Why are Unsigned Double Turns Allowed?

[Brian556]

On several occasions, outside of Texas, I have encountered double turns that are not signed. It's ridiculous. There is no f-ing way to know they exist when vehicles are sitting on top of the pavement markings, and there are no signs. It created an unsafe situation when drivers are not informed of the double turn.

I don't mind it when it's obvious because both turn lanes are in bay, but if both turn lanes are not in a bay, there defiantly needs to be signs.

I have see this in Tennessee and Florida. Tennessee's signage isn't that great, but you'd expect better from Florida.

In Texas most double turn have multiple signs, sometimes four or five.

Is there not at rule requiring them to be signed?

[myosh_tino]

Help me out guys.  Which one of the following are considered "flush medians"?

I know (A) is your standard two-way left turn lane.  I also know it's illegal to make left or u-turns in California if the road is striped like (B) or (C).

[vtk]

I know (A) is your standard two-way left turn lane.  I also know it's illegal to make left or u-turns in California if the road is striped like (B) or (C).

B and C are functionally identical, and do not in Ohio prohibit occupying or crossing that center space. The only thing different about A is that drivers turning left are *expected* to occupy the center lane before making the turn.

[cl94]

I know (A) is your standard two-way left turn lane.  I also know it's illegal to make left or u-turns in California if the road is striped like (B) or (C).

B and C are functionally identical, and do not in Ohio prohibit occupying or crossing that center space. The only thing different about A is that drivers turning left are *expected* to occupy the center lane before making the turn.

As is the case in most eastern states. I don't think the MUTCD defines a flush median as a place where cars should not be driven, either. Out here, turns are allowed unless signed otherwise or a barrier exists and, while I have never been west of the Mississippi River, everywhere I have been treats a flush median as a turn lane and that includes most of the eastern and midwestern US. What is law in California is not law on the other side of the country.

[Bitmapped]

Help me out guys.  Which one of the following are considered "flush medians"?

I know (A) is your standard two-way left turn lane.  I also know it's illegal to make left or u-turns in California if the road is striped like (B) or (C).

On a lot of 4-lane roads in eastern Kentucky, KYTC uses something like B except it's only a single line on each side rather than a double line. Sometimes there is a mountable median, sometimes not. I never know what I'm supposed to do with left turns in this configuration. It's wide enough for TWLT, so I wish they'd just mark it as such.

[hbelkins]

I'm pretty sure the mountable median is intended to be used as a turn lane.

[realjd]

I'm pretty sure the mountable median is intended to be used as a turn lane.

Mountable median?

[roadfro]

As is the case in most eastern states. I don't think the MUTCD defines a flush median as a place where cars should not be driven, either. Out here, turns are allowed unless signed otherwise or a barrier exists and, while I have never been west of the Mississippi River, everywhere I have been treats a flush median as a turn lane and that includes most of the eastern and midwestern US. What is law in California is not law on the other side of the country.

The MUTCD does not define a flush median. The standard I quoted above is one of the few mentions of the concept. However, it does define "median" as that area between two roadways of a divided highway between the traveled way excluding turn lanes. With that definition of median, I interpret the MUTCD intent is that a flush median is not to be traversed. (With that said, I recognize that the MUTCD is not the law.)

In Nevada, I can't think of any application of a flush median in a location where there is a driveway or side street that would need to be to be crossed–there is usually either a TWLTL, raised median or painted median opening instead.

I'm pretty sure the mountable median is intended to be used as a turn lane.

Mountable median?

A median that is a hard surface, often slightly raised above the pavement surface by a small amount but not nearly as high as a typical median curb.

I would be tempted to turn across a flush median, depending on location (and if anyone else were around), but I wouldn't consider using a mountable median to make a turn.

[myosh_tino]

What is law in California is not law on the other side of the country.

I understand that.  I was simply pointing out that while it may be legal in your state/region, it is not in California.

[Rothman]

I'm pretty sure the mountable median is intended to be used as a turn lane.

Mountable median?

You mount the median, son...or else, send her out to me, huh?

[Brandon]

I'm pretty sure the mountable median is intended to be used as a turn lane.

Mountable median?

It's a median that is slightly raised, but intended to be crossed over like a double turn lane.  We have quite a few in Illinois.

[UCFKnights]

Typically its not just a arrow markings on the lane that indicate its a left turn lane, its also the lines between the lanes, and the signal setup indicate dual left turn lanes. There is also the dashed lines in the intersection. I know around here, they are tried to reduce the number of unnecessary signs, as many believe it has led to overload and drivers not reading many signs because there is just so many obvious ones.

[roadman65]

Someone mentioned Florida before and someone else mentioned that if the inside line is broken then its a turn lane.  Well in Florida drivers cannot figure that one out for sure.  For one I see people using a turning lane from the opposite direction as if it were a typical bi directional turn lane.  Some areas like Orange Blossom Trail Southbound at Taft Vineland Road;'s left turn lane is over capacity and too short, so the overflow for it stacks up on the exclusive N Bound turn lane for Sam's Club.  In fact you cannot ever use the turn lane for Sam's cause of the poor planning of FDOT engineers when the roadway was widened in late 1990's.  However, some are like that and not backed up with overflow from a short turn lane, just that typical idiot drivers are too dumb to know what it means when the one side has a white line and the other has a double yellow line and still think its a bi directional turn lane.

[UCFKnights]

Someone mentioned Florida before and someone else mentioned that if the inside line is broken then its a turn lane.  Well in Florida drivers cannot figure that one out for sure.  For one I see people using a turning lane from the opposite direction as if it were a typical bi directional turn lane.  Some areas like Orange Blossom Trail Southbound at Taft Vineland Road;'s left turn lane is over capacity and too short, so the overflow for it stacks up on the exclusive N Bound turn lane for Sam's Club.  In fact you cannot ever use the turn lane for Sam's cause of the poor planning of FDOT engineers when the roadway was widened in late 1990's.  However, some are like that and not backed up with overflow from a short turn lane, just that typical idiot drivers are too dumb to know what it means when the one side has a white line and the other has a double yellow line and still think its a bi directional turn lane.

I don't know if its so much that they don't know, or that they believe its the better of the options they have. They don't want to stop in the mainline of the traffic on OBT because of risk of rearend collision and that they're stopping in the middle of a busy road, and if they stop in the turning lane on the wrong side of the street, well, its a turning lane, so people will just enter the turning lane after them. It should have no left turns permitted in some of those areas. Taft Vineland narrows right before the intersection, which is obviously insane. They need to expand that, and make it include double left turn lanes along with right turn lanes so the traffic doesn't get so backed up.

[Brandon]

I'm pretty sure the mountable median is intended to be used as a turn lane.

Mountable median?

It's a median that is slightly raised, but intended to be crossed over like a double turn lane.  We have quite a few in Illinois.

Since I was typing on a phone at the UP Meet for this...

Here's an example of one in Illinois: IL-53, Bolingbrook/Woodridge border

[Revive 755]

Is there not at rule requiring them to be signed?

At most signalized intersections there should be a proper number of dedicated heads for the turn lanes which help supplement any pavement markings, though there are some jurisdictions that don't follow this practice.

[J N Winkler]

I turn left here on a regular basis:

Zoo Boulevard at Windmill Road, Wichita, Kansas

As StreetView shows, the signal heads that control the two turn lanes are explicitly signed as left-turn signals.  They also have arrow aspects only.

Zoo carries enough traffic that the left-turn markings do not last long and are often covered by waiting vehicles anyway.  The right of the two turn lanes causes expectancy problems because it starts as a through lane about a mile back at 13th Street.  Besides the natural tendency of through traffic on Zoo to expect this lane to continue (instead of turning) and even to use it as a passing lane, it is also the favored lane for traffic taking the left turn because it feeds directly into the one lane on Windmill that remains continuous through a forced merge that was created when the I-235/13th Street flyover was completed.

As a result, I feel I am at more than usual risk of being rear-ended when I sit in this lane waiting for the light to change, so I try to cut the risk by turning on my blinker early (a good 1000 feet in advance, on a road subject to a 45 limit) and crawling up to my waiting position.