Regional driving etiquette

[NoGoodNamesAvailable]

Same thing in NYC and North Jersey. It's very common and expected for people to turn left when the light turns red. When I go back home to upstate NY this seems very rare. People will just wait scared behind the line and if they don't see a gap, they'll wait for a whole new cycle. When I explained the concept of waiting in the intersection and turning left on red to my mom (who learned to drive in a rural area), she had no idea what I was talking about.

This is very interesting, because I am a lifelong Upstater, and it's only since moving downstate that I've noticed the tendency to wait at the stop line, so much so that I've been wondering whether it's a regional difference, whether the practice has changed over time, or if indeed the law itself has changed.

Yes, learning to drive Upstate we all knew that you pulled into the intersection to turn left, and had your chance to complete the turn during the brief all-red phase. This wasn't merely informal practice, this was how you were trained in the DMV manual. Now that I live in the Hudson Valley, I've noticed the practice of waiting behind the line to be far more common–in fact, I'd never registered it as being a thing at all until living here.

I'd agree that this isn't prevalent in the city proper, and I'd never really noticed it while living there, either. So maybe this is indeed a regional practice, specific to the Hudson Valley and perhaps also the OP's corner of upstate. One possible explanation I've observed is that there are a couple of known left turn traps in the area (US 9 at NY 301 for one example), so perhaps some locals have learned to avoid these. But the practice seems too widespread for this to be the whole reason.

By upstate, I meant the Hudson Valley. I know this could spark a whole debate so let's leave it as a matter of personal opinion. But maybe my perspective is a bit skewed, since my experience is mostly NYC, Westchester, and the mid-hudson valley.

[Rothman]

Same thing in NYC and North Jersey. It's very common and expected for people to turn left when the light turns red. When I go back home to upstate NY this seems very rare. People will just wait scared behind the line and if they don't see a gap, they'll wait for a whole new cycle. When I explained the concept of waiting in the intersection and turning left on red to my mom (who learned to drive in a rural area), she had no idea what I was talking about.

This is very interesting, because I am a lifelong Upstater, and it's only since moving downstate that I've noticed the tendency to wait at the stop line, so much so that I've been wondering whether it's a regional difference, whether the practice has changed over time, or if indeed the law itself has changed.

Yes, learning to drive Upstate we all knew that you pulled into the intersection to turn left, and had your chance to complete the turn during the brief all-red phase. This wasn't merely informal practice, this was how you were trained in the DMV manual. Now that I live in the Hudson Valley, I've noticed the practice of waiting behind the line to be far more common–in fact, I'd never registered it as being a thing at all until living here.

I'd agree that this isn't prevalent in the city proper, and I'd never really noticed it while living there, either. So maybe this is indeed a regional practice, specific to the Hudson Valley and perhaps also the OP's corner of upstate. One possible explanation I've observed is that there are a couple of known left turn traps in the area (US 9 at NY 301 for one example), so perhaps some locals have learned to avoid these. But the practice seems too widespread for this to be the whole reason.

By upstate, I meant the Hudson Valley. I know this could spark a whole debate so let's leave it as a matter of personal opinion. But maybe my perspective is a bit skewed, since my experience is mostly NYC, Westchester, and the mid-hudson valley.

Well, that narrow perspective explains a lot, then.

[empirestate]

By upstate, I meant the Hudson Valley. I know this could spark a whole debate so let's leave it as a matter of personal opinion. But maybe my perspective is a bit skewed, since my experience is mostly NYC, Westchester, and the mid-hudson valley.

No need to leave it as anything, I think...even under the most objective definition, a large portion of the Hudson Valley is upstate. And so that aligns your observation to mine, and reinforces the possibility that it is indeed a regional practice. Perhaps it can be traced to a certain NYSDOT region, based on signal practices or something?

[andrepoiy]

Reading this thread is interesting to me since it doesn't seem like there's any specific regional driving etiquette that's different... Or maybe I'm so accustomed to it I don't see it as different. I don't know.

[zachary_amaryllis]

is this a colorado thing, or is it nationwide?

using the bike lane as a right-turn lane. happens all the time where i live, and while i don't bike myself, seems kinda rude to me.

[webny99]

is this a colorado thing, or is it nationwide?

using the bike lane as a right-turn lane. happens all the time where i live, and while i don't bike myself, seems kinda rude to me.

Bike lanes aren't very common in this part of the country, although they are slowly becoming more so. I don't see any problem with it in cases where there is no right turn lane and no active bikers.

[kennyshark64]

...Tourists, especially those from Florida, and certain people, will go 20 miles under the limit and slam the brakes at every slight turn in the road, or they'll slow down to gawk at the scenery and create their own mini traffic jam. I once had to deal with both of these from one idiot from Florida, on NC 105 heading into Avery County, and there wasn't a climbing lane until the Avery-Watauga line. They were going 30-35 in a 50-55...

Whereas in Michigan, speed limits might be just a suggestion, in Florida, they're something to aspire to.

[Rothman]

is this a colorado thing, or is it nationwide?

using the bike lane as a right-turn lane. happens all the time where i live, and while i don't bike myself, seems kinda rude to me.

Bike lanes aren't very common in this part of the country, although they are slowly becoming more so. I don't see any problem with it in cases where there is no right turn lane and no active bikers.

I'd bet a lot of drivers feel that pulling all the way over to the right just feels safer or appropriate.

[andrepoiy]

is this a colorado thing, or is it nationwide?

using the bike lane as a right-turn lane. happens all the time where i live, and while i don't bike myself, seems kinda rude to me.

In Ontario, I lost points on my driving exam for not blocking a bike lane before I made a right turn. I'm assuming that law exists to prevent right-hook crashes. Unfortunately in practice, cyclists get really angry if anything but a bike is in their lane.

[J N Winkler]

In Ontario, I lost points on my driving exam for not blocking a bike lane before I made a right turn. I'm assuming that law exists to prevent right-hook crashes. Unfortunately in practice, cyclists get really angry if anything but a bike is in their lane.

Unfortunately, with strict driving tests, there are occasionally wide gaps between what the examiners look for and what sensible drivers actually do.  In California, for example, waiting too long at a stop sign can result in you being dinged for "overcaution."

[HighwayStar]

In Ontario, I lost points on my driving exam for not blocking a bike lane before I made a right turn. I'm assuming that law exists to prevent right-hook crashes. Unfortunately in practice, cyclists get really angry if anything but a bike is in their lane.

Unfortunately, with strict driving tests, there are occasionally wide gaps between what the examiners look for and what sensible drivers actually do.  In California, for example, waiting too long at a stop sign can result in you being dinged for "overcaution."

Agreed. Taking my driving test I got dinged for pulling out too far past the stop sign to see traffic around a blind corner. I was supposed to stop at the line, creep up, and then look? Who does that, especially with a clutch?

[jakeroot]

In Ontario, I lost points on my driving exam for not blocking a bike lane before I made a right turn. I'm assuming that law exists to prevent right-hook crashes. Unfortunately in practice, cyclists get really angry if anything but a bike is in their lane.

Unfortunately, with strict driving tests, there are occasionally wide gaps between what the examiners look for and what sensible drivers actually do.  In California, for example, waiting too long at a stop sign can result in you being dinged for "overcaution."

Agreed. Taking my driving test I got dinged for pulling out too far past the stop sign to see traffic around a blind corner. I was supposed to stop at the line, creep up, and then look? Who does that, especially with a clutch?

It's the same thing at traffic lights when turning right or left on red. You still have to stop at the line first before inching forward to clear the turn. It's not really how drivers "drive," but I don't know how you make stopping beyond the stop line (on a red light or at a stop line) legal, as the stop line/limit line is a pretty important part of intersection control.

[HighwayStar]

In Ontario, I lost points on my driving exam for not blocking a bike lane before I made a right turn. I'm assuming that law exists to prevent right-hook crashes. Unfortunately in practice, cyclists get really angry if anything but a bike is in their lane.

Unfortunately, with strict driving tests, there are occasionally wide gaps between what the examiners look for and what sensible drivers actually do.  In California, for example, waiting too long at a stop sign can result in you being dinged for "overcaution."

Agreed. Taking my driving test I got dinged for pulling out too far past the stop sign to see traffic around a blind corner. I was supposed to stop at the line, creep up, and then look? Who does that, especially with a clutch?

It's the same thing at traffic lights when turning right or left on red. You still have to stop at the line first before inching forward to clear the turn. It's not really how drivers "drive," but I don't know how you make stopping beyond the stop line (on a red light or at a stop line) legal, as the stop line/limit line is a pretty important part of intersection control.

In a signalized intersection sure, but for a stop sign like this it would be entirely pointless.

[hotdogPi]

I feel like HighwayStar actually has a point here, even though I usually disagree with him. This is an issue of legality, not actual safety.

[HighwayStar]

I feel like HighwayStar actually has a point here, even though I usually disagree with him. This is an issue of legality, not actual safety.

I don't feel like you usually disagree with me. If we discount that whole I-70 affair I would give you a batting average over 50%.

[jakeroot]

In Ontario, I lost points on my driving exam for not blocking a bike lane before I made a right turn. I'm assuming that law exists to prevent right-hook crashes. Unfortunately in practice, cyclists get really angry if anything but a bike is in their lane.

Unfortunately, with strict driving tests, there are occasionally wide gaps between what the examiners look for and what sensible drivers actually do.  In California, for example, waiting too long at a stop sign can result in you being dinged for "overcaution."

Agreed. Taking my driving test I got dinged for pulling out too far past the stop sign to see traffic around a blind corner. I was supposed to stop at the line, creep up, and then look? Who does that, especially with a clutch?

It's the same thing at traffic lights when turning right or left on red. You still have to stop at the line first before inching forward to clear the turn. It's not really how drivers "drive," but I don't know how you make stopping beyond the stop line (on a red light or at a stop line) legal, as the stop line/limit line is a pretty important part of intersection control.

In a signalized intersection sure, but for a stop sign like this it would be entirely pointless.

I approach stop signs like this: pop into neutral (no reason to downshift if I know I have to stop), coast/brake to a stop at the line, put into first, creep forward while clearing the intersection, proceed with the maneuver. California stops might be more typical for regular stop signs with good visibility, but there's certainly nothing legal about not stopping at a stop sign.

The MUTCD is slightly to blame here. Because the crosswalk (painted or not) is always between the stop line and the roadway edge, there is almost always a very large gap between where drivers stop and where the actual point of danger is. It would require some rather fundamental changes to both the MUTCD and state laws to, say, flip those two. Yield signs could always be used, but engineers seem quite nervous using those outside of quiet neighborhoods or slip lanes.

[jakeroot]

I feel like HighwayStar actually has a point here, even though I usually disagree with him. This is an issue of legality, not actual safety.

I don't disagree with the safety argument. Most stop signs are rather pointless. It's why I'm glad many PNW cities do not use them unless the road is arterial or higher (below arterial usually is uncontrolled). But I don't know how you change the law to better fit the situation. Yield signs are really the only option.

[HighwayStar]

In Ontario, I lost points on my driving exam for not blocking a bike lane before I made a right turn. I'm assuming that law exists to prevent right-hook crashes. Unfortunately in practice, cyclists get really angry if anything but a bike is in their lane.

Unfortunately, with strict driving tests, there are occasionally wide gaps between what the examiners look for and what sensible drivers actually do.  In California, for example, waiting too long at a stop sign can result in you being dinged for "overcaution."

Agreed. Taking my driving test I got dinged for pulling out too far past the stop sign to see traffic around a blind corner. I was supposed to stop at the line, creep up, and then look? Who does that, especially with a clutch?

It's the same thing at traffic lights when turning right or left on red. You still have to stop at the line first before inching forward to clear the turn. It's not really how drivers "drive," but I don't know how you make stopping beyond the stop line (on a red light or at a stop line) legal, as the stop line/limit line is a pretty important part of intersection control.

In a signalized intersection sure, but for a stop sign like this it would be entirely pointless.

I approach stop signs like this: pop into neutral (no reason to downshift if I know I have to stop), coast/brake to a stop at the line, put into first, creep forward while clearing the intersection, proceed with the maneuver. California stops might be more typical for regular stop signs with good visibility, but there's certainly nothing legal about not stopping at a stop sign.

The MUTCD is slightly to blame here. Because the crosswalk (painted or not) is always between the stop line and the roadway edge, there is almost always a very large gap between where drivers stop and where the actual point of danger is. It would require some rather fundamental changes to both the MUTCD and state laws to, say, flip those two. Yield signs could always be used, but engineers seem quite nervous using those outside of quiet neighborhoods or slip lanes.

Nope, you are still inching forward with the clutch to even get to the point where you know what is going on.
And it is not that no one is not stopping, just stopping once, not twice, and at the relevant point to see.

The procedure is to leave the vehicle in gear as you brake and then drop the clutch just before it would start to stall, shift to first, and at the same time apply the brake to stop at a point where you can actually see, then proceed as normal.

[1995hoo]

In Ontario, I lost points on my driving exam for not blocking a bike lane before I made a right turn. I'm assuming that law exists to prevent right-hook crashes. Unfortunately in practice, cyclists get really angry if anything but a bike is in their lane.

Unfortunately, with strict driving tests, there are occasionally wide gaps between what the examiners look for and what sensible drivers actually do.  In California, for example, waiting too long at a stop sign can result in you being dinged for "overcaution."

Agreed. Taking my driving test I got dinged for pulling out too far past the stop sign to see traffic around a blind corner. I was supposed to stop at the line, creep up, and then look? Who does that, especially with a clutch?

It's the same thing at traffic lights when turning right or left on red. You still have to stop at the line first before inching forward to clear the turn. It's not really how drivers "drive," but I don't know how you make stopping beyond the stop line (on a red light or at a stop line) legal, as the stop line/limit line is a pretty important part of intersection control.

In a signalized intersection sure, but for a stop sign like this it would be entirely pointless.

It's worth noting, however, that some jurisdictions with camera enforcement set the cameras to ticket you if you fail to stop at the line. The District of Columbia has some stop sign cameras and there have been a lot of upset people who were ticketed when they stopped halfway beyond the line or similar. The one at this intersection has gotten the most publicity (you can see the camera if you pan around to the left; it's on the pole to the left of the school speed limit sign).

[interstatefan990]

I actually disagree. Many times a stop line is likely painted in a certain spot because vehicles turning left off the main roadway or from other approaches "cut the corner" or otherwise turn with too short of a radius. If a car is rolling up to a stop sign at speed and another car is cutting a left turn too close at the same time, especially with low visibility, that can result in a nasty angled T-bone crash. It's safer to stop at the line and creep up so both you and the other driver have a chance to prevent this.

[jakeroot]

Nope, you are still inching forward with the clutch to even get to the point where you know what is going on.
And it is not that no one is not stopping, just stopping once, not twice, and at the relevant point to see.

The secondary stop is entirely your choice. The state just wants you to stop at the line first to ensure (a) you aren't clipped by left-turning traffic, (b) you don't overshoot the stop line and enter cross-traffic, and (c) leave room for pedestrians and cyclists to cross.

The procedure is to leave the vehicle in gear as you brake and then drop the clutch just before it would start to stall, shift to first, and at the same time apply the brake to stop at a point where you can actually see, then proceed as normal.

That's the appropriate method for a California stop, a slip lane, or when approaching a signal or uncontrolled intersection where you might be able to keep going without stopping, but if you know you have to stop, there's no reason to leave it in gear.

[HighwayStar]

Nope, you are still inching forward with the clutch to even get to the point where you know what is going on.
And it is not that no one is not stopping, just stopping once, not twice, and at the relevant point to see.

The secondary stop is entirely your choice. The state just wants you to stop at the line first to ensure (a) you aren't clipped by left-turning traffic, (b) you don't overshoot the stop line and enter cross-traffic, and (c) leave room for pedestrians and cyclists to cross.

The procedure is to leave the vehicle in gear as you brake and then drop the clutch just before it would start to stall, shift to first, and at the same time apply the brake to stop at a point where you can actually see, then proceed as normal.

That's the appropriate method for a California stop, a slip lane, or when approaching a signal or uncontrolled intersection where you might be able to keep going without stopping, but if you know you have to stop, there's no reason to leave it in gear.

More crashes are going to result from stopping at the line and going when you can't see than people driving in your lane when they turn the corner (in which case they should be entirely at fault). Pedestrians and cyclists are always in the way as it is, no need to encourage them to do more of it.

[empirestate]

Agreed. Taking my driving test I got dinged for pulling out too far past the stop sign to see traffic around a blind corner. I was supposed to stop at the line, creep up, and then look? Who does that, especially with a clutch?

Indeed, and I have more than once gotten into conflict as a pedestrian, with a driver doing exactly that, because of course the stop line will be behind where the sidewalk crosses. (It's especially an issue if you're approaching the right side of the vehicle, because drivers are taught to look left first.)

[US 89]

It's worth noting, however, that some jurisdictions with camera enforcement set the cameras to ticket you if you fail to stop at the line. The District of Columbia has some stop sign cameras and there have been a lot of upset people who were ticketed when they stopped halfway beyond the line or similar. The one at this intersection has gotten the most publicity (you can see the camera if you pan around to the left; it's on the pole to the left of the school speed limit sign).

I have never heard of stop sign cameras until now. Looks like that one doesn't even have any "photo enforced" signage in advance, either... am I glad I don't have to drive in DC.

[TheHighwayMan3561]

It's worth noting, however, that some jurisdictions with camera enforcement set the cameras to ticket you if you fail to stop at the line. The District of Columbia has some stop sign cameras and there have been a lot of upset people who were ticketed when they stopped halfway beyond the line or similar. The one at this intersection has gotten the most publicity (you can see the camera if you pan around to the left; it's on the pole to the left of the school speed limit sign).

I have never heard of stop sign cameras until now. Looks like that one doesn't even have any "photo enforced" signage in advance, either... am I glad I don't have to drive in DC.

I mean, how do these even work? With a red light camera it's programmed to operate with the lights. How does it know to distinguish someone breaching the white line as they come to a stop, and someone legally stopping and then going across it?