U Turns and right of way

First Up

Anyone familiar with the Trees Rd/Stillorgan Rd junction in Dublin? Just opposite the Stillorgan Park Hotel. There is a common practice of people doing U turns on the Stillorgan Rd - i.e. cars facing South swing around into the city bound lanes.

They do this when they have a filter light, intended to let them turn right into Trees Rd. Problem is, traffic coming out of Trees Rd has a filter light left at the same time. Thus you have two cars, each with a green light, potentially colliding.

I don't think the U turn is illegal per se. Question is, who has right of way? Who should yield?

TimeToShine

I know the junction. The person doing the U turn should yield in theory but it probably ends up the other person instead because it's easier. The U turn isn't legal in the first place though as far as I know. Just my opinion anyway, I drive around that area a small bit.

visual

Should be illegal but its not. Unless there is a no U turn sign.

If the cars collide and all things are equal then the rule give way to traffic from your right applies.

TimeToShine

visual wrote: »

Should be illegal but its not. Unless there is a no U turn sign.

If the cars collide and all things are equal then the rule give way to traffic from your right applies.

Filter light is only for the street though. You wouldn't legally be allowed pull a U turn on any old crossroads if you had a filter light to turn right surely?

Yawns

Is there a sign saying no U turn?

mossym

visual wrote: »

If the cars collide and all things are equal then the rule give way to traffic from your right applies.

you could argue if someone is doing a u turn that both cars are to each others right for a period, which is an issue

goz83

I know the turn. Two ways of looking at it and both ways put the one car in the right. There is no sign to say no U turn.

Lets say car 1 is the car doing the U turn and car 2 is the one turning left from Trees road lower.

As car 1 is doing the U turn, car 2 is only on the right hand side for 50% of the turn and that's not the half where a collision would most likely take place. Car 1 is always to the right of car 2 during the turn, so that would mean car 2 should yield to traffic on the right.

In scenario 2, it gets easier. Car 1 is already on the major road, as car 2 is attempting to join from a minor road. Car 1 has right of way.

There needs to be a better signalling system in place there.

Cleveland Hot Pocket

A no u-turn sign would be simpler!

blackwhite

Are we sure it's not illegal at this junction?

When there is a filter for turning right, there is always also a solid red light red light. To me that would imply that you only have permission for a right turn, but not for a u-turn.

There are other lights on this road (within 500m) that have a u-turn lights
https://www.google.ie/maps/@53.297012,-6.204018,3a,75y,209.78h,85.56t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sQv1feln55Xt_fdH75mJNaQ!2e0

Yawns

My understanding is the same as goz.

The car doing the U turn is on the main road and as such has right of way. The car coming from the lesser road has to give way. The only way this would change if there was a no U turn sign. If no sign is there, then a U turn maneuver is allowed when the way is clear.

blackwhite

Yawns wrote: »

My understanding is the same as goz.

The car doing the U turn is on the main road and as such has right of way. The car coming from the lesser road has to give way. The only way this would change if there was a no U turn sign. If no sign is there, then a U turn maneuver is allowed when the way is clear.

In this case is he not leaving one carriageway and entering another one?

Yawns

blackwhite wrote: »

In this case is he not leaving one carriageway and entering another one?

No.

He's on the main road and has right of way over traffic coming from the lesser road.

blackwhite

Yawns wrote: »

No.

He's on the main road and has right of way over traffic coming from the lesser road.

On a dual carriageway the opposite sides are different carriageways.

Both drivers would have equal priority if there were no lights.

The fact that one has a green light specifically permitting what they want to do, and the other is disobeying a solid red light (they have a green for turning right, not for a u-turn) means that, at this junction, the traffic from Trees Rd should have right of way.

Yawns

Disagree. You seem to believe a U turn cannot be permitted at this particular set of lights. Unless a no U turn sign is there, then a U turn is allowed. When making the U turn, the car will be on the main road and to the right of the traffic coming from Tree's road. Therefore it will have right of way over traffic coming from the lesser road.

blackwhite

Yawns wrote: »

Disagree. You seem to believe a U turn cannot be permitted at this particular set of lights. Unless a no U turn sign is there, then a U turn is allowed. When making the U turn, the car will be on the main road and to the right of the traffic coming from Tree's road. Therefore it will have right of way over traffic coming from the lesser road.

Why then do other junctions, within 500m of this one, have specific U-turn lights?

A solid red with a filter green means you can only make the manouevre that the green arrow indicates. No u-turn green at these lights.

What's so special about a u-turn that it overrides the law on traffic lights?

the culture of deference

This happens on the N4 at palmerstown. I have seen a few close calls there.

Yawns

blackwhite wrote: »

Why then do other junctions, within 500m of this one, have specific U-turn lights?

A solid red with a filter green means you can only make the manouevre that the green arrow indicates. No u-turn green at these lights.

What's so special about a u-turn that it overrides the law on traffic lights?

Can you only make a U turn at junctions with U turn lights / lanes? If so then most people around the country won't be allowed to make a U turn.

A solid red with a filter green for right means you can proceed right when the way is clear. The driver would be turning right to make his U turn. The way is clear to complete a U turn maneuver.

There's nothing special. Just at this particular instance when the driver makes the U turn, he is on the main road and to the right of traffic merging from Trees road so has right of way over that merging traffic. Nothing special.

djimi

blackwhite wrote: »

A solid red with a filter green means you can only make the manouevre that the green arrow indicates. No u-turn green at these lights.

A u-turn is a right hand turn, no? You are turning right off the carraigeway (as opposed to going straight ahead).

Yawns

I'm looking at the link you provided yourself for the U turn junction. It's a T junction and no right turn from one side, so they put a U turn lane. Look at the other side of that junction. No U turn sign with a right filter light. So you can't perform a U turn on one side and if on the other, you an only do a U turn because there is no right turn.

blackwhite

Why then do two other junction on this same road have specific u-turn lights?

Yawns

Well one as I pointed out has a U turn lane as there is no physical right turn. Maybe it was part of a traffic management plan?

Why do some junctions have no U turn signs and others don't.

Yawns

There's also a no right turn outside the Radisson. It doesn't say no U turn but seeing as it says no right turn, that means you cannot perform a U turn as that would involve turning to the right.

So a filter right arrow that is not accompanied by a no U turn sign, allows you to perform a U turn if the way is clear.

blackwhite

Yawns wrote: »

Well one as I pointed out has a U turn lane as there is no physical right turn. Maybe it was part of a traffic management plan?

Why do some junctions have no U turn signs and others don't.

Both of the u-turn junctions are at places where the junctions had problems with people performing illegal u-turns previously.


Specific no U-turn signs are put up because there's a problem with people performing dangerous u-turns. At a junction where not too many people try to perform a u-turn then the problem is considered significant enough to warrant a sign.

Yawns

blackwhite wrote: »

Both of the u-turn junctions are at places where the junctions had problems with people performing illegal u-turns previously.


Specific no U-turn signs are put up because there's a problem with people performing dangerous u-turns. At a junction where not too many people try to perform a u-turn then the problem is considered significant enough to warrant a sign.

So in the case of the original query, it is perfectly legal to perform a U turn at the junction of Trees Rd. No specific U turn lane and more importantly a lack of a no U turn sign, so the traffic can perform a U turn maneuver as they will be turning right from that lane with the filter light. When making the maneuver they will be on the main road and to the right of traffic coming from Trees road and have right of way.

If it's brought to the attention of the relevant people, then it could be changed. A no U turn sign or more importantly I think, a yield sign at the lower junction.

Look at it this way. Someone suggested if there were no lights, who would have right of way. Traffic already on the main road or traffic merging from a lesser road?

blackwhite

Yawns wrote: »

So in the case of the original query, it is perfectly legal to perform a U turn at the junction of Trees Rd. No specific U turn lane and more importantly a lack of a no U turn sign, so the traffic can perform a U turn maneuver as they will be turning right from that lane with the filter light. When making the maneuver they will be on the main road and to the right of traffic coming from Trees road and have right of way.

If it's brought to the attention of the relevant people, then it could be changed. A no U turn sign or more importantly I think, a yield sign at the lower junction.

Look at it this way. Someone suggested if there were no lights, who would have right of way. Traffic already on the main road or traffic merging from a lesser road?

Nope. A right-turn is not the same as a u-turn, and a right-turn arrow is not the same as a u-turn arrow. A solid red with a filter means that you can only make the manouevre that the filter indicates.

Unless you can dig out legislation on this that says differently then I don't think we're going to agree.


BTW, I was the one who posted about if there were no lights, but I'll repeat it just for you

If there were no lights, then traffic making a u-turn and traffic coming from Trees Rd would both be moving from one carriageway to another. At this point it comes down to yield to traffic coming from your right, and in a case like this it can be argued that both drivers are on each other's right.
Given that one lane is taking what is the normal flow of traffic, and one is making an abnormal manouevre, I'd always hold that the person making an abnormal manouevre should be the one to yield, rather than try to bully their way through.

djimi

To be honest, at any junction where there is a right hand filter lane and filter lights, where there is no "No U Turn" sign I am going to assume that its okay to make a u turn. There is no point looking at other junctions or sets of lights along the road; they are of no relevance when you are sitting at a set of traffic lights assessing whether its okay to make a turn or not. All you can do is judge based on what you can see, and if if what you can see is a green filter light for turning right and no other signage then turn away as far as Im concerned.

The fact that other cars on the road also have a green light to turn into the same path is just poor road planning, and the resaon why you should also execute caution when making any turn. You are not to know however that these cars also have a green light.

Yawns

blackwhite wrote: »

Unless you can dig out legislation on this that says differently then I don't think we're going to agree.

You seem to think it's illegal to make a u turn at a right filter light that has a lack of no U turn signs. You've specifically said it was illegal. Show me this legislation so. Then I'll agree with you.

I'll stand by what I said. At a right turn filter light without a no U turn sign, if the way is clear, then you can make a u Turn. Seeing as you have left the carriageway and joined another as you yourself pointed out, it still means you have joined a carriageway. Whilst on this carriageway you have right of way over the traffic coming from the lesser road which at that junction is the trees road.

So performing the U turn would still leave you on the carriage way and to the right of traffic merging onto the carriageway from trees road. It's simple enough really. As another poster said, forget the other junctions and just focus on what's in front of you.

First Up

Thanks for all the interest and interesting comments. I would have though that the fact the the Trees Rd driver has explicit permission to enter the N11, while the U turner is actually breaking a light has some relevance.

I think I'll pass it to the traffic people in DLRCOCO and see what they say.

djimi

First Up wrote: »

Thanks for all the interest and interesting comments. I would have though that the fact the the Trees Rd driver has explicit permission to enter the N11, while the U turner is actually breaking a light has some relevance.

I think I'll pass it to the traffic people in DLRCOCO and see what they say.

What light is the U turner breaking?

Cleveland Hot Pocket

djimi wrote: »

What light is the U turner breaking?

The red light facing them on the road that they have u-turned on to

djimi

Cleveland Hot Pocket wrote: »

The red light facing them on the road that they have u-turned on to

Would that apply? Surely that red light is no more relevant to the person doing the u turn as it is to the person who is turning left from the far side and is also passing through the red light?

Its worth bearing in mind that a u turn is a right turn (just a 180 degree turn rather than a 90 degree turn). In the absense of further signage, I really dont think the person performing the u turn is doing anything wrong.

ardmacha

Cleveland Hot Pocket wrote: »

The red light facing them on the road that they have u-turned on to

How are they breaking this light any more than traffic turning into any road where traffic on that road has been stopped by a red light?

U turns are common at the Booterstown Ave junction, as it is difficult to reach the hotel otherwise.

One issue with some junctions in those parts is that the left turn filter is a green arrow, implying a right of way, rather than a flashing orange, which is what it should be.

pippip

Cleveland Hot Pocket wrote: »

The red light facing them on the road that they have u-turned on to

That red light would only apply to cars stopped prior to the junction. The person making the u turn would already be in the junction and as such already past the red light.

the culture of deference

Cleveland Hot Pocket wrote: »

The red light facing them on the road that they have u-turned on to

djimi wrote: »

Would that apply? Surely that red light is no more relevant to the person doing the u turn as it is to the person who is turning left from the far side and is also passing through the red light?

Its worth bearing in mind that a u turn is a right turn (just a 180 degree turn rather than a 90 degree turn). In the absense of further signage, I really dont think the person performing the u turn is doing anything wrong.

On the N4 inbound at the Palmerstown traffic lights
the traffic turning right up kennelsfort road and the the traffic coming down kennelsfort road turning left are on the same filter light cycle.

It does make sense that the cars turning left on N4 outbound toward M50 should have priority and not have to watch out for cars doing U turns, as all other lights are red.

Cleveland Hot Pocket

pippip wrote: »

That red light would only apply to cars stopped prior to the junction. The person making the u turn would already be in the junction and as such already past the red light.

Yes but the U turn is not a right turn, therefore the car should not be in that position at all. They have not passed the red light on the other side of the junction, nor have they been directed onto the road by a green light.

I vote that the legislation be clarified to specifically state that Uturns on dual carriage ways be specified as disallowed.

First Up

pippip wrote: »

That red light would only apply to cars stopped prior to the junction. The person making the u turn would already be in the junction and as such already past the red light.

I think this is the crux of it and involves both the "letter" and "spirit" of the lights at the junction. The filter light off Trees Rd operates when traffic on both the N11 (North) and on Treesdale (the smaller road directly across the junction from Trees Rd) have red lights. Thus traffic filtering from Trees Rd is protected from traffic coming onto the N11 by turning right from Treesdale. That is in effect the same maneuver as is being made by the U turner. How can it be illegal for one (Treesdale) and not the other (U turn)?

djimi

Cleveland Hot Pocket wrote: »

Yes but the U turn is not a right turn, therefore the car should not be in that position at all. They have not passed the red light on the other side of the junction, nor have they been directed onto the road by a green light.

I vote that the legislation be clarified to specifically state that Uturns on dual carriage ways be specified as disallowed.

Why isnt the u turn a right turn? Youre turning right off the carraigeway arent you?

First Up

djimi wrote: »

Why isnt the u turn a right turn? Youre turning right off the carraigeway arent you?

No, you are re-joining the carriageway. "Turning off" would mean going onto Trees Rd, not competing with cars that have a green light to enter the carriageway.

pippip

First Up wrote: »

No, you are re-joining the carriageway. "Turning off" would mean going onto Trees Rd, not competing with cars that have a green light to enter the carriageway.

Someone stated above that both sides of a carriageway are classed as separate so "turning off" one route to which you have a green light and either going onto trees road or onto the other carriageway, not the same carriageway.

First Up

pippip wrote: »

Someone stated above that both sides of a carriageway are classed as separate so the u turn is "turning off" one route to which you have a green light and either going onto trees road or onto the other carriageway, not the same carriageway.

Then they are entering a carriageway onto which traffic from another direction has been given a green light. The U turner is assuming a right that has been explicitly denied to others wishing to enter that carriageway - either already on the N11 or entering it from across the junction.

pippip

I just had a look on google street view there and will add to the mix.

If you preform a u turn you should be entering the outside lane of the Northbound carriageway.

And the people coming off Trees road are entering the inside lane.

First Up

pippip wrote: »

I just had a look on google street view there and will add to the mix.

If you preform a u turn you should be entering the outside lane of the Northbound carriageway.

And the people coming off Trees road are entering the inside lane.

Don't think that applies. For starters, nobody should be in the outside lane unless overtaking or turning right. But of more practical relevance, getting into the outside lane northbound would require a turn of about 320 degrees. Not many cars can do that.

Cleveland Hot Pocket

djimi wrote: »

Why isnt the u turn a right turn? Youre turning right off the carraigeway arent you?

No, you are turning back on yourself.
To turn right would be to leave the junction altogether.

pippip

First Up wrote: »

Don't think that applies. For starters, nobody should be in the outside lane unless overtaking or turning right. But of more practical relevance, getting into the outside lane northbound would require a turn of about 320 degrees. Not many cars can do that.

You can enter on the outside lane. There is nothing wrong with that as long as you merge into the inside lane once safe to do so.

Otherwise in this case you are switching lanes in a junction which is illegal.

The top of Mount Merrion Ave turning right is a perfect example. If you are in the right hand lane at the lights at the top of Mount Merrion Ave turning towards town then you are suppose to enter the outside lane on the carriageway as the traffic in the left lane at the lights is suppose to enter the left hand lane.

djimi

First Up wrote: »

Then they are entering a carriageway onto which traffic from another direction has been given a green light. The U turner is assuming a right that has been explicitly denied to others wishing to enter that carriageway - either already on the N11 or entering it from across the junction.

The person making the turn is not to know that the other cars also have a green light, and there is no red light or sign to forbid the car in the filter lane from making a u turn. Like I said above, its bad road planning and markings, but I really dont see why the person making the u turn is actually doing anything wrong. They are not assuming anything; they are driving to the traffic lights and the road markings.

djimi

Cleveland Hot Pocket wrote: »

No, you are turning back on yourself.
To turn right would be to leave the junction altogether.

You are turning back onto a seperate carraigeway; if you were turning back on yourself you would end up driving the wrong way down a one way road! Its still a right turn from the point where the car is sitting; there is nothing explicitly stating which roads the car can and cannot turn right onto.

First Up

pippip wrote: »

You can enter on the outside lane. There is nothing wrong with that as long as you merge into the inside lane once safe to do so.

Otherwise in this case you are switching lanes in a junction which is illegal.

The top of Mount Merrion Ave turning right is a perfect example. If you are in the right hand lane at the lights at the top of Mount Merrion Ave turning towards town then you are suppose to enter the outside lane on the carriageway as the traffic in the left lane at the lights is suppose to enter the left hand lane.

I'm saying it is a physical impossibility to turn from the outside lane in one direction directly into the outside lane in the opposite direction.

But my original question was not about the legality or otherwise of the U turn (in the absence of a prohibition, it can be assumed to be legal) but which car has right of way?

Cleveland Hot Pocket

djimi wrote: »

You are turning back onto a seperate carraigeway; if you were turning back on yourself you would end up driving the wrong way down a one way road! Its still a right turn from the point where the car is sitting; there is nothing explicitly stating which roads the car can and cannot turn right onto.

There is also nothing specifically stating that I cannot drive round and round a roundabout for 10 hours.
Doesn't make it legal or correct though.

Hence my post earlier stating that the statute should be amended for clarification and make u-turns on DC's like this either legal and accounted for or illegal and accounted for. At the moment strictly by the legal wording it is ambiguous.

djimi

Cleveland Hot Pocket wrote: »

There is also nothing specifically stating that I cannot drive round and round a roundabout for 10 hours.
Doesn't make it legal or correct though.

Hence my post earlier stating that the statute should be amended for clarification and make u-turns on DC's like this either legal and accounted for or illegal and accounted for. At the moment strictly by the legal wording it is ambiguous.

What would you be done for if you did decide to reinact the Indy 500 at your local roundabout I wonder? :pac:

The statute doesnt need to be amended in fairness; road planners just need to cop on and do a better job of marking dangerous turns. There is nothing wrong with making a u turn at a junction like this provided it is safe to do so. The issue with the situation as described by the OP is that the people making the u turn are not to know that there are other cars who also have a green light to turn onto the same stretch of road, and as such there should be a sign saying no u turns, or at least a red light to ensure that only one set of cars is turning at a time.

Cleveland Hot Pocket

djimi wrote: »

What would you be done for if you did decide to reinact the Indy 500 at your local roundabout I wonder? :pac:

The statute doesnt need to be amended in fairness; road planners just need to cop on and do a better job of marking dangerous turns. There is nothing wrong with making a u turn at a junction like this provided it is safe to do so. The issue with the situation as described by the OP is that the people making the u turn are not to know that there are other cars who also have a green light to turn onto the same stretch of road, and as such there should be a sign saying no u turns, or at least a red light to ensure that only one set of cars is turning at a time.

+1
In fairness, it is against the spirit of the law and the junction's light system to have two filter lights green at the same time when there is a possibility of intersection.

robbie99

First Up wrote: »

But my original question was not about the legality or otherwise of the U turn (in the absence of a prohibition, it can be assumed to be legal) but which car has right of way?

The car turning left has right of way over the car doing the u-turn.

Although both cars have a green light, there's a big disclaimer in the Rules of the Road about green lights - page 102, http://www.rotr.ie/rules-of-the-road-eng.pdf -

"REMEMBER: A green light is not a right of way, it is a licence to proceed with caution."

In the absence of markings, restrictions, lights or special rules on doing a u-turn, I think the u-turn can be treated as turning right, twice.

Right of way at junctions is on page 121, and one of the points is

"If you plan to turn right at a junction and a vehicle from the opposite
direction wants to turn into the same road, the vehicle that is turning left
has right of way. If yours is the vehicle turning right, you must wait for
the other vehicle to turn first."

The closest diagram I found that I think fits this situation is the one on page 128. Imagine there were no lights at the junction and you were proceeding with caution. If you wanted to do a u-turn, you'd be getting yourself into position by completing the first part of the turn (ending up in the same position as a car wanting to turn right at that junction), and from there it is clear that the car turning left has the right of way.