Intersections without traffic control devices: Do they still exist?

[roadman65]

I was wondering if uncontrolled intersections on public roads still exist anywhere.

When I was younger living in New Jersey, the Town of Westfield had them at intersections along Tice Place.  You would find absolutely no STOP signs anywhere whether it was on Tice Place itself or the intersecting roadways.  My drivers ed teacher explained to me that it was called an uncontrolled intersection.  Anyways, I just visited Tice Place virtually on GSV and noticed that all of the uncontrolled intersections now have STOP signs placed at them.

I am guessing that accidents might of occurred to have this change or maybe the MUTCD now is against these kind of intersections forcing Westfield to do something about it or maybe some other unknown reason.  To me I never understood how these intersections managed to survive without any kind of traffic control devices as there had to be times when two vehicles approached the intersection at the very same time with either unaware that the other had no STOP signs controlling them.

I know these still exist in parking lots and some private roadways, but do they still exist anywhere on highways or public streets?

[jeffandnicole]

My own street doesn't have any controls at the end of it.  You must turn left or right into a cross street.

[PHLBOS]

I know these still exist in parking lots and some private roadways, but do they still exist anywhere on highways or public streets?

In MA, many public side street intersections don't have STOP signs or any other controls on them.

[jeffandnicole]

Here as well:  http://goo.gl/maps/aFQVw

[Brandon]

Yes.  Many of them are either suburban (small residential streets) or rural (lightly trafficked gravel or blacktopped roads).

[riiga]

Plenty of them in Europe where priority to the right applies. Rural example. Urban example.

[cpzilliacus]

Plenty of them in Europe where priority to the right applies. Rural example. Urban example.

Pretty common in Finland as well.  Lots of intersections in urban areas with no controls at all, though less than in the past.

It helps that every driver in Finland seems to grasp the concept of priority to the right (or in U.S. English, yield to the right).

[briantroutman]

The small, suburban-type development I grew up in had basically no traffic control devices for most of its history–no pavement markings or signs with the exception of a few street sign blades. A couple of stop signs were added in the '90s and the main road was striped, but the branch roads remain unmarked, and a three-way intersection connecting the main road to two branches with culs-de-sac is uncontrolled.

[kkt]

Yes, many many intersections between small residential streets in Washington and California have no traffic control signs.

[roadman65]

Here as well:  http://goo.gl/maps/aFQVw

Basically if an intersection is like this, then you do not need the full stop then? You can treat the main road for as if a yield sign is there I assume.

[KEK Inc.]

Residential Seattle is mainly uncontrolled.  Occasionally, they'll add a yield sign.

Uncontrolled is taught as a 4-way yield with right-of-way to the right, but I think most drivers fear other drivers blowing through the intersection.

[Pete from Boston]

Everywhere.  This is almost like asking if there are still streets without lines down the middle.

[kphoger]

The simple answer is YES.

Let's please not post every example of an uncontrolled intersection we can think of.

[Duke87]

Plenty of them in Europe where priority to the right applies. Rural example. Urban example.

Pretty common in Finland as well.  Lots of intersections in urban areas with no controls at all, though less than in the past.

It helps that every driver in Finland seems to grasp the concept of priority to the right (or in U.S. English, yield to the right).

Indeed, American drivers usually operate on the philosophy of "I can do anything unless a sign tells me I can't". Hence why we have signs admonishing us to not block the box, keep right except to pass, etc. - which people still often ignore, because there's also the rule of "I can break any rule so long as a cop doesn't see me do it", and just general obliviousness to the concerns of other motorists.

What is potentially a great point of confusion, though, is that at three way intersections we are so used to the side street having a stop sign that we more or less treat it that way even if there isn't one posted. So at an uncontrolled intersection in the US, the concept of "priority to the right" does not apply - instead it is "priority to the through street". Which makes sense because side street traffic has to slow down to make a turn anyway whereas through street traffic can cruise straight ahead. Applying priority to the right in this circumstance is therefore quite counter-intuitive, at least from a US perspective.

[Alex4897]

There's at least two in my own neighborhood, and there had been more.  All the examples I remember are three way intersections.

[Ned Weasel]

I thought part of the idea of Shared Space was to remove signs and pavement striping.

[Bitmapped]

It's common on gravel roads in West Virginia to not have traffic control devices.

[TEG24601]

Most of SE and NE Portland is this way.  The traffic usually goes slow enough that it doesn't matter, given there is barely room enough for one car at a time due to on-street parking on 24-30' roadways.  Those roads with a certain traffic volume, or no on-street parking, usually have stop signs on their cross streets.  For some reason people I talk to think it is illegal or the city is too lazy to not put up signs, when in reality, there likely isn't a need given the low traffic volumes.

[kphoger]

Plenty of them in Europe where priority to the right applies. Rural example. Urban example.

Pretty common in Finland as well.  Lots of intersections in urban areas with no controls at all, though less than in the past.

It helps that every driver in Finland seems to grasp the concept of priority to the right (or in U.S. English, yield to the right).

Indeed, American drivers usually operate on the philosophy of "I can do anything unless a sign tells me I can't". Hence why we have signs admonishing us to not block the box, keep right except to pass, etc. - which people still often ignore, because there's also the rule of "I can break any rule so long as a cop doesn't see me do it", and just general obliviousness to the concerns of other motorists.

What is potentially a great point of confusion, though, is that at three way intersections we are so used to the side street having a stop sign that we more or less treat it that way even if there isn't one posted. So at an uncontrolled intersection in the US, the concept of "priority to the right" does not apply - instead it is "priority to the through street". Which makes sense because side street traffic has to slow down to make a turn anyway whereas through street traffic can cruise straight ahead. Applying priority to the right in this circumstance is therefore quite counter-intuitive, at least from a US perspective.

I've always understood uncontrolled three-way intersections to have an implied yield sign on the terminating leg. Is this not common state law?

[wisvishr0]

I've always understood uncontrolled three-way intersections to have an implied yield sign on the terminating leg. Is this not common state law?

Your question convinced me to get out my Maryland Driver's Manual (even though it's far from the law):

I've bolded the rules that apply to uncontrolled intersections. My driving instructor corroborated these points back when I asked him a few years ago.
The manual says you have to yield the right of way under these circumstances:

• the driver who is at or arrives before you at
the intersection;

• drivers in the opposing traffic lane, when you
are making a left turn;

• the driver on your right, if both of you arrive at
the intersection at the same time;


• drivers on a public highway, if you are entering
the highway from a driveway or a private road;

• drivers already on a limited access or
interstate highway, if you are on the entrance
or acceleration ramp;

• the driver on your right at a four way
intersection controlled by stop signs;

• pedestrians, bicyclists, and other drivers who are still in the intersection;

• drivers on the through highway, if you are at
a “T” intersection and you are entering the
through highway by either making a right or
left turn;

• other drivers, if you are approaching an
intersection with a Yield sign facing you.


Basically, at least in Maryland, you're right in that drivers approaching the end of their road at a T-junction must yield if there aren't any signs controlling it. Additionally, if you're approaching a non-T-junction, the person who got to the intersection first has the right of way. If it's ambiguous, the person on the right goes first (similar to the "priorite a droit" in Europe, except it only applies to when it's not clear who got to the intersection first). Note that this applies to both stop signs AND uncontrolled intersections. If you're turning left, you have to yield to oncoming traffic. Also, we use the "Main St" approach, where cars on the "bigger" road have the right of way.

[NE2]

I think right-of-way at a T intersection varies by state.

[Kacie Jane]

I think right-of-way at a T intersection varies by state.

Agreed.  I'm reasonably (but not 100%) confident that in Washington "yield to the right" applies to T intersections just as it does to 4-way intersections.

(I'm also 100% confident we've had this discussion before somewhere. )

[Roadrunner75]

They are very rare in NJ, for paved public roads at least, and any absence is probably because someone removed (or ran over) the sign.

[Pete from Boston]

They are very rare in NJ, for paved public roads at least, and any absence is probably because someone removed (or ran over) the sign.

It's a big state, so this is a hard contention to be sure of.  Where I grew up, in the mass of continuous suburbia radiating out from New York, New Jersey has quite a few of these on the many low-traffic residential public streets where no stop sign ever existed. 

[roadman]

I know these still exist in parking lots and some private roadways, but do they still exist anywhere on highways or public streets?

In MA, many public side street intersections don't have STOP signs or any other controls on them.

No stop sign at the end of my residental side street (which is used by local traffic as a cut-through street) where it intersects with a through street connecting Wakefield (MA)with Stoneham (MA).