Hi all, new here. I have a question about signage/intersection design, and right-of-way as modified by the signage. As we know, when two vehicles approach an intersection from opposing sides, both facing a circular green light, and both want to turn onto the same road in the same direction, the vehicle which is making the right turn has right-of-way over the vehicle that is turning left across traffic. In Windsor, and I'd imagine many other places, sometimes the right-turn lane has been separated from the other lanes at the traffic signal with a small triangular island. The right-turn lane is still directly beside the intersection, but is now somewhat separate. In Windsor, this separate right-turn lane faces a yield sign. It seems to me that the yield sign reverses the normal flow of right-of-way, where the opposing left-turning traffic now has right-of-way over the right-turning traffic facing the yield sign. An example if you wish to check it out on Google Maps would be the intersection of Howard Ave and Grand Marais Rd in Windsor: https://www.google.com/maps/@42.2791454 ... 565,19.41z Think of traffic that is coming along Grand Marais beside the gas station, turning right onto Howard, facing opposing left-turning traffic. Can anyone break down how this is supposed to work? Am I correct in thinking that the yield sign overrides the usual right-of-way and forces the right-turning traffic to wait even when they face a green light? Your thoughts are appreciated.
Hi all, new here. I have a question about signage/intersection design, and right-of-way as modified by the signage.
As we know, when two vehicles approach an intersection from opposing sides, both facing a circular green light, and both want to turn onto the same road in the same direction, the vehicle which is making the right turn has right-of-way over the vehicle that is turning left across traffic.
In Windsor, and I'd imagine many other places, sometimes the right-turn lane has been separated from the other lanes at the traffic signal with a small triangular island. The right-turn lane is still directly beside the intersection, but is now somewhat separate. In Windsor, this separate right-turn lane faces a yield sign.
It seems to me that the yield sign reverses the normal flow of right-of-way, where the opposing left-turning traffic now has right-of-way over the right-turning traffic facing the yield sign.
Think of traffic that is coming along Grand Marais beside the gas station, turning right onto Howard, facing opposing left-turning traffic.
Can anyone break down how this is supposed to work? Am I correct in thinking that the yield sign overrides the usual right-of-way and forces the right-turning traffic to wait even when they face a green light?
Additional thoughts... If the right-turn lane were separated by some distance, in the style of a highway ramp, there would be no question: the yield sign applies at all times. But since these "forked" right turn lanes are directly connected to the main intersection, it is unclear exactly what the intent is. If the right-turning traffic is not deemed to be at the same intersection, then the traffic signal does not apply and the yield sign is all that matters for the right-turners.
Additional thoughts...
If the right-turn lane were separated by some distance, in the style of a highway ramp, there would be no question: the yield sign applies at all times. But since these "forked" right turn lanes are directly connected to the main intersection, it is unclear exactly what the intent is. If the right-turning traffic is not deemed to be at the same intersection, then the traffic signal does not apply and the yield sign is all that matters for the right-turners.
Yes, unfortunately that is the case I'm thinking. If one obeys the yield sign at some of these lights, the right-turning traffic will only ever be able to proceed as right-on-red after the light changes. It's completely asinine. Probably more an issue to table locally with city council, but I guess I'm wondering if anyone knowledgeable with the HTA sees anything noncompliant about these installations (putting a yield sign at a traffic light).
The bottom line is: you are facing a yield sign. The rest is irrelevant.
Yes, unfortunately that is the case I'm thinking.
If one obeys the yield sign at some of these lights, the right-turning traffic will only ever be able to proceed as right-on-red after the light changes. It's completely asinine.
Probably more an issue to table locally with city council, but I guess I'm wondering if anyone knowledgeable with the HTA sees anything noncompliant about these installations (putting a yield sign at a traffic light).
I'm not sure I understand your concern. When facing the green, the presence of the yield sign (while still having legal meaning) is pretty much irrelevant in practice. When facing the red, it allows you to continue without stopping when cross-traffic is light. What am I missing?
If one obeys the yield sign at some of these lights, the right-turning traffic will only ever be able to proceed as right-on-red after the light changes.
I'm not sure I understand your concern. When facing the green, the presence of the yield sign (while still having legal meaning) is pretty much irrelevant in practice. When facing the red, it allows you to continue without stopping when cross-traffic is light.
Where I live, these lanes are very common and referred to as a "bypass" lane. You are bypassing the intersection - the traffic lights do not apply to you. You do not have to stop first (in fact, you are NOT to stop in that lane) unless you need to give way to traffic already on the intersecting street or pedestrians crossing that lane. So don't think of the yield sign as being "at the intersection". It is beside the intersection, controlling traffic in a separate lane that has not been controlled by the lights. You are correct that it does "reverse" the usual priority of the right turn over the left turn, but most of the time these lanes do not exist on a one-lane road - they are employed on busier streets that have two or more lanes - and if people make their turns into the correct lane you should not conflict. In terms of having to wait - it really makes no difference whether you are sitting at the stop line waiting to make a right turn, or yielding in the right-turn bypass lane. If traffic is heavy, you may end up waiting until the green light faces your direction anyway, but outside of those busy times it greatly improves flow and reduces wait time. The thing I dislike most about these bypass lanes is the inconsistency on how to join the traffic on the next street - some have good acceleration lanes so you can merge after making the turn. Some have a tiny little lane (one car length or so) that forces you to stop and wait anyway, and some have nothing at all after the yield sign/crosswalk - you are immediately into the live traffic lane. You'd think there would be some sort of standardized sign that indicated what the lane arrangement was. Nothing more annoying than sitting backed up at one of these lanes waiting to turn while someone who doesn't realize there is an acceleration lane available holds everyone up. ;)
Where I live, these lanes are very common and referred to as a "bypass" lane.
You are bypassing the intersection - the traffic lights do not apply to you.
You do not have to stop first (in fact, you are NOT to stop in that lane) unless you need to give way to traffic already on the intersecting street or pedestrians crossing that lane.
So don't think of the yield sign as being "at the intersection". It is beside the intersection, controlling traffic in a separate lane that has not been controlled by the lights.
You are correct that it does "reverse" the usual priority of the right turn over the left turn, but most of the time these lanes do not exist on a one-lane road - they are employed on busier streets that have two or more lanes - and if people make their turns into the correct lane you should not conflict.
In terms of having to wait - it really makes no difference whether you are sitting at the stop line waiting to make a right turn, or yielding in the right-turn bypass lane. If traffic is heavy, you may end up waiting until the green light faces your direction anyway, but outside of those busy times it greatly improves flow and reduces wait time.
The thing I dislike most about these bypass lanes is the inconsistency on how to join the traffic on the next street - some have good acceleration lanes so you can merge after making the turn. Some have a tiny little lane (one car length or so) that forces you to stop and wait anyway, and some have nothing at all after the yield sign/crosswalk - you are immediately into the live traffic lane. You'd think there would be some sort of standardized sign that indicated what the lane arrangement was. Nothing more annoying than sitting backed up at one of these lanes waiting to turn while someone who doesn't realize there is an acceleration lane available holds everyone up.
I'm not sure I understand your concern. When facing the green, the presence of the yield sign (while still having legal meaning) is pretty much irrelevant in practice. When facing the red, it allows you to continue without stopping when cross-traffic is light. What am I missing? If you are facing this sign at an intersection where there is not any straight-through traffic coming from the same direction as you, and you are facing opposing traffic that has a never-ending supply of left-turning vehicles, you as a right-turner in the "bypass lane" will not be able to complete your turn until the light turns red, if you obey the yield sign. There are intersections with this flow in Windsor, where this type of sign is installed, and that is exactly where my concern comes from. I've watched people have near-misses because they have conflicting understandings of how it's supposed to work, and I've seen it happen every time I've been at one of those that flows that way.
If one obeys the yield sign at some of these lights, the right-turning traffic will only ever be able to proceed as right-on-red after the light changes.
I'm not sure I understand your concern. When facing the green, the presence of the yield sign (while still having legal meaning) is pretty much irrelevant in practice. When facing the red, it allows you to continue without stopping when cross-traffic is light.
What am I missing?
If you are facing this sign at an intersection where there is not any straight-through traffic coming from the same direction as you, and you are facing opposing traffic that has a never-ending supply of left-turning vehicles, you as a right-turner in the "bypass lane" will not be able to complete your turn until the light turns red, if you obey the yield sign.
There are intersections with this flow in Windsor, where this type of sign is installed, and that is exactly where my concern comes from. I've watched people have near-misses because they have conflicting understandings of how it's supposed to work, and I've seen it happen every time I've been at one of those that flows that way.
All of what you say makes perfect sense. I agree that people do not respect the lane they are supposed to turn into, and that is a major complicating factor here. One of the scenarios I referred to in my reply to the above post actually is a one-lane road, so that definitely throws a wrench into the flow of things. But it's not the norm. Unfortunately in Windsor, the majority of these do not turn into a protected/dedicated lane. Even in cases where they turn into an "acceleration lane", that lane is also a through-lane from the opposite side of the intersection, is often used as one, and ends too quickly to provide space for everyone to merge. I haven't seen how it's done in other cities, but I can't imagine this completely counter-intuitive engineering is standard practise. On the surface, it's a very clear and simple issue: turn into the correct lane, and both parties can go simultaneously with no issues. But it just doesn't end up working like that in reality. Especially if the "bypass lane" is not deemed part of the same intersection, the party entering the road from the bypass lane would be 100% at-fault (Insurance Act) if they were struck by a car that had turned on a green arrow, because now the car with the arrow has cleared the intersection before the collision happened. Food for thought, maybe.
Where I live, these lanes are very common and referred to as a "bypass" lane.
You are bypassing the intersection - the traffic lights do not apply to you.
You do not have to stop first (in fact, you are NOT to stop in that lane) unless you need to give way to traffic already on the intersecting street or pedestrians crossing that lane.
So don't think of the yield sign as being "at the intersection". It is beside the intersection, controlling traffic in a separate lane that has not been controlled by the lights.
You are correct that it does "reverse" the usual priority of the right turn over the left turn, but most of the time these lanes do not exist on a one-lane road - they are employed on busier streets that have two or more lanes - and if people make their turns into the correct lane you should not conflict.
In terms of having to wait - it really makes no difference whether you are sitting at the stop line waiting to make a right turn, or yielding in the right-turn bypass lane. If traffic is heavy, you may end up waiting until the green light faces your direction anyway, but outside of those busy times it greatly improves flow and reduces wait time.
The thing I dislike most about these bypass lanes is the inconsistency on how to join the traffic on the next street - some have good acceleration lanes so you can merge after making the turn. Some have a tiny little lane (one car length or so) that forces you to stop and wait anyway, and some have nothing at all after the yield sign/crosswalk - you are immediately into the live traffic lane. You'd think there would be some sort of standardized sign that indicated what the lane arrangement was. Nothing more annoying than sitting backed up at one of these lanes waiting to turn while someone who doesn't realize there is an acceleration lane available holds everyone up.
All of what you say makes perfect sense. I agree that people do not respect the lane they are supposed to turn into, and that is a major complicating factor here.
One of the scenarios I referred to in my reply to the above post actually is a one-lane road, so that definitely throws a wrench into the flow of things. But it's not the norm.
Unfortunately in Windsor, the majority of these do not turn into a protected/dedicated lane. Even in cases where they turn into an "acceleration lane", that lane is also a through-lane from the opposite side of the intersection, is often used as one, and ends too quickly to provide space for everyone to merge. I haven't seen how it's done in other cities, but I can't imagine this completely counter-intuitive engineering is standard practise.
On the surface, it's a very clear and simple issue: turn into the correct lane, and both parties can go simultaneously with no issues. But it just doesn't end up working like that in reality.
Especially if the "bypass lane" is not deemed part of the same intersection, the party entering the road from the bypass lane would be 100% at-fault (Insurance Act) if they were struck by a car that had turned on a green arrow, because now the car with the arrow has cleared the intersection before the collision happened. Food for thought, maybe.
"Because Windsor", I guess ;-) As is pointed out, the problem isn't really with the yield sign, it's with poor driving. If it were me, I would complain to my councilor. At the very least they should paint guide lines for that left turning traffic to try and nudge them into that correct lane. Better off, increase police presence at that intersection for a while.
"Because Windsor", I guess
As is pointed out, the problem isn't really with the yield sign, it's with poor driving.
If it were me, I would complain to my councilor. At the very least they should paint guide lines for that left turning traffic to try and nudge them into that correct lane. Better off, increase police presence at that intersection for a while.
Somewhat of a followup... It's called a "channelized right turn", and the traffic engineering people confirm that it is not considered part of the same intersection. It is a separate entrance into the flow of traffic, which is not controlled by the traffic signals, only the yield sign. Therefore, as discussed above, the traffic in that lane definitely do have to come to a full stop and remain so until traffic breaks. That lane never has right of way, it can only go when an opening forms. Of course, being a yield, stopping is not necessary if the way is clear. Interesting hypothetical: https://www.drivesmartbc.ca/rules-road/ ... right-turn The Ontario HTA might view the particulars a little differently, but if one were to continue and turn right after the island, the car making the right turn in those circumstances would have right-of-way.
Somewhat of a followup...
It's called a "channelized right turn", and the traffic engineering people confirm that it is not considered part of the same intersection. It is a separate entrance into the flow of traffic, which is not controlled by the traffic signals, only the yield sign.
Therefore, as discussed above, the traffic in that lane definitely do have to come to a full stop and remain so until traffic breaks. That lane never has right of way, it can only go when an opening forms. Of course, being a yield, stopping is not necessary if the way is clear.
The Ontario HTA might view the particulars a little differently, but if one were to continue and turn right after the island, the car making the right turn in those circumstances would have right-of-way.
Hi, I am new to the forum. I have been trying to get information off of here and www.ticketcombat.com for my case.
I was given a ticket for going 122km/h in a posted 100km/h zone at Hwy 401 east at Thickson Rd in Whitby ON on April 10th, 2009.
I find this absolutely absurd, since I was in the left most lane of the 401 approximately(within 5km/h) following the speed of traffic in my lane. The guy in…
Hey this is my first ticket so as much information that people can provide will be appreciated. I was making the drive home going around 90kph(in a 80) behind what I knew was an undercover police car. The cop abruptly pulled to the side and pulled back in behind me to pull me over. Now I reduced my speed to below 80 when the cop pulled to the side but he claimed he had me clocked at 109kph and…
On Wednesday I attended court at 1530 Markham Road, courtroom E2, in order to fight my speeding ticket. My original plan was to plead not guilty, and to watch all the people who went before me, the process, the Prosecutor and the Justice Of The Peace so I could strategize and form the best plan for my defence at trial. I had done some research online and sort of knew I wanted to defend myself,…
About 5 months ago I was driving along a two-way road approaching an intersection. The road had a left/ straight turning lane and a right turning lane. There was an 18 wheel gravel truck occupying the left lane at a red light. I pulled behind the truck intending to drive straight. After not moving for about 1 second, I check my rear view mirror, signaled and changed lanes to the right…
I am currently working for an auto parts delivery company and they contracted me to work as a courier.
As I left my base to make my first delivery which was less than 300 meters away from the shop, I had my seat belt off because i was under the impression, according to Section 106 Exception #6 subsection (c) of the highway traffic act, that I would be exempted from the seat belt law. The rule…
Got a ticket yesterday for "Insecure Load" contrary to HTA Sec 111(2). $160. I was pulling a utility trailer in which I had loaded a steel and wood cabinet. Total length of cabinet is 57.5". 14.75" (1/4 of the cabinet) was sticking out over the side of the trailer at about a 45 degree angle, the rest (3/4) was inside the trailer. The trailer has sides 24" high. I didn't have a tie-down or bungee…
I've been researching for months for defence strategy and basic trial information regarding my speeding ticket. However, the information is so conflicting that I have no confidence whatsoever that I know what I'm doing.
I didn't get this info from a friend of a friend, it came from this website, court officials, case laws, and a consultation with a traffic ticket fighting company.
So I was driving east bound pulling an empty tandem trailer on a gravel highway. Eventually I caught up to a truck pulling a fifth wheel. The speed limit was 70km/h and I don't quite remember but I'm almost 100% that the guy in front of me was driving at 60km/h. After being behind him for a few kilometers and getting two cracks in my windshield from rocks off his tires, I decided to pass him. I…
I have been driving for over 10 years without any tickets and accidents what so ever. Unfortunately my luck ran out this past Friday; when the officer pulled me over doing 80 in a 50 zone in Mississauga, Ontario. Officer was very friendly and polite not to mention nice enough to reduce the charge to 15KM.
On the speeding ticket it now says doing 65km in a 50 zone. Never having a speeding…
hi everyone im just wondering if its right for a cop to have my car impounded and give me a traffic ticket for improper plates when my car didnt leave my property, yes i knew the plates werent to my car but on private property it dont matter aslong as it dosent go onto public property. am i right with this that i shouldnt have gotten the ticket or my car impounded?????????????
Have been busy and haven't had much time to follow up on this...
Went to court having not received disclosure (and was not organized enough to apply for a stay), so the trial was adjourned. They photocopied the officer's ticket and notes and provided a log sheet from the plane. I've sent another request for the rest of the disclosure items.
So here's my question -- can an officer amend the ticket…
Hi guys, I got pulled over last night and was ticketed with HTA 172, I was going 157 on a 100 on 400N and was wondering what I should do. I was using cruise control but the guy in the lane to my left was driving into my lane irresponsibly to I sped up to get ahead of him and just my luck that's when an OPP cruiser pulled up behind me flashing his lights. My court date is at the end of the month…
If anyone can answer this I would greatly appreciate it.
Friday morning I checked my mail and received a letter from the MTO stating that under section 47(1) of the HTA the Registrar of Motor Vehicles has decided to suspend my driving privilege for medical reasons. This was due to a report submitted by a physician in compliance with section 203 of the HTA. Enclosed with that letter were forms to…
Ok so looking for some advice in regards to my wife's speeding ticket 120k in 100 (I was in vehicle so witnessed most - but was resting at initial clock.)
whats the likelihood of positive outcome of an 11b (or an officer no show, which I suspect doesn't really happen as much as web/Ads would have you believe) of 8months.
Wife REALLY doesn't want to go, and of course I'm the one doing all of the…
I know I shouldn't have driving but I slept at my buddies' place and I thought I was ok to drive in the morning.. needless to say I still drove and got pulled over.
Background details:
I was pulled over in the morning last week, apparently going 120 km/hr on 90km Northbound DVP. Two cop cars tailed me for a bit, saw them in my rearview mirror while on the left lane, slowed down to…
I got two tickets on Feb 20 2011. One for red light, and the other for Stop sign. I knew I had a good chance at getting off on the red light, because the officer couldn't actually see the light facing me. He was at an opposite angle, further up the street.
I set a court date for both tickets. On April 22 I moved to a new place. I went to the Service Ontario location and renewed my licence…
Winnipeg's police officers have been told to issue more traffic tickets, in part to increase revenue.
And a union representing cops says the move could hurt their efforts to curb the city's gang violence.
Police Chief Keith McCaskill said last night he -- and he alone, without input from Mayor Sam Katz -- recently made the call to patrolling officers and to those in specialized units to step up…
I'm wondering if anyone could enlighten me on what to do about the following scenario:
I was pulled over by a YRP constable because I only had one front head light working. Upon being pulled over, I also realized my insurance card was expired by one month and my car permit was not on me at all. (It doesn't matter now but my valid insurance card was sitting at home in an envelope…
I have a wicked prosecutor in my area, he is an evil man and will lie and cheat, whatever is necessary for him to win. I got a yellow light infraction ticket and the cop was a no show. I requested the charge dismissed and it went like this:
Me: I request the charge be dismissed because the officer is not here
Prosecutor: No, we are going to adjourn the trial so the officer can attend
Accident happened at a regular intersection with turning lanes and lights. I was turning left. The light turned yellow, and the car approaching sped up to make the light. I thought he was stopping, so i made the turn. At the time of the collision the light was red.
I understand that it is my fault. I'm just wondering what my best course of action is.
alright well to get started ive developed a passion for longboarding
for those of you who dont already know a longboard is a big skateboard too heavy for tricks and stuff but boy can they ever go fast
my hobbies include going up the escarpment here in hamilton and stoney creek and riding down the roads leading to the lower part of the city. just wondering here. what would happen if i was going down…
My court date is nearing at old city hall at appeals court.
iwhats going to happen and what do i do?
do I present my certificate of offence and point out to the judge the fine was incorrect, I did not appear and am now appealing on the grounds the Justice of the peace erred and failed to quash the ticket on the basis of the certificate not being properly examined and is not complete and regular on…
.