Hi folks, I have not been charged under the HTA but I'm hoping to improve my understanding here, if possible. As various news outlets have been sharing with the public, there are new changes to Section 172 of the HTA and Regulation 455/07, dealing with the exact vehicle operations that are deemed to be "stunts" and also dealing with the places where those operations are prohibited and punishable. I have the following questions, which I don't know who to turn to for an answer, perhaps my MPP...but here they are: 1. It is my understanding that historically, prior to the new changes eff...

Somewhat of a followup... It's called a "channelized right turn", and the traffic engineering people confirm that it is not considered part of the same intersection. It is a separate entrance into the flow of traffic, which is not controlled by the traffic signals, only the yield sign. Therefore, as discussed above, the traffic in that lane definitely do have to come to a full stop and remain so until traffic breaks. That lane never has right of way, it can only go when an opening forms. Of course, being a yield, stopping is not necessary if the way is clear. Interesting hypothetical...

Where I live, these lanes are very common and referred to as a "bypass" lane. You are bypassing the intersection - the traffic lights do not apply to you. You do not have to stop first (in fact, you are NOT to stop in that lane) unless you need to give way to traffic already on the intersecting street or pedestrians crossing that lane. So don't think of the yield sign as being "at the intersection". It is beside the intersection, controlling traffic in a separate lane that has not been controlled by the lights. You are correct that it does "reverse" the usual pri...

If one obeys the yield sign at some of these lights, the right-turning traffic will only ever be able to proceed as right-on-red after the light changes. I'm not sure I understand your concern. When facing the green, the presence of the yield sign (while still having legal meaning) is pretty much irrelevant in practice. When facing the red, it allows you to continue without stopping when cross-traffic is light. What am I missing? If you are facing this sign at an intersection where there is not any straight-through traffic coming from the same direction as you, and you are facing opposing tra...

whaddyaknow wrote: ↑Fri Jul 05, 2019 1:34 pm The bottom line is: you are facing a yield sign. The rest is irrelevant.

Yes, unfortunately that is the case I'm thinking.

If one obeys the yield sign at some of these lights, the right-turning traffic will only ever be able to proceed as right-on-red after the light changes. It's completely asinine.

Probably more an issue to table locally with city council, but I guess I'm wondering if anyone knowledgeable with the HTA sees anything noncompliant about these installations (putting a yield sign at a traffic light).

Additional thoughts...

If the right-turn lane were separated by some distance, in the style of a highway ramp, there would be no question: the yield sign applies at all times. But since these "forked" right turn lanes are directly connected to the main intersection, it is unclear exactly what the intent is. If the right-turning traffic is not deemed to be at the same intersection, then the traffic signal does not apply and the yield sign is all that matters for the right-turners.

Hi all, new here. I have a question about signage/intersection design, and right-of-way as modified by the signage. As we know, when two vehicles approach an intersection from opposing sides, both facing a circular green light, and both want to turn onto the same road in the same direction, the vehicle which is making the right turn has right-of-way over the vehicle that is turning left across traffic. In Windsor, and I'd imagine many other places, sometimes the right-turn lane has been separated from the other lanes at the traffic signal with a small triangular island. The right-turn lane is ...