Who gives way first?

[tom66]

A debate on a UK driving subreddit is still unresolved, so I'm curious if any highways engineers (or other knowledgeable folk) know the answer.

If you are on the A10 here and you want to turn right onto Humphries Way, but another car is sitting at its give way line with its right signal on waiting to move into the turn box, do you:

(a) give way to the turning vehicle on the minor road, so allow them to cross into the turn box when they have an opportunity
(b) assume priority and cross the opposing lane when clear, and then the car in the minor road moves into the turn box afterwards?

My interpretation:
The give way line for traffic turning off the A10 is a reminder that you need to give way to traffic approaching the turn box (so if a car had started crossing but you were still approaching you'd need to let them continue), but in itself it has no other meaning. Because you need to give way to traffic down the main line of the A10 when turning right anyway. Otherwise you're going to collide at 50 mph. Therefore, if you are turning right from the A10, you go before the other car turning onto the A10.

However this has lit up some debate and it seems about 70% of people think the other situation is the case; the vehicle turning right onto the A10 assumes priority over the car waiting to turn onto the minor road.

To me this is covered in Highway Code Rule 172:

The approach to a junction may have a 'Give Way' sign or a triangle marked on the road. You MUST give way to traffic on the main road when emerging from a junction with broken white lines across the road.

and indeed if you were at a turn box which did not have a give way marking painted (i.e. most of them) then you would assume priority over traffic waiting to turn onto said road. However, does painting the additional give way line and triangle here change the situation? I also find it interesting that the definition of 'minor road' is not clarified in the cited legislation. Are drivers supposed to intuit this? If such a junction with two A roads met (admittedly unlikely!) then would there be a differing interpretation?

What is perfectly clear to me is this is a horrible botch of a junction if people can't agree on a consistent interpretation.

[wallmeerkat]

Reminds me a bit of this junction - https://www.google.com/maps/place/52%C2 ... ?entry=ttu - at a shopping centre on the outskirts of Belfast

In practice it's a bit of a free for all, drivers seem to sort it out among themselves.

Theres also this junction on the other side of the city - https://www.google.com/maps/place/52%C2 ... ?entry=ttu

If traffic from the left is turning right, and traffic from the right is turning left, who goes first? Again in practice motorists seem to work it among themselves almost merge-in-turn like.

[Glen]

This is a fairly common layout in a central reservation, so traffic turning right into to side road has to give way to traffic emerging right from the side road.

It gives traffic emerging from the side road more opportunities to cross into the central reservation, which could otherwise have a long wait to do so.

In the context of the Highway Code, the main road is the one with priority over the side road which is marked to give way, classification of the roads is irrelevant.

[WhiteBlueRed]

If traffic from the left is turning right, and traffic from the right is turning left, who goes first?

I would think that the left turners should go first. Like at a regular priority junction, when both cars have a Give Way line, when one wants to turn right, and the other wants to turn left.

[jgharston]

If traffic from the left is turning right, and traffic from the right is turning left, who goes first?

I would think that the left turners should go first. Like at a regular priority junction, when both cars have a Give Way line, when one wants to turn right, and the other wants to turn left.

I'd agree with that. Right turners are "trespassing" on the wrong side of the road to enter the road, left turners are not, left turners have priority.

[Bomag]

A debate on a UK driving subreddit is still unresolved, so I'm curious if any highways engineers (or other knowledgeable folk) know the answer.

If you are on the A10 here and you want to turn right onto Humphries Way, but another car is sitting at its give way line with its right signal on waiting to move into the turn box, do you:

(a) give way to the turning vehicle on the minor road, so allow them to cross into the turn box when they have an opportunity
(b) assume priority and cross the opposing lane when clear, and then the car in the minor road moves into the turn box afterwards?

My interpretation:
The give way line for traffic turning off the A10 is a reminder that you need to give way to traffic approaching the turn box (so if a car had started crossing but you were still approaching you'd need to let them continue), but in itself it has no other meaning. Because you need to give way to traffic down the main line of the A10 when turning right anyway. Otherwise you're going to collide at 50 mph. Therefore, if you are turning right from the A10, you go before the other car turning onto the A10.

However this has lit up some debate and it seems about 70% of people think the other situation is the case; the vehicle turning right onto the A10 assumes priority over the car waiting to turn onto the minor road.

To me this is covered in Highway Code Rule 172:

The approach to a junction may have a 'Give Way' sign or a triangle marked on the road. You MUST give way to traffic on the main road when emerging from a junction with broken white lines across the road.

and indeed if you were at a turn box which did not have a give way marking painted (i.e. most of them) then you would assume priority over traffic waiting to turn onto said road. However, does painting the additional give way line and triangle here change the situation? I also find it interesting that the definition of 'minor road' is not clarified in the cited legislation. Are drivers supposed to intuit this? If such a junction with two A roads met (admittedly unlikely!) then would there be a differing interpretation?

What is perfectly clear to me is this is a horrible botch of a junction if people can't agree on a consistent interpretation.

None of the give way markings look to still be a lawful contiguous marking do the discussion is a bit redundant.

[tom66]

If traffic from the left is turning right, and traffic from the right is turning left, who goes first? Again in practice motorists seem to work it among themselves almost merge-in-turn like.

When you say "traffic from the left" are you speaking of the A10? (as in, to the left of the motorist waiting on the minor road)

[pjr10th]

This marking is recommended for D1 roads by the Traffic Signs Manual Chapter 5: 5.5.2. 'where there is likely to be driver confusion over priority within the central reservation opening'. To me, this would indicate that the rules are not changed. However, based on the markings, I would say that you may proceed into the reservation opening if there is no-one in the gap already, otherwise you should wait your turn in the right-turn lane. If someone approaches to your right, you should let them go into the central reservation first.

[jervi]

My take on it is that no one has explicit priority, like if two people are turning right on the minor roads of a crossroads.

It depends on where traffic is queueing on who should give way, for example if there is evidently a 5 car queue waiting to turn right into the side road, and 1 car turning right from the side road, then the side with more vehicles should go first, but that all require some driver commination which some people seem to lack.

If it comes to choosing 1 side over another, I'd say those turning right into the side road goes first, although I'd understand why people may think the otherway around.

[wallmeerkat]

If traffic from the left is turning right, and traffic from the right is turning left, who goes first? Again in practice motorists seem to work it among themselves almost merge-in-turn like.

When you say "traffic from the left" are you speaking of the A10? (as in, to the left of the motorist waiting on the minor road)

I'm speaking of the example I gave

Theres also this junction on the other side of the city - https://www.google.com/maps/place/52%C2 ... ?entry=ttu

It's a bit of a gyratory, but the situation where both give ways may want onto the southbound road.

[Chris5156]

If traffic from the left is turning right, and traffic from the right is turning left, who goes first? Again in practice motorists seem to work it among themselves almost merge-in-turn like.

When you say "traffic from the left" are you speaking of the A10? (as in, to the left of the motorist waiting on the minor road)

I'm speaking of the example I gave

Well yes, but in that example, whose left are we talking about? Do you mean left and right as you look at the aerial photograph?

[AndyB]

As far as I’m concerned, the “major road” is those turning right from the side road. It’s to give them a clear run to get to the central reservation gap before they have to give way to traffic coming from the left.

WMK, do you mean this junction? The link just took me back to the A10. The same “give way to traffic crossing your path from the right” markings are used at the gaps between Antrim and Ballymena on the A26.

[tom66]

As far as I’m concerned, the “major road” is those turning right from the side road. It’s to give them a clear run to get to the central reservation gap before they have to give way to traffic coming from the left.

I feel this is inconsistent though: Humphries Way is a small residential road. The A10 is a single carriageway road linking Cambridge and Ely with significant volumes of traffic. If the logic is that the residential road has to be treated as "major" and the A10 as "minor" then the rules should be rewritten to clarify this because it is not at all obvious why you'd assume such a thing.

[AndyB]

Well, logically, why else would you have to give way before the turning point?

[tom66]

Well, logically, why else would you have to give way before the turning point?

Of course... but the question isn't whether you'd have to give way for traffic on the oncoming main line (that's not in dispute), but whether you are to assume priority (who goes first) over the traffic on the turning side road or not.

My position is if you are waiting to turn right off the A10 onto Humphries you give way only to oncoming A10 traffic*, and traffic waiting on the minor road has to give way to you. In other words, the give way signage is just a reminder, it doesn't change your legal responsibilities. This aligns with HC rule 172 and, as pjr10th mentions, the design in 5.5.2 seems to suggest the priority is not changed from a regular right turn from a major to minor road.

That seems to be contentious - but I'm trying to understand what the legal requirements of this junction were - let's say a serious accident happened here resulting in a fatality - would the party turning right off the A10 be at fault? (let's presume that dangerous/careless driving is not at question here, just an ordinary accident)

*The only exception would be if a car was immediately passing in front of you - in other words, they arrived at the Humphries give way before you did and started to cross the carriageway, so you must give way to avoid a collision. Or if their vehicle is too large to otherwise give you space to complete your turn.

[AndyB]

Yes, but the placement of the double give way means that you’re required to give way before you give way to oncoming traffic at the single give way line.

The wording in TSRGD is this (Schedule 9 Part 7):

3. Subject to paragraph 4, the requirements conveyed to vehicular traffic on roads by a give way sign are that no vehicle is to cross the transverse line provided for at item 3 of the sign table in Part 6 of this Schedule nearer to the major road at the side of which that line is placed, or if that line is not clearly visible, enter that major road, so as to be likely to endanger any person, or to cause the driver of another vehicle to change its speed or course in order to avoid an accident.

Placing the give way line there makes turning right out of the side road the people on the major road. The fact that less than a metre later you have to give way to opposing traffic isn’t the point - you deal with the first marking you come to, and you can’t cross that Give Way line unless you are sure that nothing is crossing your path in either direction.

[tom66]

Yes, but the placement of the double give way means that you’re required to give way before you give way to oncoming traffic at the single give way line.

The wording in TSRGD is this (Schedule 9 Part 7):

3. Subject to paragraph 4, the requirements conveyed to vehicular traffic on roads by a give way sign are that no vehicle is to cross the transverse line provided for at item 3 of the sign table in Part 6 of this Schedule nearer to the major road at the side of which that line is placed, or if that line is not clearly visible, enter that major road, so as to be likely to endanger any person, or to cause the driver of another vehicle to change its speed or course in order to avoid an accident.

Placing the give way line there makes turning right out of the side road the people on the major road. The fact that less than a metre later you have to give way to opposing traffic isn’t the point - you deal with the first marking you come to, and you can’t cross that Give Way line unless you are sure that nothing is crossing your path in either direction.

Thanks for quoting the legislation. The problem I have though is I don't think that clarifies the matter, because traffic at Humphries has to wait at its own give way line. If traffic from Humphries has started moving as you approached, yes, you will need to give way, that much is clear, but if they are waiting for a gap, and you arrive while they are waiting, then a gap opens up, who goes first? Is this matter clarified at all in the legislation?

[AndyB]

Doesn’t really need to be. Let’s suppose the main road is going A to B and the side road goes to C.

Someone wants to go from A to C and gets to the junction. Cars are going from B to A, so there’s nothing to give way to but you can’t clear the junction as a whole so wait at the double give way line.

Car going from C to B reaches the junction. Once traffic from B to A clears, all things being equal they have priority over the car going to A to C - but I’m canny enough to make sure the car from A to C is giving way that before I pull into their path, and besides someone quick off the mark might be able to legitimately and safely make the right turn towards C before it’s safe for the car coming from C to cross their Give Way line.

[FosseWay]

My take on the OP (the A10 junction) is that the road markings are explicitly intended to tell traffic on the A10 that wants to turn right that it must give way to traffic turning right out of the side road. Normally, where right turners are only expected to give way to oncoming traffic on their own road, there isn't a Give Way sign or triangle on the tarmac, since we presume we need to give way in this scenario.

Whether this is sensible, I can't decide. On the one hand, it may give traffic emerging from the side road a better crack at getting out than making it wait till all lanes on both sides of the A10 are completely free. On the other hand, right turners on the A10 may be dissuaded from turning by the presence of vehicles wanting to use the priority that the Give Way sign offers, but which don't do so because they can see that there is traffic approaching on the mainline from behind the right turner that they would conflict with if they executed the entire manoeuvre. The problem here is: if I'm turning right off the A10, do I wait because it's the other turner's priority, even if they're not making use of it, or do I go because they're not and/or I can see that traffic from behind means they can't complete the turn, only to find that they choose to go halfway (which is entirely legal AFAICS)?

Basically having a Give Way there is a bit non-standard. If there's a good, thought-through reason for it and it works, fair enough. But deviations from standard also tend to introduce uncertainty and raise questions, so as a starting point I'd personally prefer to go with the normal state of affairs at T-junctions - namely, that traffic emerging from the minor road must ensure it doesn't get in the way of *any* traffic on the mainline.

One thing, though - if the priorities as currently marked are to be retained, that road paint needs redoing pronto. It irks me that road markings are left to become borderline illegible in cases where they are important for determining priority or restrictions.

[Chris5156]

Having looked at this, my impression as a driver is the same as Andy's - the road markings are trying to tell me that right turning traffic from the A10 should give way to right turning traffic joining the A10. Whether that is the intention of the markings I don't know, but that is how I would read them.

The issue here is not about whether either right turn movement would give way to westbound traffic staying on the A10 - that has priority over both and is not in question. The issue is around who takes priority in the triangle of roadway I have marked in red here, which is used only by right turners coming off the A10 and right turners onto the A10. It is this small triangle of roadway where those two flows are in conflict.

If there were no markings at all, the general rules described above would apply: traffic on the main road takes priority, therefore traffic turning right from the A10 into Humphries Way gets to turn first, and traffic emerging from Humphries Way must give way to all other vehicles.

However, the markings that have been painted require right turning traffic from the A10 to give way before the Red Triangle Of Uncertainty. To my eyes that is saying that you not only give way to traffic coming the other way along the A10, you also give way to other vehicles in that triangle. The only other vehicles in that triangle are those turning right out of Humphries Way, therefore it looks to me like a reasonable attempt to give right turning traffic out of Humphries Way a better shot at joining the A10.

If that was not the intention - if priority over the Red Triangle Of Uncertainty actually belongs to right turning traffic from the A10, as per the usual rules - then I would expect to see a marking like this, which unambiguously tells right turners from the A10 that they proceed unhindered until the point where they have to give way to oncoming vehicles on the A10; and which unambiguously tells right turners coming out of Humphries Way that they can only cross into the central reservation when there is nobody waiting to turn right across their path.

Again, I don't know if that is the intention of the markings, but that's the message it conveys to me.

Incidentally this junction is far from unique and all those marked out in this fashion are at least somewhat ambiguous. There must be a better way of doing it.