AARoads Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length

Author Topic: Right on Red Arrow  (Read 20617 times)

jakeroot

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 6513
  • Don't do what Donny Don't does

  • Age: 22
  • Location: BC / Tacoma, Wash
  • Last Login: Today at 04:06:47 AM
Re: Right on Red Arrow
« Reply #250 on: October 27, 2017, 12:25:52 AM »

The only time I see electronic turn prohibition signs are at railway crossings (here) or pedestrian crossings (here) (the latter is required because RTOR w/ red arrows is allowed in Washington, as it is in NJ).

There are several of these signs in my area that aren't at railway or pedestrian crossings:

Ramp to SB I-15 at Parrish Lane, Centerville
Ramp to NB I-15 at Park Lane, Farmington
Ramp to SB Legacy at Park Lane, Farmington

All three are at a freeway onramp. I'm not sure why these movements would be prohibited, unless it's just poor visibility.

There are also several of these signs at the many CFI's along Bangerter Highway, such as this one. These signs are there because a right turn would conflict with the CFI left-turn movements.

Hmm. More common than I realized. Unless another PNW user knows of one that I can't think of, I am certain that no electronic prohibition signs exist in my area for purposes other than railways or crosswalks. Still seems a bit odd.
Logged

mrsman

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1628
  • Age: 42
  • Location: Silver Spring, MD
  • Last Login: Today at 08:12:32 AM
Re: Right on Red Arrow
« Reply #251 on: October 27, 2017, 01:48:31 PM »

The only time I see electronic turn prohibition signs are at railway crossings (here) or pedestrian crossings (here) (the latter is required because RTOR w/ red arrows is allowed in Washington, as it is in NJ).

There are several of these signs in my area that aren't at railway or pedestrian crossings:

Ramp to SB I-15 at Parrish Lane, Centerville
Ramp to NB I-15 at Park Lane, Farmington
Ramp to SB Legacy at Park Lane, Farmington

All three are at a freeway onramp. I'm not sure why these movements would be prohibited, unless it's just poor visibility.

There are also several of these signs at the many CFI's along Bangerter Highway, such as this one. These signs are there because a right turn would conflict with the CFI left-turn movements.

Hmm. More common than I realized. Unless another PNW user knows of one that I can't think of, I am certain that no electronic prohibition signs exist in my area for purposes other than railways or crosswalks. Still seems a bit odd.

I would only venture a guess that it is done that way in order to prevent people from inching in when another group has clear right of way and a short cycle.

If you are on a street and want to make a right turn onto the freeway on-ramp.  You will normally focus on finding even a small gap in traffic to make that turn and continue.  But what if the gap is really small.  When you make your turn, the traffic that has the right of way will react by slowing down, thereby limiting throughput on their turn.  Basically, it is a form of aggressive driving.

I know of one intersection near here at Forest Glen and Georgia in Silver Sping, MD where during the morning rush there is a long line of cars making the right turn from Eastbound Forest Glen to SB Georgia.  (On-ramps tothe Beltway are just south of there.) Because traffic signals favor Georgia, a very heavy left turn movement from FG westbound to SB Georgia with many heading to the right lane of Georgia to access the Beltway ramps, and a decent amount of pedestrians walking to the nearby Metro station on the green light, the time to make this right turn is actuaully quite short, so people make the turn in whatever gap they can find.  If their gap to turn is big enough for their car to fit, but small enough that conflicting traffic with ROW would have to slow down to let them through, then those right turners are stealing available throughput.

In their judgment, MD allows for this turn by not prohibiting the turn on red.  UT prohibits this turn so that the left turners can get maximum throughput on their turn.  Fully protected from all users, even if it is slightly inefficient where there are right turn gaps.
Logged

jakeroot

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 6513
  • Don't do what Donny Don't does

  • Age: 22
  • Location: BC / Tacoma, Wash
  • Last Login: Today at 04:06:47 AM
Re: Right on Red Arrow
« Reply #252 on: October 27, 2017, 02:52:30 PM »

If a particular turn movement really needs just that extra bit of capacity, I suppose I could see a case being made. But under most circumstances, it doesn't seem like it would be necessary.

One particular turn on red I like to take advantage of is turning into an unused turn lane. Sometimes around here, you'll have left turning cars all stacked in the left-most left turn lane (usually because the other turn lane ends after the turn). I'll turn right on red into the right lane, and then merge over. That little maneuver wouldn't be possible with a RTOR restriction.
Logged

kphoger

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 6707
  • Location: Wichita, KS
  • Last Login: December 15, 2017, 04:58:24 PM
Re: Right on Red Arrow
« Reply #253 on: October 27, 2017, 03:10:26 PM »

If a particular turn movement really needs just that extra bit of capacity, I suppose I could see a case being made. But under most circumstances, it doesn't seem like it would be necessary.

One particular turn on red I like to take advantage of is turning into an unused turn lane. Sometimes around here, you'll have left turning cars all stacked in the left-most left turn lane (usually because the other turn lane ends after the turn). I'll turn right on red into the right lane, and then merge over. That little maneuver wouldn't be possible with a RTOR restriction.

Am I understanding you correctly? :

Oncoming traffic has dual left-turn lanes and a green arrow.
You intend to turn right and have a red light.
The crossroad tapers to one lane in that direction, so everyone is in the leftmost turn lane.
This frees up the lane you intend to turn into, because it would be for the nonexistent traffic in the rightmost turn lane.
Logged
Keep right except to pass.  Yes.  You.

jakeroot

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 6513
  • Don't do what Donny Don't does

  • Age: 22
  • Location: BC / Tacoma, Wash
  • Last Login: Today at 04:06:47 AM
Re: Right on Red Arrow
« Reply #254 on: October 27, 2017, 07:52:00 PM »

If a particular turn movement really needs just that extra bit of capacity, I suppose I could see a case being made. But under most circumstances, it doesn't seem like it would be necessary.

One particular turn on red I like to take advantage of is turning into an unused turn lane. Sometimes around here, you'll have left turning cars all stacked in the left-most left turn lane (usually because the other turn lane ends after the turn). I'll turn right on red into the right lane, and then merge over. That little maneuver wouldn't be possible with a RTOR restriction.

Am I understanding you correctly? :

Oncoming traffic has dual left-turn lanes and a green arrow.
You intend to turn right and have a red light.
The crossroad tapers to one lane in that direction, so everyone is in the leftmost turn lane.
This frees up the lane you intend to turn into, because it would be for the nonexistent traffic in the rightmost turn lane.

Precisely. And this is the intersection where I used to perform the maneuver most often, before moving away: https://goo.gl/4oP4cs
Logged

Baloo Uriza

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1422
  • Age: 35
  • Location: Tulsa, Oklahoma
  • Last Login: December 16, 2017, 10:50:04 PM
Re: Right on Red Arrow
« Reply #255 on: October 28, 2017, 04:52:28 PM »

If a particular turn movement really needs just that extra bit of capacity, I suppose I could see a case being made. But under most circumstances, it doesn't seem like it would be necessary.

One particular turn on red I like to take advantage of is turning into an unused turn lane. Sometimes around here, you'll have left turning cars all stacked in the left-most left turn lane (usually because the other turn lane ends after the turn). I'll turn right on red into the right lane, and then merge over. That little maneuver wouldn't be possible with a RTOR restriction.

I honestly wouldn't mind a NTOR restriction when a pedestrian is in the crosswalk.  Intersections that are far wider than they are long are the worst for pedestrians when a permissive left is allowed, and intersections that are much longer than they are wide (or just plain long) are the worst for right turns.  In both cases, I think it's pretty reasonable for a hard restriction on turns across the crosswalk indicated by the signal or blackout sign.  Essentially, giving pedestrian movements equal priority to vehicular movement instead of afterthought levels of lesser priority.  Giving the beg buttons the worst timing and their respective crosswalks the worst right of way in intersections is both insulting and dangerous.  Even then, if the timing is still shit, then at least reward beg button use with protected access similar to vehicular movement when the light turns from orange to white.
« Last Edit: October 28, 2017, 05:07:00 PM by Baloo Uriza »
Logged

jakeroot

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 6513
  • Don't do what Donny Don't does

  • Age: 22
  • Location: BC / Tacoma, Wash
  • Last Login: Today at 04:06:47 AM
Re: Right on Red Arrow
« Reply #256 on: October 28, 2017, 06:39:23 PM »

I honestly wouldn't mind a NTOR restriction when a pedestrian is in the crosswalk.  Intersections that are far wider than they are long are the worst for pedestrians when a permissive left is allowed, and intersections that are much longer than they are wide (or just plain long) are the worst for right turns.  In both cases, I think it's pretty reasonable for a hard restriction on turns across the crosswalk indicated by the signal or blackout sign.  Essentially, giving pedestrian movements equal priority to vehicular movement instead of afterthought levels of lesser priority.  Giving the beg buttons the worst timing and their respective crosswalks the worst right of way in intersections is both insulting and dangerous.  Even then, if the timing is still shit, then at least reward beg button use with protected access similar to vehicular movement when the light turns from orange to white.

-- Deleted my post because I don't think it has anything to do with your response --

I don't mind fully protected crossing movements ('no turn on red' for right turns, or red arrows instead of FYAs for left turns), but I'd prefer to only see them during the "WALK" phase, instead of during the whole phase, as I often see in Bellevue, WA (red arrows for left turns during entire walk+don't walk phase). This would be similar to advanced walk signals seen in downtown areas, where the cars don't get a green until after the pedestrians do, to improve visibility (visibility seems to be the big issue).

I do think beg buttons should be utilised different than they are now. With a more advanced adaptive system, one street would be considered the arterial, and would display a permanent walk sign (FYA permitted after maybe first five seconds?). Once a car approaches from a side street, the countdown would start and the phase would end. I would prefer these side streets not have default walk signs. Especially during off-peak hours, there's not a lot of cars coming down these side streets, so including a default walk phase for the street would increase the minimum green time from 3-5 seconds, to 20+ seconds (depends on width) for each cycle, which could be disastrous for traffic flow.

What I really want is an adaptive (camera-based) system that can detect pedestrians, so we can just do away with the beg buttons altogether. You wouldn't need to worry about pressing a button in time.

FWIW, even the most pedestrian friendly countries on earth use beg buttons. Exhibit A: the Netherlands.
Logged

Baloo Uriza

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1422
  • Age: 35
  • Location: Tulsa, Oklahoma
  • Last Login: December 16, 2017, 10:50:04 PM
Re: Right on Red Arrow
« Reply #257 on: October 28, 2017, 07:12:32 PM »

I honestly wouldn't mind a NTOR restriction when a pedestrian is in the crosswalk.  Intersections that are far wider than they are long are the worst for pedestrians when a permissive left is allowed, and intersections that are much longer than they are wide (or just plain long) are the worst for right turns.  In both cases, I think it's pretty reasonable for a hard restriction on turns across the crosswalk indicated by the signal or blackout sign.  Essentially, giving pedestrian movements equal priority to vehicular movement instead of afterthought levels of lesser priority.  Giving the beg buttons the worst timing and their respective crosswalks the worst right of way in intersections is both insulting and dangerous.  Even then, if the timing is still shit, then at least reward beg button use with protected access similar to vehicular movement when the light turns from orange to white.

-- Deleted my post because I don't think it has anything to do with your response --

I don't mind fully protected crossing movements ('no turn on red' for right turns, or red arrows instead of FYAs for left turns), but I'd prefer to only see them during the "WALK" phase, instead of during the whole phase, as I often see in Bellevue, WA (red arrows for left turns during entire walk+don't walk phase). This would be similar to advanced walk signals seen in downtown areas, where the cars don't get a green until after the pedestrians do, to improve visibility (visibility seems to be the big issue).

I do think beg buttons should be utilised different than they are now. With a more advanced adaptive system, one street would be considered the arterial, and would display a permanent walk sign (FYA permitted after maybe first five seconds?). Once a car approaches from a side street, the countdown would start and the phase would end. I would prefer these side streets not have default walk signs. Especially during off-peak hours, there's not a lot of cars coming down these side streets, so including a default walk phase for the street would increase the minimum green time from 3-5 seconds, to 20+ seconds (depends on width) for each cycle, which could be disastrous for traffic flow.

What I really want is an adaptive (camera-based) system that can detect pedestrians, so we can just do away with the beg buttons altogether. You wouldn't need to worry about pressing a button in time.

FWIW, even the most pedestrian friendly countries on earth use beg buttons. Exhibit A: the Netherlands.

I'm not opposed to beg buttons per se, but I'm not a fan of vehicles being allowed to cross at all.  I'd be OK with permissive movements being allowed after, say, 80% of the flashing orange light, but not at the start of the flashing orange (since it's impossible to cross even the nearside lanes on most typical white lights), and certainly not at any time during the white phase.
« Last Edit: October 28, 2017, 07:15:19 PM by Baloo Uriza »
Logged

mrsman

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1628
  • Age: 42
  • Location: Silver Spring, MD
  • Last Login: Today at 08:12:32 AM
Re: Right on Red Arrow
« Reply #258 on: October 28, 2017, 09:57:08 PM »

If a particular turn movement really needs just that extra bit of capacity, I suppose I could see a case being made. But under most circumstances, it doesn't seem like it would be necessary.

One particular turn on red I like to take advantage of is turning into an unused turn lane. Sometimes around here, you'll have left turning cars all stacked in the left-most left turn lane (usually because the other turn lane ends after the turn). I'll turn right on red into the right lane, and then merge over. That little maneuver wouldn't be possible with a RTOR restriction.

Am I understanding you correctly? :

Oncoming traffic has dual left-turn lanes and a green arrow.
You intend to turn right and have a red light.
The crossroad tapers to one lane in that direction, so everyone is in the leftmost turn lane.
This frees up the lane you intend to turn into, because it would be for the nonexistent traffic in the rightmost turn lane.

Precisely. And this is the intersection where I used to perform the maneuver most often, before moving away: https://goo.gl/4oP4cs

The RTOR maneuver onto a freeway on-ramp during the time when opposing traffic has a protected left turn green arrow seems to be what we are discussing.  We acknowledge that the movement is likely to be busy and likely to have a fairly limited amount of the time in the traffic signal cycle.  This seems to be what is prohibited in roadguy2's examples from Utah.

It is also prohibited in this example here in the Los Angeles area:

https://www.google.com/maps/@34.1552031,-118.4311256,3a,75y,29.73h,93.45t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1skD_063hQkbP0Ln4pRUAnJg!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo1.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DkD_063hQkbP0Ln4pRUAnJg%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D220.16148%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i13312!8i6656

(As can be seen at the Woodman Ave onramp to southbound (eastbound) US 101 in Van Nuys, there is NTOR but only 7-9AM weekdays.  So for the busiest time periods of the on-ramp, both for those who make the opposing left turn and any cross traffic from off-ramp to on-ramp, the DOT decided that they do not want right turners interfering with the limited time the other people have for making this turn.  Since the traffic signal generally favors Woodman, the right turners have sufficient time on their own portion of the cycle to make the turn and they do not need to steal time from other directions.)

Off-peak, no problem.  Make the right turn when it is safe, if you see a gap in traffic.

So the reason for many of these instances appears to be throughput.  A left turn onto a freeway on ramp will have a lot of demand but generally have a short phase in a traffic signal that favors through traffic along the main street.  There is likely not going to be much of a gap anyway, excepting for someone sneaking in because someone is making their left turn movement slowly.  So to prevent drivers from taking away part of the signal time, a NTOR is imposed on traffic turning right at the same ramp.
Logged

jakeroot

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 6513
  • Don't do what Donny Don't does

  • Age: 22
  • Location: BC / Tacoma, Wash
  • Last Login: Today at 04:06:47 AM
Re: Right on Red Arrow
« Reply #259 on: October 28, 2017, 11:38:02 PM »

I honestly wouldn't mind a NTOR restriction when a pedestrian is in the crosswalk.  Intersections that are far wider than they are long are the worst for pedestrians when a permissive left is allowed, and intersections that are much longer than they are wide (or just plain long) are the worst for right turns.  In both cases, I think it's pretty reasonable for a hard restriction on turns across the crosswalk indicated by the signal or blackout sign.  Essentially, giving pedestrian movements equal priority to vehicular movement instead of afterthought levels of lesser priority.  Giving the beg buttons the worst timing and their respective crosswalks the worst right of way in intersections is both insulting and dangerous.  Even then, if the timing is still shit, then at least reward beg button use with protected access similar to vehicular movement when the light turns from orange to white.

-- Deleted my post because I don't think it has anything to do with your response --

I don't mind fully protected crossing movements ('no turn on red' for right turns, or red arrows instead of FYAs for left turns), but I'd prefer to only see them during the "WALK" phase, instead of during the whole phase, as I often see in Bellevue, WA (red arrows for left turns during entire walk+don't walk phase). This would be similar to advanced walk signals seen in downtown areas, where the cars don't get a green until after the pedestrians do, to improve visibility (visibility seems to be the big issue).

I do think beg buttons should be utilised different than they are now. With a more advanced adaptive system, one street would be considered the arterial, and would display a permanent walk sign (FYA permitted after maybe first five seconds?). Once a car approaches from a side street, the countdown would start and the phase would end. I would prefer these side streets not have default walk signs. Especially during off-peak hours, there's not a lot of cars coming down these side streets, so including a default walk phase for the street would increase the minimum green time from 3-5 seconds, to 20+ seconds (depends on width) for each cycle, which could be disastrous for traffic flow.

What I really want is an adaptive (camera-based) system that can detect pedestrians, so we can just do away with the beg buttons altogether. You wouldn't need to worry about pressing a button in time.

FWIW, even the most pedestrian friendly countries on earth use beg buttons. Exhibit A: the Netherlands.

I'm not opposed to beg buttons per se, but I'm not a fan of vehicles being allowed to cross at all.  I'd be OK with permissive movements being allowed after, say, 80% of the flashing orange light, but not at the start of the flashing orange (since it's impossible to cross even the nearside lanes on most typical white lights), and certainly not at any time during the white phase.

The point with the delayed FYA is simply to get pedestrians out into the intersection before the FYA pops up, so that drivers would be more likely to see them. Of course, if you're walking, and the walk sign pops up, say, 10 seconds before you get to the crosswalk, there will probably be cars turning through the crosswalk as you approach it. But that's just the way she goes. I have been for red-arrows during the entire walk+don't walk phase before, but my experience with it IRL has not been good, and my opinion has swayed: pedestrians hit the button, cross on red anyways, and then make me wait 20-25 seconds while their phase is protected (even though they've long moved on); creating extremely long phases due to three separate left turn phases (red arrow, FYA, green arrow -- all quite long); pedestrians continue to cross even after the don't walk phase has ended, because the parallel traffic still has a green light...the list goes on. Like I said, I don't mind red arrows for the length of the white hand, but beyond that, it starts to get annoying, especially since pedestrians often move quite fast, and there's not a lot of them outside of downtown cores.
Logged

jakeroot

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 6513
  • Don't do what Donny Don't does

  • Age: 22
  • Location: BC / Tacoma, Wash
  • Last Login: Today at 04:06:47 AM
Re: Right on Red Arrow
« Reply #260 on: October 28, 2017, 11:43:01 PM »

So the reason for many of these instances appears to be throughput.  A left turn onto a freeway on ramp will have a lot of demand but generally have a short phase in a traffic signal that favors through traffic along the main street.  There is likely not going to be much of a gap anyway, excepting for someone sneaking in because someone is making their left turn movement slowly.  So to prevent drivers from taking away part of the signal time, a NTOR is imposed on traffic turning right at the same ramp.

I still don't understand the math. A gap, is a gap, is a gap...if a right turner decides to fill that gap, I don't see how that could affect the flow of those turning left. The flow of those turning left is exacerbated by the slow left turner, not the guy taking advantage of a dimwitted driver.

The only reason I could see this being an issue is a chain-reaction brake, but that shouldn't be an issue here, since traffic was already stopped waiting for the green arrow.

Side note: California could improve their traffic flow if they stopped using so many single-lane protected lefts.
Logged

7/8

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 2105
  • Civil Eng Student at Waterloo: Co-op this Fall

  • Age: 22
  • Location: The K in KW (Kitchener, ON)
  • Last Login: Today at 10:44:10 AM
Re: Right on Red Arrow
« Reply #261 on: October 29, 2017, 12:52:43 AM »

So the reason for many of these instances appears to be throughput.  A left turn onto a freeway on ramp will have a lot of demand but generally have a short phase in a traffic signal that favors through traffic along the main street.  There is likely not going to be much of a gap anyway, excepting for someone sneaking in because someone is making their left turn movement slowly.  So to prevent drivers from taking away part of the signal time, a NTOR is imposed on traffic turning right at the same ramp.

I still don't understand the math. A gap, is a gap, is a gap...if a right turner decides to fill that gap, I don't see how that could affect the flow of those turning left. The flow of those turning left is exacerbated by the slow left turner, not the guy taking advantage of a dimwitted driver.

The only reason I could see this being an issue is a chain-reaction brake, but that shouldn't be an issue here, since traffic was already stopped waiting for the green arrow.

Side note: California could improve their traffic flow if they stopped using so many single-lane protected lefts.

The problem is you might get someone who tries getting in a small gap that forces the left turners to brake. Still, I think this is rare enough to not warrant a NTOR sign. In my area, things work just fine without prohibiting right turns during this phase.

I do think it could be useful in areas with lots of U-turns. I almost hit someone since I made a ROR and they were doing a U-turn. I'm not used to looking out for that, but this one intersection has lots of people doing U-turns to get to a nearby street.
Logged


http://www.mob-rule.com/user/dscurtis
http://tm.teresco.org/user/?u=7_8

- Graduating in April. Where does the time go?
- Bring back the pre-Mike Harris King's Highway System!

kphoger

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 6707
  • Location: Wichita, KS
  • Last Login: December 15, 2017, 04:58:24 PM
Re: Right on Red Arrow
« Reply #262 on: October 30, 2017, 01:54:43 PM »

If a particular turn movement really needs just that extra bit of capacity, I suppose I could see a case being made. But under most circumstances, it doesn't seem like it would be necessary.

One particular turn on red I like to take advantage of is turning into an unused turn lane. Sometimes around here, you'll have left turning cars all stacked in the left-most left turn lane (usually because the other turn lane ends after the turn). I'll turn right on red into the right lane, and then merge over. That little maneuver wouldn't be possible with a RTOR restriction.

Am I understanding you correctly? :

Oncoming traffic has dual left-turn lanes and a green arrow.
You intend to turn right and have a red light.
The crossroad tapers to one lane in that direction, so everyone is in the leftmost turn lane.
This frees up the lane you intend to turn into, because it would be for the nonexistent traffic in the rightmost turn lane.

Precisely. And this is the intersection where I used to perform the maneuver most often, before moving away: https://goo.gl/4oP4cs

I was having trouble coming up with an example around me, but I wasn't thinking of highway on-ramps.  Here's one where I do the same thing, less than a mile from my house.  south on Oliver Road, turning onto westbound Kellogg.
Logged
Keep right except to pass.  Yes.  You.

jakeroot

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 6513
  • Don't do what Donny Don't does

  • Age: 22
  • Location: BC / Tacoma, Wash
  • Last Login: Today at 04:06:47 AM
Re: Right on Red Arrow
« Reply #263 on: October 30, 2017, 04:01:38 PM »

The problem is you might get someone who tries getting in a small gap that forces the left turners to brake. Still, I think this is rare enough to not warrant a NTOR sign. In my area, things work just fine without prohibiting right turns during this phase.

That's basically my stance. It just seems so unusual that it seems like a total waste to even bother with all the wiring, timing, etc.

I do think it could be useful in areas with lots of U-turns. I almost hit someone since I made a ROR and they were doing a U-turn. I'm not used to looking out for that, but this one intersection has lots of people doing U-turns to get to a nearby street.

Most of the roads with medians in my area permit U-turns, so I'm pretty used to having to yield to U-turners. Here's a common sign: https://goo.gl/i7SrmL (still didn't prevent a cop from cutting me off while I was doing a U-turn a few years ago).
Logged

jakeroot

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 6513
  • Don't do what Donny Don't does

  • Age: 22
  • Location: BC / Tacoma, Wash
  • Last Login: Today at 04:06:47 AM
Re: Right on Red Arrow
« Reply #264 on: November 21, 2017, 04:37:17 AM »

I finally found a double right in my area with a restriction on the left lane: https://goo.gl/8i2rnN (27 Ave NE @ 172 St NE, Marysville, WA).

As far as I can tell, the restriction was put in place sometime between 2012 and 2015, judging by GSV. There's been a double right turn in this location for at least ten years. No idea what would have caused the change. Double rights are very common in my area, and no others have this kind of restriction.

FWIW, the far-right signal head has a red arrow.
Logged

 


Opinions expressed here on belong solely to the poster and do not represent or reflect the opinions or beliefs of AARoads, its creators and/or associates.