Hey, there! Log in / Register
Left on red
By adamg on Wed, 08/06/2008 - 10:11am
Anali notes a Financial District intersection where you can legally turn left on red. And here's a car caught in the act of legally turning left on red from Avery Street onto Washington Street by the Ritz Carlton (you can't read it, but the sign above the red-circled right-turn arrow on the far side of the intersection actually tells you can turn left on red):
So where else in the Boston area is this legal? Well, legal and marked by a sign? Anali finds state law that indicates it's legal wherever two one-way streets intersect.
Topics:
Ad:
Support Universal Hub
Help keep Universal Hub going. If you like what we're up to and want to help out, please consider a (completely non-deductible) contribution.
Comments
Yeah it's in the handbook
of rules for drivers from the MA Registry of Motor Vehicles.
I do it all the time: if you're turning left from a one-way street onto a one-way street, and there's no "No Turn on Red" sign, one can go right ahead after stopping, just like we do with a right-turn.
Davis Square
Right at the beginning of Summer St., there's a marked Left on Red onto Cutter, which is the best (only?) way to get from the center of Davis to Highland Ave. eastbound.
Next block too
I've done it on the next intersection on Summer, at Willow. It's a little trickier because Summer is two-way afterward and you have to watch/yield for oncoming cars turning right. I presume it's legal there, but I rarely go that way anymore now that Willow is narrower.
In Lynn..
There's a place near City Hall in Downtown Lynn where you can. It's liberating. You should try it. :)
This page has a list of locations
http://www.motorists.org/ma/left_locations.html#bo...
It doesn't have to have a permissive sign to be legal. The sign is merely advisory.
Make sure it is a solid red. You cannot make a left turn on a left red arrow, or a right turn on a right red arrow.
That's only true if there's a "No turn on Red" sign
Drivers may take a turn on on an arrow after stopping unless there is a sign indicating otherwise. According to state law, there is no difference between between a red ball and a red arrow other than to indicate the lane direction.
Also, it should be noted that the law states that drivers may turn on red after stopping, there is no requirement to do so.
Sure you can
Sure you can. A red arrow is still a red light, and there's no law that differentiates the two when it comes to right-on-red.
More than a few times, I've had to lay on the horn to get the car in front of me to move on a red arrow.
Why only care about part of the rule?
You know that there's no difference between an arrow and a circle, but you ignore the part that says that you "may" turn on red and choose to honk (to aggravate/in aggravation) when someone chooses not to go on red?
Why not go?
C'mon Kaz, isn't that reading a bit much into the law? It's like stopping at a STOP sign and waiting for it to say "Go". ;-) There's nobody coming - go.
Besides the only reason people aren't going is because they don't believe they're allowed to. To them, it's not a choice. I'm simply educating them of the fact that they are actually allowed to go on a red arrow.
i actively don't go when
i actively don't go when people beep at me. its up to me to decide when it's safe to go, not the person behind me.
Not in Boston
My statement was overly broad. Indeed there is no state law that differentiates a circular red from a red arrow. But some city regulations, including Boston's, do differentiate.
The city regulations are based on MassHighway's "Standard Municipal Traffic Code":
http://www.mhd.state.ma.us/downloads/trafficMgmt/M...
MassHighway's guide contains a "sample regulation" that cities can use as a template. The sample regulation makes a clear differentiation between a solid red vs. a red arrow. From p41 (asterisks added by me for emphasis):
SECTION 7-9 Obedience to Traffic Control signals
3. Steady red indications shall have the following meanings:
a. Drivers, facing a steady CIRCULAR RED signal and NO TURN ON RED SIGN shall stop at a clearly marked stop line, but if none, 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 except as provided in (b) below.
b. When no sign is in place prohibiting a right turn, or a left turn from a one way street to another one way street, drivers ***facing a steady circular red signal*** may cautiously enter the intersection to make the right turn, or left turn from a one way street to another one way street, after shopping as provided in (a) above. Such drivers shall yield the right-of-way to pedestrians lawfully within an adjacent crosswalk and to other traffic lawfully using the intersection.
c. Drivers, facing a steady RED ARROW indication ***may not enter the intersection to make the movement indicated by such arrow***, and unless entering the intersection to make such other movement as is permitted by other indications shown at the same time, shall stop at a clearly marked stop line, but if none, 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 make the movement indicated by such arrow is shown.***
The City of Boston uses similar language in its traffic regulations (see p20):
http://www.cityofboston.gov/transportation/pdfs/ru...
Cambridge does not differentiate between red circles and red arrows.
Wow, this is pretty messy, huh?
As we go town to town, right on red laws change? What a mess.
Here's an excerpt from chapter 4, "Rules of the road", of the Mass driver's manual, found here.
Steady Red
A steady red light means “stop.” Do not go until the light turns green. You may make a right turn on a red light only after coming to a complete stop, then yielding to pedestrians or other vehicles in your path. You may not turn on red if a NO TURN ON RED sign is posted.
If you are traveling on a one-way street and turning left onto another one-way street, you are allowed to turn left on a red light. Come to a complete stop and yield to pedestrians and other vehicles before turning.
Steady Red Arrow
A steady red arrow means the same as a steady red, circular signal (see the preceding Steady Red section), but a steady red arrow applies only to vehicles intending to proceed in the direction of the arrow. The same rules for “turning on red” apply.
Really, how is one suppoed to know? If I get a ticket in Boston, con I contest it, citing the Mass driver's manual?
Yeah it is a mess
I would certainly contest it, citing the RMV manual. The RMV manual isn't always right, but drivers ought to be able to rely on it.
It's also possible that the MassHighway sample regulations are poorly worded, and the authors never intended there to be a difference between the circle and the arrow. Might be a good research project for anyone who cares enough about such things and wants to find out the lowdown :-)
Education
Will you then at least stop "educating" people as to the correct rules, since now it's clear that you don't know them yourself?
The signs are probaly in
The signs are probaly in heavily traffic inflicted areas, and its a cheap fix to put up a sign telling people to turn on red rather than fixing the light system so you dont get clogged traffic arteries.
That being said you find more and more "no turn on red" signs at these one way intersections. They seem to pop up all over the place. I also think alot of people, especially out of staters and students are afraid of doing anything illegal in the city and getting caught by a traffic cam so the sign is a good way of letting them know its ok.
I appreciate the
I appreciate the information, but she had to look up the law? We learned this in driver's ed, its as basic as a right on red. It is legal in most states, but in a select few it is not.
Maybe us cyclists do know the laws better than most *ducks*
I wonder if she is a student
I wonder if she is a student visiting from another state? We have lots of them here. Bostonians always get blamed for being bad drivers, but I wonder how many of those bad drivers are actually from Kansas and Ohio where all the roads are made out of dirt and there are no one way roads unless there is a cow in the street.
Well, then it's their problem
And they should follow those cows around, use their paths to make new roads, and then confuse the hell out of the tourists who come THERE.
unknowledgeable drivers are home grown
Massachusetts perenially scores in the toilet on a national assessment of road rules knowledge put out by the insurance industry, playing swapsies with RI, NY, and DC. Can't blame that on students, can blame it on very low requirements to get a license.
That's one reason why I am hesitant to go left on red, even though I've known that rule for 25 years ... I can't count on the cops knowing it!
I beg to differ , I drive
I beg to differ , I drive around outside and inside the city and the closer you get to student centers the more crazy things seem to get.
Parts of RI, NY and DC also have large numbers of transient or student populations. Any states on that list that dont have a large number of resident students or transient populations (DC doesnt have as many students, but has lots of temporary and intern workers who arent around for more than a few years at most)?
MA lacks realistic requirements
I realize "blame all those outsiders and students for everything" is a common local ploy, but the statistics say otherwise. The northeast is legendary for states that haven't changed their minimum standards for getting a license in much of a century despite horrendous conditions.
It isn't the students or the young drivers that bring down the scores - it is never having to pass a comprehensive, 50 or 60 question exam spun up by a randomizing system so you can't tell your friends what is on it. It is also the lack of requirement to show other than parallel parking skills on the road. I had to show that I understood the rules in dozens of practical situations to get my license, barely passing with a 74 score. My husband got to take a victory lap of Cohasset Common and do the obligatory parallel parking ceremony before he got his crackerjack box with the prize in it.
Eeka and I have described our license exams in the Northwest before - and the Northwest has a huge population of young people compared to the Northeast these days (in fact, OR and WA have slid from the top spots, likely due to nearly doubling population through migration - OR is even considering requiring testing when transferring a license for people who were initially licensed in states without comprehensive exams). I would love to see people have to pass a real test while waiting in the waiting room for their license every 5 years. If the insurance industry assessment is correct, we would see 1/3 fail it in MA. That isn't the students - that is EVERYBODY.
All I can say is that my kids ain't going near even a driver's ed course until they can pass this test with a 75 or better.
Do tests really matter?
When it comes to driving, I think attitude, lifestyle, frame of mind, etc. are a lot more important than a test. A person's driving manners are just an extension of their personality. A massive type A is going to drive like one, for the most part, as in "get the ^&%$ out of my way" type of driving. Or, if someone is arrogant, that will come out in their driving. Go to Lawrence, Kansas, where people are polite, congenial, patient, etc. and you'll find that in their driving. Same probably goes for the NW states that you're so endeared to.
Passing a test just means you know the law or can exercise the skills, it doesn't mean you'll actually exercise them when you get the license.
Is it really important that someone know if you can turn right on a red arrow? Not really. Even if it's illegal, if someone does it in a safe manner, nobody is going to get killed. Who would you rather have on the road:
a) Someone who passed all tests with flying colors and drive like an idiot, or...
b) Someone who scored marginally on the written test, passed the driving test, and drives courteously.
Anyways, the best we can do is give people some kind of test to make sure they're competent, but whatever happens after that is definitely not influenced by any test.
I just learned how to use
I just learned how to use the track feature, please excuse the late reply. Im assuming you wont ever see this, but here it goes!
I got a perfect score on my driving test and could have told you everything you needed to know about every rule, no matter how obscure when I got my license. I even ended up going to take my test in what I later found out was in one of the "hard" cities to take it in. On top of that the driving school car was falty because the gear shift was in the middle consol and would move into a different gear if you hit it even if you didnt push down on the break and push the button to move it. This resulted in a very awkward 3 point turn followed by a parrarell parking job on a steep two way hill which I executed perfectly.
I only bring that up because I later (not even 6 months later) went on to wreck a car after a string of minor accidents. Noone was hurt but the car was a disaster, it was an 80's era big body chevy and I ended up crumpling the hood and twisting the frame, some broken windows, I dont think I was even wearing a seat belt. I got out of the car and there was oil, and fluid and all sorts of stuff pooling under the car, it was quite a scene. Yeah so I passed every test there was, proved how much I knew, and then took my cocky teenage self on a joyride... no test was gonna show that coming. As not to scare anyone here, Ive had a perfect record since then, 10 years and not even a speeding ticket to my name...
Don't get me started!
I love that we have left on red. I only wish everyone knew about it.
I even have a blog at the address:
http://leftonredislegal.blogspot.com
There is something seriously wrong with me!!!!!!!!