Double Right-turns

[andrepoiy]

In Ontario, at some interchanges, there exists double right turns from the ramp to the intersecting road. And it is also totally legal to turn on a red, as there is an absence of a no-turn-on-red sign. Thus, there are "permissive" double-right turns here.



I was wondering, does this exist in your area, how common is it, and what do you think about these?

[jakeroot]

Definitely quite a few in Washington State, although most double right turns are designed with porkchop islands to the left (example). For the most part, right on red is permitted, but a few disallow it.

I've actually been keeping track of where I've spotted double right turns in my area that are not via slip lanes; here's a few (all permit right turn on red, even those with red arrows):

* Pacific Hwy northbound to S 348th St, Federal Way (part time) (yield to peds on green)
* 16th Ave S northbound to Pacific Hwy, Federal Way (yield to peds on green)
* 1st Ave S southbound to S 356th St, Federal Way (yield to peds on green)
* S 336th St westbound to 1st Way S, Federal Way (yield to peds on green)
* Weyerhaeuser Way S northbound to S 320th St, Federal Way (yield to peds on green)
* South Hill Mall exit westbound to 9th Ave SW, Puyallup (no ped crossing)
* 116th Ave NE southbound to NE 8th St, Bellevue (no ped crossing)
* Steilacoom Blvd eastbound to South Tacoma Way, Lakewood (red during ped phase)
* Ellingson Rd eastbound to East Valley Hwy, Auburn (part time) (no ped crossing)
* Houser Way northbound to Bronson Way, Renton (three turn lanes) (no turn on red) (no ped crossing)
* 2nd St westbound to Rainier Ave, Renton (red during ped phase)
* Strander Blvd westbound to Southcenter Pkwy, Tukwila (no ped crossing)
* 66th Ave S north/eastbound to Southcenter Blvd, Tukwila (no ped crossing)
* Southcenter Blvd eastbound to 61st Ave S, Tukwila (no turn on red) (no ped crossing)

As it relates to right-on-red: this triple right turn in Federal Way permits it, but only via the right two lanes; it is forbidden from the far left lane. It's also a slip lane, so it wouldn't count for this thread.

There are also numerous double right turns in downtown Seattle (too many to list), and most allow yielding to pedestrians. But almost as many have been removed to reduce conflict points.

British Columbia also has quite a few double right turns, but almost all are via slip lanes. Of those that aren't, this is the only one I know of that permits turns on red: Dunbar northbound to W 16th, Vancouver.

edit: better grammar, clarified whether yielding is required, added more locations.

[SkyPesos]

There's a handful in the Cincinnati area. Most of them restricts right turns on red from the right lane only, and some on freeway off-ramps don't allow right on red at all.

[tolbs17]

Some interchanges have double right turns here in North Carolina too. And I'm pretty sure, yes.

[SeriesE]

This is very common for California offramps that end with a stop sign or traffic signal.

Diamonds, parclos, SPUIs

[TheHighwayMan3561]

MN 100 at Excelsior Blvd, St. Louis Park (NTOR)

I-94/694 at Hemlock Lane in Maple Grove

[jmd41280]

Jefferson Blvd (connector from PA Turnpike 43) at PA 51 south of Pittsburgh

[dlsterner]

Actually have a Triple Right Turn here in Maryland.  At the end of the ramp from eastbound US 50 to MS 197 near Bowie.

Interestingly, Right Turn On Red is allowed from the rightmost two lanes, but not from the third.

http://www.google.com/maps/@38.9512471,-76.7426532,3a,90y,59.39h,85.13t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sbN7w9FAZyQLxlYwu7_4Bjw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

[jeffandnicole]

A rarity in NJ...right lane must turn right. Adjacent lane may turn right. RTOR allowed from both lanes.

https://maps.app.goo.gl/HkcAjb9HXLjvR1rp8 

[roadfro]

Signalized double right turns are fairly common in Nevada. They are most often seen at freeway off ramps to a side road, but there are other applications of it, especially in the Vegas area. Nearly all cases have the right turn separated by a pork chop island. However, in the vast majority of cases, right turn on red is not allowed.

There are a few instances of a dedicated right turn lane with a second lane as shared right/thru. In the few cases I'm aware of, RTOR is permitted from the curb lane but not the shared lane.

[kphoger]

Not unheard of around here, and RTOR is legal from both lanes.  Not exactly common, however.

These are the three I use regularly:
Exit ramp
Onto one-way frontage road
Option lane at intersection

[RobbieL2415]

Double right turn lanes are useless here because state law is RTOR from right lane only.

[kphoger]

Double right turn lanes are useless here because state law is RTOR from right lane only.

Why are they still useless when the light is green?

[webny99]

Double right turn lanes are useless here because state law is RTOR from right lane only.

Why are they still useless when the light is green?

My guess is that it won't improve much during the green phase, and nobody will want to use it during the red phase.

It can be hard to predict if you'll still come out ahead by using it when the light is red, and you also get screwed if the light is green but then turns yellow/red after you've committed to that lane.

[kphoger]

Double right turn lanes on a green light are sure useful if you're planning to turn left immediately after getting on the crossroad.

For example, even if RTOR were prohibited from the second lane, it would still make it easier to do this maneuver.

[jakeroot]

For example, even if RTOR were prohibited from the second lane, it would still make it easier to do this maneuver.

You have to wonder if traffic would still use the outside lane, with the hope that they could turn on red and quickly slide over and make the left turn. As opposed to using the "proper" option, the inside lane, and waiting for a green light instead.

For capacity and safety's sake, I wonder if it would be easier to simply ban turn-on-red at double right turns with option lanes, to prevent drivers from using the "inappropriate" lane simply because they can turn on red from that lane. Of course, my preferred alternative, in that case, would be to [somehow] eliminate the option lane and institute a right-on-red option.

[kphoger]

For example, even if RTOR were prohibited from the second lane, it would still make it easier to do this maneuver.

You have to wonder if traffic would still use the outside lane, with the hope that they could turn on red and quickly slide over and make the left turn. As opposed to using the "proper" option, the inside lane, and waiting for a green light instead.

If both queues aren't very long, then sure.  But, if I were going to do that maneuver, the light were red, the right lane had a dozen cars in it, and the left lane only had three–then I sure wouldn't become the 13th car in the right lane.

For capacity and safety's sake, I wonder if it would be easier to simply ban turn-on-red at double right turns with option lanes, to prevent drivers from using the "inappropriate" lane simply because they can turn on red from that lane. Of course, my preferred alternative, in that case, would be to [somehow] eliminate the option lane and institute a right-on-red option.

What exactly is the problem you're seeking to avoid?  For example, how would banning RTOR here help anything?

[jakeroot]

For example, even if RTOR were prohibited from the second lane, it would still make it easier to do this maneuver.

You have to wonder if traffic would still use the outside lane, with the hope that they could turn on red and quickly slide over and make the left turn. As opposed to using the "proper" option, the inside lane, and waiting for a green light instead.

If both queues aren't very long, then sure.  But, if I were going to do that maneuver, the light were red, the right lane had a dozen cars in it, and the left lane only had three–then I sure wouldn't become the 13th car in the right lane.

For sure, as would I. But there's still some risk that the light will last long enough that you will end up spending more time waiting for a green light in the proper lane, as opposed to use the inappropriate lane, turning on red, and sliding over.

For capacity and safety's sake, I wonder if it would be easier to simply ban turn-on-red at double right turns with option lanes, to prevent drivers from using the "inappropriate" lane simply because they can turn on red from that lane. Of course, my preferred alternative, in that case, would be to [somehow] eliminate the option lane and institute a right-on-red option.

What exactly is the problem you're seeking to avoid?  For example, how would banning RTOR here help anything?

There's a couple of problems, although whether they are actual problems is certainly debatable:

(1) drivers turning on red into the far lane despite the double right turn; this is easily done as the option lane is blocked by through traffic
(2) lane imbalance caused by hesitation towards using the lane that will almost certainly require a green light to continue (as opposed to the right-only lane, where RTOR is more likely)

But it is certainly situational; I wouldn't ban RTOR in your example since there doesn't seem to be any reason for lane imbalance (I don't see any immediate left turns after the double right turn, for example). But then in some instances, I must question whether the double right is necessary. From your experience, how often does traffic turn right from the option lane at 13th and Zoo Blvd? I didn't see anyone in Street View, and given the lack of any immediate left turns after the right turn, plus the potential for being blocked by through traffic, I don't see why anyone would turn from that lane unless the light were already green.

[kphoger]

But then in some instances, I must question whether the double right is necessary. From your experience, how often does traffic turn right from the option lane at 13th and Zoo Blvd? I didn't see anyone in Street View, and given the lack of any immediate left turns after the right turn, plus the potential for being blocked by through traffic, I don't see why anyone would turn from that lane unless the light were already green.

Anyone getting on I-235 would have use for that second lane.

Honestly, it's the only lane I personally ever use there.

[jakeroot]

But then in some instances, I must question whether the double right is necessary. From your experience, how often does traffic turn right from the option lane at 13th and Zoo Blvd? I didn't see anyone in Street View, and given the lack of any immediate left turns after the right turn, plus the potential for being blocked by through traffic, I don't see why anyone would turn from that lane unless the light were already green.

Anyone getting on I-235 would have use for that second lane.

Honestly, it's the only lane I personally ever use there.

I see. I assume through traffic along 13th is fairly minimal in comparison to right turns.

On the flip-side to my argument: one potential issue with option-lane double right turns may actually be a decrease in capacity by encouraging two maneuvers to share a single lane, rather than forcing them to use separate lanes. I think this is most noticeable at option-lane exits that have a popular left-split downstream; the exit-only lane is much quieter than the option lane because most traffic needs to make the left split. The end of I-84 in Portland, OR was like this; the #3 lane was previously an exit-only to the Rose Quarter, but this was a very quiet exit, so the option lane was eliminated, and the #3 lane now allows traffic to exit to both the Rose Quarter and northbound I-5. This meant a much higher use of the previously-quiet #3 lane, and overall more capacity despite the same number of lanes.

edit: the easiest fix to the above situation is to ensure that both the option lane and non-option lane can reach the same downstream point.