View Single Post
Old 02-01-16, 06:17 PM
  #86  
mr_bill
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 4,530
Mentioned: 34 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2112 Post(s)
Liked 663 Times in 443 Posts
Originally Posted by CliffordK
That is odd.... But, I think you're right.

So, there really wouldn't be a true "yield". Rather just go straight ahead balls-out, then cut over when convenient. Is it mislabelled? I assume there isn't a merge sign, just yield signs.

There are a few places that those +1 lanes are very nice.

One could extend the bike lane on both sides of the +1 lane for a short distance to give the cyclist more crossing choices, although I think cutting across as quickly as possible in a fixed location is better.
There is an "added lane sign" - MUTCD W4-3.

This intersection is clearly just so WAY too confusing so it's *COMPLETELY* understandable that a motorist couldn't figure out how to successfully navigate it - it's the CONFUSING INTERSECTION'S FAULT.

-mr. bill
mr_bill is offline