Which intersections should be signalized?

[interstatefan990]

It's not any harder than determining if you can safely pass or not. Besides, it just says "move over". It doesn't say you have to fully enter the opposing lane to do so–my inclination would be to move over enough to straddle the centerline, to give the emergency vehicle a few extra feet of space.

Furthermore, as Oscar points out, since it's at a state line, the intent of the sign is probably simply to inform the driver of a Texas law that may or may not apply in the state the traveler just left (it does in Oklahoma, but that's not any of Texas's business). Thus the driver will hopefully remember it coming into play in a situation where it's more relevant, like the four-lane roads approaching Amarillo.

Well it is slightly harder because the two main differences are (a) the vehicle to be passed is stopped instead of moving, and (b) there is a critical decision point, the location of the stopped emergency vehicle (you have to do one thing or the other by the time you reach it); whereas with passing a vehicle you always have the option to just wait until the oncoming vehicle is gone.

I'm not sure about the specifics, but in most states "moving over"  is legally defined as vacating the lane closest to or containing the emergency vehicle, at least on highways with more than one lane in a given direction. It may not include simply giving the vehicle a few feet of space, but again, I'm not sure how it applies to roads with only one lane in each direction.

And if that last part is true, doesn't it make much more sense to post it closer to the beginning of the four-laners? 

[oscar]

I'm not sure about the specifics, but in most states "moving over"  is legally defined as vacating the lane closest to or containing the emergency vehicle, at least on highways with more than one lane in a given direction. It may not include simply giving the vehicle a few feet of space, but again, I'm not sure how it applies to roads with only one lane in each direction.

And if that last part is true, doesn't it make much more sense to post it closer to the beginning of the four-laners? 

The Texas law as stated applies to two-lane roads too, even if the "move over" option isn't always available for them and "slow down" might sometimes be the only choice.

Additional reminder signs may be appropriate farther away from the state line, but one right at the state line makes sense too.

[kphoger]

I've personally been pulled over and gotten a warning for not slowing down or moving over when passing a stopped emergency vehicle on a two-lane road.  This was in Illinois, back in 2005 or so.  There was an oncoming vehicle, so I couldn't complete a normal lane change to go around at the 55 mph speed limit.  I judged that speeding up would be safer than braking at that particular moment, so I sped up to about 62 mph and crept over the yellow line, then got fully back in my lane in time for the oncoming vehicle to pass by.

The officer had just finished up his paperwork and had his radar running, clocked me at 7 mph over the limit, and pulled me over and gave me a written warning.

[interstatefan990]

The officer had just finished up his paperwork and had his radar running, clocked me at 7 mph over the limit, and pulled me over and gave me a written warning.

He pulled you over and gave you a warning for trying to ensure his safety and avoid hitting him? Someone's ungrateful!

[kphoger]

He obviously didn't know what was going through my mind.  All he knew is that his radar detector beeped for a vehicle that just went past him.

[Scott5114]

Was the warning for speeding, or did it specifically cite the move over/slow down law?

[kphoger]

Was the warning for speeding, or did it specifically cite the move over/slow down law?

Both.  Plus a half-missing license plate.  In a commercial vehicle.

I was happy to get a warning...

(And he also tried to get me for not having a CDL, but he wasn't aware that a CDL wasn't required for the weight class I was driving.)

[interstatefan990]

He obviously didn't know what was going through my mind.  All he knew is that his radar detector beeped for a vehicle that just went past him.

Well did you mention to him what WAS going through your mind?

[kphoger]

He obviously didn't know what was going through my mind.  All he knew is that his radar detector beeped for a vehicle that just went past him.

Well did you mention to him what WAS going through your mind?

My memory is fuzzy, but I think he mentioned the half-missing license plate first.  I wasn't really in a position to start arguing things.

[mrsman]

Here's a crazy example in Beverly Hills, CA:
https://www.google.com/maps/@34.0797219,-118.4116234,3a,75y,260.17h,78.98t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sRasWv6qXW_AP7Zq8efdLDQ!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DRasWv6qXW_AP7Zq8efdLDQ%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D185.61006%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i13312!8i6656

I have seen that intersection in multiple LA-based reality TV shows in those montages between scenes with the upbeat music, and I always wondered where it was. Thanks for finally locating it for me!

Now that I think about it, this looks like a perfect candidate for a roundabout.

Yes, it is quite famous.  A lot of LA scenery shows this part of Beverly Drive with the very tall palm trees and the wide streets as being classic LA.  The streets do come together in  a pretty geometric fashion, but a pain to drive through.  THere are also two other nearby six point intersections (Sunset/Beverly/Crescent and Sunset/Canon/Rodeo) but those are both signalized.

I do like the roundabout idea.  A number of sites dealing with LA traffic (like rants on Reddit) have made that suggestion.  In fact, I do remember a roundabout pilot from many years ago at that intersection (with cones and police tape).  It was certainly better than the controlled chaos* that exists now.  I think the roundabout should be revisited as they are now more common in the US than when the pilot was conducted.

* It seems that even the crazy LA drivers know how dangerous this is so surprisingly there aren't too many accidents here.  Unlike a standard all-way stop, it is very difficult to remember whose turn it is to go here, since there are so many points to this intersection.  Plus, a lot of traffic on Beverly and Canon align themselves as two lanes in each direction since the roads are relatively wider and there are few parked cars (and both streets are two lanes in each direction south of Santa Monica Blvd).  Cars tend to go and then slow in the middle as other cars from other directions are also going.  Somehow they each negotiate who goes first depending on who reaches the middle first.  Fortunatley, there are very few cars along Lomitas, so you almost never have to consider them.  Like I said, controlled chaos.

Quite recently, while doing other road research, I came across this map from 1928.

https://www.davidrumsey.com/luna/servlet/detail/RUMSEY~8~1~24250~880079:Map-of-Los-Angeles,-California--Cop?sort=Pub_List_No_InitialSort&qvq=q:los%2Bangeles;sort:Pub_List_No_InitialSort;lc:RUMSEY~8~1&mi=56&trs=108#

If you look to the left of the red Beverly Hills, you will see the intersection of Canon/Beverly/Lomitas demarked as a traffic circle.  Perhaps it was a traffic circle many years ago.

[tolbs17]

I'm surprised this one isn't signalized it gets very busy in the morning and evenings and it's a headache to turn left. And right cause people are rushing.

How would two right turn lanes and a superstreet do at this intersection? It's very busy and there's a quick lane drop to just turn right. Who can draw a nice configuration?

I'm kind of already talking fictional here but these dangerous intersections warrant a signal.