This document was prepared as an internal report for circulation within the then Australian Road

Research Board and to selected stakeholders.

It may have received a level of internal review at the time of compilation but was not intended to
be an externally published document.
For historical purposes it has now been included within the ARRB Knowledge Base.
ARRB Group, 2015

/
11, U STR ALIAN R O A D R ESE A R C H

'lJ"/

--- ')v
'.

B OI-\R D

PRIO RITY OF TR AFFIC AT INTERSECTI ONS

II"'"

I:>

A.J. B.Clayton, B.Sc. ( Eng . L M.Le. E.

While further research would be useful, there is sufficient

infonnation to make some recommendations.
The "give 'way to the right" rule is basically sound and works
well enough at minor intersections.

It fails in practice to meet the

inclinations of drivers on existing main roads.

l limited

a.ccess

freeway is necessary to take heavy volumes

of traffic off congested unsuitable streets.

streets taking arterial troffic should
routes" .

Until this cq.n be done I surface

in stages, be designated "priority

For these no simple priority rule is sufficient, but intersections

should be reduced in number and the remainder be given maximum free flow'
and safety by effective trafficm anagement methods.

These -Illiould include

signs requiring side road traffic to give \l'lCly to the main road,
Changes in the meaning of the "S top" sign would be rE quired!
together with some additional signs.
In expla.ining these changes to drivers it must be made clear
that everywhere they are uhder ancibligation to. avoid the chance of collisjon ,
even

at the expeDse of losin g time.

AUSTRALIAN ROAD RESEARCH BOARD

Internal Report AIR No. 123-5
CLAYTON, A.J.H. (1971): Priority
of traffic at intersection.

1.

The increase in traffi.c fl ow and of accidents I particul arly

at intersections I in Australia I ha s led to concern as to the
efficacy of the present rules governing priority of vehicles
at intersections. The Board has been asked for recommend
ations and to undertake further research if necessary.

2.

A smal l technical committee was set up conSisting of

representatives of:Country Roads Board I Victoria (NAAS Rl\)
Road S afety and Traffic Authority (Victori.a COS TCE)
Royal Automohile Club I Victoria (AAA)
ARRB (Convenor)
The viewsof this committee and of other bodies to whom these
views have been referred I form the basis of this report.

IH E_;EXIS TING S ITUJ\TION

3.

While it is expl icit in Common Law and in traffic regul ations

that drivers shoul d exercise care at all times a rule requiring
one to give precedence to another when they are on collision
courses makes both for safety and expedition.
I

4.

Under the Austral ian C ode (Appendix A) I when two vehicles

enter an intersection from djfferent public roads I the driver
who has the other on his right must give way.
This applies
al so if either or both vehicl es are turning from one road to
This is a simple rule and requires no special signs.
another.
There are however difficul ties in its appl ication in practice.

5.

S ome speCific research projects into this questton have been

undertaken and others give information which may be relevant.
(Appendix B) .

6.

There are two aspects to be considered I traffic flow and safety.

TRAFFIC FLOW
7.

Research shows that at individual intersections the "give

way to the right" or "off side" rule gives less del ay to traffic
as a whole (and particularly to minor road traffic) than the
"give \lvay to the main road" rul e or the "give way to the near
side" rul e. The traffic capacity of the intersection. is also
I

7.

cont ...

greater,
On the other hand the delay to the few vehicles
on a minor road is not excessive under the "Main road" rule
if the traffic both ways on the' main road is not more than,
say, 1500 veh. per hour.
No data is available as to loss
of time due to vehicles slowing unnecessarily in case it may
be necessary to give way.
SAFETY
8.

A large proportion of accidents on urban roads occurs at

inters ections (about 50% but the proportion varies from city
to city) . Less than half of these, again, are of the type
preventable by a "give way" rule. This is true for U, K. where
there is no "off side" rule, as well as in Australia.
The actual
number of collisions is clearly much less than the potential
number, so the priority rule must be of some value.
The
accident study found that in many cases the speed of vehicles
approaching an intersection was excessive for visibility.

THE ROAD NETWORK

9

Traffic surveys in urJJan areas have shown that about 80%

of the traffic is to be found on about 20% of the road mileage.
If we cal l the 20% Arterial or Major Roads and the remainder
local or minor roads, we may make an arbitrary but useful
division of intersections into:-

(1)

Minor

64

(2)

Major/Minor

32

(3)

Major

1 0;

At the minor intersections the "off side" rule works quite well,
provided speeds are reasonable, as' rarely are more than two
ve hicle s involved .

11.

It is in the Class 2 that we find that the rules impose on the

driver behaviour which is contrary to his inclinations and
capabilities permit ambiguities to arise, or do not meet the
needs of the situation.
I

12.

For example: -

(a)

On major roads (both urban and rural) traffic

moves at such a speed (within the legal. limit)
that a driver cannot see a vehicle that may be
(but probably is not) there in time to give way
unless the side road vehicle emerges very slowly.

12.

1 3.

cont . ...

(b)

A main road driver need not give way if

he is shielded by a vehicle in the
opposite direction,
This involves a
rapid assessment of a complex situation
by the first driver.

( c)

The side road driver hesitates over taking

his priority ( not being sure it will be
respected.

( d)

On a road with a wide media.n ( a driver

cannot tell if a vehicle passing through
gap on hi.s right is crossing or turning.

(e)

The "Stop" sign does not (except in Tasmania)

overri.de the "off side rule" whereas the
"Give Way" does for one driver but not the .
other.

( f)

A drIver on one road does not know when

the other road has a "Stop" or "Give INay"
sign until he sees the back of it - too late.

The relatively few but important major intersections in many

cases have traffic engineering devices suited to their needs (
such as traffic signals.
Where they rely on the "off side"
rule ( it is generally respected but ambiguities arise when more
than two vehicles arrive at once and in the case of an irregular
layout.

ALTERNATIVES
14.

The main alternative which has been suggested to the "off side"
rule is the "give way to the main road" rule.
This needs a
clear indication of the main road and this ( in turn ( means
extensive sign-posting:
, ' This systm has grown up over many
years in U.K. without any previous priority rule. .A. complete
changeover at this sta ge in Austra11.a would clearly be impracticable.

IS.

The application of the main road rule to selected routes is common

overseas and as been tried in Canberra and in Western Australia.
It is worthy of serious consideration.

16.

The exclusion of turning vehicles from the priority ( as in

New Zealand ( would a void some delay at a "T" intersection but
might lead to misunderstanding at cross roads.
It could be
investigated.

17

The reversal to the European "near side" rule would have no

advantage.

RE COMMENDATIONS

18.

There should be no change in the basic "off side" rule.

19.

';r'tte a.ct th-at lthere are certain roads which are regarded as
major routes by drivers who use them should be accepted
and suitable action taken.

- "'" 20."

'After careful investigation Hre-se'Toutes should be defined

as "Priority Routes". This classification should not be on

the basis of absolute traffic flow but on relative importance
to through traffic.
The various classifications used by the
States do not in themselves appear to be suitable. Local
knowledge under central direction is required.
21.

Ideally these major routes should be limited access roads'

or freeways.
In practice most will have to b e ordinary
general purpose roads for a long- time. Minor road access
should be limited by available traffic and planning devices
such as service roads, stopping off, one way streets, and
closing gaps in the median, (but not if that would lead to
U turns).

22.

The intersections should be dealt with by recognised methods

of control including coordinated signals. The remaining
minor intersections can be provided wit'h "Give Way" or "Stop"
signs unless the traffic on the main road is too heavy (more
than, say, 1500 veh. p.h.) when signals will be necessary.

23.

Urgent consideration should be given to changing the meaning

of the "Stop" sign to "Stop and Give VIray".
It would then,
This sign
incidentally, conform with international practice.
should not then be used on two intersecting roads, but should
be reserved for blind intersections

24.

Signs should be approved to mark priority' crossings (the present

cross sign could be altered with a little paint) and priority
roads . (Appendix C).

25

Consideration should be given to the use of road miJ.rkings to"

mean "give way" (Appendix C) to minimise the use of signs
from the environmental aspect.

26.

Facilities for pedestrians should be provided on priority routes

in the form of zebras, Signals linked with other signals, islands
and overbridges as most suitable.

27.

All the above will take time as it will require skilled engineering.
In the meantime, the other two "Es", education and enforcement
will need to be in operation but, as always, engineering is the
most effective.

nJRTHER RESEARCH REQUIRED

28.

Field studies on driver behaviour in relation to speed on

approaching intersections related to traffic flow I visibility
and signs.

29.

Before and after studies of traffic times and accidents for

priority routes which have been treated as recommended above.

30.

Study of the operation of the New Zealand priority system in

practice in New Zealand.

/-\P PLNlJ1X

PART 6

I';

GIVING WP,Y

Where these R eg ulations require a driver to g ive way to a

vehicle or person, the driver shall, in circumstances where
if he proceeded there would be a reasonable possibility of
his colliding with that vehicle or person or otherwise creating
a dang erous situation, slow down to such an extent, or stop
and remain stationary for such time as is necessary to all ow
that vehicle or person to continue on its or his course without
risk of collision or as is necessary to avoid creating a dangerous
situation.

603.

604.

(1)

A driver approaching or passing through an intersection

shall exercise special care and where appropriate shall
drive at a reduced sped.

(2)

Except as provided in Reg ulations 402 (9) and 603, a

driver of a vehicle which has entered or is approaching
an intersection from one carriageway shall give way to
any vehicle which is on his right and has entered or is
approaching the intersection from another carri.ageway.

Giving Way During Turns

(1)

Subject to the provisions of Reg ulations 402 (9) and 608,

a driver who intends to turn, is turning or has turned to
the right at an intersection shall g ive way to any vehicle
which has entered or is approaching the intersection from
the opposite direction.

(2)

A driver turning to the right or left at an intersection

shall g ive way to all pedestrians.

(3)

A driver making a U Turn shall g ive way to all other

vehicles and to all pedestrians.

(4)

Except as otherwise provided in this regulation, the

provisions of Regulation 602 shall apply to turning vehicles.

Movements to or from Parked Positton

(1)

A driver who is about to drive or is driving a vehicle

into or out from a Park ing Area or the boundary of a
carriag eway shall g i.ve way to all other vehicles.

604.
(2)

A driver shall not drive a vehicle in reverse

out of a Parking Area established across the centre
- of a carriageway,'," --

605.

, ..

...

Agtion on Approach of Emergency Vehicles

A driver shall give way and make every reasonable effort to
give a clear and uni.nterrupted passage to every emergency
vehicle sounding a siren or a bell.

606.

Entering or Leavi ng a Road

A driver -

607.

(a)

entering a road from land abutting on the

road I except pursuant to an instruction of
a traffic control signal; or

(b)

leaving a road to enter land abutting on the

road - shall give way to all vehicles and
pedestrians travelling in either direction
along the road.

NLE.!lt!:Y...o
.t Choked Intersections
(1)'

A driver shall not enter upon or attempt to cross an

intersection if the intersection or the carriageway
that the driver wishes to enter is blocked by vehicles.

(2)

This Regulation applies to all intetsections I including

an intersection at which a traffic-control signal displays
an instruction to the driver that he may proceed.

The driver of a vehicle entering a roundabout shall give way

to any ' vehicle which is within the roundabout.

RECENT RELEVANT BESEARCH SPONSORED BY ARRB

1.

Cameron, C., "The Determination of Priorities at Controlled

and Uncontrolled Intersections - Ri.ght of Way", Australian Road
Research, Vol. 3, No. 6, pp. 38-41.

2.

Foldvary, L.A. "Priority Rules at Intersections: Their l'.dvantages

and Disadvantages, "Australian Road Research, Vol. 4, No.1,
pp. 3-21. (Note this is a condensation of a paper by Dr.Foldvary
entitled "Appraisal of the Australian Off-Side Priority Eule",
published in the July 1969 issue of "Aile et Route" ( Br sseJ.s) .)

3.

Forwood, A. V., and Pretty, R.L. "A Comparison of Right of Way

Rules at Intersections", Proc. 4th Conference ARRB Vol. 4,
Part 1, 1968.

4.

McGill,oW., "Population Expectancies and Traffic System Design",

Australian Road Research, Vol. 2, No.7, pp. 19-42.

5.

McGi.ll, W., "Right of Way - Some Preliminary Investigations",

Australian Road Research, Vol. 3, No. 7, pp. 25-38.

6.

Robertson, J.S" McLean, A.J., and Ryan, G.A. II Traffic

Accidents in Adelaide", ARRB Special Report No. I, 1966.

7.

Wooller, J. "Road Traffic Accidents in Adelaide and Brisbane"

Proc. 4th ConL ARRB. Vol. 4/ Part I, 1968

8.

Jamieson, K. G., Duggon , A. V\1., Tweddell, J., and Pope, 1. I. I

and Zviqulis, V.E., "Traffic Crashes in Brisbane, ARRB Special
Report No. 2, Feb. 1971.

APPENDIX

P tV 9 ())- (l-( -* I Iv I ui\-- D

"

P I \ [) j),.fl I

....
"