Does the red arrow traffic signal have any special meaning (vs. red ball)?

[mrsman]

....

(3) uniformity is important, but most people only drive in their state with their state's laws. Some uniformity for "keep right" sake makes sense (especially for safety), but uniformity for red arrows seems to be uniformity for uniformity's sake, with there not being any obvious safety benefits to banning turns on red arrows.

....

The clause in boldface seems implausible to me–I highly doubt most people drive only in their own state, other than perhaps people from Alaska or Hawaii or maybe a few of the very large states out west like Texas. (Maybe being from the East Coast, with its smaller states, and living six miles from a state line colors my perception, of course.) I do think, however, that most people assume that whatever the law is in their own state is also the law everywhere else, except with respect to obvious things like speed limits* and maybe some more esoteric things like Virginia not allowing radar detectors.

*Even with speed limits, there are still some clueless people: Last summer I worked with a guy who swore there is a 55-mph national speed limit and told me I was crazy when I disagreed with him. Nice guy in general, but talk about someone who doesn't get out much....

I reworded my post. I was trying to imply that most people spend most of their time (probably 99% of the year) in a single state, and have become accustomed to the laws of that state (the exceptions being metro areas that span multiple states, but even then, most non-commute driving is likely in their home state). ....

OK, I can certainly agree with that proposition. I had interpreted you to be suggesting that most people spend their entire lives in a given state and never leave it, and I found that implausible. If you'd said most Americans never leave the country, even in normal circumstances when the borders are open, I'd have agreed with that. The way you phrase your point here makes more sense and I certainly can't argue with it because areas like where I live, where it's routine for large numbers of people to commute across state lines, are certainly the exception rather than the norm (notwithstanding places like New York City, Philadelphia, and Chicago).

I think regular commuting and more or less reasonably common travel are two different concepts, but there are definitely a lot of the population that are within a daytrip's journey of another state.  So many of our largest cities are near state lines: NYC, Chicago, Boston, Philadelphia, Washington, Charlotte, St. Louis, Cincinnatti, Kansas City, Virginia Beach, Louisville, Memphis, and El Paso.  And there are more that are within 100 miles of a border.  So there are quite a lot of people that could be affected if neighboring states have different rules of traffic interpretation.

Getting back to the topic at hand, is there a list (or partial list) over which states treat right red arrow as red ball and which states treat red arrow as do not proceed until red arrow is extinguished.  And for the states in the second category, are there any instances of a red right arrow that is not also accompanied by a NTOR arrow sign or equivalent?  It would seem, then, that even though a majority of the states may be in the second category, it may make sense to make the first category the national rule and just add a NTOR sign as appropriate if NTOR is desired.

I have stated on this forum before, and I will repeat it now, I dislike NYC's special exemption for NTOR.  While I understand the inherent risks of turning on red in intersections with heavy pedestrian presence, I believe that each intersection needs to be carefully analyzed and signs should be put up in every intersection where NTOR is warranted.  There are plenty of intersections in Staten Island and Queens where NTOR is not warranted, but are prohibited any way.  While there is signage of NYC's law at city entrances, I don't feel that this is enough warning for out of state drivers. 

[UCFKnights]

The only advantage I can see to banning turns on red arrows is so that you can reduce the number of "no turn on red" signs. But this fails to take into account how many new "turn on red arrow OK after stop" signs would need to be implemented around the country, where red arrows were installed without the intent of banning turns on red. These signals could be changed to flashing red arrows, but this requires more than just a simple code change, and would take decades to complete across an entire state. You'd be far more likely to see the red arrows removed than changed to flashing red, since you could just swap out the signal head.

I think this isn't really valid. Since we're not really adding a state or anything like with FYA, I'd imagine most controller are capable of being wired in such a way to configure a light to flash. The only situation that I can think of where it probably couldn't be wired that way without substantial work is if its not a single wire being shared with the straight movements. Even if thats the case, in the days of LED bulbs, it'd be fairly easy to develop a bulb with the flasher integrated into it so the controller doesn't even need to know about it, and that likely wouldn't cost even as much as a sign. If it doesn't already exist. Hell, my pool light bulb can change colors and flash at will!

Out of curiosity, does MUTCD specify a solid right red arrow should be used for NTOR and a FRA for permitting turn on red after stop? I'd really like to see the MUTCD updated to mandate it, so new installations get it at the very least. It does seem like most new installations I see while travelling are using FYA and retroreflective borders, even if most areas haven't gone back and upgraded the old intersections yet. And it seems to be growing fairly quickly all things considered.

[roadfro]

Out of curiosity, does MUTCD specify a solid right red arrow should be used for NTOR and a FRA for permitting turn on red after stop? I'd really like to see the MUTCD updated to mandate it, so new installations get it at the very least. It does seem like most new installations I see while travelling are using FYA and retroreflective borders, even if most areas haven't gone back and upgraded the old intersections yet. And it seems to be growing fairly quickly all things considered.

The 2009 MUTCD already defines the meanings of signal indications that would be compatible with this (see Section 4D.04, p03.C.2 & p03.F.2):

Steady red arrow: Cannot enter the intersection to turn in the direction of the arrow. Must stop and remain stopped until the red arrow is extinguished. (Exception applies if another traffic control device permits the movement, then stop sign rules apply.)

Flashing red arrow: Must stop first. Traffic can proceed in the direction of the arrow according to stop sign rules.


Given other rules on signal indications, a red arrow could really only be used in situations where a dedicated turn lane exists. So the steady/flashing red arrow governing RTOR can't be used everywhere.

EDIT: Removed list tags[/list]

[kalvado]

....

(3) uniformity is important, but most people only drive in their state with their state's laws. Some uniformity for "keep right" sake makes sense (especially for safety), but uniformity for red arrows seems to be uniformity for uniformity's sake, with there not being any obvious safety benefits to banning turns on red arrows.

....

The clause in boldface seems implausible to me–I highly doubt most people drive only in their own state, other than perhaps people from Alaska or Hawaii or maybe a few of the very large states out west like Texas. (Maybe being from the East Coast, with its smaller states, and living six miles from a state line colors my perception, of course.) I do think, however, that most people assume that whatever the law is in their own state is also the law everywhere else, except with respect to obvious things like speed limits* and maybe some more esoteric things like Virginia not allowing radar detectors.

*Even with speed limits, there are still some clueless people: Last summer I worked with a guy who swore there is a 55-mph national speed limit and told me I was crazy when I disagreed with him. Nice guy in general, but talk about someone who doesn't get out much....

I reworded my post. I was trying to imply that most people spend most of their time (probably 99% of the year) in a single state, and have become accustomed to the laws of that state (the exceptions being metro areas that span multiple states, but even then, most non-commute driving is likely in their home state). ....

OK, I can certainly agree with that proposition. I had interpreted you to be suggesting that most people spend their entire lives in a given state and never leave it, and I found that implausible. If you'd said most Americans never leave the country, even in normal circumstances when the borders are open, I'd have agreed with that. The way you phrase your point here makes more sense and I certainly can't argue with it because areas like where I live, where it's routine for large numbers of people to commute across state lines, are certainly the exception rather than the norm (notwithstanding places like New York City, Philadelphia, and Chicago).

I think regular commuting and more or less reasonably common travel are two different concepts, but there are definitely a lot of the population that are within a daytrip's journey of another state.  So many of our largest cities are near state lines: NYC, Chicago, Boston, Philadelphia, Washington, Charlotte, St. Louis, Cincinnatti, Kansas City, Virginia Beach, Louisville, Memphis, and El Paso.  And there are more that are within 100 miles of a border.  So there are quite a lot of people that could be affected if neighboring states have different rules of traffic interpretation.

Getting back to the topic at hand, is there a list (or partial list) over which states treat right red arrow as red ball and which states treat red arrow as do not proceed until red arrow is extinguished.  And for the states in the second category, are there any instances of a red right arrow that is not also accompanied by a NTOR arrow sign or equivalent?  It would seem, then, that even though a majority of the states may be in the second category, it may make sense to make the first category the national rule and just add a NTOR sign as appropriate if NTOR is desired.

I have stated on this forum before, and I will repeat it now, I dislike NYC's special exemption for NTOR.  While I understand the inherent risks of turning on red in intersections with heavy pedestrian presence, I believe that each intersection needs to be carefully analyzed and signs should be put up in every intersection where NTOR is warranted.  There are plenty of intersections in Staten Island and Queens where NTOR is not warranted, but are prohibited any way.  While there is signage of NYC's law at city entrances, I don't feel that this is enough warning for out of state drivers.

And how often you can get away following the laws of one state in the other state? It's not that red light has a different meaning. One would need to find an infrequent situation where laws are indeed different, AND a cop willing to enforce something that cannot be very dangerous (otherwise, it will be banned across the board). So I can reasonably see people just being unaware of fine print differences.

[1995hoo]

^^^^

I certainly made a point of looking up North Carolina law regarding left on red when I started law school because downtown Durham has a lot of places where said maneuver should be allowed but is not due to the state's inexplicable ban on same (not that it necessarily stopped me when I was in my 20s).

[mrsman]

^^^^

I certainly made a point of looking up North Carolina law regarding left on red when I started law school because downtown Durham has a lot of places where said maneuver should be allowed but is not due to the state's inexplicable ban on same (not that it necessarily stopped me when I was in my 20s).

That's another rule that should have a uniform national application.  LTOR permitted from one way to one way unless a sign says otherwise.  In states that want to prohibit the movement, just put up a NTOR sign.

[hbelkins]

Someone with the time and energy and desire should compile a list of where RTOR is allowed on a red arrow vs. where it is prohibited. And the same with right turns on red from the leftmost of two right-turn lanes.

I'm not sure of Kentucky's laws on either, although I routinely turn right from the leftmost turn lane on the ramp from southbound I-75 to US 60 in Lexington.

[mrsman]

Someone with the time and energy and desire should compile a list of where RTOR is allowed on a red arrow vs. where it is prohibited. And the same with right turns on red from the leftmost of two right-turn lanes.

I'm not sure of Kentucky's laws on either, although I routinely turn right from the leftmost turn lane on the ramp from southbound I-75 to US 60 in Lexington.

I think HB hit the nail on the head.  These rules are so obscure that many do not even know their own state's rules on such, let alone being able to keep track of other states.  It speaks to the need for uniformity and possibly the need for signage, even when there is uniformity.

The right turn on red from the left of two lanes is a really obscure concept.  I would hope that whereever that is prohibited, there would be signs posted, even if that is a statewide rule.  (I believe that's the rule in VA and I believe that every time that concept applies, there is signage.)

RTOR arrow has all of the confusion discussed upthread.  In addition, there are probably some states where there isn't even a set rule on the books at all for a steady red arrow.

[1995hoo]

Someone with the time and energy and desire should compile a list of where RTOR is allowed on a red arrow vs. where it is prohibited. And the same with right turns on red from the leftmost of two right-turn lanes.

I'm not sure of Kentucky's laws on either, although I routinely turn right from the leftmost turn lane on the ramp from southbound I-75 to US 60 in Lexington.

I think HB hit the nail on the head.  These rules are so obscure that many do not even know their own state's rules on such, let alone being able to keep track of other states.  It speaks to the need for uniformity and possibly the need for signage, even when there is uniformity.

The right turn on red from the left of two lanes is a really obscure concept.  I would hope that whereever that is prohibited, there would be signs posted, even if that is a statewide rule.  (I believe that's the rule in VA and I believe that every time that concept applies, there is signage.)

RTOR arrow has all of the confusion discussed upthread.  In addition, there are probably some states where there isn't even a set rule on the books at all for a steady red arrow.

In my observation, the boldfaced comment is correct, although the signage varies from intersection to intersection and sometimes even within the same intersection if there are two signs posted. There are two signs advising of the prohibition as you exit the Beltway at Van Dorn, for example, and it's understandable why the small sign hanging from the span wire has a shorter message. VDOT is absolutely religious about signing this prohibition (with one weird exception I'll mention), and in my observation the independent cities seem to follow their lead on this (the example I'm the most familiar with, because it's closest to where I live, is westbound Eisenhower Avenue at Van Dorn Street in the City of Alexandria, where a sign on Eisenhower says right on red is allowed from the curb lane only). The unintended side effect is that in many places, only the far right lane gets a lot of use for turning traffic because people don't want to get stuck not being able to turn on red from the other lane.

The weird exception is the very rare situation where there are dual left-turn lanes where a left on red is permitted. I can think of two such locations off the top of my head (four such spots at the interchange of Seminary Road and I-395, and one such spot involving a left-only lane and an optional left-or-straight lane going from westbound US-29 to the Fairfax County Parkway, VA-286) and neither of them has a sign saying left turns on red are permitted from the far left lane only. You'd think the same principles that cause them to insist on right on red from the far right lane only would apply. But then, I'd wager over 95% of motorists in Virginia have no clue that left on red is ever permitted at all, so as a practical matter it probably doesn't matter.

Regarding turning on red from lanes other than the curb lane, I'm never sure whether that's allowed when I'm in other states, but in Florida I routinely see people do it, so I've followed their example so as not to hold up the traffic. I just always hope people have the lane discipline to turn into the correct lane when they do that. People in the DC area definitely do NOT have much lane discipline when they turn, even on green and even when there are three turn lanes all with those small skip lines (VDOT sometimes calls them "puppy tracks") guiding you around the turn. I sometimes wonder whether Virginia's prohibition of right-on-red from other than the far right lane contributes to some of this because so few people typically turn right from other lanes, unless the light is green when they get there, that people are just used to there not being anyone to their left.

(Edited to move a sentence that unintentionally didn't fit where I had typed it.)

[jeffandnicole]

...even when there are three turn lanes all with those small skip lines (VDOT sometimes calls them "puppy tracks") guiding you around the turn.

A friend of mine will call them "idiot lines".

[1995hoo]

...even when there are three turn lanes all with those small skip lines (VDOT sometimes calls them "puppy tracks") guiding you around the turn.

A friend of mine will call them "idiot lines".

I can think of some intersections where they're useful for various reasons, such as it not necessarily being apparent what's around the corner due to visibility issues or situations where the road curves somewhat as you go across the intersection such that people unfamiliar with it need to be told where to go.

But then there are places where it doesn't matter what they do. This intersection has two left-only lanes and an option lane and plenty of signs telling you which lane goes where. But then you go around the corner and, while Street View doesn't show it, it tends to be a free-for-all of lane-changing–people in the far left lane that heads to Old Keene Mill Road try to shove right to get onto the highway, and people in the far right lane that goes to I-95 South try to shove left to get to either I-95 North, the Beltway, or I-395 North, never mind all the signs that told them which lanes to use. It's a wonder there aren't more crashes there.