Tempe's "no right turn on red" intersections (Phoenix: condo, live)

[Valley Native]

Originally Posted by exit2lef

Because nearly universal right-on-red creates the expectation that the practice is allowed in all cases, even when it is unsafe. Drivers often fail to see signs disallowing right on red, but if the default assumption was that a turn was illegal unless specifically permitted, there would be a lot more attention paid to signs. Also, it's about more than visibility. It's also the issue that right-on-red creates a hostile environment for pedestrians. Drivers are preoccupied with looking left for gaps in traffic and forget to look right for pedestrians before moving forward. That behavior has caused near-misses for people in this thread and resulted in the recent death of a Sunnyslope high school student who was obeying all traffic regulations. Drivers also edge out trying to see traffic better, blocking the crosswalk in the process. For those reasons, another dream scenario of mine would be that a pedestrian's action of pressing a "walk" button would then trigger the display of a red arrow prohibiting a right turn.

As I said earlier: a lot of this is a combination of inattentiveness/stupidity with certain drivers, AND inattentiveness/stupidity on the part of certain pedestrians. People need to practice responsibility everywhere they go, and no matter what they're transportation modes are. Drivers need to come to a complete stop at all red lights before making their turns, and pedestrians also have the responsibility of crossing when legal to do so ... not when it says "DON'T WALK", and not by jaywalking.

Lately, a lot of these traffic incidents are related to these damn smart phones. Of course, it's easy to blame the phones, but it's the idiots who can't seem to look up from them and pay attention! Again, it's not just with motorists. I witnessed somebody walking casually across the street glued to her phone, and she wasn't even in a crosswalk. Traffic had to slow down for her, and she kept walking slowly gawking at her phone even when she was honked at.

Originally Posted by new2colo

The right turn on red prohibitions at the end of freeway off ramps are set by ADOT, not cities. Banning right turns on red lights could be the result of limited sight distance, heavy pedestrian traffic, a high frequency of accidents prior to the ban on right on red movements, or general traffic control by limiting high volumes of traffic from dumping onto surface streets that are already congested from through traffic.

Ah, that sheds a new light on the subject, huh? It's not the cities putting up these stupid signs, it's your wonderful ADOT. This is the same department that couldn't finish the 231 miles of freeways they promised us over 30 years ago. The same department that was responsible for the I10 flooding several years ago because they didn't maintain their pumps properly. The same department that coats freeways with rubberized asphalt which is cracking & falling apart in a short amount of time.

[PhoenixSomeday]

Can't stand no-right-on-red, and I don't see most of the ones I've been to having any sensible reason. That said, I abide by them 100%, even at midnight where there's no one and nothing around for a mile in any direction and it's a massive waste of time sitting around waiting for unintelligent lights. Other places at least have the sense to have either A) smarter lights that change when necessary at night or B) posted hours that the no-right-on-red is in effect. If "limited visibility" is going to be a reason, there's no reason the eastbound 202 off ramp to southbound Alma School wouldn't have one, since limited visibility should be unconditional on other factors. Visibility there is garbage. You have to creep pretty far past the crosswalk to even get a decent enough line of sight to the oncoming traffic. Although it would make the traffic problem on that off ramp that much worse.

Originally Posted by Valley Native

... The same department that coats freeways with rubberized asphalt which is cracking & falling apart in a short amount of time.

I've wondered if that rubberized stuff is the reason it seems common to be hard to stay in the middle of a lane along many roads in the Phoenix metro (surface street, freeway or otherwise), compared to any other place I've been. Not just me, but everyone. Cars just seem to drift to damn near driving on the line (either side of the lane).

[exit2lef]

Originally Posted by Valley Native

and pedestrians also have the responsibility of crossing when legal to do so ... not when it says "DON'T WALK", and not by jaywalking.

This statement is true, but it's also 100% irrelevant to the discussion of right-on-red. RoR creates a uniquely dangerous situation for pedestrians who are doing everything as they should.

[new2colo]

Originally Posted by Valley Native

Ah, that sheds a new light on the subject, huh? It's not the cities putting up these stupid signs, it's your wonderful ADOT. This is the same department that couldn't finish the 231 miles of freeways they promised us over 30 years ago. The same department that was responsible for the I10 flooding several years ago because they didn't maintain their pumps properly. The same department that coats freeways with rubberized asphalt which is cracking & falling apart in a short amount of time.

Yes. The same agency that for years you’ve accused of mismanagement without providing a single link from anywhere to back up your assertions. No investigative journalism piece, no court dockets, nothing. Just nonsensical boomer ranting.

Yep, ADOT’s rubberized asphalt test is a failure and their maintenance of drainage facilities needs to be improved. However, your question deals with restricted right turn movements, which are not tied to drainage or asphalt.

[Valley Native]

Originally Posted by exit2lef

This statement is true, but it's also 100% irrelevant to the discussion of right-on-red. RoR creates a uniquely dangerous situation for pedestrians who are doing everything as they should.

Understood, but having no right on red creates other problems: mainly increased congestion & increased commute times. I see it as just another way of dumbing down the intersections just to protect a selected few who are overly timid, have limited depth perception, etc. Another poster brought up the issue of sitting still at these intersections late at night when there is virtually no traffic. Serves no valuable purpose in those cases.

I do have to make a correction to what I stated earlier about Phoenix not having "no right on red" intersections. Light rail intersections prohibit right turns on red as well. The way I remembered this is my citation a few years go for turning right on a red light in downtown Phoenix. I failed to see the "no right turn" sign, which was my fault. I can understand why it's prohibitive at intersections where trains are involved, but having them selectively at vehicle centric intersections is rather senseless.

Originally Posted by new2colo

Yes. The same agency that for years you’ve accused of mismanagement without providing a single link from anywhere to back up your assertions. No investigative journalism piece, no court dockets, nothing. Just nonsensical boomer ranting.

Yep, ADOT’s rubberized asphalt test is a failure and their maintenance of drainage facilities needs to be improved. However, your question deals with restricted right turn movements, which are not tied to drainage or asphalt.

I've already stated in another thread where to find the articles about ADOT's audit. At least you admitted their failures on other essential matters, which should be enough proof that they have blundered quite often, including their selective restrictions on right turns.

[exit2lef]

Originally Posted by Valley Native

I do have to make a correction to what I stated earlier about Phoenix not having "no right on red" intersections. Light rail intersections prohibit right turns on red as well. The way I remembered this is my citation a few years go for turning right on a red light in downtown Phoenix. I failed to see the "no right turn" sign, which was my fault. I can understand why it's prohibitive at intersections where trains are involved, but having them selectively at vehicle centric intersections is rather senseless.

Yes, I said that many posts ago in this thread. Glad to see it acknowledged, even if a bit late. The RoR prohibitions around light rail are needed where a right turn could put a vehicle directly in the path of a train approaching from behind or the side. I'd like to see even more intersections in the Downtown and Midtown areas have RoR prohibitions because those parts of town have high levels of pedestrian traffic. Fear of congestion should never be an excuse for not providing a safe environment for those who are vulnerable even when obeying all traffic regulations that apply to them.

[Valley Native]

Originally Posted by exit2lef

Yes, I said that many posts ago in this thread. Glad to see it acknowledged, even if a bit late. The RoR prohibitions around light rail are needed where a right turn could put a vehicle directly in the path of a train approaching from behind or the side. I'd like to see even more intersections in the Downtown and Midtown areas have RoR prohibitions because those parts of town have high levels of pedestrian traffic. Fear of congestion should never be an excuse for not providing a safe environment for those who are vulnerable even when obeying all traffic regulations that apply to them.

No argument from me on restricting right turns at light rail intersections or pedestrian heavy areas. Freeway offramps are completely different because they're heavily vehicle oriented, and keeping the traffic moving as much as possible should be the predominant focus.

[mags61]

I don't particularly like the no-ROR lights but I obey them anyway because I don't want a ticket.
I think they plant these on purpose as traps. Cops hide out and try to catch people making illegal turns. I've seen this happen.

[locolobo13]

On those off-ramp right turns along that stretch of US 60. There's a concrete barrier that cuts off visibility. In order to safely make a right turn you have to pull completely into the crosswalk. Then wait for an opening. Chances are people were completely blocking the crosswalks during rush hour making it more dangerous for pedestrians crossing the 60. Hence the signage.

[Valley Native]

Originally Posted by mags61

I don't particularly like the no-ROR lights but I obey them anyway because I don't want a ticket.
I think they plant these on purpose as traps. Cops hide out and try to catch people making illegal turns. I've seen this happen.

That's exactly what happened to me a few years ago when I made a right turn at a "no right on red" light rail intersection. A cop in an unmarked car instantly pulled me over. I remember being hesitant about pulling to the curb because the car wasn't properly marked, but he was quick to make sure I was cited. It was my fault for not seeing the restricted "no right turn on red" sign, but it was suspicious how he nabbed me instantaneously ... like he was purposely hiding out & waiting for it to happen.