Proper placement of "One Way" signs

[theline]

Just having witnessed a driver take a turn the wrong way on a one-way street, I'm wondering again about the proper placement of "One Way" signs. It seems logical to me that, in the absence of a "Wrong Way" or "Do Not Enter" sign, a One Way sign should always be placed where the driver will last look before making the errant turn. Example: if I approach a one way street where the traffic moves from my left to my right, I want the sign on the left far corner.

Here's the driver's view of the intersection where I saw the wrong-way turn:


The only One Way sign is on the right, where the driver failed to see it. What do the guidelines say on sign placement?

[colinstu]

A "No Left Turn" (R3-2 in the MUTCD) should probably be up near the traffic lights.

Otherwise, http://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/htm/2009/part2/fig2b_14_longdesc.htm ?

Full MUTCD 2009 manual: http://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/pdfs/2009/mutcd2009edition.pdf (30mb) (can also do a Ctrl+F and type in r3-2 for details on placement of a no left turn sign)

[theline]

Thanks, colinstu. It looks like I'm right that there should be a sign on the left far corner. The one on the right is optional. As you point out, there should be a No Left Turn sign as well.

This is in downtown South Bend, IN. Although this is signed as US 20, it's really the business route, since the main route bypassed years ago. I think it's under city responsibility. South Bend used to have much better signage, but that has gone downhill as signs were replaced over the years. The downtown is such a mixture of one-way and two-way streets that better signs should be a priority.

[Brian556]

I agree that there should be one on the left corner. Drivers considering turning left would never see the one on the right corner. This is just stupid.

[realjd]

So what are the criteria for using one of the white textual One Way signs as shown above over the wide, rectangular white arrow on a black background One Way signs?

I agree conspicuous no-turn signs should be present as well as pavement arrows.

[colinstu]

So what are the criteria for using one of the white textual One Way signs as shown above over the wide, rectangular white arrow on a black background One Way signs?

I agree conspicuous no-turn signs should be present as well as pavement arrows.

The R6-2 (one seen in the first post) and R6-1 (the one you're mentioning) can be used interchangeably. Section 2B.40 in the MUTCD (page 77 from the pdf above) talks about the function of using such a sign, and keeps both of these versions in parenthesis suggesting one could use either. I've never seen a R6-1 used in Wisconsin, but I know those signs are very common in New York for example. I guess the DOT will choose the sign that's used most in the area or state.

(sorry, made some edits)

[Brian556]

So what are the criteria for using one of the white textual One Way signs as shown above over the wide, rectangular white arrow on a black background One Way signs?

In my opinion, the 36x12 "word inside arrow" design is far surperior to the 18x24 "textual version". The "word inside arrow" style is much easier to instantly reconize, whereas the "textual version" more easily blends in with the tons of other vertical white rectangular signs.
If it were up to me, I would strongly consider removing the "textual version" from the MUTCD.

[Alps]

I'm surprised the textual version is still in the MUTCD. I can't think of any use where the arrow wouldn't make as much or more sense.

[DaBigE]

I've never seen a R6-1 used in Wisconsin, but I know those signs are very common in New York for example. I guess the DOT will choose the sign that's used most in the area or state.

You must be avoiding roundabouts in Wisconsin, as WisDOT places them in the central island (above the R6-4b chevron bank) in every roundabout constructed on the state network. A few municipalities around the state use/used them. I know West Bend used them for a while, but then switched to the state-preferred R6-2. I've also seen a couple hidden in places around Madison.

They are also in the new WisDOT specs for J-turns and some divided highway situations (2-way stop), where the ONE WAY sign is placed above the STOP sign.

[empirestate]

I agree that there should be one on the left corner. Drivers considering turning left would never see the one on the right corner. This is just stupid.

It's not even so much about where drivers will see the sign...as shown here, this street is only one-way to the right of the picture. The approach on the left is a two-way street according to signage. It's not at all unusual to see that in real life.

In other words, the problem here isn't proper placement of one-way signs; it's placement of them at all.

[Special K]

I've never seen a R6-1 used in Wisconsin, but I know those signs are very common in New York for example. I guess the DOT will choose the sign that's used most in the area or state.

You must be avoiding roundabouts in Wisconsin, as WisDOT places them in the central island (above the R6-4b chevron bank) in every roundabout constructed on the state network. A few municipalities around the state use/used them. I know West Bend used them for a while, but then switched to the state-preferred R6-2. I've also seen a couple hidden in places around Madison.

A one-way sign supplementing the chevron?  Overkill?

[colinstu]

I've never seen a R6-1 used in Wisconsin, but I know those signs are very common in New York for example. I guess the DOT will choose the sign that's used most in the area or state.

You must be avoiding roundabouts in Wisconsin, as WisDOT places them in the central island (above the R6-4b chevron bank) in every roundabout constructed on the state network. A few municipalities around the state use/used them. I know West Bend used them for a while, but then switched to the state-preferred R6-2. I've also seen a couple hidden in places around Madison.

A one-way sign supplementing the chevron?  Overkill?

Yeah I haven't driven up there at all. That is overkill too. Do not want.

[Brian556]

It's not even so much about where drivers will see the sign...as shown here, this street is only one-way to the right of the picture. The approach on the left is a two-way street according to signage. It's not at all unusual to see that in real life.

This type of situation where a cross street is one-way one direction, and two way the other, needs to be adressed in the MUTCD with standard signage.
The City of Dallas uses a "BEGIN" plaque abaove a ONE WAY sign on the mast arm in this situation.
http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&ll=32.779551,-96.807962&spn=0.000009,0.006266&t=m&z=18&layer=c&cbll=32.779551,-96.807962&panoid=3LwgGog_LglvzZyeYz2f5Q&cbp=12,245.19,,0,0
The City of Denton uses NO LEFT/RIGHT TURN signs at one intersection
http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&ll=33.206507,-97.134408&spn=0.000004,0.003133&t=m&z=19&layer=c&cbll=33.206504,-97.134542&panoid=F21evN9S0wSMDvORQb4VPw&cbp=12,83.14,,0,0
, and at another also uses ONE WAY signs on the one way side.
http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&ll=33.214655,-97.161404&spn=0.000004,0.003133&t=m&z=19&layer=c&cbll=33.214655,-97.161404&panoid=o8qa5aXTU7kYFfq6mGiKNA&cbp=12,14.15,,0,0

[DaBigE]

I've never seen a R6-1 used in Wisconsin, but I know those signs are very common in New York for example. I guess the DOT will choose the sign that's used most in the area or state.

You must be avoiding roundabouts in Wisconsin, as WisDOT places them in the central island (above the R6-4b chevron bank) in every roundabout constructed on the state network. A few municipalities around the state use/used them. I know West Bend used them for a while, but then switched to the state-preferred R6-2. I've also seen a couple hidden in places around Madison.

A one-way sign supplementing the chevron?  Overkill?

It stems from the first FHWA Roundabout Guide, back when the chevron bank was a back & yellow alignment/warning sign. The ONE WAY was used to give regulatory enforcement of the counterclockwise circulation required for the roundabout. Even when the chevron bank was updated to the current black & white configuration, using a ONE WAY sign to supplement the chevron bank was left as an option, at least according to NCHRP 672 (the 2nd edition of the Roundabout Guide). As far as I can tell, the 2009 MUTCD neither endorses nor denies this signing practice, as what is shown for roundabout signs in the MUTCD are purely "examples" and not hard rules.

Yes, with the regulatory version of the chevron bank, it is redundant/overkill, but it isn't changing in Wisconsin anytime soon. Similarly, the ONE WAY (R6-2) mounted below the left-side YIELD sign at a roundabout will be retained in Wisconsin for the foreseeable future as well.

[mjb2002]

I'm surprised the textual version is still in the MUTCD. I can't think of any use where the arrow wouldn't make as much or more sense.

I am too...I thought they removed it, until I saw the Textual version of the sign on some highways in Barnwell and Williston, S.C.

[roadman]

So what are the criteria for using one of the white textual One Way signs as shown above over the wide, rectangular white arrow on a black background One Way signs?

I agree conspicuous no-turn signs should be present as well as pavement arrows.

The R6-2 (one seen in the first post) and R6-1 (the one you're mentioning) can be used interchangeably. Section 2B.40 in the MUTCD (page 77 from the pdf above) talks about the function of using such a sign, and keeps both of these versions in parenthesis suggesting one could use either. I've never seen a R6-1 used in Wisconsin, but I know those signs are very common in New York for example. I guess the DOT will choose the sign that's used most in the area or state.

(sorry, made some edits)

Current Massachsuetts practice (as noted in their 2009 MUTCD amendements) is to use the R6-1 "arrow" sign when the one way street is coming into the intersection, and to use the R6-2 "text" sign when the one way street is going away from the intersection.