U-turn-RTOR sign does not follow MUTCD

[Troubleshooter]

This sign is on an arterial street in my town. It is posted at every side street at a signalized intersection on that arterial:



Notice that the right turn on red is instructed to yield to the U-turn. But how is the right turn on red driver supposed to know which cars in the cross street left turn lane are turning left and which cars are making a U-turn?

MUTCD allows the sign making U-turns wait for RTOR, but not this.

[kphoger]

This sign is on an arterial street in my town. It is posted at every side street at a signalized intersection on that arterial:



Notice that the right turn on red is instructed to yield to the U-turn. But how is the right turn on red driver supposed to know which cars in the cross street left turn lane are turning left and which cars are making a U-turn?

MUTCD allows the sign making U-turns wait for RTOR, but not this.

I don't know how you can claim the sign violates the MUTCD, when it's an MUTCD R10-30 sign.

Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices, 2009 Edition

Chapter 2B – Regulatory Signs, Barricades, and Gates

§ 2B.54 – No Turn on Red Signs (R10-11 Series, R10-17a, and R10-30)

Option:
08 – A RIGHT TURN ON RED MUST YIELD TO U-TURN (R10-30) sign (see Figure 2B-27) may be installed to remind road users that they must yield to conflicting u-turn traffic on the street or highway onto which they are turning right on a red signal after stopping.

[1995hoo]

If someone starts making a U-turn, you stop and yield. Very simple. You pay attention to all the traffic in the intersection and react accordingly.

I've mostly seen that sign used where the U-turn traffic has a green arrow, but of course it really applies everywhere because the guy making a right on red has a red light and is therefore required to yield to everyone else, other than the guy who illegally makes a U-turn against a red light. I think the primary use for that sign is at locations where there are more people making U-turns than you might otherwise expect. For example, at this intersection a couple of miles from where I live, the road design forces people in that neighborhood of single-family houses across the way to make a right out of their neighborhood and then make a U-turn at the light if they want to make the equivalent of a left turn. That means there are more U-turns than you might otherwise expect, so the sign is there as an attempt to call right-turners' attention to it so they pay more attention instead of blindly focusing on traffic coming from the left. (That is, the way is not necessarily going to be clear just because nobody's coming from the left.)

I wish the City of Alexandria would post that sign at the intersection seen here (I backed the image up to 2021 because there's a bus in the 2022 image that obstructs the view). There's a McDonald's around the corner to the right of the camera viewpoint, so a lot of people make U-turns to go to McDonald's; there are also a lot of U-turns by drivers coming out of a small shopping center on the far side of the road around the corner. It causes problems because the right-on-red crowd think they don't have to yield to the U-turners (who have a green arrow) and some of the U-turners seem to think they have to yield to the right-on-red crowd (wrong, you have a green arrow and the right-turner has a red light), which in turn causes problems for people who just want to make a left turn. I always get in the right-hand left-turn lane there because I'm aware of the problem.

[SectorZ]

Is there an actual sign telling u-turners to yield to people taking a right on red? If so, that one smells a bit.

[kphoger]

Is there an actual sign telling u-turners to yield to people taking a right on red? If so, that one smells a bit.

There is a U-TURN YIELD TO RIGHT TURN (R10-16) sign in the MUTCD.  However, its intended use is for locations in which there are simultaneous conflicting green left-turn and green right-turn signals.

That is to say, R10-16 isn't telling U-turners to yield to people taking a right on red.  Rather, it is telling U-turners to yield to people taking a right on green right-turn arrow–and only if said U-turners are facing a green left-turn arrow of their own.

[1995hoo]

Is there an actual sign telling u-turners to yield to people taking a right on red? If so, that one smells a bit.

There is a U-TURN YIELD TO RIGHT TURN (R10-16) sign in the MUTCD.  However, its intended use is for locations in which there are simultaneous conflicting green left-turn and green right-turn signals.

That is to say, R10-16 isn't telling U-turners to yield to people taking a right on red.  Rather, it is telling U-turners to yield to people taking a right on green right-turn arrow–and only if said U-turners are facing a green left-turn arrow of their own.

Here is a former example of such a sign in use (link should show the July 2012 Street View image). It got knocked down multiple times (whether by accident or intentionally, who knows) and VDOT must have given up on posting it. The conflict between U-turners and people going right on a green arrow is a frequent problem there because there are a lot of U-turners coming off the Beltway. I assume, but don't know, that most of those people probably messed up in the Springfield Interchange and are turning around for another attempt.

[Troubleshooter]

This sign is on an arterial street in my town. It is posted at every side street at a signalized intersection on that arterial:



Notice that the right turn on red is instructed to yield to the U-turn. But how is the right turn on red driver supposed to know which cars in the cross street left turn lane are turning left and which cars are making a U-turn?

MUTCD allows the sign making U-turns wait for RTOR, but not this.

I don't know how you can claim the sign violates the MUTCD, when it's an MUTCD R10-30 sign.

Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices, 2009 Edition

Chapter 2B – Regulatory Signs, Barricades, and Gates

§ 2B.54 – No Turn on Red Signs (R10-11 Series, R10-17a, and R10-30)

Option:
08 – A RIGHT TURN ON RED MUST YIELD TO U-TURN (R10-30) sign (see Figure 2B-27) may be installed to remind road users that they must yield to conflicting u-turn traffic on the street or highway onto which they are turning right on a red signal after stopping.

Odd. When they put it up, I looked and that sign wasn't in the MUTCD.

Is there an actual sign telling u-turners to yield to people taking a right on red? If so, that one smells a bit.

There is a U-TURN YIELD TO RIGHT TURN (R10-16) sign in the MUTCD.  However, its intended use is for locations in which there are simultaneous conflicting green left-turn and green right-turn signals.

That is to say, R10-16 isn't telling U-turners to yield to people taking a right on red.  Rather, it is telling U-turners to yield to people taking a right on green right-turn arrow–and only if said U-turners are facing a green left-turn arrow of their own.

Here is a former example of such a sign in use (link should show the July 2012 Street View image). It got knocked down multiple times (whether by accident or intentionally, who knows) and VDOT must have given up on posting it. The conflict between U-turners and people going right on a green arrow is a frequent problem there because there are a lot of U-turners coming off the Beltway. I assume, but don't know, that most of those people probably messed up in the Springfield Interchange and are turning around for another attempt.

There is a right turn arrow at that pictured intersection.

[kphoger]

Odd. When they put it up, I looked and that sign wasn't in the MUTCD.

If you looked it up after 2009, then it was in the MUTCD.  I don't know about editions before that.

There is a right turn arrow at that pictured intersection.

Which, as I explained, is exactly the situation the MUTCD says it's for.  U-turns facing that sign must yield to right turns facing the right turn arrow.


Edited to add:  I looked at the 2003 edition, and there was no R10-30 sign in it.  So I guess 2009 was the first edition it appeared in.

[Mr. Matté]

This sign is on an arterial street in my town. It is posted at every side street at a signalized intersection on that arterial:
[...]
Notice that the right turn on red is instructed to yield to the U-turn. But how is the right turn on red driver supposed to know which cars in the cross street left turn lane are turning left and which cars are making a U-turn?

MUTCD allows the sign making U-turns wait for RTOR, but not this.

I don't know how you can claim the sign violates the MUTCD, when it's an MUTCD R10-30 sign.

Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices, 2009 Edition

Chapter 2B – Regulatory Signs, Barricades, and Gates

§ 2B.54 – No Turn on Red Signs (R10-11 Series, R10-17a, and R10-30)

Option:
08 – A RIGHT TURN ON RED MUST YIELD TO U-TURN (R10-30) sign (see Figure 2B-27) may be installed to remind road users that they must yield to conflicting u-turn traffic on the street or highway onto which they are turning right on a red signal after stopping.

Even if this exact sign wasn't in the manual, wouldn't section 2B.02, line 2 apply as a catch-all in this case?

Regulatory word message signs other than those classified and specified in this Manual and the "Standard Highways Signs and Markings" book (see Section 1A.11) may be developed to aid the enforcement of other laws or regulations.

[Troubleshooter]

Odd. When they put it up, I looked and that sign wasn't in the MUTCD.

If you looked it up after 2009, then it was in the MUTCD.  I don't know about editions before that.

There is a right turn arrow at that pictured intersection.

Which, as I explained, is exactly the situation the MUTCD says it's for.  U-turns facing that sign must yield to right turns facing the right turn arrow.


Edited to add:  I looked at the 2003 edition, and there was no R10-30 sign in it.  So I guess 2009 was the first edition it appeared in.

They put it up in 2006 when they opened the new road.

The reason I see a hazard is the way the intersections are made with a wide median. The RTOR driver can't tell a U-turn from a left turn until the vehicle is already moving at turning speed.

[kphoger]

They put it up in 2006 when they opened the new road.

Then that's why you didn't see it in the MUTCD.  It wasn't in there yet.

The reason I see a hazard is the way the intersections are made with a wide median. The RTOR driver can't tell a U-turn from a left turn until the vehicle is already moving at turning speed.

This is definitely a fair point.  Can you link to the location on Google Maps, so we can see for ourselves?

[RobbieL2415]

Y'all are really gonna love this sign,
https://maps.app.goo.gl/c7Lss9aipEx19oQY7

[kphoger]

Y'all are really gonna love this sign,
https://maps.app.goo.gl/c7Lss9aipEx19oQY7

Similar to what you can find in Ocean City:  https://goo.gl/maps/YEA54J9f1jUWcb8RA

[RobbieL2415]

Y'all are really gonna love this sign,
https://maps.app.goo.gl/c7Lss9aipEx19oQY7

Similar to what you can find in Ocean City:  https://goo.gl/maps/YEA54J9f1jUWcb8RA

Except my example is a protect left with a conflicting protected red.

[vdeane]

Note that the right turn on the cross street has a green arrow.  That's what the U turn traffic has to yield to.

[hbelkins]

There seems to be some sort of universal belief that states, municipalities, and other local governments are limited to using only signage included in the MUTCD. The reality is that non-federal agencies can use any kind of sign necessary (warning or regulatory) to address conditions on the ground, be they one-off installations or frequently-used signage. If a state law requires U-turns to yield to RTOR, then it makes sense for the prohibition to be signed.

[roadfro]

Y'all are really gonna love this sign,
https://maps.app.goo.gl/c7Lss9aipEx19oQY7

This is basically similar in meaning to a now standard sign in the 2009 MUTCD.

Option:
10 A U-TURN YIELD TO RIGHT TURN (R10-16) sign (see Figure 2B-27) may be installed near the left-turn signal face if U-turns are allowed on a protected left-turn movement on an approach from which a right-turn GREEN ARROW signal indication is simultaneously being displayed to drivers making a right turn from the conflicting approach to their left.

I think it's more questionable to allow this situation to begin with, as there's not supposed to be any yielding when you have a green arrow protected movement.

In Nevada, where a heavy right turn movement is signalized and overlaps the complimentary left turn, the U-Turn maneuver is typically prohibited.

[roadfro]

There seems to be some sort of universal belief that states, municipalities, and other local governments are limited to using only signage included in the MUTCD. The reality is that non-federal agencies can use any kind of sign necessary (warning or regulatory) to address conditions on the ground, be they one-off installations or frequently-used signage. If a state law requires U-turns to yield to RTOR, then it makes sense for the prohibition to be signed.

True. But if a standard sign exists that conveys a particular meaning or regulation in an application, agencies are supposed to use the MUTCD standard version instead of their own creation in the interest of uniformity (pretty sure that's an MUTCD standard statement somewhere).

[kphoger]

This is basically similar in meaning to a now standard sign in the 2009 MUTCD.

Except that the MUTCD sign says who it is you're supposed to yield to.

I think it's more questionable to allow this situation to begin with, as there's not supposed to be any yielding when you have a green arrow protected movement.

You're right.  It's kind of like having a green turn arrow and parallel WALK signal illuminated at the same time.

[US 89]

I think it's more questionable to allow this situation to begin with, as there's not supposed to be any yielding when you have a green arrow protected movement.

You're right.  It's kind of like having a green turn arrow and parallel WALK signal illuminated at the same time.

I'd think the appropriate way to signalize this would be a flashing yellow U-turn arrow. I am pretty sure I've seen this someplace but can't recall where it was.

[roadfro]

I think it's more questionable to allow this situation to begin with, as there's not supposed to be any yielding when you have a green arrow protected movement.

You're right.  It's kind of like having a green turn arrow and parallel WALK signal illuminated at the same time.

I'd think the appropriate way to signalize this would be a flashing yellow U-turn arrow. I am pretty sure I've seen this someplace but can't recall where it was.

Except this is a left turn lane (actually a dual left turn lane approach) from which a U-turn is allowed, not a dedicated U-turn lane. So that wouldn't be appropriate.

I'm not really seeing the need for signalized right turn phases at this intersection, TBH.

[CtrlAltDel]

They put it up in 2006 when they opened the new road.

Then that's why you didn't see it in the MUTCD.  It wasn't in there yet.

That makes me wonder if the sign had some kind of provisional approval at some point between 2003 and 2009.

[Scott5114]

They put it up in 2006 when they opened the new road.

Then that's why you didn't see it in the MUTCD.  It wasn't in there yet.

That makes me wonder if the sign had some kind of provisional approval at some point between 2003 and 2009.

The MUTCD allows putting any word message on a warning or regulatory sign. It may just have been that enough states used some form of this sign that it was added to the MUTCD just to standardize the wording.

[Troubleshooter]

They put it up in 2006 when they opened the new road.

Then that's why you didn't see it in the MUTCD.  It wasn't in there yet.

The reason I see a hazard is the way the intersections are made with a wide median. The RTOR driver can't tell a U-turn from a left turn until the vehicle is already moving at turning speed.

This is definitely a fair point.  Can you link to the location on Google Maps, so we can see for ourselves?

Actually the opposite problem exists. The U-turn often has to travel on the shoulder or back up to complete the turn.

The road is designed so that drivers u-turn to make left turns at driveways between intersections, but many cars (and all large trucks) can't complete the U turn without backing up. My old car could not make the turn without using the shoulder, my new one does it nicely. With the old car, I had to wait to make the U-turn if a bus was stopped in the bus stop.

(I used to know where the info for getting a Google Maps image reference is, but I can't find it.)

Found it.

https://goo.gl/maps/reFS8q2ufafCxm5v9

The one with a wide median is in Indianapolis somewhere.

[CtrlAltDel]

They put it up in 2006 when they opened the new road.

Then that's why you didn't see it in the MUTCD.  It wasn't in there yet.

That makes me wonder if the sign had some kind of provisional approval at some point between 2003 and 2009.

The MUTCD allows putting any word message on a warning or regulatory sign. It may just have been that enough states used some form of this sign that it was added to the MUTCD just to standardize the wording.

True, but given that the phrasings were identical, it made me curious. But looking at the Terminated Interim Approvals Issued Under 2003 MUTCD, this wasn't one of them.