I almost got t-boned at a four way intersection this afternoon.
Three ways of the intersection are two-way streets. The fourth way is a one-way street, with traffic on the one-way street entering the intersection.
one-way
two-way two-way
two-way
I was on the two-way street facing the one-way street, so there were large “Do Not Enter” signs in front of me. Since I could not go straight, I had to make either a left or right turn. When the light changed, I saw a green left arrow, and a green right arrow. There was no non-directional green light. I have always taken green arrows to mean “You have the right of way in the indicated direction”, so I started to make a left turn - and almost got T-boned by a car coming from the one-way street.
I investigated, and the guy on the one-way street had a green light. Obviously, he had the right of way, since a green light is a green light - but why did my street have the two green arrows?
By investigation, do you mean you asked him and he bullshitted you? Either he did bullshit you, or you need to get down to City Hall (or whoever does these things) and tell them their traffic lights are broken.
A green light is a green light, but a green arrow is a green light too. You can’t have a green arrow opposing a green light. If that’s happening, it’s incredibly dangerous, and they need to either cycle the lights differently so the green arrows have a red opposite, or they need to ditch the arrows and replace them with a regular green light (then at least, you will know you might have to give way). If I were in that situation, I too would have taken the green arrows to mean I had absolute right of way.
I pulled over, got out of my car, and watched what the lights did from the sidewalk. This isn’t the first time I’ve wondered what the hell is going on at this intersection, but it is the first time I’ve come so close to an accident.
Are you originally from Massachusetts? IIRC (and this is from 20 years ago), they have oddities like this. Here in Michigan, a green arrow means you have the right of way. There? Not so much.
Agreed. My understanding has always been that a green light permits you to move through the intersection if approaching traffic is clear, but a green arrow specifies that all cross traffic has a red.
What the hell do they mean by “with a red or yellow lens”?
I go through an intersection similar to the one in the OP, but the two-way facing the one-way gets a green ball light, not arrows. They rely on your spotting the big, red Do Not Enter signs opposite to keep you from going straight.
Zen Beam’s citation notwithstanding, it is a poorly set up intersection and the road authority should change it. They were trying to emphasize that you should not proceed straight into the one way road, but as you experienced, it allows people to be confused. It does need to change. Either the green light for the one way road and the two green arrows on your leg each need to have their own green while the other directions are red, or there needs to be a sign indicating that the left turn on a green arrow must yield to oncoming traffic. I don’t like this second option and could not find a standard sign for it.
It would be good to report it to the city (or county or state, depending on the road authority).
I think it’s essentially a red or yellow light that has a green arrow in the middle. Two colors. I have a vague recollection of seeing lights like that.
I think I understand the spirit of what the rule is trying to say, but it seems really odd. When I see a green arrow and another color light, I usually take that to mean that the arrow is for people making that turn and the light (without an arrow) is directed at people that are travelling stright through the intersection.
Near my house is an intersection almost identical to that one. The difference is that the traffic would have been stopped when you had a green turn arrow, but you would have run the risk of hitting pedestrians who have a green walk sign. And this is in California, which doesn’t have the law mentioned above. Seems pretty ridiculous to me, but what do I know…
Or they could just change the light setup at that particular intersection. It sounds like a dangerous situation and one that poses a genuine concern for visiting motorists.
As a slight hijack - how much of a headache is it generally for out-of-state drivers in the US? If a Californian wanted to drive across the country to NYC, would it be:
a) A major headache involving lots of research
b) Very minor, and play it by ear as you go?
What is the intersection, MITer? I assume it is in Massachusetts, if you are at MIT.
That signal dislay is in violation of FEDERAL law and you should complain to the traffic agency in charge of the intersection. Mass. has been doing things their own way for decades, in flagrant violation of the Federal Highway Administration’s “Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices” to which ALL road agencies are “required” to conform, at least theoretically. I say theoretically as there is an exception that allows states’ rights to dictate, to the detriment of traffic safety and the poor interstate tourist/traveler. Does Mass. still have the red over yellow pedestrian signal indications?
The entire document can be read at http://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov . The next edition is being formulated and anyone is able to submit comments through the federal register process.
Rather than link to the 1,000-page document, here are the specific pertinent sections and the overview of the Manual
“Section 4D.05 Application of Steady Signal Indications
Standard:
When a traffic control signal is being operated in a steady (stop-and-go) mode, at least one lens in each signal face shall be illuminated at any given time.
A signal face(s) that controls a particular vehicular movement during any interval of a cycle shall control that same movement during all intervals of the cycle.
Steady signal indications shall be applied as follows:
F. **A steady GREEN ARROW signal indication:
Shall be displayed only to allow vehicular movements, in the direction indicated, that are not in conflict with other vehicles moving on a green or yellow signal indication** or with pedestrians crossing in conformance with a WALKING PERSON (symbolizing WALK) or flashing UPRAISED HAND (symbolizing DONT WALK) signal indication (see Section 4D.09).
**Shall be displayed on a signal face that controls a left-turn movement when said movement is not in conflict with other vehicles moving on a green or yellow signal indication ** or with pedestrians crossing in conformance with a WALKING PERSON (symbolizing WALK) or flashing UPRAISED HAND (symbolizing DONT WALK) signal indication (see Section 4D.09).
Shall not be required on the stem of T-intersections or for turns from one-way streets.”
“Overview [of the MUTCD]
The traffic control devices (TCD) are very critical for the safe and efficient transportation of people and goods. The Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD), by setting minimum standards and providing guidance, ensures uniformity of traffic control devices across the nation. The use of uniform TCDs (messages, location, size, shapes, and colors) helps reduce crashes and congestion, and improves the efficiency of the surface transportation system. Uniformity also helps reduce the cost of TCDs through standardization. The information contained in the MUTCD is the result of either years of practical experience, research, and or the MUTCD experimentation process. This effort ensures that TCDs are visible, recognizable, understandable, and necessary. The MUTCD is a dynamic document that changes with time to address contemporary safety and operational issues.
Key Messages:
B. The MUTCD contains the national standards governing all traffic control devices. All public agencies across the nation rely on the MUTCD to bring uniformity to the roadway. The MUTCD plays a critical role in improving safety and mobility of all road users.
C. **The MUTCD is the law governing all traffic control devices. Non-compliance of the MUTCD ultimately can result in loss of federal-aid funds as well as significant increase in tort liability. **
D. Uniformity of traffic control devices is critical in highway safety and mobility as well as cutting capital and maintenance costs of TCDs for public agencies and manufacturers.
E. The FHWA has established a sound process to incorporate new devices and applications in the MUTCD. The process involves the Federal Register rulemaking activity which encourages public involvement. Any interested person or organization may provide input to the rulemaking activity by submitting comments to the docket.
F. The process encourages innovation and flexibility while maintaining uniformity.
G. The success of the MUTCD depends on nationwide complete acceptance and application of the MUTCD as well as extensive participation by the practitioners in developing and evaluating the content of the MUTCD.
H. Input from practitioners and all other stakeholders is very critical in keeping the MUTCD current and relevant.”
Just out of curiosity, can you provide a cite (federal code) that specifies that states must adopt the uniform rules, and that federal code provides exceptions due to states’ rights? I’m not looking to pick a fight, but I always hear this “federal law” argument, and while it’s good to have uniform rules, I’ve never been convinced that there’s an actual requirement.