Question: right turn on red in New York City
John
a full stop on a Saturday morning in New York City near Columbia
University. The traffic at the time was very light. The description of
traffic infraction is "Disobey steady red light". The fine is $130
plus three points. I moved to New Jersey about four years ago and have
made occasional trips to NYC. I never notice any traffic sign saying
"no right turn on red" at the George Washington bridge, Lincoln
tunnel, Holland tunnel or anywhere in the city. I would appreciate if
anyone would tell me where the signs are, if there are any. Would the
points incurred in NY be transferred to NJ?
Steve
There should be signs coming out of the Lincoln, AFAIR, but yeah, NYC
has no RTOR because it's a city of over 1 million and thus is granted a
NYS exemption from RTOR unless otherwise posted. This is easier than
posting every intersection as NTOR. Unfortunately, unless you know this
or notice the sign, you're screwed.
RAD unx-posted because.
Garth Almgren
> I got a traffic violation ticket for making a right turn on red after
> a full stop on a Saturday morning in New York City near Columbia
> University. <snip> Would the points incurred in NY be transferred to NJ?
Unless otherwise indicated by a sign, there are no right turns on red
permitted in NYC. Completely opposite from most of the rest of the
country. I guess this is what they invented phrases like "ignorance of
the law is no excuse" for. Sorry you had to learn the hard way. :(
I have no idea whether the points will transfer because I don't have a
clue as to how your point system works. We don't have points here in WA.
--
~/Garth |"I believe that it is better to tell the truth than a lie.
Almgren | I believe it is better to be free than to be a slave.
--------| And I believe it is better to know than to be ignorant."
========| - Henry Louis Mencken (1880-1956)
James Robinson
>
> I never notice any traffic sign saying
> "no right turn on red" at the George Washington bridge, Lincoln
> tunnel, Holland tunnel or anywhere in the city.
The no-right-on-red is universal in New York City. You are only allowed
to turn right on a solid red, after a stop, where a sign specifically
allows you to.
The NY state highway code has a provision that permits cities of 1
million or more population to enact a local law that prohibits right
turns on red. (Article 24, Section 1111 (d) 2) Conveniently, the only
city approaching that size is NYC:
http://assembly.state.ny.us/leg/?cl=128&a=48
And the City of New York has enacted the necessary law (you have to
click on a link to a PDF file. It will take a couple of minutes to
download on a dial-up connection.):
http://www.nyc.gov/html/dot/html/permits/traffic_rules.html
Here's the pertinent part (Chapter 4-03 (a) 3)
===================================
(3) Steady red alone:
(i) Vehicular traffic facing such signal shall stop before entering the
crosswalk on the near side of the intersection or, if none, then before
entering the intersection and shall remain standing until an indication
to proceed is shown.
(ii) Notwithstanding the foregoing provisions of this subdivision (a),
or any provisions of state law, an operator approaching an intersection
where a sign authorizes right or left turns on red signal may make such
turn after coming to a complete stop, but shall yield the right of way
to all vehicles and pedestrians lawfully within the intersection.
=================================
Toastmaster
You were charged in violation of V&TL 1111-01, right? That's
the same thing as if you blew through the red light.
Personally I think RTOR should be a lesser offense than
disobey steady red but that's how the law is.
There are RTOR signs at JFK airport and in some approachs to
Manhattan. However, the law is the law and they don't need
signs. 2 points will transfer to New Jersey.
You COULD try to plead not guilty. You might get lucky and
not have the cop show up (especially if it was a patrol
cop). You might also be able to tell the judge that you are
from out-of-town and ignorant. You are not the only
out-of-towner to get caught doing that, in fact i see people
with out of state plates do RTOR every day. Plea bargaining
and traffic school is not an option in New York City traffic
courts, so you could hope for at least a reduced fine or
maybe, just maybe a possible dismissal if the judge feels
sorry for you. You have nothing at all to lose by pleading
not guilty. If you really want to play the system, keep
asking for trial continuances. By the time the case gets up,
the cop will probably have forgotten you and will have to
drop the charges.
Good luck, let us know how it turns out.
--
If you flame me, then the terrorists have won.
Toastmaster
>
>
> ===================================
>
> (3) Steady red alone:
> (i) Vehicular traffic facing such signal shall stop before
> entering the
> crosswalk on the near side of the intersection or, if
> none, then before
> entering the intersection and shall remain standing until
> an indication
> to proceed is shown.
> (ii) Notwithstanding the foregoing provisions of this
> subdivision (a),
> or any provisions of state law, an operator approaching an
> intersection
> where a sign authorizes right or left turns on red signal
> may make such
> turn after coming to a complete stop, but shall yield the
> right of way
> to all vehicles and pedestrians lawfully within the
> intersection.
>
> =================================
Are left turns on red allowed anywhere in NYC? Anyone know?
James Robinson
>
> Would the points incurred in NY be transferred to NJ?
New Jersey is a member of the "Drivers License Compact", so you will
supposedly get two points added to your record for out-of-state traffic
violations. (They might not, since you only violated a city code, and
not a state code. I don't really know, however.)
Here's a link to a traffic lawyer I stumbled across:
http://www.nyctrafficlawyer.com/
There are supposedly a dozen or so law firms listed in the NYC yellow
pages that handle traffic cases. Can't hurt to call, first call's
free. Something like 50% of cases that go to court get thrown out, or
ruled not guilty.
John David Galt
> New Jersey is a member of the "Drivers License Compact", so you will
> supposedly get two points added to your record for out-of-state traffic
> violations.
I thought the Compact rule was that your home state will count the
violation as though it had happened there. So since NJ allows this turn
unless banned by a sign, which it wasn't, I would assume you won't get
any points. But you might ask the NJ DMV.
gkowal
Being from New Jersey, Joisey or Nooh Cheresy, we have automatic
diplomatic immunity,
depending on which town your from, and if the NYC cop ever had a bad time
there.
There USED to be signs, a few years back when the whole "right turn on
red" concept came out.
The signs where removed, either by the "Fuggedaboudit" Bill of 1995, or by
natural anthropy.
2 points will transfer over to your NJ account, only if you plead or are
found guilty.
One way to diplomaticize this is to lose the whole thing, then years later
when they drag you into court on another ticket,
they will tell you about this old one. The cop, if he does show up, will
probably not remember any details about something 4 or 5 years back,
whereby you'll win your case.
Happened to me.
If you never had a NY license, they can't do much except ask you to come
in to court.
Actually it's not much of a real court.
Sort of a rent-a-judge inside a shopping mall or office bulding.
GK
N. W. Perry
> There should be signs coming out of the Lincoln, AFAIR, but yeah, NYC
> has no RTOR because it's a city of over 1 million and thus is granted a
> NYS exemption from RTOR unless otherwise posted. This is easier than
> posting every intersection as NTOR. Unfortunately, unless you know this
> or notice the sign, you're screwed.
> RAD unx-posted because.
<nitpick> Cities over 1 million are not granted an exemption, but are
rather empowered to enact the relevant law. It jo so happens NYC has
done so...</nitpick>
Joel Rubin
>John wrote:
>>
>> I got a traffic violation ticket for making a right turn on red after
>> a full stop on a Saturday morning in New York City near Columbia
>> University. The traffic at the time was very light. The description of
>> traffic infraction is "Disobey steady red light". The fine is $130
>> plus three points. I moved to New Jersey about four years ago and have
>> made occasional trips to NYC. I never notice any traffic sign saying
>> "no right turn on red" at the George Washington bridge, Lincoln
>> tunnel, Holland tunnel or anywhere in the city. I would appreciate if
>> anyone would tell me where the signs are, if there are any. Would the
>> points incurred in NY be transferred to NJ?
>
There are a few places in NYC where right on red is legal but there
aren't a whole lot. (e.g. at the 21 St. exit of the upper level of the
59th St. Bridge)
I know there are or were signs if you enter Queens on the Long Island
Expressway.
Ricardo
<v6s...@v6stang.com> wrote:
>Unless otherwise indicated by a sign, there are no right turns on red
>permitted in NYC.
Correct. Probably not a bad thing either, in a city like that. RTOR
is abused enough here as it is, and this city's minuscule compared
with NY.
>We don't have points here in WA.
What?! I didn't know that... if that's true, then that means that
were "Muggins" finally to procure a U.S. visa, and drive in/through
Washington state, and somehow get a tix (perish the thought! <g>),
there'd be no points to Xfer? That's awesome, because, afaik, WA is
the only yank state with which BC has a non-resident violator pact.
And if that's still the case today, it means I couldn't ever get
points Xferred to my BC licence for U.S. traffic violations! Of
course that's all hypothetical for me, 'cos I'm law abiding, but
it's really interesting to know that WA doesn't levy points. Very,
very nice. The only caveat for you guys is the "all speeding is
reckless" statute, but hey, one can't have everything now, eh? :)
--
ricardo, ex-euroslav
vancouver bc canada
e-mail: sovietjamaicanguy <at> yahoo <dot> ca
for liability purposes: I *always* obey the law.
Ricardo
wrote:
>Are left turns on red allowed anywhere in NYC? Anyone know?
No idea if any are signed for in NYC, but LTOR is legal here onto a
one way street, even if unsigned.
Debra Co
Jersey. Anyway, lack of a sign doesn't mean lack of a law, or of your
obligation to obey said law.
If they posted a sign about every different driving law from NJ to NY at every
crossing, you'd be required to pull over after crossing each bridge and spend a
couple of hours reading.
Deb
--------------
Librarians have the power to hide your dissertation behind a pile of old Field
and Stream magazines.
(to email me, remove the "nospam" from my address)
Peter T. Daniels
> Are left turns on red allowed anywhere in NYC? Anyone know?
Only one car at a time may proceed into the intersection and wait for
the oncoming traffic to clear so as to make a left turn. If the light
turns red while that car is in the intersection, it may make the turn
when the traffic clears.
--
Peter T. Daniels gram...@att.net
Gav
> On 11/25/2002 7:26 PM, John felt the need to say:
>
> > I got a traffic violation ticket for making a right turn on red after
> > a full stop on a Saturday morning in New York City near Columbia
> > University. <snip> Would the points incurred in NY be transferred to NJ?
>
> Unless otherwise indicated by a sign, there are no right turns on red
> permitted in NYC. Completely opposite from most of the rest of the
> country. I guess this is what they invented phrases like "ignorance of
> the law is no excuse" for. Sorry you had to learn the hard way. :(
That pretty much sucks all right.
Having said that, IMO they shouldn't allow right turns on red
_anywhere_ - it's just plain crazy allowing people to go through a red
light at their discretion. If traffic lights are installed they
should be set up to control traffic/pedestrians in all the
combinations of directions - but I guess that would require a more
complex and expensive system and the bean counters prefer to put
safety at risk.
Gav
Brandon Sommerville
Right on red is a wonderful concept. If there is no traffic coming,
how does your sitting there do anything but increase the pollution of
the area?
--
Brandon Sommerville
remove ".gov" to e-mail
The easy way is always mined.
Stephen Bauman
At the very least, a person who ignores one will not be able to renew his
license. At worst, if that person is later stopped for any infraction then
he/she may be escorted to jail and will have to post bond to insure his
appearence at a judicial hearing.
On Tue, 26 Nov 2002 05:40:33 +0000, gkowal wrote:
>
> One way to diplomaticize this is to lose the whole thing, then years later
> when they drag you into court on another ticket,
> they will tell you about this old one. The cop, if he does show up, will
> probably not remember any details about something 4 or 5 years back,
> whereby you'll win your case.
>
>
> GK
>
Steve Lackey
> >> > a full stop on a Saturday morning in New York City near Columbia
> >> > University. <snip> Would the points incurred in NY be transferred to
NJ?
Moving violation? They used to, as of 10 years ago. Don't know about now.
> >>
> >> Unless otherwise indicated by a sign, there are no right turns on red
> >> permitted in NYC. Completely opposite from most of the rest of the
> >> country. I guess this is what they invented phrases like "ignorance of
> >> the law is no excuse" for. Sorry you had to learn the hard way. :(
> >
> > That pretty much sucks all right.
> >
> > Having said that, IMO they shouldn't allow right turns on red
> >_anywhere_ - it's just plain crazy allowing people to go through a red
> >light at their discretion. If traffic lights are installed they
> >should be set up to control traffic/pedestrians in all the
> >combinations of directions - but I guess that would require a more
> >complex and expensive system and the bean counters prefer to put
> >safety at risk.
>
> Right on red is a wonderful concept. If there is no traffic coming,
> how does your sitting there do anything but increase the pollution of
> the area?
Wasn't that the original reason for ROR in California in the 70's, to cut
down
on standing vehicle pollution? Ditto for NYS in 1985(?). I always
thought of that law as geared towards rural/suburban areas anyways.
NYC has other peculiarities different from the rest of the state. First,
the
minimum driving age is 18, not 16. Second, on divided roads like Park Ave
and Brodaway, you have to make a left turn on two green lights: one green
before you make the turn. Then you wait in the median until the light for
the street you;re turning on turns green as well. This effectively allows
only
two to a maximum of 4 cars to turn left per red/green traffic light cycle.
Then there's the usual gridlock stuff.
Alex L
There are a couple of intersections in Staten Island that rae signed for
left turn on red.
Alex L
> <snip>
>
> NYC has other peculiarities different from the rest of the state. First,
> the minimum driving age is 18, not 16. Second, on divided roads like Park
> Ave
> and Brodaway, you have to make a left turn on two green lights: one green
> before you make the turn. Then you wait in the median until the light for
> the street you;re turning on turns green as well. This effectively allows
> only two to a maximum of 4 cars to turn left per red/green traffic light
> cycle.
> Then there's the usual gridlock stuff.
Last I looked, the divided roadway rules were based on the width of the median,
with, I believe, 20' being the dividing point. Where the median is less than
20', you may make the turn and proceed across the remainder of the road on the
same light, providing there is no on-coming traffic. If the median is larger
than 20', once having made the turn, you must obey any traffic signals/signs
that are now in front of you.
John David Galt
>> NYC has other peculiarities different from the rest of the state. First,
>> the minimum driving age is 18, not 16. Second, on divided roads like Park
>> Ave
>> and Brodaway, you have to make a left turn on two green lights: one green
>> before you make the turn. Then you wait in the median until the light for
>> the street you;re turning on turns green as well. This effectively allows
>> only two to a maximum of 4 cars to turn left per red/green traffic light
>> cycle.
>> Then there's the usual gridlock stuff.
Alex L wrote:
> Last I looked, the divided roadway rules were based on the width of the median,
> with, I believe, 20' being the dividing point. Where the median is less than
> 20', you may make the turn and proceed across the remainder of the road on the
> same light, providing there is no on-coming traffic. If the median is larger
> than 20', once having made the turn, you must obey any traffic signals/signs
> that are now in front of you.
That's bizarre. And unique to NY, AFAIK.
Trevor Hill
|At least they can do that in NYC. Around here (Taunton and Raynham,
|MA), thanks to lagging left traps, you can't. And no, there are no
|warning signs. Unfortunately, if you know about the traps, and stay
|out of the intersections, the increasingly impatient drivers behind
|you apparently do not know about the traps.
What is a "lagging left trap"? I was under the impression that if the light
was green, you were always allowed to enter the intersection (unless you
were travelling straight through and traffic was lined up on the other side
of the intersection) and then the car already in the intersection would be
allowed to turn left when the light turned yellow.
Although, I've noticed that people do this a LOT less often here in New
Brunswick, and it frustrates me. Of course, I was under the impression that
it was universally accepted to wait in the intersection to turn left, and
now it appears that may not be the case.
On another note, in Ontario you are always permitted to turn right on red,
except where otherwise signed, and you always permitted to turn left on red
from a one-way street to a one-way street, unless otherwise signed.
There is one such one-way to one-way intersection in Waterloo, ON, that
baffles many visitors. I will attempt to render it below in ASCII art. :)
Caroline St S.
| | | |
| | |
| v | v | ^ |
| R L | |
| | | |
--------- ------------
< < RT
- - - - - - - - - - - Erb St.
< < T
- - - - - ------------
< >
---------- ----------
| | | |
| ^ ^ ^ |
| L | T | R |
| |
| | | |
| |
Caroline St. N (to Bridgeport Rd.)
L = Left turn lane, R = Right turn lane, T = Through lane
So people come south (bottom to top) on Caroline, and come to the red light.
You are ALLOWED to turn left onto Erb on the red light, but people only
actually do this about 50% of the time. It's a pain in the ass to be the
second car in line, stuck behind someone who either doesn't know they're
allowed to turn, or just doesn't want to. :)
--Trevor
Steve
Based on traffic, it makes sense - there are generally no safe breaks to
cross the opposing traffic, and without this rule, people would try to
take advantage of unsafe breaks. There are very few auto accidents on
NYC streets for the amount of traffic (well besides fender benders and
rear-ending, I'm sure), and that's a good thing.
SPUI
> On Tue, 26 Nov 2002, The Etobian wrote:
>
>> At least they can do that in NYC. Around here (Taunton and Raynham,
>> MA), thanks to lagging left traps, you can't. And no, there are no
>> warning signs. Unfortunately, if you know about the traps, and stay
>> out of the intersections, the increasingly impatient drivers behind
>> you apparently do not know about the traps.
>
> What is a "lagging left trap"? I was under the impression that if the
light
> was green, you were always allowed to enter the intersection (unless you
> were travelling straight through and traffic was lined up on the other
side
> of the intersection) and then the car already in the intersection would be
> allowed to turn left when the light turned yellow.
Sometimes the other direction continues to have a green light after your
side turns red. If there is no signage indicating this, and no red left
arrow, there is a conflict.
--
Dan Moraseski - 15th grade at MIT
http://web.mit.edu/spui/www/ - FL NJ MA route logs and exit lists
Alex Rodriguez
As you guessed, they are on the NY side of the GWB , holland and lincoln
tunnel. They are not huge signs, so you have to look at them and read them.
Points probably won't transfer over.
-----------------
Alex __O
_-\<,_
(_)/ (_)
Alex Rodriguez
says...
>
>On 11/25/2002 7:26 PM, John felt the need to say:
>
>> I got a traffic violation ticket for making a right turn on red after
>> a full stop on a Saturday morning in New York City near Columbia
>> University. <snip> Would the points incurred in NY be transferred to NJ?
>
>Unless otherwise indicated by a sign, there are no right turns on red
>permitted in NYC. Completely opposite from most of the rest of the
>country. I guess this is what they invented phrases like "ignorance of
>the law is no excuse" for. Sorry you had to learn the hard way. :(
I wonder if left on red from one way street to one way street is also
prohibited in NYC?
Alex Rodriguez
says...
>Second, on divided roads like Park Ave
>and Brodaway, you have to make a left turn on two green lights: one green
>before you make the turn. Then you wait in the median until the light for
>the street you;re turning on turns green as well. This effectively allows
>only
>two to a maximum of 4 cars to turn left per red/green traffic light cycle.
>Then there's the usual gridlock stuff.
Once you turn left you don't have to wait for the light to turn green
to go through the intersection unless there is a sign that says so. IIRC,
the only time you do have to wait, even if there is no sign, is when the
median is over 30 feet wide. When I turn left on broadway or park, I keep
going if the road is clear and there is no sign saying I must stop.
Jeremiah Kristal
The really annoying thing is that there is no signage to indicate if
you can complete a left turn. I know that there are parts of Broadway
where the divider is most likely just under 20 feet wide, but I don't
want to chance it.
Jeremiah
Alex Rodriguez
j...@diogenes.sacramento.ca.us says...
>Alex L wrote:
>> Last I looked, the divided roadway rules were based on the width of the
median,
>> with, I believe, 20' being the dividing point. Where the median is less
than
>> 20', you may make the turn and proceed across the remainder of the road on
the
>> same light, providing there is no on-coming traffic. If the median is larger
>> than 20', once having made the turn, you must obey any traffic signals/signs
>> that are now in front of you.
>
>That's bizarre. And unique to NY, AFAIK.
IIRC, the cops went out and measured the medians at the most common
intersections so that they could tell where they could give out tickets,
and where they couldn't. It pays, literallyl, to be able to guesstimate
distances in NYC.
Alex Rodriguez
>
>Toastmaster wrote:
>
>> Are left turns on red allowed anywhere in NYC? Anyone know?
>
>Only one car at a time may proceed into the intersection and wait for
>the oncoming traffic to clear so as to make a left turn. If the light
>turns red while that car is in the intersection, it may make the turn
>when the traffic clears.
I don't think that is the situation the other poster was asking about.
In many places it is legal to make a left on red from a one way street
onto another one way street. It is the same logic as the ROR law. I think
that is what they were referring to.
Gav
>>_anywhere_ - it's just plain crazy allowing people to go through a
red
>>light at their discretion. If traffic lights are installed they
>>should be set up to control traffic/pedestrians in all the
>>combinations of directions - but I guess that would require a more
>>complex and expensive system and the bean counters prefer to put
>>safety at risk.
>
>Right on red is a wonderful concept.
It's an invitation for accidents. The lights create an expectation
on the part of the person on green that their path will be clear.
This just cues them up for an accident with someone exercising poor
lack of judgement when they turn on a red.
> If there is no traffic coming,
>how does your sitting there do anything but increase the pollution of
>the area?
I said quite clearly in my post that where traffic lights are
installed they should be set up to manage traffic in all the
permutations. A good lights system will detect the presence of a car
waiting and change to green to let it through if the coast is clear.
Of course, a _good_ system costs more money which many authorities
are loath to spend.
Gav
George Jefferson
: It's an invitation for accidents. The lights create an expectation
:on the part of the person on green that their path will be clear.
:This just cues them up for an accident with someone exercising poor
:lack of judgement when they turn on a red.
With that logic I guess you think no one should be
able to turn left on green either.
Brandon Sommerville
>>> Having said that, IMO they shouldn't allow right turns on red
>>>_anywhere_ - it's just plain crazy allowing people to go through a
>red
>>>light at their discretion. If traffic lights are installed they
>>>should be set up to control traffic/pedestrians in all the
>>>combinations of directions - but I guess that would require a more
>>>complex and expensive system and the bean counters prefer to put
>>>safety at risk.
>>
>>Right on red is a wonderful concept.
>
> It's an invitation for accidents. The lights create an expectation
>on the part of the person on green that their path will be clear.
>This just cues them up for an accident with someone exercising poor
>lack of judgement when they turn on a red.
If you never allow people to make their own judgements, then they
won't be able to when they have to. If you give them the freedom to
make those judgments, the chances of error are reduced.
>> If there is no traffic coming,
>>how does your sitting there do anything but increase the pollution of
>>the area?
>
> I said quite clearly in my post that where traffic lights are
>installed they should be set up to manage traffic in all the
>permutations. A good lights system will detect the presence of a car
>waiting and change to green to let it through if the coast is clear.
>Of course, a _good_ system costs more money which many authorities
>are loath to spend.
Where I am, the lights on the major streets are synchronized. You can
cross the city without catching a red if you travel between 55 and 60
km/h. If there is no traffic and I wait for a red to turn green, I
not only have to wait for that red light, but I also have to wait for
the light at the next intersection. If I turn right on red, I don't
get caught at any lights.
The bottom line is that you can automate anything, but at the end of
the day you have to ask if there are significant tangible benefits to
automation vs user options. A super high tech light system is great,
probably effective but damn sure it's going to be expensive. Allowing
right on reds doesn't cost anything yet increases efficiency. After
having lived with it for my entire driving career it isn't even
something worth being concerned about.
George Kowal
> > >> Unless otherwise indicated by a sign, there are no right turns on red
> > >> permitted in NYC. Completely opposite from most of the rest of the
> > >> country. I guess this is what they invented phrases like "ignorance of
> > >> the law is no excuse" for. Sorry you had to learn the hard way. :(
> > >
> > > That pretty much sucks all right.
> > >
> > > Having said that, IMO they shouldn't allow right turns on red
> > >_anywhere_ - it's just plain crazy allowing people to go through a red
> > >light at their discretion. If traffic lights are installed they
> > >should be set up to control traffic/pedestrians in all the
> > >combinations of directions - but I guess that would require a more
> > >complex and expensive system and the bean counters prefer to put
> > >safety at risk.
> >
> > Right on red is a wonderful concept. If there is no traffic coming,
> > how does your sitting there do anything but increase the pollution of
> > the area?
NYC, outside if the heavy pedestrian areas in Manhattan could really
use Right On Red to reduce traffic congestion. It makes no sense in a
place like Staten Island to wait for a green light to turn right.
Second, on divided roads like Park Ave
> and Brodaway, you have to make a left turn on two green lights: one green
> before you make the turn. Then you wait in the median until the light for
> the street you;re turning on turns green as well. This effectively allows
> only
> two to a maximum of 4 cars to turn left per red/green traffic light cycle.
> Then there's the usual gridlock stuff.
I absolutely positively never do and never will wait for a second
green light to go through one intersection. I always go through that
second red light, as soon as traffic is clear, and have never been
bothered by anyone, official or civilian about it. In fact, I always
see drivers going through the second light when caught in the middle
median. I consider it my civic responsibility to clear the
intersection, and not wait for the second red light, particularly so
others can get through. That's my NYC law. That's the way I interpret
it.
GK
George Kowal
> It is never good policy to ignore a traffic ticket.
>
> At the very least, a person who ignores one will not be able to renew his
> license. At worst, if that person is later stopped for any infraction then
> he/she may be escorted to jail and will have to post bond to insure his
> appearence at a judicial hearing.
>
can only give you some $10 ticket and that's it. That was my
experience.
Besides, I have a hard time thinking NY and law in the same sentence.
GK
Ricardo
<gri...@mindless.com.gov> wrote:
>Allowing
>right on reds doesn't cost anything yet increases efficiency. After
>having lived with it for my entire driving career it isn't even
>something worth being concerned about.
RTOR is a very fine system, provided that it is not abused. At
certain intersections, a RTOR ban should definitely be signed, e.g.
where a left turner in one direction has a filter and the opposing
traffic has a red light. The left turner with the filter is turning
into a one lane street. The right turner at the red light wants to
turn onto the same street, but mistakenly thinks it has two lanes...
I've experienced a couple of near misses at one particular
intersection in exactly the manner described above. Both times I was
the left turner with the filter arrow ergo right of way (and a very
active horn finger!). At that intersection (southbound Main/Pender
for the locals), RTOR should definitely be outlawed. It's asking for
trouble there. But in most cases, it's a good system, provided
drivers actually use it properly and:
(a) STOP AT THE RED LIGHT! (Yes, that's right, red means stop!)
(b) YIELD THE RIGHT OF WAY! (Red light = no right of way!)
Since many people seem to have problems grasping those basics, RTOR
is something I would not greatly miss were it banned tomorrow. Gav's
idea of inductively tripped lights is already implemented in some
suburban communes here. Others operate filter arrows at EVERY major
intersection and have blended them into the normal cycle (i.e. no
unprotected left turns are possible because the filter light goes
red when the oncoming traffic has a green). This is more expensive,
but it is also (im) much safer than allowing RTOR in inappropriate
locations, and unprotected left turns ANYWHERE where the line of
sight is even slightly limited, or the traffic density is high.
Besides, at most of the major filtered intersections, RTOR is still
legal, and I have no problem with that at all. The problem, if any,
is the drivers who abuse the system.
Ricardo
wrote:
>In many places it is legal to make a left on red from a one way street
>onto another one way street.
Or indeed from a 2 way street onto a 1 way street!
Ricardo
<sba...@abt.net> wrote:
>It is never good policy to ignore a traffic ticket.
True (for the most part).
>At the very least, a person who ignores one will not be able to renew his
>license.
That's the way it works here. Period. Oh, well, there's the little
trivial side factoid that one gets convicted in absentia too, and
the conviction goes on one's record. No payment, no license renewal.
However there's no jail time over a simple traffic ticket. Contrast
this with some parts of the U.S., where 80mph could get you an
instant ticket to jail! Who thought that one up and why were such
civil liberty destroying measures allowed to pass in the first
place? Because "ignorance is strength", au Mons. George Orwell?
Toastmaster
> James Robinson wrote:
>
> >New Jersey is a member of the "Drivers License Compact",
> so you will
> >supposedly get two points added to your record for
> out-of-state traffic
> >violations.
>
>
> I thought the Compact rule was that your home state will
> count the
> violation as though it had happened there. So since NJ
> allows this turn
> unless banned by a sign, which it wasn't, I would assume
> you won't get
> any points. But you might ask the NJ DMV.
He got charged with running a light, not illegal right turn
on red. New Jersey gives a blanket 2 points regardless of
violation (see their website). The motorist could attempt to
protest this with New Jersey, if a formal procedure is in
place.
Toastmaster
>
> (a) STOP AT THE RED LIGHT! (Yes, that's right, red means
> stop!)
> (b) YIELD THE RIGHT OF WAY! (Red light = no right of way!)
Which reminds me of New York City's interesting traffic sign:
WAIT FOR GREEN LIGHT
George Jefferson
:
:WAIT FOR GREEN LIGHT
Thats common in PA too. It indicates the opposing traffic has an advance
green, but it is a really dumb way to tell you that.
Peter T. Daniels
> Sometimes the other direction continues to have a green light after your
> side turns red. If there is no signage indicating this, and no red left
> arrow, there is a conflict.
Where would this situation occur with no notice? In Illinois and New
York, there are either signs "Oncoming Traffic Has Longer Green" or
left-turn arrows (normally in connection with a left turn lane pocket).
I don't know what "lagging left trap" is either, but in NYC there aren't
many left turn lane pockets, because most streets aren't wide enough to
accommodate them.
--
Peter T. Daniels gram...@att.net
Peter T. Daniels
>
> On Tue, 26 Nov 2002 12:36:50 -0500, Trevor Hill
> <tdh...@mgc2000.math.uwaterloo.ca> wrote:
>
> >What is a "lagging left trap"? I was under the impression that if the light
> >was green, you were always allowed to enter the intersection (unless you
> >were travelling straight through and traffic was lined up on the other side
> >of the intersection) and then the car already in the intersection would be
> >allowed to turn left when the light turned yellow.
>
> intersection waiting to be make a left turn. Direction A's lights
> turn red. Direction B's stays green. There's your left turn trap.
Still don't know what you're talking about. Why would such a situation
occur???
Peter T. Daniels
This is permitted wherever there is "ROR," so obviously they are not
allowed in NYC. I know of one explicit permission for left turn on red
-- the entrance to Allen Pavilion (the hospital at Baker Field) from
northbound Broadway at 220th St. Both streets, in fact, are two-way:
Broadway and the driveway.
Peter T. Daniels
> I absolutely positively never do and never will wait for a second
> green light to go through one intersection. I always go through that
> second red light, as soon as traffic is clear, and have never been
> bothered by anyone, official or civilian about it. In fact, I always
> see drivers going through the second light when caught in the middle
> median. I consider it my civic responsibility to clear the
> intersection, and not wait for the second red light, particularly so
> others can get through. That's my NYC law. That's the way I interpret
> it.
An -- an anarchist. Do try it on Houston Street some day.
danny burstein
In <3DE3FA...@worldnet.att.net> "Peter T. Daniels" <gram...@worldnet.att.net> writes:
>I don't know what "lagging left trap" is either, but in NYC there aren't
>many left turn lane pockets, because most streets aren't wide enough to
>accommodate them.
Try hanging out in Brooklyn. As in Ocean Parkway. And many others.
--
_____________________________________________________
Knowledge may be power, but communications is the key
dan...@panix.com
[to foil spammers, my address has been double rot-13 encoded]
Me
John <w...@ieee.org> wrote:
> I got a traffic violation ticket for making a right turn on red after
> a full stop on a Saturday morning in New York City near Columbia
> University. The traffic at the time was very light. The description of
> traffic infraction is "Disobey steady red light". The fine is $130
> plus three points. I moved to New Jersey about four years ago and have
> made occasional trips to NYC. I never notice any traffic sign saying
> "no right turn on red" at the George Washington bridge, Lincoln
> tunnel, Holland tunnel or anywhere in the city. I would appreciate if
> anyone would tell me where the signs are, if there are any. Would the
> points incurred in NY be transferred to NJ?
There's no "no turn on red" signs in NYC at most intersections because
the law is that turning right on red there is illegal unless there is a
sign that indicates its okay to turn right at a particular intersection.
Sorry, but the ticket sounds legitimate to me.
Vishal
"Steve" <smal...@mit.edu> wrote in message
news:3DE2EB66...@mit.edu...
> John wrote:
> >
> > I got a traffic violation ticket for making a right turn on red after
> > a full stop on a Saturday morning in New York City near Columbia
> > University. The traffic at the time was very light. The description of
> > traffic infraction is "Disobey steady red light". The fine is $130
> > plus three points. I moved to New Jersey about four years ago and have
> > made occasional trips to NYC. I never notice any traffic sign saying
> > "no right turn on red" at the George Washington bridge, Lincoln
> > tunnel, Holland tunnel or anywhere in the city. I would appreciate if
> > anyone would tell me where the signs are, if there are any. Would the
> > points incurred in NY be transferred to NJ?
>
> has no RTOR because it's a city of over 1 million and thus is granted a
> NYS exemption from RTOR unless otherwise posted. This is easier than
> posting every intersection as NTOR. Unfortunately, unless you know this
> or notice the sign, you're screwed.
> RAD unx-posted because.
don't know about the GW, but I have seen this sign coming out from the
Lincoln Tunnel and driving back from the airport.
- v
gkowal
"Peter T. Daniels" wrote:
Wait just one second! When and where did someone change the law for making
left turns on a GREEN LIGHT???
Everywhere you go you get into the intersection, yield to oncoming traffic
and then proceed when it is safe.
I've driven in NYC decades and everyone always drives like this too.
Many or most intersections have a traffic light in the middle as part of
the overall traffic light system for that intersection.
Are you, or is anyone saying that in NYC, all of a sudden, you are supposed
to wait twice, through 2 lights to make a left turn???
I don't think so.
To out-of-towners, what we are discussing is, you pull up to an
intersection in NYC that has a divider in the roadway, your straight ahead
light is green, the cross traffic light should always be red at that point.
As you wait or check for the intersection's opposing traffic to clear, it
would make no sense and be counterproductive to sit there in the middle of
the road and wait for the cross traffic's red light to turn green. That is
not your light. Your light is green. You are making one left turn on the
green light controlling your movement. The divider is usually not even wide
enough to hide a car in, so you need to clear it asap for efficiency and
safety reasons.
I've never seen anyone in NYC get bothered for making a left on green like
this.
GK
gkowal
Toastmaster wrote:
Wording here is important. If you ask for a formal procedure, they
schedule you to see a State Administrative Law Judge, which takes about
a year or more to schedule and gives you not much of a chance to
convince them to overide the existing procedures.
You are usually better off asking for an "informal" hearing, where you
speak with a motor vehicles person in a regional center. They are more
accustomed to writing things off.
Two different choices anyway.
GK
Timothy J. Lee
The Etobian <the_e...@hNoOtSmPaAiMl.com> wrote:
>In my example, say you're Direction A. When would it be safe to turn
>left? Your light turned red, but you can't turn left because oncoming
>traffic still has the green light. What visual clue would you use to
>know when their direction is about to turn red?
>
>There are no warning signs posted. Suppose you're from out of town,
>having no clue these traps exist, making a left turn, and seeing your
>light go red. So you try to complete the left turn. Oncoming traffic
>is still green. Wham!
So how do you make a left turn safely and legally at such an intersection
(without being trapped in the intersection or being unable to tell when
it is safe to go)? Or do locals just go around the block because it is
too unsafe?
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Timothy J. Lee
Unsolicited bulk or commercial email is not welcome.
No warranty of any kind is provided with this message.
mj...@duke.edu
> On Mon, 25 Nov 2002 22:32:54 -0500, Steve <smal...@mit.edu> wrote:
>
> >John wrote:
> >>
> >> I got a traffic violation ticket for making a right turn on red after
> >> a full stop on a Saturday morning in New York City near Columbia
> >> University. The traffic at the time was very light. The description of
> >> traffic infraction is "Disobey steady red light". The fine is $130
> >> plus three points. I moved to New Jersey about four years ago and have
> >> made occasional trips to NYC. I never notice any traffic sign saying
> >> "no right turn on red" at the George Washington bridge, Lincoln
> >> tunnel, Holland tunnel or anywhere in the city. I would appreciate if
> >> anyone would tell me where the signs are, if there are any. Would the
> >> points incurred in NY be transferred to NJ?
> >
> There are a few places in NYC where right on red is legal but there
> aren't a whole lot. (e.g. at the 21 St. exit of the upper level of the
> 59th St. Bridge)
>
> I know there are or were signs if you enter Queens on the Long Island
> Expressway.
>
were.....gone for construction, probably won't get replaced. THere are
signs on Sunrise Highway, Southern and Northern State parkways at the city
line.
Marc
>On Mon, 25 Nov 2002 19:58:42 -0800, Garth Almgren
><v6s...@v6stang.com> wrote:
>
>>Unless otherwise indicated by a sign, there are no right turns on red
>>permitted in NYC.
>
>is abused enough here as it is, and this city's minuscule compared
>with NY.
>
>>We don't have points here in WA.
>
>What?! I didn't know that... if that's true, then that means that
>were "Muggins" finally to procure a U.S. visa, and drive in/through
>Washington state, and somehow get a tix (perish the thought! <g>),
>there'd be no points to Xfer? That's awesome, because, afaik, WA is
>the only yank state with which BC has a non-resident violator pact.
>And if that's still the case today, it means I couldn't ever get
>points Xferred to my BC licence for U.S. traffic violations! Of
>course that's all hypothetical for me, 'cos I'm law abiding, but
>it's really interesting to know that WA doesn't levy points. Very,
>very nice. The only caveat for you guys is the "all speeding is
>reckless" statute, but hey, one can't have everything now, eh? :)
TX doesn't have points. However, had I gotten a ticket in TX before
moving to AK, and if AK were to find out about it, they would assign
it points. That means that you can get a ticket in a location without
points, yet still get points "back home." Of course, this may not
apply for the states in question.
Marc
For email, remove the first "y" of "whineryy"
Gav
Firstly, around here many *busy* junctions have fully filtered
left/right turns or indeed forbid left turns totally for precisely the
reason that left turns on green at a busy intersection is a major
accident risk and causes all sorts of traffic flow problems. It costs
more to buy/design such a system, but it cuts down bigtime on
accidents. That's why I said in my original reply that the lights
should be set up to manage all the permutations of traffic.
Secondly, in the cases where left turn on green is possible and
not filtered, it's MUCH more obvious whether or not it is safe to
make a turn when you are facing oncoming traffic than when you are
joining flowing traffic from a road at 90 degrees to it. Also the
driver who is likely to get impeded by a twit making a stupid
ill-judged turn has a much better view of what is happening and more
time to take action vs suddenly being confronted with someone entering
his lane from the fringes of his vision.
Gav
Gav
[..]
> Since many people seem to have problems grasping those basics, RTOR
> is something I would not greatly miss were it banned tomorrow. Gav's
> idea of inductively tripped lights is already implemented in some
> suburban communes here.
Those inductive lights are absolutely BRILLIANT. They're not so
much use in heavy traffic but at off-peak times one hardly ever gets
impeded by stupid red lights holding you when the road is clear. This
really reduces the temptation/frustration that can tempt people into
jumping reds.
Even better, the authorities here have implemented synchronisation
in lights along major thoroughfares. When I drive into work in the
morning I'm basically cruising down a 6km length of city road for most
of my way. Once I get past the first red light, if I hold to
60-65kph (speed limit is 60kph) I can cruise right down the entire
stretch with no further stops. It really helps traffic flow.
> Others operate filter arrows at EVERY major
> intersection and have blended them into the normal cycle (i.e. no
> unprotected left turns are possible because the filter light goes
> red when the oncoming traffic has a green). This is more expensive,
> but it is also (im) much safer than allowing RTOR in inappropriate
> locations, and unprotected left turns ANYWHERE where the line of
> sight is even slightly limited, or the traffic density is high.
Again, that has been implemented here at major intersections.
Either you get a fully filtered flow making it impossible to cut
across the path of someone else on a green light, or the left turn is
prohibited totally at that junction.
Minor junctions are usually 'less' filtered. Some only offer full
filtering on the 'busy' road whereas traffic on the 'quiet' road gets
to make left turns on an unfiltered green and others are totally
unfiltered.
One thing I really don't like about the local system though, is
that you can often make a right turn on a filtered green BUT the
pedestrian traffic waiting to cross the perpendicular road ALSO gets a
green 'walk' light. This means that if you are a pedestrian you run
the risk of being flattened by a driver who sees the green and thinks
its perfectly safe to whizz around the corner, and if you are a
driver you can have a pedestrian suddenly jump out in front of you as
you make the turn. There is supposed to be a fashing amber lamp next
to the filter lamp but this is not always the case.
Gav
Peter T. Daniels
>
> ( groups changed to just nyc.transit)
>
> In <3DE3FA...@worldnet.att.net> "Peter T. Daniels" <gram...@worldnet.att.net> writes:
>
> >I don't know what "lagging left trap" is either, but in NYC there aren't
> >many left turn lane pockets, because most streets aren't wide enough to
> >accommodate them.
>
> Try hanging out in Brooklyn. As in Ocean Parkway. And many others.
You know very well that Ocean Parkway is hardly typical -- Olmstead
(wasn't it?) laid out for Brooklyn a set of parkways like those he'd
done in Chicago (including Eastern as well).
Peter T. Daniels
> left? Your light turned red, but you can't turn left because oncoming
> traffic still has the green light. What visual clue would you use to
> know when their direction is about to turn red?
One. More. Time. Why would such a situation occur? What _explanation_ do
your "traffic engineers" have?
> There are no warning signs posted. Suppose you're from out of town,
> having no clue these traps exist, making a left turn, and seeing your
> light go red. So you try to complete the left turn. Oncoming traffic
> is still green. Wham!
>
> Why would such a situation occur? Because the traffic engineers and
> DPW types east of the Hudson are total morons. Another stupid thing
Hey, moron, New York City is east of the Hudson, and you are posting to
nyc.transit.
On Broadway at 231st St., northbound traffic has a longer green, because
many buses (and cars) need to turn left (west) onto 231st. Southbound
traffic has a red light and northbound traffic has a green light and a
green left arrow. If a southbound vehicle has begun a left turn onto
231st (east) when its light turns red, obviously it completes the left
turn ASAP, and, in accordance with the rule I stated near the beginning
of the thread (yeah, right), no further vehicles have entered the
intersection to make the turn from south to east. (No bus makes this
turn.)
Moreover, there is just one lane of traffic either way because of the
elevated subway structure overhead, and there is a bus stop on Broadway
in each direction just before the intersection. (Not for the buses that
turn left there, though.)
> here is they take a two-lane road, with one lane in each direction,
> and at many intersections, they make two straight-ahead lanes going in
> each direction, in addition to dedicated left and right turn lanes.
> There is the normal one lane in each direction right after the
> intersection. You have to learn to merge and merge often. There's a
> lot of very short drag racing around here when the light turns green.
Peter T. Daniels
>
> "Peter T. Daniels" wrote:
>
> > George Kowal wrote:
> >
> > > I absolutely positively never do and never will wait for a second
> > > green light to go through one intersection. I always go through that
> > > second red light, as soon as traffic is clear, and have never been
> > > bothered by anyone, official or civilian about it. In fact, I always
> > > see drivers going through the second light when caught in the middle
> > > median. I consider it my civic responsibility to clear the
> > > intersection, and not wait for the second red light, particularly so
> > > others can get through. That's my NYC law. That's the way I interpret
> > > it.
> >
> > --
> > Peter T. Daniels gram...@att.net
>
> Wait just one second! When and where did someone change the law for making
> left turns on a GREEN LIGHT???
> Everywhere you go you get into the intersection, yield to oncoming traffic
> and then proceed when it is safe.
> I've driven in NYC decades and everyone always drives like this too.
> Many or most intersections have a traffic light in the middle as part of
> the overall traffic light system for that intersection.
>
> Are you, or is anyone saying that in NYC, all of a sudden, you are supposed
> to wait twice, through 2 lights to make a left turn???
Evidently you've never driven on Houston Street east of Lafayette or so.
The median is _very_ broad, and if you haven't made it on the green
arrow, you're not going to get across the oncoming lane on the rest of
your green.
> I don't think so.
>
> To out-of-towners, what we are discussing is, you pull up to an
> intersection in NYC that has a divider in the roadway, your straight ahead
> light is green, the cross traffic light should always be red at that point.
> As you wait or check for the intersection's opposing traffic to clear, it
> would make no sense and be counterproductive to sit there in the middle of
> the road and wait for the cross traffic's red light to turn green. That is
> not your light. Your light is green. You are making one left turn on the
> green light controlling your movement. The divider is usually not even wide
> enough to hide a car in, so you need to clear it asap for efficiency and
> safety reasons.
>
> I've never seen anyone in NYC get bothered for making a left on green like
> this.
In fact, you don't wait in the left lane of Broadway or Park Avenue
until the oncoming traffic clears (it almost never does); you turn onto
the cross street and wait for a break in the oncoming traffic so you can
dart across, or, de facto, you wait for the cross street's green.
I intend to ask the Defensive Driving teacher what the official position
on this question is the next time I renew whatever it is that triggers
it (I missed my second opportunity because none was scheduled when I
could get to it).
Matthew Russotto
Timothy J. Lee <remo...@sonic.net> wrote:
>In article <lp58uu8fj52nlrb4v...@4ax.com>,
>The Etobian <the_e...@hNoOtSmPaAiMl.com> wrote:
>>In my example, say you're Direction A. When would it be safe to turn
>>left? Your light turned red, but you can't turn left because oncoming
>>traffic still has the green light. What visual clue would you use to
>>know when their direction is about to turn red?
>>
>>There are no warning signs posted. Suppose you're from out of town,
>>having no clue these traps exist, making a left turn, and seeing your
>>light go red. So you try to complete the left turn. Oncoming traffic
>>is still green. Wham!
>
>So how do you make a left turn safely and legally at such an intersection
>(without being trapped in the intersection or being unable to tell when
>it is safe to go)? Or do locals just go around the block because it is
>too unsafe?
I don't see the problem. While you're in the intersection, the
cross-traffic light remains red and you can SEE (because you're in the
intersection) the oncoming traffic light. So you just wait for
oncoming traffic to clear and proceed normally.
--
Matthew T. Russotto mrus...@speakeasy.net
"Extremism in defense of liberty is no vice, and moderation in pursuit
of justice is no virtue." But extreme restriction of liberty in pursuit of
a modicum of security is a very expensive vice.
Allston Parking Refugee
> "Peter T. Daniels" <gram...@worldnet.att.net> writes:
>
> >I don't know what "lagging left trap" is either, but in NYC there aren't
> >many left turn lane pockets, because most streets aren't wide enough to
> >accommodate them.
>
> Try hanging out in Brooklyn. As in Ocean Parkway. And many others.
A few new left turn lanes have recently been squeezed in on two-way
crosstown streets in Midtown. The through lanes in both directions
shift to the sides, leaving enough space for a narrow turn lane (with
a 3-arrow signal) in the middle.
-Apr
Timothy J. Lee
The Etobian <the_e...@hNoOtSmPaAiMl.com> wrote:
>On 27 Nov 2002 01:05:56 -0800, gavs_...@swissonline.ch (Gav) wrote:
>> Those inductive lights are absolutely BRILLIANT. They're not so
>>much use in heavy traffic but at off-peak times one hardly ever gets
>>impeded by stupid red lights holding you when the road is clear. This
>>really reduces the temptation/frustration that can tempt people into
>>jumping reds.
>
>synchronization.
Around here (CA), there are sensors, but also timing. During high
traffic times, the lights operate on a timed program, except that a
phase will be skipped if the sensors detect nothing (and some phases
may be shorter if the sensors stop detecting things from that direction).
During low traffic times, the main direction will be the default-green,
with the sensors triggering for the other directions on demand.
Alex Rodriguez
says...
>On 26 Nov 2002 18:39:11 GMT, ad...@columbia.edu (Alex Rodriguez) wrote:
>>I wonder if left on red from one way street to one way street is also
>>prohibited in NYC?
>the signs say no turns on red, I would suppose that would cover left
>turns
I'll check that this weekend. I thought the signs only said not
right on red unless otherwise indicated. Not just a generic no turn
on red.
-----------------
Alex __O
_-\<,_
(_)/ (_)
http://nutritionsoftware.org
first time, I read somewhere about the No RT on Red rule in NYC and it was
so ingrained in my mind that I thought it applies everywhere in the NY
state. For several days, in Westchester county, I had my right blinkers on
at every red light patiently waiting to turn on green even when the roads
were empty, ... except for a car or two behind me...
--
Editor, Internet's Convenient and Unbiased Directory of Nutrition Software
http://nutritionsoftware.org
"John" <w...@ieee.org> wrote in message
news:qdq5uu0nr944ttnb2...@4ax.com...
Toastmaster
http://nutritionsoftware.org wrote:
> Many years ago, when I just got my driver's licence and visited NY for the
> first time, I read somewhere about the No RT on Red rule in NYC and it was
> so ingrained in my mind that I thought it applies everywhere in the NY
> state. For several days, in Westchester county, I had my right blinkers on
> at every red light patiently waiting to turn on green even when the roads
> were empty, ... except for a car or two behind me...
>
In New Jersey, they say you can tell if someone is from NYC
when they are waiting at the red light with the right
blinker on.
Ricardo
<the_e...@hNoOtSmPaAiMl.com> wrote:
>I can just see a New England DPW type or traffic engineer reading the
>above post.
>
>"Timing? What's that? Why would anyone design a traffic light scheme
>allowing drivers to hit one green light after another? I don't get
>it."
Timed lights are fine, except for one problem: improper engineering.
On our Highway #7 the lights are timed for the speed limit of 60km/h
(where the highway passes through populated areas), which is
absurdly low for off-peak periods. 100km/h is easily R&P. That is
why it would be a lot less frustrating at off-peak times if the main
thoroughfare had constant green lights which would only change to
amber/red if tripped inductively from a X street or by a ped.
--
ricardo, ex-euroslav
vancouver bc canada
e-mail: sovietjamaicanguy <at> yahoo <dot> ca
for liability purposes: I *always* obey the law.
Ricardo
wrote:
>In New Jersey, they say you can tell if someone is from NYC
>when they are waiting at the red light with the right
>blinker on.
Afaik legal RTOR does not make it illegal to wait (since the light
is red, after all), but waiting at a red light when it's safe to
make a legal right turn could understandably piss off some people...
Toastmaster
JohnDoe wrote:
>
> or making a left turn
> when they should be using the jug handle
Who knew you had to make a right turn in order to make a
left turn??
Joe Versaggi
Toastmaster <woo...@noemailme.com> wrote in message
news:3DE53C53...@noemailme.com...
> JohnDoe wrote:
> > or making a left turn
> > when they should be using the jug handle
> Who knew you had to make a right turn in order to make a
> left turn??
>
newcomer.
Walter Theurer
Peter T. Daniels
>
> In nyc.transit Peter T. Daniels <gram...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
> >
> > I intend to ask the Defensive Driving teacher what the official position
> > on this question is the next time I renew whatever it is that triggers
> > it (I missed my second opportunity because none was scheduled when I
> > could get to it).
>
That's not it, because my first license renewal is next month (fifth
birthday after moving back here), and I was sent the materials on the
Defensive Driving class about two years ago when I couldn't make it (the
main reason for taking it is to get 10% more off insurance rates, so
it's also a question of measuring the cost of the session(s) against the
amount of savings and the value of one's own time).
> BTW, I've re-upped my license for 8 years, and geez, you'd have
> to be blind to fail the eye exam: they don't make you do the test
> with each individual eye.
I thought it's a five-year license.
Timothy J. Lee
They are common when exiting a freeway to a non-freeway in California,
but rare (if there are any) when going between two non-freeways in
California.
Peter T. Daniels
There are even some on Central Ave. in Yonkers, and they're just as
annoying there.
Mike Epstein
>>We take jug handles for granted in NJ now, but they are strange to any
>>newcomer.
>
> They are common when exiting a freeway to a non-freeway in California,
> but rare (if there are any) when going between two non-freeways in
> California.
The only one I know of is at the entrance to the Stanford Shopping
Center from northbound El Camino Real (CA-82) in Palo Alto.
--mike
danny burstein
>There are even some on Central Ave. in Yonkers, and they're just as
>annoying there.
speaking of which, would you know if they still have that red light with
the flashing strobe in it? It was the intersection near (the former
PetNosh or somesuch) and nearly blinded me.
obtransit: there's a Beeline route there.
--
_____________________________________________________
Knowledge may be power, but communications is the key
dan...@panix.com
[to foil spammers, my address has been double rot-13 encoded]
Phil Kane
>Are left turns on red allowed anywhere in NYC? Anyone know?
Where they are allowed, it is from the left-hand lane of a one-way
street into the left-hand lane of another one-way street going to
the left.
---
===> Stand Clear of the Closing Doors <===
Phil Kane -- Beaverton, Oregon
PNW Milepost 754 -- Tillamook District
Phil Kane
> Having said that, IMO they shouldn't allow right turns on red
>_anywhere_ - it's just plain crazy allowing people to go through a red
>light at their discretion.
RTOR requires a full stop at the crosswalk or stop line before the
signal and yielding the right of way to pedestrians in the crosswalk
and to any oncoming traffic. It's not a pure "do anything you want
and damn the consequences" move if made legally.
Fallure to make the stop as required is known colloquially in traffic
enforcement circles as a "Hollywood stop" or "Saint Louis Roll" or
some other colorful moniker depending on where in the country one is.
You don't drive in a jurisdiction that has RTOR, do you? Those
of us who have it and use it properly love that it keeps things
moving.
Phil Kane
>There USED to be signs, a few years back when the whole "right turn on
>red" concept came out.
I got my first driver license in NYC in 1955 when there was no RTOR
anywhere on the East Coast, and when I moved to California in 1957
RTOR was "old stuff" there - one of the many "new world" things I
discovered there.
That was 45 years ago, hardly a new concept, NYC is decades behind
the times.
Phil Kane
>> Right on red is a wonderful concept. If there is no traffic coming,
>> how does your sitting there do anything but increase the pollution of
>> the area?
>
>Wasn't that the original reason for ROR in California in the 70's, to cut
>down on standing vehicle pollution?
RTOR was legal in California in the early 50s if not before.
It was one of the novel concepts that impressed this
then-New-Yorker to move there in the mid-50s. Palm trees and
lack of "winter weather" and snow was another.
Phil Kane
>There's no "no turn on red" signs in NYC at most intersections because
>the law is that turning right on red there is illegal unless there is a
>sign that indicates its okay to turn right at a particular intersection.
>Sorry, but the ticket sounds legitimate to me.
The ticket sounds legitimate. It's the law that is cited that
bears scruitny.
Phil Kane
>>Right on red is a wonderful concept.
>
> It's an invitation for accidents. The lights create an expectation
>on the part of the person on green that their path will be clear.
>This just cues them up for an accident with someone exercising poor
>lack of judgement when they turn on a red.
Driving so as to avoid getting into situations like that is taught
in Defensive Driving 101 where the assumption is that all other
drivers will make stupid moves and that it is your responsibility to
avoid them, irregardless of who "has the right of way" (another
driving myth).
Phil Kane
>
>: It's an invitation for accidents. The lights create an expectation
>:on the part of the person on green that their path will be clear.
>:This just cues them up for an accident with someone exercising poor
>:lack of judgement when they turn on a red.
>
>With that logic I guess you think no one should be
>able to turn left on green either.
The first poster does not understand the concept of "make the
movemen when it is safe to do so", yielding right of way as
necessary.
Our city (Beaverton, OR - pop.77,000 - residential and light
industrial suburb of Portland) is a test bed for a proposed
FHWA sequemce of green left turn signals:
Steady green meaning "OK to move straight through or to make
a left yurn yielding the right of way to oncoming traffic"
(as it is now) - oncomimg traffic gets steady green.
Flashing green left arrow meaning "OK to make left turn,
oncoming traffic required to yield right of way". Oncoming
traffic gets flashing green, changing to yellow.
Steady green left arrow meaning "OK to make left turn, oncoming
traffic not permitted to enter intersection". Oncoming
traffic gets red.
Or so they explained it to us, in newspaper articles and flyers
distributed to the neighborhkood associations affected.
They have it installed at four fairly well traveled intersections -
results are not yet released.
More if it happens.
Peter T. Daniels
>
> Joe Versaggi wrote:
> We take jug handles for granted in NJ now, but they are
> strange to any
> newcomer.
>
>
>
> What's a jug handle?
To avoid left turns from major roads, they put a quarter-cloverleaf road
leading right from the main road around to the left-pointing direction
of the cross road.
Peter T. Daniels
>
> In <3DE565...@worldnet.att.net> "Peter T. Daniels" <gram...@worldnet.att.net> writes:
>
> >There are even some on Central Ave. in Yonkers, and they're just as
> >annoying there.
>
> speaking of which, would you know if they still have that red light with
> the flashing strobe in it? It was the intersection near (the former
> PetNosh or somesuch) and nearly blinded me.
>
> obtransit: there's a Beeline route there.
There are at least a couple of lights with strobes inside the red. No
idea what the purpose is (unless they want to weed out the epileptics).
SPUI
news:3DE5647C...@verizon.net...
>What's a jug handle?
http://web.mit.edu/spui/www/jug.html
--
Dan Moraseski - 15th grade at MIT
http://web.mit.edu/spui/www/ - FL NJ MA route logs and exit lists
Ricardo
<Phil...@nov.shmovz.ka.pop> wrote:
> RTOR was legal in California in the early 50s if not before.
> It was one of the novel concepts that impressed this
> then-New-Yorker to move there in the mid-50s. Palm trees and
> lack of "winter weather" and snow was another.
Yep, the Golden State truly is Heaven on Earth.
Ricardo
<gram...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>> What's a jug handle?
>
>To avoid left turns from major roads, they put a quarter-cloverleaf road
>leading right from the main road around to the left-pointing direction
>of the cross road.
I believe these (or similar constructions) are almost everywhere in
places like Spain. You get a tix for attempting a direct left turn.
Ricardo
<Phil...@nov.shmovz.ka.pop> wrote:
> You don't drive in a jurisdiction that has RTOR, do you?
Gav's in CH, just about the only free and democratic country of any
great significance in western Europe these days (AND, MC etc. don't
really count as being of great significance!). And no, afaik, those
pesky Confœderatio Helvetians are not permitted to make RTOR.
> Those
> of us who have it and use it properly love that it keeps things
> moving.
The humongous problem with RTOR is precisely the fact that a lot of
people DON'T use it properly. If everybody used it properly, and it
were appropriately banned as necessary at certain intersections, it
would indeed be wonderful. The widespread abuse of the system makes
me skeptical of its overall benefit, though. It has both obvious
advantages and disadvantages. Maybe more tix should be issued to
RTOR abusers (effectively red light runners, the tix being for "fail
to stop at red light", $144 + 2pts)?
Bill Mitchell
> James Robinson wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > ===================================
> >
> > (3) Steady red alone:
> > (i) Vehicular traffic facing such signal shall stop before
> > entering the
> > crosswalk on the near side of the intersection or, if
> > none, then before
> > entering the intersection and shall remain standing until
> > an indication
> > to proceed is shown.
> > (ii) Notwithstanding the foregoing provisions of this
> > subdivision (a),
> > or any provisions of state law, an operator approaching an
> > intersection
> > where a sign authorizes right or left turns on red signal
> > may make such
> > turn after coming to a complete stop, but shall yield the
> > right of way
> > to all vehicles and pedestrians lawfully within the
> > intersection.
> >
> > =================================
>
>
> Are left turns on red allowed anywhere in NYC? Anyone know?
You can make a left off 1st Ave. onto E 39th. Street on red. There's a
sign that permits it, it's the same as the signs permitting right
turns except it reads LEFT instead of right. The sign's on the red
light mast on the left side of 1st. Ave at the intersection.
David J. Greenberger
> The really annoying thing is that there is no signage to indicate if
> you can complete a left turn. I know that there are parts of Broadway
> where the divider is most likely just under 20 feet wide, but I don't
> want to chance it.
The rule I learned is that the Broadway median is narrow (i.e., turns
are permitted without waiting for the second light) and the Park median
is wide. But oncoming traffic is usually heavy enough that turning
traffic has to wait for the light anyway.
--
David J. Greenberger
New York, NY
David J. Greenberger
> I'll check that this weekend. I thought the signs only said not
> right on red unless otherwise indicated. Not just a generic no turn
> on red.
http://plover.net/~green/?linctun-e-ex_2
http://plover.net/~green/?linctun-e-ex_4
David J. Greenberger
> Are left turns on red allowed anywhere in NYC? Anyone know?
Yes, in some cases in settings that lefts on red wouldn't be permitted
elsewhere in the state without explicit signage, like off of two-way
streets.
NB Chrystie at Broome (two-way to one-way):
http://plover.net/~green/?chr-br-ltor
SB 7th Avenue in the 150's (u-turn on divided street):
http://plover.net/~green/?7av-ltor
Cross Bay Boulevard (two-way divided) at various dead-end cross streets:
http://plover.net/~green/?crossbay-leftred
WB Kings Highway(?) at Ryder:
http://plover.net/~green/?noleft-x-buses
David J. Greenberger
> Alex L wrote:
> > Last I looked, the divided roadway rules were based on the width of
> > the median, with, I believe, 20' being the dividing point. Where the
> > median is less than 20', you may make the turn and proceed across
> > the remainder of the road on the same light, providing there is no
> > on-coming traffic. If the median is larger than 20', once having
> > made the turn, you must obey any traffic signals/signs that are now
> > in front of you.
>
> That's bizarre. And unique to NY, AFAIK.
What's bizarre and unique to NY?
Think of a typical one-way couplet (a pair of parallel one-way
streets). Obviously, traffic turning left off the couplet can't proceed
past the second one-way street without waiting there for the light.
The block between the two parallel one-way streets may be short. How
short does it have to be before the one-way couplet is legally
considered a single two-way divided street? In NYC, 20 feet is the
answer. Other cities and states may have different criteria, but the
line has to be drawn somewhere.
What may make this somewhat unclear to out-of-towners is how left turns
are executed on Broadway, Park Avenue, and similar streets. There is no
left turn bay. Traffic turns left into the "pocket" -- or, if you
prefer, the short block of the cross street between the northbound
street and the southbound street. It then waits there for the light
it's now facing to turn green. (That's not strictly necessary on
Broadway, where the median is narrower than 20 feet. It's practically
necessary except late at night, since traffic is steady and visibility
is limited.)
There are some poorly designed intersections, on Park Avenue just north
of Grand Central Terminal. (I believe that section of Park is
maintained by the MTA, since it's effectively an elevated road above the
Metro-North tracks, rather than by NYCDOT, hence the unusual
arrangement.) There are no overhanging signals, and in fact, the only
signals are in the median. So traffic waiting to turn left is required
to wait for a green light that isn't visible! (These intersections
don't even have pedestrian signals, a very unusual phenomenon in
Manhattan.)
Toastmaster
Phil Kane wrote:
> On Tue, 26 Nov 2002 05:40:33 GMT, gkowal wrote:
>
>
>>There USED to be signs, a few years back when the whole "right turn on
>>red" concept came out.
>
>
> I got my first driver license in NYC in 1955 when there was no RTOR
> anywhere on the East Coast, and when I moved to California in 1957
> RTOR was "old stuff" there - one of the many "new world" things I
> discovered there.
>
> That was 45 years ago, hardly a new concept, NYC is decades behind
> the times.
There are very few places in NYC where RTOR would work well
without people bouncing into each other (save Staten
Island). Usually, it is very difficult to see traffic coming
in the other direction if you are in the right lane waiting
to make a right on red.
--
If you flame me, then the terrorists have won.
Toastmaster
Walter Theurer wrote:
>>
> What's a jug handle?
That which is hanging off an old stripper.
SPUI
> On Thu, 28 Nov 2002 01:18:39 GMT, "Peter T. Daniels"
> <gram...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>
>>> What's a jug handle?
>>
>> To avoid left turns from major roads, they put a quarter-cloverleaf road
>> leading right from the main road around to the left-pointing direction
>> of the cross road.
>
> I believe these (or similar constructions) are almost everywhere in
> places like Spain. You get a tix for attempting a direct left turn.
There are a lot using city streets on QC 125 (Boul Pie-IX) in Québec.
David Jensen
"Phil Kane" <Phil...@nov.shmovz.ka.pop> wrote in
<cuvyxnansvbet....@netnews.attbi.com>:
>On Tue, 26 Nov 2002 05:40:33 GMT, gkowal wrote:
>
>>There USED to be signs, a few years back when the whole "right turn on
>>red" concept came out.
>
> I got my first driver license in NYC in 1955 when there was no RTOR
> anywhere on the East Coast, and when I moved to California in 1957
> RTOR was "old stuff" there - one of the many "new world" things I
> discovered there.
>
> That was 45 years ago, hardly a new concept, NYC is decades behind
> the times.
Careless drivers already kill thousands of pedestrians. Allowing RTOR in
NYC would add to the body count.
Phil Kane
>> RTOR was legal in California in the early 50s if not before.
>> It was one of the novel concepts that impressed this
>> then-New-Yorker to move there in the mid-50s. Palm trees and
>> lack of "winter weather" and snow was another.
>
>Yep, the Golden State truly is Heaven on Earth.
It was in the '40s and '50s. It no longer is. Oregon is like Cal
was then except for the winter weather (cold and rainy) which is the
pits.
Peter T. Daniels
>
> On Tue, 26 Nov 2002 04:14:37 GMT, Toastmaster wrote:
>
> >Are left turns on red allowed anywhere in NYC? Anyone know?
>
> Where they are allowed, it is from the left-hand lane of a one-way
> street into the left-hand lane of another one-way street going to
> the left.
Or, from northbound two-way Broadway into the two-way driveway of Allen
Pavilion.
Peter T. Daniels
Doesn't happen in Chicago.