Text Signs Where A MUTCD Symbol Sign Would Suffice

[talllguy]

Maybe this is just a Baltimore thing, but I am not sure why the city DOT insists on signing with lots of text. Here's a thread to collect those types of signs.

To start: I feel like this sign is an insult to the illiterate driver

Left Turn Wordy by Elliott Plack, on Flickr

[NE2]

What symbol would suffice?

[Revive 755]

I'll nominate the 'No Turn On Red' signs.  I'd like to see the no right turn symbol with 'On Red' beneath it version added as a standard sign in the next version of the MUTCD.  I've seen it in Missouri around St. Louis (Streetview of one), and I've also seen at least one on a DuPage County (IL) roadway somewhere.

[jakeroot]

What symbol would suffice?

I've come up with a few:

I'll nominate the 'No Turn On Red' signs.  I'd like to see the no right turn symbol with 'On Red' beneath it version added as a standard sign in the next version of the MUTCD.  I've seen it in Missouri around St. Louis (Streetview of one), and I've also seen at least one on a DuPage County (IL) roadway somewhere.

How about:



EDIT 2: I've seen both the sign above and the one you are describing in Seattle: (here) and (here), respectively.

[sammi]

This is very much a thing where I am.

[NE2]

What symbol would suffice?

I've come up with a few:

Oh, something you came up with. The problem is that you always have to yield unless there's a green arrow. So if a driver can remember what your sign means, they probably remember that.

[The Nature Boy]

Why is a sign needed there period? Isn't yielding to traffic in the other direction the law everywhere on a green? I thought that only a green arrow indicated that you had the right of way.

[Revive 755]

How about:



EDIT 2: I've seen both the sign above and the one you are describing in Seattle: (here) and (here), respectively.

I like the all symbol version better, but the one with only the no right turn symbol would be more likely to pass muster with FHWA since it uses a symbol already used with regulatory signs.  The traffic light with only a red ball would have to go through the experimental process.

[jakeroot]

How about:

EDIT 2: I've seen both the sign above and the one you are describing in Seattle: (here) and (here), respectively.

I like the all symbol version better, but the one with only the no right turn symbol would be more likely to pass muster with FHWA since it uses a symbol already used with regulatory signs.  The traffic light with only a red ball would have to go through the experimental process.

The first link that I posted was of the all-symbol version in downtown Seattle. I suppose that means SDOT is ignoring that process?

Oh, something you came up with. The problem is that you always have to yield unless there's a green arrow. So if a driver can remember what your sign means, they probably remember that.

My point is, if Jose Garcia and his familia are visiting from Mexico, and are unfamiliar with the rules of the road (for whatever reason), they should be able to decipher what action they may or may not take from their left-turn lane.

Why is a sign needed there period? Isn't yielding to traffic in the other direction the law everywhere on a green? I thought that only a green arrow indicated that you had the right of way.

Yes, that is the law. The signs exist as a reminder.

[Revive 755]

The first link that I posted was of the all-symbol version in downtown Seattle. I suppose that means SDOT is ignoring that process?

There's actually quite a few signs in the US that have non-compliant symbols.

Experimenting with options for a more symbolic "Left Turn Yield on Green" sign:


Was wondering how well the vertical version would work when mounted next to a traffic signal head.

[DevalDragon]

Why do you need a sign here? Turning traffic always has to yield on a solid green...

[jakeroot]

Why do you need a sign here? Turning traffic always has to yield on a solid green...

Because people tend to forget that (for whatever reason).

[talllguy]

Why is a sign needed there period? Isn't yielding to traffic in the other direction the law everywhere on a green? I thought that only a green arrow indicated that you had the right of way.

That was my thought as well, come to think of it. Yielding is implicit if you are turning left without an arrow.

[Big John]

Looking at the picture, why would there be such a sign as it looks to be a one way street going away from the traffic signal?

[The Nature Boy]

Now I think of it.............

Aren't there some states that allow you to turn left on red onto another one way? Maybe this is an east-west one way and you would be turning left onto a southbound one way?

In that case, turning WOULD require you to yield to southbound traffic and the sign would be helpful to out of staters who may know that they can even legally turn left on red.

[Pink Jazz]

I remember someone on these forums suggested that logo signs should use symbols rather than words such as "FOOD", "GAS", "LODGING", or "CAMPING", as do many general services signs do.  However, such symbols would take up more space on the sign, requiring the signs to be larger (especially if there is more than one service type on a single sign).  Plus, I don't believe there is an official MUTCD-compliant symbol for "ATTRACTIONS".

[jakeroot]

Was wondering how well the vertical version would work when mounted next to a traffic signal head.

Probably best with a stacked doghouse:

[riiga]

Why the need for a sign? If it had been a protected turn there would've been a green arrow instead of a green circle in the traffic light, right?

[jakeroot]

Why the need for a sign? If it had been a protected turn there would've been a green arrow instead of a green circle in the traffic light, right?

Right, yes. The problem is that, unlike most countries, most Americans don't understand general rules of the road. I know that sounds a bit brash, but it's true. People see green and automatically assume the right-of-way is theirs. That's why roundabouts have worked so well (people don't have a signal controlling their movement so they have to actually look up from their phones to make sure they don't wreck). People take a green light far too literally (a common saying here is "green means go", despite only being true for through-movements).

[Pete from Boston]

People take a green light far too literally (a common saying here is "green means go", despite only being true for through-movements).

Red light stop, green light go, yellow light go very fast.

[riiga]

[...]yellow light go very fast.

I was told it meant "drive like hell" while visiting the States.

[Pink Jazz]

Here in Arizona, "Left Turn Yield On Green" signs are completely optional.  However, a sign is required for "Left Turn Yield on Flashing Yellow Arrow", although the yellow arrow symbol is optional (signs in Mesa typically don't include the symbol).

[GaryV]

"No right turn on Red".  With a placard below, "Except on Green Arrow."

Uh, if you have a green arrow, then you don't have a red light - even if straight through does have a red light.

[Revive 755]

^ Had a couple times a couple months ago I would have liked to have seen that "Except on Green Arrow" plaque.  The signals where this plaque could have been used were five section towers where the green arrow and red ball are on at the same time, and the driver at the front of the line in the right turn lane would not turn when the arrow was up.

Of course, the agencies in charge of those signals could have simply used a separate four-section right turn signal (red arrow, yellow arrow, flashing yellow arrow, green arrow) since the opposing lefts were protected only.

[talllguy]

Sigh, I regret starting a thread with such a poor example. The initial sign should have probably been in the redundant thread. Still, there are plenty of extra-wordy signs around town that I can add.