so is a dick move.

I'm not 'blocking the way for others' if I'm waiting for a light to turn green.  I choose my routes through the city partly based on whether I think I'll be able to turn right on red or not, but I would never honk my horn at someone not turning right on red in front of me.

[Scott5114]

Well, if you are legally able to turn there on red, what aspect the light is displaying only relevant to whether you stop before you turn and whether you have other traffic to yield to. If you are not turning when the way is clear you are in fact blocking the way for others–if you were not there, others would certainly be turning, and you are the only element preventing them from doing so. This seems fairly clear to me.