Left hand turn at non-left turn lights?
Discussion
A friend has just done it.
New road layout (to them), but obviously some years ago as no reminders of new road layout ahead.
Lights went green, set off, noticed the “no left turn” on floor as car was rolling over it, only just revealed as car ahead cleared it.
Pretty much stopped (3-5km/h according to dashcam) as they rolled through slowly looking all round wondering what/why/checking for traffic/why or if this even applies to them.
All clear so proceeded carefully. Thought perhaps it was to stop left turning traffic going into oncoming right hand lane?!
Or that other junction immediately before the main left hand turn?!
Was clearly a road to traverse as had just watched traffic flowing that way from right hand side while waiting at lights.
Upon review it’s clearly a new mini-loop and you go ahead and come back around to the left a few sets of lights 100 yards on.
Also there are three traffic lights visible while queuing from a distance, but not the no left turn marker… it’s not visible that it’s no left turn until you see the last traffic light or the on-road marking, though once you’re underway following traffic the need to re-check the third and final traffic light to see no left turn seems a mistake waiting to happen.
Though the junction just prior on the left may be a left turn, so the other traffic lights could be confusing if they said no left turn.
Also clearly the ped crossing lights are red, so there wasn’t a chance (at this time) of ped/car conflict.
I assume at times, if the button is pressed, peds can cross here while traffic is crossing in the parallel direction only.
So what do people suffer for this misuse of no left turning?
[url]
|https://thumbsnap.com/7KVgVEfn[/url]
New road layout (to them), but obviously some years ago as no reminders of new road layout ahead.
Lights went green, set off, noticed the “no left turn” on floor as car was rolling over it, only just revealed as car ahead cleared it.
Pretty much stopped (3-5km/h according to dashcam) as they rolled through slowly looking all round wondering what/why/checking for traffic/why or if this even applies to them.
All clear so proceeded carefully. Thought perhaps it was to stop left turning traffic going into oncoming right hand lane?!
Or that other junction immediately before the main left hand turn?!
Was clearly a road to traverse as had just watched traffic flowing that way from right hand side while waiting at lights.
Upon review it’s clearly a new mini-loop and you go ahead and come back around to the left a few sets of lights 100 yards on.
Also there are three traffic lights visible while queuing from a distance, but not the no left turn marker… it’s not visible that it’s no left turn until you see the last traffic light or the on-road marking, though once you’re underway following traffic the need to re-check the third and final traffic light to see no left turn seems a mistake waiting to happen.
Though the junction just prior on the left may be a left turn, so the other traffic lights could be confusing if they said no left turn.
Also clearly the ped crossing lights are red, so there wasn’t a chance (at this time) of ped/car conflict.
I assume at times, if the button is pressed, peds can cross here while traffic is crossing in the parallel direction only.
So what do people suffer for this misuse of no left turning?
[url]
|https://thumbsnap.com/7KVgVEfn[/url]It seems pretty clear to me personally, the light you have circled blue can't have a no left turn on it because it appears there is a car park entrance just after it?
The junction where No left turn is allowed has a sign both on the road and on the traffic light and actually I would suggest the no left turn for that junction is visable at the set of lights before on the lights at the junction where it applies.
The penalty if the junction is monitored by cameras is a non endorsable fine
The junction where No left turn is allowed has a sign both on the road and on the traffic light and actually I would suggest the no left turn for that junction is visable at the set of lights before on the lights at the junction where it applies.
The penalty if the junction is monitored by cameras is a non endorsable fine
Yes it’s really two junctions, the first light on the left is technically for the depot, then the next pair (?) are for the main junction.
Or are the first two traffic lights for the depot? The last single (with the no left turn marker) for the main junction?
Given they all operate in unison it does look a bit like one junction, not two.
Having had a quick check through traffic signs manual it doesn’t look like there is a better way to sign it.
An ahead arrow and right hand green arrow doesn’t exist. A green light with a supplementary turn restriction is how you achieve that, which is what it’s got.
I suppose there are always these quirky road designs hiding places that can catch you out.
I think that depot is an ambulance station, so possibly some elements are in play when they depart, that makes this seemingly rare (?) configuration necessary.
It’s always good to pick apart mistakes and hopefully learn from them! Dash cams are very handy in that regard.
Thanks for the heads up on the likely penalty.
Or are the first two traffic lights for the depot? The last single (with the no left turn marker) for the main junction?
Given they all operate in unison it does look a bit like one junction, not two.
Having had a quick check through traffic signs manual it doesn’t look like there is a better way to sign it.
An ahead arrow and right hand green arrow doesn’t exist. A green light with a supplementary turn restriction is how you achieve that, which is what it’s got.
I suppose there are always these quirky road designs hiding places that can catch you out.
I think that depot is an ambulance station, so possibly some elements are in play when they depart, that makes this seemingly rare (?) configuration necessary.
It’s always good to pick apart mistakes and hopefully learn from them! Dash cams are very handy in that regard.
Thanks for the heads up on the likely penalty.
Edited by Mr Whippy on Saturday 8th July 17:11
Can’t argue with that.
This would be where using a well trodden route in the past which has now changed, may yield issues with assumptions on layout.
Ultimately that depot junction removes the opportunity for repeaters, so if you miss that first sign’s detail you’re left with the final traffic light or the on-road marking.
It definitely won’t be mistaken again. However that’s not the point really.
It’s always frustrating to miss something like this.
This would be where using a well trodden route in the past which has now changed, may yield issues with assumptions on layout.
Ultimately that depot junction removes the opportunity for repeaters, so if you miss that first sign’s detail you’re left with the final traffic light or the on-road marking.
It definitely won’t be mistaken again. However that’s not the point really.
It’s always frustrating to miss something like this.
Edited by Mr Whippy on Saturday 8th July 17:32
I've known that junction all my life. They changed it when they built the large housing estate nearby. I'm not clear what problem this unusual layout is supposed to solve. I can see it might help traffic flow for those approaching from the left on the first picture if they are turning left towards Menston, or traffic approaching from straight ahead turning right towards Leeds & Bradford. The first time I approached from the Menston side, I expected the old layout and ended up having to go straight on towards Otley.
Having said that, in my experience the traffic does flow well here, so I guess the planners have done a good job!
Having said that, in my experience the traffic does flow well here, so I guess the planners have done a good job!
There must be a no man’s land in that triangle.
I’m surprised it’s not just a big roundabout, but then the ambulance (?) depot would still cause problems.
I agree it’s probably the best confit given what’s there, and the pedestrian provision there seems good all considered which is a good thing these days!
Always a school day
I’m surprised it’s not just a big roundabout, but then the ambulance (?) depot would still cause problems.
I agree it’s probably the best confit given what’s there, and the pedestrian provision there seems good all considered which is a good thing these days!
Always a school day
Mr Whippy said:
There must be a no man’s land in that triangle.
There is, it's a small wooded area about 15-20 yards along each edgeMr Whippy said:
I’m surprised it’s not just a big roundabout, but then the ambulance (?) depot would still cause problems.
And other existing buildingsMr Whippy said:
Always a school day
So very true.I'd stab in the dark that due to the no Right Turn from opposite direction it would be quite likely the pedestrian crossing on the road to the left (of your friend) could be green for pedestrians?
We have a hairpin (two streets merge not a cross roads) near my home with a No Left Turn on the right hand street, you often see look of shock on those ignoring it as they realise pedestrians are strolling across the crossing with the expectation of being safe.
We have a hairpin (two streets merge not a cross roads) near my home with a No Left Turn on the right hand street, you often see look of shock on those ignoring it as they realise pedestrians are strolling across the crossing with the expectation of being safe.
Just watching video again.
It is actually two junctions, clearly that first pair of lights are a separate entity to the main junction.
However the on-road markings are almost worn away, and they’re immediately followed by yellow boxing for the depot junction, which terminates at the cycle box at the head of the main junction.
It’s a lot to cram in and ultimately means the main junction waiting area doesn’t really exist (it’s a yellow box and a cycle box)
So the lights for the initial depot junction for all intents and purposes serve the main junction as you can’t technically enter it until the main junction lights are green, but for obvious reasons can’t have no left turn marked on those first lights, or on the floor, as it’d interfere with that depot junction.
Thus there is no space to provide ‘no left turn’ on the floor ahead of the main junction either, as it’d either be in the cycle box, the yellow box, or prior to the depot junction turn and again cause issues.
Given its nature as an ambulance station (possibly also fire?), the yellow box zone has to be there, and the extra lights likely to stop traffic when required?
I’m now sat thinking about similar configurations I know that I just take for granted but would catch an unfamiliar user out.
It is actually two junctions, clearly that first pair of lights are a separate entity to the main junction.
However the on-road markings are almost worn away, and they’re immediately followed by yellow boxing for the depot junction, which terminates at the cycle box at the head of the main junction.
It’s a lot to cram in and ultimately means the main junction waiting area doesn’t really exist (it’s a yellow box and a cycle box)
So the lights for the initial depot junction for all intents and purposes serve the main junction as you can’t technically enter it until the main junction lights are green, but for obvious reasons can’t have no left turn marked on those first lights, or on the floor, as it’d interfere with that depot junction.
Thus there is no space to provide ‘no left turn’ on the floor ahead of the main junction either, as it’d either be in the cycle box, the yellow box, or prior to the depot junction turn and again cause issues.
Given its nature as an ambulance station (possibly also fire?), the yellow box zone has to be there, and the extra lights likely to stop traffic when required?
I’m now sat thinking about similar configurations I know that I just take for granted but would catch an unfamiliar user out.
RB Will said:
Got done for turning right at no right turn but presume the same for left 
No points, just a fine of about £30-40 + about £100 in admin costs & victim surcharge. Mine was about 5 years ago now so maybe account for inflation.
Oooo, what's a victim surcharge?No points, just a fine of about £30-40 + about £100 in admin costs & victim surcharge. Mine was about 5 years ago now so maybe account for inflation.
Yes I've seen £50 is common for this, so sounds about right relative to your example.
But the admin/victim bit is interesting additional info. Is this increasingly relevant if there were some consequences to the action?
I used to travel that route on a daily basis a couple of years ago, and it wasn't unusual to see somebody turning left there.
It's not as though the signage is inadequate though, as there's plenty of it!
A similar junction has recently been established on the A658 in Greengates, Bradford (but for right turns only) and there too, I saw loads of people (even police!) failing to observe the signage.
It's not as though the signage is inadequate though, as there's plenty of it!
A similar junction has recently been established on the A658 in Greengates, Bradford (but for right turns only) and there too, I saw loads of people (even police!) failing to observe the signage.
Here in Nottingham we've several no left turn junctions for the reason suggested above, a pedestrian crossing to the left.
Whoever thought that was a safe idea is a muppet. Practically every time I'm a pedestrian on the green light crossing a driver turns left. It's deadly, but occasionally I feel a bit sorry for the motorist as the signs are often inadequate or almost hidden in a cornucopia of other signs.
Whoever thought that was a safe idea is a muppet. Practically every time I'm a pedestrian on the green light crossing a driver turns left. It's deadly, but occasionally I feel a bit sorry for the motorist as the signs are often inadequate or almost hidden in a cornucopia of other signs.
I think I’m just going to stop driving where I’m not wanted
Some builders who work out my way say if they get to traffic lights you’ve gone too far.
That sounds about right these days.
I think part of the issue is road designs that were car centric are now not car centric, so they’re inherently easy to misread because the caveat to their function is like an afterthought rather than by initial layout design.
I’m by no means bashing improving pedestrian accessibility etc, being a pedestrian with young kids is hard work… but the end result we often get is just half arsed and isn’t truly any good for either party if we’re being honest.
All these main radial routes that cut through old suburb villages and towns are just being broken by integrating such disparate needs into one.
Build a new radial trunk (sky bridge or tunnel), or gap grade the pedestrian needs at these junctions.
And move the Ambulance Depot.
I’d not been into Leeds in a long time and notice it’s changed drastically in the last 5 years, almost as much change again vs the preceding 15 years.
Now much better for pedestrians, but now harder to get to in a car.
I’d say I’d get the train from Ilkley, but you can’t even park down near the river for free now.
Add in Ilkley parking, train fares, and so on, it’s cheaper and more convenient to just drive.
Or, like the local builders say, just don’t bother going
Some builders who work out my way say if they get to traffic lights you’ve gone too far.
That sounds about right these days.
I think part of the issue is road designs that were car centric are now not car centric, so they’re inherently easy to misread because the caveat to their function is like an afterthought rather than by initial layout design.
I’m by no means bashing improving pedestrian accessibility etc, being a pedestrian with young kids is hard work… but the end result we often get is just half arsed and isn’t truly any good for either party if we’re being honest.
All these main radial routes that cut through old suburb villages and towns are just being broken by integrating such disparate needs into one.
Build a new radial trunk (sky bridge or tunnel), or gap grade the pedestrian needs at these junctions.
And move the Ambulance Depot.
I’d not been into Leeds in a long time and notice it’s changed drastically in the last 5 years, almost as much change again vs the preceding 15 years.
Now much better for pedestrians, but now harder to get to in a car.
I’d say I’d get the train from Ilkley, but you can’t even park down near the river for free now.
Add in Ilkley parking, train fares, and so on, it’s cheaper and more convenient to just drive.
Or, like the local builders say, just don’t bother going
Mr Whippy said:
Can’t argue with that.
This would be where using a well trodden route in the past which has now changed, may yield issues with assumptions on layout.
Ultimately that depot junction removes the opportunity for repeaters, so if you miss that first sign’s detail you’re left with the final traffic light or the on-road marking.
It definitely won’t be mistaken again. However that’s not the point really.
It’s always frustrating to miss something like this.
And that is why our driver trainer at work always says "never assume you know the road" He loves going down roads he knows have changed in recent years to see if our drivers notice new signs/markings etc This would be where using a well trodden route in the past which has now changed, may yield issues with assumptions on layout.
Ultimately that depot junction removes the opportunity for repeaters, so if you miss that first sign’s detail you’re left with the final traffic light or the on-road marking.
It definitely won’t be mistaken again. However that’s not the point really.
It’s always frustrating to miss something like this.
Edited by Mr Whippy on Saturday 8th July 17:32
DavePanda said:
And that is why our driver trainer at work always says "never assume you know the road" He loves going down roads he knows have changed in recent years to see if our drivers notice new signs/markings etc
Amen to that. That is how I got my last SAC. Turned off a 40mph dual carriageway into another dual carriageway that was also 40. I say was, it had been revised down to 30 (I was done for 37). 30 signs slightly obscured by pedestrian crossing lights and foliage. I even took a photo, but I thought there was no point appealing. On my SAC, the instructor asked us to write down how we got caught out, then he came round individually with suggestions of how to avoid. For me the advice was ‘new road, new speed limit. Never assume it stays the same. Check or keep to 30 until you see a repeater that confirms otherwise’.Pica-Pica said:
DavePanda said:
And that is why our driver trainer at work always says "never assume you know the road" He loves going down roads he knows have changed in recent years to see if our drivers notice new signs/markings etc
Amen to that. That is how I got my last SAC. Turned off a 40mph dual carriageway into another dual carriageway that was also 40. I say was, it had been revised down to 30 (I was done for 37). 30 signs slightly obscured by pedestrian crossing lights and foliage. I even took a photo, but I thought there was no point appealing. On my SAC, the instructor asked us to write down how we got caught out, then he came round individually with suggestions of how to avoid. For me the advice was ‘new road, new speed limit. Never assume it stays the same. Check or keep to 30 until you see a repeater that confirms otherwise’.I can see why some assumption of what repeaters used to say, but aren't currently visible, would lead you to choose 40mph.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff