Slip lanes with stop signs

[jakeroot]

I've seen this all over the place, many times, but I've never understood it.

Slip lanes pretty much universally have yield signs, as they are A) usually more of a merge than a right turn, and B) they are frequently used at signals, so a yield sign allows the right turning traffic to continuously turn during the straight-ahead green phase, except when giving way to oncoming left turns.

But every now and then, I see a stop sign used at these locations. If you know of any egregious examples, feel free to share.

Here's one in Seattle that drivers frequently acknowledge as a yield sign. And below, a nearly brand-new slip lane with a stop sign in Coquitlam, BC (the other three slip lanes at this intersection feature yield signs or nothing (add-lane) -- no idea why this particular movement is special).

[TheHighwayMan3561]

Wisconsin likes slip lanes with stop signs or signals.

[jakeroot]

Wisconsin likes slip lanes with stop signs or signals.

I've always liked WI's signalized slip lanes, but did not know they used the stop sign at these locations too.

[bcroadguy]

I guess this sort of counts as a slip lane...

This fairly new (built 2011-ish) on ramp has a stop sign. It's a relatively low volume movement, but I've always found it very bizarre / kind of haphazard for a pretty new ramp between two major roads: https://www.google.com/maps/@49.2504394,-122.7377319,3a,75y,191.22h,81.6t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sc_CmYd6gcQhobTbC3Srx5A!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo3.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3Dc_CmYd6gcQhobTbC3Srx5A%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D164.97737%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i13312!8i6656


That Coquitlam example that Jakeroot posted is often treated like a yield sign by many people (myself included).

[bcroadguy]

Here's a stop sign freeway RIRO onramp in North Vancouver (with a merge lane for some reason). I have no idea why it hasn't been removed yet since it only serves a small residential neighborhood and there's a proper (sort of) interchange very close by.

https://www.google.com/maps/@49.3326857,-123.104799,3a,84.9y,199.6h,82.19t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sNExpKs5Vf8WGr2qgkB0I1A!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

[UCFKnights]

I've seen this all over the place, many times, but I've never understood it.

Slip lanes pretty much universally have yield signs, as they are A) usually more of a merge than a right turn, and B) they are frequently used at signals, so a yield sign allows the right turning traffic to continuously turn during the straight-ahead green phase, except when giving way to oncoming left turns.

But every now and then, I see a stop sign used at these locations. If you know of any egregious examples, feel free to share.

Here's one in Seattle that drivers frequently acknowledge as a yield sign. And below, a nearly brand-new slip lane with a stop sign in Coquitlam, BC (the other three slip lanes at this intersection feature yield signs or nothing (add-lane) -- no idea why this particular movement is special).

One that always drove me crazy was i-75/Archer Road in Gainesville.
https://www.google.com/maps/@29.6167892,-82.3873387,3a,24.8y,258.09h,87.26t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sAPnaHk7v9gmjaXgH9eWBiA!2e0!5s20170201T000000!7i13312!8i6656
https://www.google.com/maps/@29.6177061,-82.385027,3a,75y,101.33h,97t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sEBhXhMgZUkF39tBcqdC9AQ!2e0!5s20080301T000000!7i3328!8i1664

Cops used to love to hang out there and give tickets to anyone who failed to come to a complete stop, and the second one especially, would back up pretty severely when people were stopping due to cops watching. I say used to as they actually removed both slip ramps recently and replaced them with traditional right turn lanes at the lights. I've heard rumors that was because of the ticket abuse at the location, although I don't know why they couldn't just have switched the stop to yield instead of removing the slip lanes.

[DaBigE]

Wisconsin likes slip lanes with stop signs or signals.

I've always liked WI's signalized slip lanes, but did not know they used the stop sign at these locations too.

Unfortunately, they do. Way too many of them, IMO. Some are converted from Yield control, but there are many like this one which have been stop-controlled from day one. Very annoying when the rest of the approach has a green light, but right-turners still have to stop. It leads to a lot of generous rolling stops.

[jeffandnicole]

These off the NJ Turnpike Exit 3 looks like the perfect yield situations, but each has a stop sign. https://goo.gl/maps/g3fosPsjJ652 . It's possible you could argue the nearby driveways would require a stop sign at these locations.  Anyway, the stop signs function as a yield sign. Many years ago when I worked this interchange, I had someone come through with a printout of all the quote-unquote known police speed and other traps, and this stop sign was one of them. (I often thought that list was filled with a ton of places someone happened to see a cop just driving and had nothing to do with a speed trap.) In all my years of traveling around this intersection, I've never seen a cop down there watching traffic at the stop sign. Note...the crosswalks are newer so they don't really factor into why there's always been stop signs on the ramps.

Similar situation was at the NJ Turnpike Exit 2. However, the right turn slip lane was upgraded from a stop sign to a yield sign when a traffic light was installed.
https://goo.gl/maps/2n5WaGjy32K2

[Revive 755]

Unfortunately, they do. Way too many of them, IMO. Some are converted from Yield control, but there are many like this one which have been stop-controlled from day one. Very annoying when the rest of the approach has a green light, but right-turners still have to stop. It leads to a lot of generous rolling stops.

And Wisconsin putting up a sign beneath the stop sign saying "Right Turns Obey This Sign" (of which I can't find an example of on Streetview this morning).


Illinois has a couple:
* IL 58 at IL 72 in Schaumburg for the EB IL 72 to WB IL 58

* IL 62 at IL 68 for the EB IL 62 to WB IL 68 movement

[webny99]

Yes, I do know of an example: right here at NY 104 and NY 250 in Webster, NY. Completely unnecessary, and it bugs the tar out of me every time I use it. 

[DaBigE]

Unfortunately, they do. Way too many of them, IMO. Some are converted from Yield control, but there are many like this one which have been stop-controlled from day one. Very annoying when the rest of the approach has a green light, but right-turners still have to stop. It leads to a lot of generous rolling stops.

And Wisconsin putting up a sign beneath the stop sign saying "Right Turns Obey This Sign" (of which I can't find an example of on Streetview this morning).

Here's one

[Eth]

There is this one a few miles from me. Admittedly it does hit the cross road at a sharper-than-average angle, but I'd say that's just an artifact of poor intersection design.

[kphoger]

Soooooo............  A slip lane with a stop sign is actually more restrictive than the stoplight it supposedly avoids–when that stoplight is green.   

[webny99]

Soooooo............  A slip lane with a stop sign is actually more restrictive than the stoplight it supposedly avoids–when that stoplight is green.   

Yeah, I know, hence my hatred for these things.

[jakeroot]

This fairly new (built 2011-ish) on ramp has a stop sign. It's a relatively low volume movement, but I've always found it very bizarre / kind of haphazard for a pretty new ramp between two major roads:

I've always hated that one too. That damn bridge/interchange opened in 2009, but that merge looks like something from the 50s. Apparently not enough room for a proper merge before the railway underpass, so we got stuck with this.

That Coquitlam example that Jakeroot posted is often treated like a yield sign by many people (myself included).

Guilty as charged.

Here's a stop sign freeway RIRO onramp in North Vancouver (with a merge lane for some reason). I have no idea why it hasn't been removed yet since it only serves a small residential neighborhood and there's a proper (sort of) interchange very close by.

https://www.google.com/maps/@49.3326857,-123.104799,3a,84.9y,199.6h,82.19t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sNExpKs5Vf8WGr2qgkB0I1A!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

I've never understood that RIRO. The province has been working tirelessly to upgrade Highway 1 throughout the Lower Mainland with bigger/better interchanges, more lanes, safer merges, etc. But they let crap like this fly, even when a proper interchange is just a few hundred meters away. Stupid.  Looks more like something you'd seen on the SFPR.

[jakeroot]

Wisconsin likes slip lanes with stop signs or signals.

I've always liked WI's signalized slip lanes, but did not know they used the stop sign at these locations too.

Unfortunately, they do. Way too many of them, IMO. Some are converted from Yield control, but there are many like this one which have been stop-controlled from day one. Very annoying when the rest of the approach has a green light, but right-turners still have to stop. It leads to a lot of generous rolling stops.

Wait, some of them have been changed to stop control from yield? Jesus. The one's I'm most familiar with have always been stop signs (as stupid as they may be). Can't even imagine the level of non-compliance at ones that used to be a yield.

One that always drove me crazy was i-75/Archer Road in Gainesville.
https://www.google.com/maps/@29.6167892,-82.3873387,3a,24.8y,258.09h,87.26t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sAPnaHk7v9gmjaXgH9eWBiA!2e0!5s20170201T000000!7i13312!8i6656
https://www.google.com/maps/@29.6177061,-82.385027,3a,75y,101.33h,97t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sEBhXhMgZUkF39tBcqdC9AQ!2e0!5s20080301T000000!7i3328!8i1664

Cops used to love to hang out there and give tickets to anyone who failed to come to a complete stop, and the second one especially, would back up pretty severely when people were stopping due to cops watching. I say used to as they actually removed both slip ramps recently and replaced them with traditional right turn lanes at the lights. I've heard rumors that was because of the ticket abuse at the location, although I don't know why they couldn't just have switched the stop to yield instead of removing the slip lanes.

Classic revenue scheme. Total crap.

Slip lanes are often being removed now to reduce the number of crossings for pedestrians, or improve pedestrian safety at poorly-performing slip lanes. Though I agree that many, if not all, could be fixed by signalizing the slip ramp instead of completely rebuilding it.

These off the NJ Turnpike Exit 3 looks like the perfect yield situations, but each has a stop sign. https://goo.gl/maps/g3fosPsjJ652 . It's possible you could argue the nearby driveways would require a stop sign at these locations.  Anyway, the stop signs function as a yield sign. Many years ago when I worked this interchange, I had someone come through with a printout of all the quote-unquote known police speed and other traps, and this stop sign was one of them. (I often thought that list was filled with a ton of places someone happened to see a cop just driving and had nothing to do with a speed trap.) In all my years of traveling around this intersection, I've never seen a cop down there watching traffic at the stop sign. Note...the crosswalks are newer so they don't really factor into why there's always been stop signs on the ramps.

Similar situation was at the NJ Turnpike Exit 2. However, the right turn slip lane was upgraded from a stop sign to a yield sign when a traffic light was installed.
https://goo.gl/maps/2n5WaGjy32K2

I think your first link should have been to this trumpet: https://goo.gl/ShuiXM

Those merges appear to be completely ignored! For good reason. Plenty of room for merging.

Glad that second link's right turn was modified. Proper intersection now. Sidenote: NJ, as usual, way outdoing every other northeast state with their signal placement.

[jakeroot]

Illinois has a couple:
* IL 58 at IL 72 in Schaumburg for the EB IL 72 to WB IL 58

* IL 62 at IL 68 for the EB IL 62 to WB IL 68 movement

Woah, a slip lane in IL that's unsignalized! Guess I shouldn't be surprised that they opted for stop control, as they are apparently afraid of right-turn-yield situations (never seen one in IL).

Yes, I do know of an example: right here at NY 104 and NY 250 in Webster, NY. Completely unnecessary, and it bugs the tar out of me every time I use it. 

I can see why put up those massive stop signs. I'm sure most drivers are rightfully ignoring them, as you can clearly see that it's OK to turn without stopping when the off-ramp has a green signal (as is the case with most examples here).

Unfortunately, they do. Way too many of them, IMO. Some are converted from Yield control, but there are many like this one which have been stop-controlled from day one. Very annoying when the rest of the approach has a green light, but right-turners still have to stop. It leads to a lot of generous rolling stops.

And Wisconsin putting up a sign beneath the stop sign saying "Right Turns Obey This Sign" (of which I can't find an example of on Streetview this morning).

Here's one

:facepalm:  --  if a stop sign and signal are so close together that you need to use that sign, perhaps a reconsideration of the traffic control method is in order.

There is this one a few miles from me. Admittedly it does hit the cross road at a sharper-than-average angle, but I'd say that's just an artifact of poor intersection design.

They are sometimes designed like that to improve pedestrian visibility, but I don't see why they couldn't still use yield signs, especially being that close to a signal. The approach reminds me of this off-ramp: https://goo.gl/UhwHWG (sharp turn but yield sign).

[DaBigE]

Wisconsin likes slip lanes with stop signs or signals.

I've always liked WI's signalized slip lanes, but did not know they used the stop sign at these locations too.

Unfortunately, they do. Way too many of them, IMO. Some are converted from Yield control, but there are many like this one which have been stop-controlled from day one. Very annoying when the rest of the approach has a green light, but right-turners still have to stop. It leads to a lot of generous rolling stops.

Wait, some of them have been changed to stop control from yield? Jesus. The one's I'm most familiar with have always been stop signs (as stupid as they may be). Can't even imagine the level of non-compliance at ones that used to be a yield.

Yup, it's the hierarchy of improvements. Places where right turn volumes aren't high enough to justify signalization, but compliance is low enough that the Yield sign isn't working, and typically in urban areas where pedestrians could be an issue. Note my example above has a mixed use path paralleling the main road. In my other example, it's adjacent to the downtown. All in an effort to save a couple thousand dollars from lack of signalization, but you get the indirect "benefit" of an increase in rolling stops. 

And Wisconsin putting up a sign beneath the stop sign saying "Right Turns Obey This Sign" (of which I can't find an example of on Streetview this morning).

Here's one

:facepalm:  --  if a stop sign and signal are so close together that you need to use that sign, perhaps a reconsideration of the traffic control method is in order.

In the city's defense, the right turn volumes are incredibly low at that location. There used to be protected/permissive lefts for the opposing direction (serving the influx of shift traffic from the major employers that used to be just down the road). The Stop sign is a carryover from those days. Back when the left-turn arrows were active, signalized right-turn lanes were uncommon (non-existent in that city). The left-turn arrows are long gone, but the Stop sign will likely remain until the time the intersection is redone (not even on the radar screen).

[kphoger]

Woah, a slip lane in IL that's unsignalized!

There are slip lanes in Illinois, however, where it's unclear whether you have to stop at a red light or not.  Take a look at this intersection in Marion, for example.  There is a slip lane with a signal next to it made up of right arrows, but no stop bar or crosswalk markings.  The geometry and pavement seems to contradict the signal indication.

[jakeroot]

Yup, it's the hierarchy of improvements. Places where right turn volumes aren't high enough to justify signalization, but compliance is low enough that the Yield sign isn't working, and typically in urban areas where pedestrians could be an issue. Note my example above has a mixed use path paralleling the main road. In my other example, it's adjacent to the downtown. All in an effort to save a couple thousand dollars from lack of signalization, but you get the indirect "benefit" of an increase in rolling stops. 

I think the way they signalized the right turn (in this example) from University to Allen is a great alternative to yield signs, assuming funds exist. I guess there wasn't any money left over to replace that yield sign!

if a stop sign and signal are so close together that you need to use that sign, perhaps a reconsideration of the traffic control method is in order.

In the city's defense, the right turn volumes are incredibly low at that location. There used to be protected/permissive lefts for the opposing direction (serving the influx of shift traffic from the major employers that used to be just down the road). The Stop sign is a carryover from those days. Back when the left-turn arrows were active, signalized right-turn lanes were uncommon (non-existent in that city). The left-turn arrows are long gone, but the Stop sign will likely remain until the time the intersection is redone (not even on the radar screen).

They could have taken a page from IL and just used green circles for the right turns. I guess this would give priority to right turning traffic...come to think of it, kind of unsure how things work in IL if the right turn has a green circle...

Woah, a slip lane in IL that's unsignalized!

There are slip lanes in Illinois, however, where it's unclear whether you have to stop at a red light or not.  Take a look at this intersection in Marion, for example.  There is a slip lane with a signal next to it made up of right arrows, but no stop bar or crosswalk markings.  The geometry and pavement seems to contradict the signal indication.

That is strange. The other slip lanes have stop lines (though very faded), yet no indication that one ever existed for that right turn. I could sort of understand it, if the right turn got its own lane (making the arrow an effective "keep moving" signal), but that's obviously not the case. I guess they just want drivers to stop before entering the "intersection control area"?

[kphoger]

Woah, a slip lane in IL that's unsignalized!

There are slip lanes in Illinois, however, where it's unclear whether you have to stop at a red light or not.  Take a look at this intersection in Marion, for example.  There is a slip lane with a signal next to it made up of right arrows, but no stop bar or crosswalk markings.  The geometry and pavement seems to contradict the signal indication.

That is strange. The other slip lanes have stop lines (though very faded), yet no indication that one ever existed for that right turn. I could sort of understand it, if the right turn got its own lane (making the arrow an effective "keep moving" signal), but that's obviously not the case. I guess they just want drivers to stop before entering the "intersection control area"?

While they are certainly rare, slip lanes do exist in Illinois without restriction.  Just down Route 13 from that other intersection is this one (very near where I briefly worked a miserable temp job at a Circuit City distribution center 12½ years ago) with no restriction at all.

[jakeroot]

Woah, a slip lane in IL that's unsignalized!

There are slip lanes in Illinois, however, where it's unclear whether you have to stop at a red light or not.  Take a look at this intersection in Marion, for example.  There is a slip lane with a signal next to it made up of right arrows, but no stop bar or crosswalk markings.  The geometry and pavement seems to contradict the signal indication.

That is strange. The other slip lanes have stop lines (though very faded), yet no indication that one ever existed for that right turn. I could sort of understand it, if the right turn got its own lane (making the arrow an effective "keep moving" signal), but that's obviously not the case. I guess they just want drivers to stop before entering the "intersection control area"?

While they are certainly rare, slip lanes do exist in Illinois without restriction.  Just down Route 13 from that other intersection is this one (very near where I briefly worked a miserable temp job at a Circuit City distribution center 12½ years ago) with no restriction at all.

I assume the idea is to follow the lead of the signals to the left?

[Revive 755]

Illinois has a couple:
* IL 58 at IL 72 in Schaumburg for the EB IL 72 to WB IL 58

* IL 62 at IL 68 for the EB IL 62 to WB IL 68 movement

Woah, a slip lane in IL that's unsignalized! Guess I shouldn't be surprised that they opted for stop control, as they are apparently afraid of right-turn-yield situations (never seen one in IL).

I thought we had a thread on yield controlled right turns in Illinois?  I think District 8 (Collinsville) had the most.  Couple examples:

* One off SB IL 3 in Dupo
* SB IL 3 at Sand Bank Road in Columbia
* IL 157 at IL 3 in Cahokia (appears to also have right turn arrows?

[DaBigE]

Yup, it's the hierarchy of improvements. Places where right turn volumes aren't high enough to justify signalization, but compliance is low enough that the Yield sign isn't working, and typically in urban areas where pedestrians could be an issue. Note my example above has a mixed use path paralleling the main road. In my other example, it's adjacent to the downtown. All in an effort to save a couple thousand dollars from lack of signalization, but you get the indirect "benefit" of an increase in rolling stops. 

I think the way they signalized the right turn (in this example) from University to Allen is a great alternative to yield signs, assuming funds exist. I guess there wasn't any money left over to replace that yield sign!

I'm assuming you're referring to this one? Your link went to the same unsignalized right-turn. For the record, I have yet to see this one go red (or this over-signalized monstrosity...yes that's FIVE signals all for a single right-turn lane  ). Trust me, they had the money, but because of the volumes, they were lazy and kept the Stop sign. As part of the same project, this was also put in. The project spanned from just west of the Hill Farms WisDOT HQ (near Sheboygan Ave) to approximately Allen Blvd. The only way they could have spent more money is if it would have been all concrete. For what it's worth, I don't believe the original right turn movement in question was ever a Yield control. Several in Wisconsin have followed the pattern of Yield sign to Stop sign but I don't think this was one of them.

if a stop sign and signal are so close together that you need to use that sign, perhaps a reconsideration of the traffic control method is in order.

In the city's defense, the right turn volumes are incredibly low at that location. There used to be protected/permissive lefts for the opposing direction (serving the influx of shift traffic from the major employers that used to be just down the road). The Stop sign is a carryover from those days. Back when the left-turn arrows were active, signalized right-turn lanes were uncommon (non-existent in that city). The left-turn arrows are long gone, but the Stop sign will likely remain until the time the intersection is redone (not even on the radar screen).

They could have taken a page from IL and just used green circles for the right turns. I guess this would give priority to right turning traffic...come to think of it, kind of unsure how things work in IL if the right turn has a green circle...

That would have cost extra money to run conduit. As much as an annoyance as it is to drivers, unless the volumes, safety needs, or political will warrants it, they'll always go the cheaper route. Whenever the time does come to rebuild the intersection, I see the EB slip lane disappearing and the NB free-flow right turning into a Stop-controlled lane or pulled back into the main approach altogether. As I eluded to before, traffic patterns have changed dramatically since the current configuration was constructed. I doubt the right turn lanes at that intersection will ever be signalized slip lanes.

[jakeroot]

I'm assuming you're referring to this one? Your link went to the same unsignalized right-turn. For the record, I have yet to see this one go red (or this over-signalized monstrosity...yes that's FIVE signals all for a single right-turn lane  ). Trust me, they had the money, but because of the volumes, they were lazy and kept the Stop sign. As part of the same project, this was also put in. The project spanned from just west of the Hill Farms WisDOT HQ (near Sheboygan Ave) to approximately Allen Blvd. The only way they could have spent more money is if it would have been all concrete. For what it's worth, I don't believe the original right turn movement in question was ever a Yield control. Several in Wisconsin have followed the pattern of Yield sign to Stop sign but I don't think this was one of them.

Yes, that's the correct slip lane. I copied your link that I cut out when quoting you (to minimize stacking), but since I was referring to that intersection, I just copied your original link for my response. Probably could have just made another one in retrospect .

Anyways, I refuse to acknowledge the concept of over-signalization. I come from an area with virtually no requirements for secondary signals (just cities and counties doing whatever the hell they want, sometimes using them, sometimes not), so I have a strong appreciation for "just in case" signals.

The University/Spring Harbor intersection might be the first signal I've seen in Wisconsin without a secondary through signal face. Obviously the right turn has one, as does the oncoming left and the oncoming through, but nothing extra for northbound traffic. Funny how they can have single-lane right turns with five signal faces, but be unable to find a way to have even one secondary through head for that movement.

As much as an annoyance as it is to drivers, unless the volumes, safety needs, or political will warrants it, they'll always go the cheaper route. Whenever the time does come to rebuild the intersection, I see the EB slip lane disappearing and the NB free-flow right turning into a Stop-controlled lane or pulled back into the main approach altogether. As I eluded to before, traffic patterns have changed dramatically since the current configuration was constructed. I doubt the right turn lanes at that intersection will ever be signalized slip lanes.

Slip lanes are rapidly disappearing from many WA cities, and even BC has been backing off the idea (despite building them religiously at most intersections for many decades). Honestly, I'd rather right turns occurred at the main intersection box if it meant not having to go through a stop sign for the right turn. If a jurisdiction is gonna build a slip lane, build it right (with correct angles for improved visibility -- see link), and put in a yield sign or a signal. Or, don't build one at all. But don't cheap out with stop signs. Yuck.