New South Wales, U-Turns at signallised intersections.

[Ext User(John Tserkezis)]

To quell an argument (ahem, discussion) I'm having with some associates, I
would like to know if anyone knows of any real legally valid documents that
state that U-Turns are allowed at signalised intersections within New South Wales.


So far, I'm aware of the Australian Road Rules (which the RTA has adopted)
(http://www.rta.nsw.gov.au/rulesregulations/downloads/roadraustr_dl1.html)
Individual chapters, or, the entire kit and caboodle can be downloaded here.

...which state that they ARE allowed where signed so, however, there is an
RTA Technical Directive (99/23) that upheld the old existing no U-Turn at
signalised intersections past their adoption of the ARR.

(http://www.rta.nsw.gov.au/doingbusinesswithus/guidelines/documentregister/tdlist92to2000.html)
Shows the list, and 99/23 was introduced in October 1999, and not marked as
superseded (yet?). There is a link at the bottom to the PDF document if you like.

At this stage, I'm completely convinced (with documents to show it) that I'm
right, and everyone else is wrong (with nothing more than anecdotal evidence).
My mates are still not convinced of the errors of their ways, and appear to
still need some more "encouragement".


Now, before you try (because all my associates already have), I *DON'T* want
to know about your cousins next door neighbour who used to know a guy who's ex
girlfriend said she had passed a "U-Turn allowed" at some light intersection
sign somewhere up north, a bit up the no-mans road of where that old gum tree
with the initials "CS" carved in it used to be.
No, that's not going to work for me.

Also, I'm not interested in how one council in the middle of nowhere has
gone contrary to RTA rulings and posted up their own signs. I am well aware
this DOES happen, but I'm not interested in what one hick town does to make up
it's own rules:

I want legally enforceable documents. Or something from the RTA at least...
--
Linux Registered User # 302622
<http://counter.li.org>

[Ext User(Just JT)]

"John Tserkezis" <jt@techniciansyndrome.org.invalid> wrote:
> To quell an argument (ahem, discussion) I'm having with some associates,
> I would like to know if anyone knows of any real legally valid documents
> that state that U-Turns are allowed at signalised intersections within New
> South Wales.
>
~~~~~~~~~~~~
According to the RTA Road User's Handbook published in October 1987:

U-TURNS

Take extra care when making U-turns as they can be dangerous. U-turns cannot
be made:
....

- At traffic lights unless you see a U-TURN PERMITTED sign at the
intersection.


http://www.rta.nsw.gov.au/licensing/downloads/2007_10ruh_english.pdf

This is pretty common sense. In NSW, a right-turn arrow is concurrent with a
left-turn arrow from the perpendicular road. A U-turn in this situation
could potentially cause a collision.

--
Don't.do.it.unless.a.sign.permits.you.

[Ext User(the_dawggie)]

On Mar 12, 10:51 am, "Just JT" <Johnnyt...@Hotmale.com> wrote:
> "John Tserkezis" <j...@techniciansyndrome.org.invalid> wrote:
> > To quell an argument (ahem, discussion) I'm having with some associates,
> > I would like to know if anyone knows of any real legally valid documents
> > that state that U-Turns are allowed at signalised intersections within New
> > South Wales.
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~
> According to the RTA Road User's Handbook published in October 1987:
>
> U-TURNS
>
> Take extra care when making U-turns as they can be dangerous. U-turns cannot
> be made:
> ...
>
> - At traffic lights unless you see a U-TURN PERMITTED sign at the
> intersection.
>
> http://www.rta.nsw.gov.au/licensing/downloads/2007_10ruh_english.pdf
>
> This is pretty common sense. In NSW, a right-turn arrow is concurrent with a
> left-turn arrow from the perpendicular road. A U-turn in this situation
> could potentially cause a collision.
>
> --
> Don't.do.it.unless.a.sign.permits.you.


Correct. NSW has no such signs. QLD does. So, the picture still
conforms to the ARRs.

In short, in NSW - nope, can't legally do anywhere - the signs
don't exist in NSW.

[Ext User(Mot Adv)]

"John Tserkezis" <jt@techniciansyndrome.org.invalid> wrote in message
news:47d71531$0$6277$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au ...
> To quell an argument (ahem, discussion) I'm having with some associates,
> I would like to know if anyone knows of any real legally valid documents
> that state that U-Turns are allowed at signalised intersections within New
> South Wales.
Feb 2008 Edition of the Australian Road Rules:-
40 - Making a U-turn at an intersection with traffic

lights

A driver must not make a U-turn at an intersection with

traffic lights unless there is a U-turn permitted sign at the

intersection.

Offence provision.

Note Intersection and traffic lights are defined in the dictionary.


> So far, I'm aware of the Australian Road Rules (which the RTA has
> adopted)
> (http://www.rta.nsw.gov.au/rulesregulations/downloads/roadraustr_dl1.html)
> Individual chapters, or, the entire kit and caboodle can be downloaded
> here.
This one:-
http://www.rta.nsw.gov.au/trafficinformation/downloads/99_23.pdf


> ...which state that they ARE allowed where signed so, however, there is
> an RTA Technical Directive (99/23) that upheld the old existing no U-Turn
> at signalised intersections past their adoption of the ARR.

You *can* do a U-Turn at traffic lights IF a "U-Turn Permitted" sign is
fixed.

Now owing the Technical Direction, *which is still in force* as at Feb
2008 - NSW opts-out of the ARR allowance at Rule 40 (Feb 2008) by simply not
using the sign. IF you have an example of a 'hick' council that has
installed a 'U-Turn Permitted' sign, then RTA want to know about it. Speak
to Bob O'Keefe below.

So, the answer *at law* is yes, BUT at RTA Policy level 'NO' (safety
concerns as to what 'standards' dictate safe environmental placement of
such).

You need to speak with Bob O'Keefe; (02) 9218 6287.


> (http://www.rta.nsw.gov.au/doingbusinesswithus/guidelines/documentregister/tdlist92to2000.html)
> Shows the list, and 99/23 was introduced in October 1999, and not marked
> as superseded (yet?). There is a link at the bottom to the PDF document
> if you like.
Per above, the Technical Directive is STILL IN FORCE. The signs are not to
be used on NSW roads.

JP

[Ext User(Theo Bekkers)]

Mot Adv wrote:

> You *can* do a U-Turn at traffic lights IF a "U-Turn Permitted" sign
> is fixed.
>
> Now owing the Technical Direction, *which is still in force* as at Feb
> 2008 - NSW opts-out of the ARR allowance at Rule 40 (Feb 2008) by
> simply not using the sign. IF you have an example of a 'hick'
> council that has installed a 'U-Turn Permitted' sign, then RTA want
> to know about it. Speak to Bob O'Keefe below.
>
> So, the answer *at law* is yes, BUT at RTA Policy level 'NO' (safety
> concerns as to what 'standards' dictate safe environmental placement
> of such).

> Per above, the Technical Directive is STILL IN FORCE. The signs are
> not to be used on NSW roads.

Same in WA. No such signs.

Theo

[Ext User(Nev..)]

Just JT wrote:

> This is pretty common sense. In NSW, a right-turn arrow is concurrent
> with a left-turn arrow from the perpendicular road. A U-turn in this
> situation could potentially cause a collision.

LOL. The RTA must think drivers in NSW are absolute dumb shits... but I
suppose they must have some historical basis for that.

Nev..
'07 XB12X

[Ext User(George W Frost)]

"Nev.." <idiot@mindless.com> wrote in message
news:47d72a1b$0$19206$5a62ac22@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...
> Just JT wrote:
>
>> This is pretty common sense. In NSW, a right-turn arrow is concurrent with a
>> left-turn arrow from the perpendicular road. A U-turn in this situation could
>> potentially cause a collision.
>
> LOL. The RTA must think drivers in NSW are absolute dumb shits... but I suppose
> they must have some historical basis for that.
>
> Nev..
> '07 XB12X

Very true Nev. New South Walians have always been the absolute dumbshit drivers ever
since driving was invented

[Ext User(John Hudson)]

"Mot Adv" <mot.adv@internode.on.net> wrote in message
news:13te9jv7q579a4@corp.supernews.com...
> Per above, the Technical Directive is STILL IN FORCE. The signs are not
> to be used on NSW roads.
>
> JP

What a bunch of dickheads, they work fine in Qld. The sign is generally used
on multi lane roads where there is a right turn arrow, so safety is not a
concern. There's an intersection near me where the speed limit is 80 and U
turns are permitted at the lights.
huddo

[Ext User(E. Newnes)]

On Wed, 12 Mar 2008 02:46:30 GMT, "John Hudson" <huddo@bigpond.net.au>
wrote:

>
>"Mot Adv" <mot.adv@internode.on.net> wrote in message
>news:13te9jv7q579a4@corp.supernews.com...
>> Per above, the Technical Directive is STILL IN FORCE. The signs are not
>> to be used on NSW roads.
>>
>> JP
>
>What a bunch of dickheads, they work fine in Qld. The sign is generally used
>on multi lane roads where there is a right turn arrow, so safety is not a
>concern. There's an intersection near me where the speed limit is 80 and U
>turns are permitted at the lights.
>huddo
>

Yep, the cockroaches are under the management of a bunch of dickheads.
U-turns at signals work well, are safe and help to manage congestion.

[Ext User(Yeebers)]

That makes the "No U Turn" at the lights near Rock's in town a bit of an
oxymoron then.

Working on logic I do u turns if I need to and there's no sign saying
its disallowed - assuming that 'no' signs were only posted where
required .. which appears wrong now.

E. Newnes wrote:
> On Wed, 12 Mar 2008 02:46:30 GMT, "John Hudson" <huddo@bigpond.net.au>
> wrote:
>
>> "Mot Adv" <mot.adv@internode.on.net> wrote in message
>> news:13te9jv7q579a4@corp.supernews.com...
>>> Per above, the Technical Directive is STILL IN FORCE. The signs are not
>>> to be used on NSW roads.
>>>
>>> JP
>> What a bunch of dickheads, they work fine in Qld. The sign is generally used
>> on multi lane roads where there is a right turn arrow, so safety is not a
>> concern. There's an intersection near me where the speed limit is 80 and U
>> turns are permitted at the lights.
>> huddo
>>
>
> Yep, the cockroaches are under the management of a bunch of dickheads.
> U-turns at signals work well, are safe and help to manage congestion.
>

[Ext User(Mot Adv)]

"Yeebers" <Yeeb@yeeb.yeeb> wrote in message
news:47d76b2f@news.comindico.com.au...
> That makes the "No U Turn" at the lights near Rock's in town a bit of an
> oxymoron then.
Yes, take is as an additional reminder. In time the sign would be removed
or not replaced if destroyed.


> Working on logic I do u turns if I need to and there's no sign saying its
> disallowed - assuming that 'no' signs were only posted where required ..
> which appears wrong now.

To do a U-Turn at traffic lights in NSW, you need to see a "U-Turn
permitted" sign. Naturally, NSW does not use them.

J.

[Ext User(Yeebers)]

Those lights were installed in the last few months, at most a year ago.

Mot Adv wrote:
> "Yeebers" <Yeeb@yeeb.yeeb> wrote in message
> news:47d76b2f@news.comindico.com.au...
>> That makes the "No U Turn" at the lights near Rock's in town a bit of an
>> oxymoron then.
> Yes, take is as an additional reminder. In time the sign would be removed
> or not replaced if destroyed.
>
>
>> Working on logic I do u turns if I need to and there's no sign saying its
>> disallowed - assuming that 'no' signs were only posted where required ..
>> which appears wrong now.
>
> To do a U-Turn at traffic lights in NSW, you need to see a "U-Turn
> permitted" sign. Naturally, NSW does not use them.
>
> J.
>
>
>

[Ext User(John Tserkezis)]

Mot Adv wrote:

> Feb 2008 Edition of the Australian Road Rules:-

The download at the relevant area on the RTA site is October 1999.

Is there a later version? Or was that when you last downloaded it?

> Now owing the Technical Direction, *which is still in force* as at Feb
> 2008 - NSW opts-out of the ARR allowance at Rule 40 (Feb 2008) by simply not
> using the sign.

Good, that was my impression as well.

> IF you have an example of a 'hick' council that has
> installed a 'U-Turn Permitted' sign, then RTA want to know about it. Speak
> to Bob O'Keefe below.

Thanks, I'll do that. So far though, is that EVERY time I've asked for an
exact location, or nearest cross street, or basically any street, I get (as
per usual) nothing. Though so far, it makes three unconfirmed accounts (that
I know about) for allowed U-Turns within NSW.
I'll push them harder for locations.

> So, the answer *at law* is yes, BUT at RTA Policy level 'NO' (safety
> concerns as to what 'standards' dictate safe environmental placement of
> such).

Purely out of interest, if it's allowed by law, but not by mere RTA policy,
why are people getting booked for even *thinking* about doing a U-Turn at lights?
Or does an RTA policy over-ride the law?

> You need to speak with Bob O'Keefe; (02) 9218 6287.

Noted, thanks.
--
Linux Registered User # 302622
<http://counter.li.org>

[Ext User(Mot Adv)]

"John Tserkezis"
>> So, the answer *at law* is yes, BUT at RTA Policy level 'NO' (safety
>> concerns as to what 'standards' dictate safe environmental placement of
>> such).

> Purely out of interest, if it's allowed by law, but not by mere RTA
> policy, why are people getting booked for even *thinking* about doing a
> U-Turn at lights?

> Or does an RTA policy over-ride the law?
The law only allows the U-Turn IF a sign is posted permitting it so.
Without the sign, the law is unusable by the public.

J.

[Ext User(G-S)]

Theo Bekkers wrote:
>
> Same in WA. No such signs.
>
> Theo
>
>

Victoria has "U Turn Permitted - U turn must give way" signs at some
traffic light intersections.

The one at the intersection of the Calder Highway and Lockwood road is
an example.



G-S

[Ext User(John Tserkezis)]

Mot Adv wrote:

>> Purely out of interest, if it's allowed by law, but not by mere RTA
>> policy, why are people getting booked for even *thinking* about doing a
>> U-Turn at lights?
>> Or does an RTA policy over-ride the law?

> The law only allows the U-Turn IF a sign is posted permitting it so.
> Without the sign, the law is unusable by the public.

But that's a reverse-catch-22 isn't it? A U-Turn will NEVER be allowed,
because the sign that specifically allows it, is never allowed to be shown in
the first place.

What's the difference with simply saying that U-Turns aren't allowed at all?
Because there should never be a condition where the allowance sign will ever
be shown.
--
Linux Registered User # 302622
<http://counter.li.org>

[Ext User(Just JT)]

"John Tserkezis" <jt@techniciansyndrome.org.invalid> wrote:
> Mot Adv wrote:
>
>>> Purely out of interest, if it's allowed by law, but not by mere RTA
>>> policy, why are people getting booked for even *thinking* about doing a
>>> U-Turn at lights?
>>> Or does an RTA policy over-ride the law?
>
>> The law only allows the U-Turn IF a sign is posted permitting it so.
>> Without the sign, the law is unusable by the public.
>
> But that's a reverse-catch-22 isn't it? A U-Turn will NEVER be allowed,
> because the sign that specifically allows it, is never allowed to be shown
> in the first place.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Goodness you're a pedantic dork. Just pay off the bet: YOU LOST AND COP IT
LIKE A MAN!!!

--
Your.question.has.been.answered.so.shut.up.and.mov e.on.arsehole!

[Ext User(F Murtz)]

John Tserkezis wrote:
> Mot Adv wrote:
>
>>> Purely out of interest, if it's allowed by law, but not by mere RTA
>>> policy, why are people getting booked for even *thinking* about doing
>>> a U-Turn at lights?
>>> Or does an RTA policy over-ride the law?
>
>> The law only allows the U-Turn IF a sign is posted permitting it so.
>> Without the sign, the law is unusable by the public.
>
> But that's a reverse-catch-22 isn't it? A U-Turn will NEVER be
> allowed, because the sign that specifically allows it, is never allowed
> to be shown in the first place.
>
> What's the difference with simply saying that U-Turns aren't allowed at
> all?
> Because there should never be a condition where the allowance sign will
> ever be shown.
Because the rule is australia wide and some states allow it

[Ext User(the_dawggie)]

On Mar 12, 10:23 pm, John Tserkezis
<j...@techniciansyndrome.org.invalid> wrote:
> Mot Adv wrote:
> >> Purely out of interest, if it's allowed by law, but not by mere RTA
> >> policy, why are people getting booked for even *thinking* about doing a
> >> U-Turn at lights?
> >> Or does an RTA policy over-ride the law?
> > The law only allows the U-Turn IF a sign is posted permitting it so.
> > Without the sign, the law is unusable by the public.
>
> But that's a reverse-catch-22 isn't it? A U-Turn will NEVER be allowed,
> because the sign that specifically allows it, is never allowed to be shown in
> the first place.
>
> What's the difference with simply saying that U-Turns aren't allowed at all?
> Because there should never be a condition where the allowance sign will ever
> be shown.
> --
> Linux Registered User # 302622
> <http://counter.li.org>

Nope - there is a single ARR, just like ADR that all states
must keep to. NSW has a problem with installing those
signs. They also have an increasing problem with removing
LTOR signs (I wanted one t'other side of intersectection
and they were all like "WTF is that there?!?! so it was
removed". So now the intersection has no LTOR signs.

The NSW RTA you really have to watch. Athol and Mot
AdV will tell you that.

Conforming to ARRs is not quite what you would think.

[Ext User(John Tserkezis)]

the_dawggie wrote:

> Conforming to ARRs is not quite what you would think.

You're not wrong. It's more than just being a vague document that could be
interpreted in several ways, it's a right dog's breakfast.
--
Linux Registered User # 302622
<http://counter.li.org>