Right of way questions | GTAMotorcycle.com

Right of way questions

Baggsy

Baggsy

Well-known member
Site Supporter
Right turn on red vs u turn on green into the rightmost of two or three lanes?

Can you make a u turn on red?

Offramp with yield sign but that goes into it's own lane vs someone coming straight through who needs to turn right at that own lane in a short distance?

Passing a slower vehicle on the right vs them trying to pull over as you're halfway past? i.e. they lane change into your side. Does it depend on how far up the side they are?
 
Baggsy said:
Right turn on red vs u turn on green into the rightmost of two or three lanes?

Can you make a u turn on red?

Offramp with yield sign but that goes into it's own lane vs someone coming straight through who needs to turn right at that own lane in a short distance?

Passing a slower vehicle on the right vs them trying to pull over as you're halfway past? i.e. they lane change into your side. Does it depend on how far up the side they are?
Click to expand...
Without looking at fdr

Assuming u turn is not prohibited, u turn has green, right turn has red and must wait until safe.

Normally no as that is similar to a left on red.

Vehicle entering lane is at fault. I cant think of a situation where i have seen this scenario. Does the sign have words or just yield (eg in a roundabout they have entering vehicles must yield to vehicles in roundabout).

Undertaking is not an offense in ontario. Left lane bandit with unsafe lane change is at fault.
 
Have you seen this?

Law Document English View

Welcome to the new e-Laws. It’s now easier than ever to find Ontario laws. We welcome your feedback.
www.ontario.ca www.ontario.ca
You should be able to infer answers to most of your questions
 
GreyGhost said:
Without looking at fdr

Assuming u turn is not prohibited, u turn has green, right turn has red and must wait until safe.

Normally no as that is similar to a left on red.

Vehicle entering lane is at fault. I cant think of a situation where i have seen this scenario. Does the sign have words or just yield (eg in a roundabout they have entering vehicles must yield to vehicles in roundabout).

Undertaking is not an offense in ontario. Left lane bandit with unsafe lane change is at fault.
Click to expand...
Half way through a u turn you're facing a red, and making a left. Also, is there not an obligation to keep towards the left on the u turn?

If the vehicle entering the lane is at fault, then what's the point of the yield sign? I'll have to go and check to see if they've removed them. Will look for an example.
Here's an example of the yield sign, although the business and driveway into it are closed:
www.google.ca

Google Maps

Find local businesses, view maps and get driving directions in Google Maps.
www.google.ca www.google.ca
Here's one where they've appended "to pedestrians" to the sign:
www.google.ca

Google Maps

Find local businesses, view maps and get driving directions in Google Maps.
www.google.ca www.google.ca
 
Last edited:
If the vehicle entering the lane is at fault, then what's the point of the yield sign? I'll have to go and check to see if they've removed them.

You answered your own question, the purpose of the yeild sign is to "point out" the vehicle in that lane MUST yeild to the flow of traffic. So, if you simply fly out of the on/off ramp directly into the right lane, (the lane entering or exiting a ramp, is called the MERGE lane), then your at fault. Same as iff you made a right turn on a green/stop sign, or uncontrolled intersection your at fault, (legally) but still, for some stupid reason, under insirance FDR's it is still a no fault collision meaning bioth insurers pay for their own damages, BUT your insurance record will show an AT fault claim.
 
If you think whatever your position is, whatever, can kill you they have right of way. No matter what. Common sense says if you want to go home alive, not in the back of an Ambulance or Herse.
Ask yourself can they see you? Do they care? High on drugs or alcohol. are they carrying a weapon. So many circumstancse to consider. Look out for number one.
 
cycling said:
If you think whatever your position is, whatever, can kill you they have right of way. No matter what. Common sense says if you want to go home alive, not in the back of an Ambulance or Herse.
Ask yourself can they see you? Do they care? High on drugs or alcohol. are they carrying a weapon. So many circumstancse to consider. Look out for number one.
Click to expand...
I think we were debating the legal ROW not the moral/ethical/smart ROW. They are often different as you pointed out.
 
Here's an intersection I've always wondered about: where Westbound and Eastbound Lakeshore split at the entrance to the Exhibition grounds (Columbia Road). Is Westbound Lakeshore considered a one-way at this intersection, and can you make a left at the red light if the way is clear? In the opposite direction from Columbia, there's a sign that says no right on red.


1666729470511.png
 
Relax said:
Here's an intersection I've always wondered about: where Westbound and Eastbound Lakeshore split at the entrance to the Exhibition grounds (Columbia Road). Is Westbound Lakeshore considered a one-way at this intersection, and can you make a left at the red light if the way is clear? In the opposite direction from Columbia, there's a sign that says no right on red.


View attachment 58158
Click to expand...
Seems reasonable. No right on red is probably for awkward visibility while a vehicle turning left doesn't have the same problem. Now, only one-way to one-way is legal for left on red. I wouldn't be surprised if they handed out tickets and am not sure how it would play out in court. Where is the legal change from two way to one way (eg is it at the actual point they join or is it xxx metres from that point?).

Traffic lights | Traffic Signs and Lights

The online version of the Ontario’s driver’s handbook. Use this book to study for your G1 driver’s licence, test your knowledge, and prepare for your Level 2 road test.
www.ontario.ca www.ontario.ca
 
I can't tell from this view, would need to see overhead view. But basically you can ONLY make a LEFT turn, (Unless a sign is posted stating it is not permitted), on a red light is if your going from a ONE way road onto another ONE way road. You can NOT cross ANY oncoming lanes. Also you can only turn from the farthest LEFT lane into the farthest LEFT lane, so basically curb lane to curb lane.
 
hedo2002 said:
Also you can only turn from the farthest LEFT lane into the farthest LEFT lane, so basically curb lane to curb lane.
Click to expand...
That makes sense but isn't what the province has in the handbook (I linked it above). I can't see it specifically mentioned in HTA, they would just use failure to obey signal or careless or one of the other catch-alls if they were mad at you. Do you know where the part you mentioned is spelled out?
 
Relax said:
Here's an intersection I've always wondered about: where Westbound and Eastbound Lakeshore split at the entrance to the Exhibition grounds (Columbia Road). Is Westbound Lakeshore considered a one-way at this intersection, and can you make a left at the red light if the way is clear? In the opposite direction from Columbia, there's a sign that says no right on red.


View attachment 58158
Click to expand...

I would say no, because there is opposing traffic, and three phase signal, so a red light to you, might be green to the opposing traffic.
Be careful of that intersection, especially at rush hour.
I used to go up there and through the Ex on my motorcycle, and it was amazing how many people would "squeeze in" from the right, by blocking the live traffic lanes and then "squeeze in" again to get onto the Gardiner Eastbound.

Here I've done it many times, but pedestrians will step out in front of you without looking, so you still have to be careful:
www.google.ca

Google Maps

Find local businesses, view maps and get driving directions in Google Maps.
www.google.ca www.google.ca
 
Last edited:
Baggsy is 100% correct. Because traffic coming from British Columbia Drive is considered "opposing traffic" then you can NOT legally turn left on a red at that intersection.

I would be surprised if that intersection didn't have a dedicated LEFT turn signal of it's own. One signal for drivers turning left off BC drive, one in the "turn around from east to west, and one for straight thru onto BC Drive
 
hedo2002 said:
Baggsy is 100% correct. Because traffic coming from British Columbia Drive is considered "opposing traffic" then you can NOT legally turn left on a red at that intersection.

I would be surprised if that intersection didn't have a dedicated LEFT turn signal of it's own. One signal for drivers turning left off BC drive, one in the "turn around from east to west, and one for straight thru onto BC Drive
Click to expand...
Where is that written? I can't find anything remotely like that. As for being opposing traffic, there are two lanes of traffic coming off BC into three lanes on lakeshore (maybe four if you are optimistically counting). They should never legally be in the left lane so there is no conflict with vehicle turning left lakeshore to lakeshore.

EDIT:
If the wide single lane lakeshore to lakeshore was occupied as two lanes, there is a potential conflict for the vehicle in the fabricated lane and vehicle from BC.
 
GreyGhost said:
Where is that written? I can't find anything remotely like that. As for being opposing traffic, there are two lanes of traffic coming off BC into three lanes on lakeshore. They should never legally be in the left lane so there is no conflict with vehicle turning left lakeshore to lakeshore.

EDIT:
If the wide single lane lakeshore to lakeshore was occupied as two lanes, there is a potential conflict for the vehicle in the fabricated lane and vehicle from BC.
Click to expand...

That left turn lane is a single lane, so there also should never be two vehicles wide there. The only potential problem is when eastbound traffic needs to immediately get into the right lane of westbound Lakeshore to enter the Gardiner eastbound on-ramp, but that's solved with the 3-phase lights and the "no right on red" on Columbia.
 
GreyGhost said:
Where is that written? I can't find anything remotely like that. As for being opposing traffic, there are two lanes of traffic coming off BC into three lanes on lakeshore (maybe four if you are optimistically counting). They should never legally be in the left lane so there is no conflict with vehicle turning left lakeshore to lakeshore.

EDIT:
If the wide single lane lakeshore to lakeshore was occupied as two lanes, there is a potential conflict for the vehicle in the fabricated lane and vehicle from BC.
Click to expand...
I'm open to being wrong about whether you can turn left on red there, but not to making sure you do it carefully in any case.
Especially if you're heading to the Gardiner, rather than Jameson.
 
Baggsy said:
I'm open to being wrong about whether you can turn left on red there, but not to making sure you do it carefully in any case.
Especially if you're heading to the Gardiner, rather than Jameson.
Click to expand...
The theory you and hedo are operating on seems reasonable. It needs to be written somewhere though to be enforceable instead of just courtesy. It may be somewhere in hta and I didnt see it.

Left to right in that distance can probably not be legally done as you need to shoot across multiple lanes at an angle. There isnt enough space to do safe lane changes.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom