http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov 

FHWA Safety Program 

PROVEN SAFETY COUNTERMEASURE: 

Reduced Left-Turn 

Conflict Intersections 
NOTICE 

This document is disseminated under the sponsorship of the U.S. 

Department of Transportation in the interest of information exchange. 

The U.S. Government assumes no liability for the use of the 

information contained in this document. 

The U.S. Government does not endorse products or manufacturers. 

Trademarks or manufacturers’ names appear in this report only 

because they are considered essential to the objective of the document. 

QUALITY ASSURANCE STATEMENT 

The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) provides high-quality 

information to serve Government, industry, and the public in a manner 

that promotes public understanding. Standards and policies are used to 

ensure and maximize the quality, objectivity, utility, and integrity of its 

information. FHWA periodically reviews quality issues and adjusts its 

programs and processes to ensure continuous quality improvement. 

Cover photo sources: Lef - Bolton & Menk, Inc., Top right - FHWA, Right bottom - FHWA 
Source: Bolton & Menk, Inc.

1

What is it?

Generally, reduced left-turn conflict intersections are geometric designs that lessen the number or 

severity of potential vehicle-to-vehicle conflicts associated with left-turn movements. Two of these 

highly effective intersection designs are included in this FHWA Proven Safety Countermeasure—the 

restricted crossing U-turn (RCUT) and the median U-turn (MUT). In addition to modifying conflict 

points, these designs simplify driver decisions, reduce intersection congestion and delay, and 

minimize the potential for related crashes. For the RCUT and the MUT, the main intersection and 

the designated U-turn locations may be signalized or unsignalized. 

Restricted Crossing U-turn 

(Also known as: J-Turn, Synchronized Street, Superstreet)

The RCUT intersection design modifies the direct left-turn 

and through movements that drivers make from cross-street 

approaches. In an RCUT design, cross-street vehicles make 

a right turn followed by a U-turn at a designated location 

before continuing in the desired direction. 

Median U-turn 

(Also known as: Michigan Left, 

Express Left, ThrU-Turn, Boulevard 

Left)

The MUT intersection design 

modifies direct left turns from 

either (or both) the major and 

minor approaches. Vehicles 

proceed through the targeted 

main intersection, make a U-turn a 

short distance down the road, then make a right turn at the targeted main intersection. Left-turning traffic 

on the minor approach can also be directed to make a right turn at the main intersection followed by a 

U-turn at a designated location.

Reduced Left-Turn Conflict Intersections

Source: FHWA
FWHA PROVEN SAFETY COUNTERMEASURE 

“It is estimated that 10 to 20 reduced-conflict intersections can be built for the cost of 

ONE interchange. We are treating as many intersections as possible, being effective with 

taxpayer dollars and, most important, saving lives with every installation.” 

Minnesota DOT 

What are the Benefits? 

Safety 

The underlying reason for the proven 

safety of the RCUT and MUT intersection 

designs is the reduction of conflict points— 

in particular, crossing conflict points. 

Each crossing conflict point increases the 

opportunity for right-angle crashes (also 

called T-bone crashes) to occur, which 

ofen result in severe injuries or fatalities. 

Compared to traditional intersection 

designs, the RCUT and MUT intersection 

designs reduce the number of crossing 

conflict points by 87 percent and 75 

percent, respectively. 

RCUT Crossing Conflict Points 

MUT 87% 

REDUCTION 75% 

REDUCTION 

With this dramatic lessening in potential 

conflict points, the reduced lef-turn 

conflict intersection strategy is proving 

its worth as States are increasingly 

implementing—and realizing the safety 

benefits of—RCUT and MUT designs. 

Conventional Intersection: Conflict Points 

RCUT Intersection: Conflict Points 

Legend 

Legend 

= Crossing 

= Merging 

= Diverging 

= Crossing 

= Merging 

= Diverging 

Conflict Type Count 

Crossing 16 

Merging 8 

Diverging 8 

Total: 

32 Conflicts 

Conflict Type Count 

Crossing 2 

Merging 6 

Diverging 6 

Total: 

14 Conflicts 

MUT Intersection: Conflict Points 

Legend 

= Crossing 

= Merging 

= Diverging 

Conflict Type Count 

Crossing 4 

Merging 6 

Diverging 6 

Total: 

16 Conflicts 

2 
1

, 2,

3 456

7

6 

REDUCED LEFT-TURN CONFLICT INTERSECTIONS 

The following table highlights several RCUT implementations and study results. 

9 RCUT intersections along 

US 15 and US 2011 

8 RCUT intersections3 5 RCUT intersections 

along US 634 

93 RCUT intersections5,6 

⯀ 44% reduction in total 

crashes 

⯀ 100% reduction in fatal 

and serious injury rightangle crashes 

⯀ 77% reduction in all 

severity right-angle 

crashes 

⯀ 50% reduction in injury 

crashes 

⯀ 35% reduction in total 

crashes 

⯀ 54% reduction in fatal 

and injury crashes 

⯀ 59% reduction in total 

crashes 

⯀ 71% reduction in fatal 

and injury crashes 

⯀ The study also showed 

that these crash 

reductions remained 

consistent over a range of 

intersection volumes 

RCUT at US 301 and MD-3132

⯀ 92% crash reduction over a 

10-year period 

⯀ 100% reduction in rightangle collisions and fatal 

and injury crashes 

MARYLAND MINNESOTA MISSOURI NORTH CAROLINA 

1 USDOT, FHWA, Field Evaluation of a Restricted Crossing U-Turn Intersection, FHWA-HRT-11-067 (June 2012). Available at: 

https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/research/safety/hsis/11067/11067.pdf. 

2 Hochstein, J., T. Maze, T. Welch, “The J-turn Intersection Design Concept Basics,” September, 2008. Available at: 

https://transportation.ky.gov/Congestion-Toolbox/Documents/J-Turn%20101.pdf. 

3 Minnesota Department of Transportation, A Study of the Trafic Safety at Reduced Conflict Intersections in Minnesota (May 2017). 

Available at: http://www.dot.state.mn.us/roadwork/rci/docs/traficsafetyatrcistudy.pdf. 

4 Edara, P., C. Sun, and S. Breslow. “Evaluation of J-turn Intersection Design Performance in Missouri.” Missouri Department of 

Transportation, December 2013. 

5 Simpson, C., Safety Efectiveness of Un-Signalized Synchronized Street Intersections. North Carolina: North Carolina Department of 

Transportation, July 2016. Available at: https://connect.ncdot.gov/resources/safety/Safety%20Evaluation%20Completed%20Projects/ 

Unsignalized%20Synchronized%20Street%20Presentation%202016.pdf. 

North Carolina Department of Transportation, NCDOT Trafic Safety Unit Programs, Synchronized Streets Evaluation. Available at: 

https://connect.ncdot.gov/resources/safety/TraficSafetyResources/Unsignalized%20Synchronized%20Streets.pdf. 

Michigan Department of Transportation (MDOT) is a pioneer on MUT installations. The MDOT 

website reports that, on roadways where Michigan Lefs were implemented, overall crashes were 

reduced by 30 to 60 percent. The greatest reductions are rear-end and head-on crashes during lef 

turns (a 60 to 90 percent reduction), and in right-angle crashes (60 percent reduction).1 

Source: @2018 Google Map data, https://goo.gl/maps/DnhC4PJpu4L2 

MUT intersection at US 24 and W. Warren Avenue in Dearborn Heights, Michigan. 

Michigan Department of Transportation, “Michigan Lefs.” last modified n.d., Available at https://www.michigan.gov/mdot/0,4616,7-

151-9615_44557-161777—,00.html. Last accessed October 2, 2018. 

3 

1
FWHA PROVEN SAFETY COUNTERMEASURE

4

Texas used the RCUT design (called Superstreet in Texas) on US 281 North and Loop 1604 West. 

Each corridor has yielded travel time reductions in both the morning and evening peak times.2 8

According to the US 281 traffic study completed for the Alamo Regional Mobility Authority, 

the RCUT design can reduce fuel consumption by 1.1 million gallons annually for 

the corridor.39

2 Texas A&M Transportation Institute, Mobility Investment Priorities, Strategies, Superstreets. Available at: https://mobility.tamu.edu/

mip/strategies-pdfs/system-modification/technical-summary/superstreets-4-pg.pdf.

3 Alamo Regional Mobility Authority, Proposed U.S. Highway 281 Superstreet Traffic Study (June 2009).

Traffic Flow 

The RCUT and MUT designs can reduce travel times and congestion as well as improve overall 

traffic flow.

Implementation of an MUT design can improve intersection throughput by 

20 to 50 percent compared to direct left-turn configurations.*

*FHWA, Median U-turn Intersection, FHWA-SA-14-042, (Washington, DC: 2014)

Morning Rush Hour Evening Rush Hour

US 281 19% 34%

Loop 1604 14% 35%

Travel Time 

Savings

1.1 

million gallons 

annually

Source: FHWA
$

REDUCED LEFT-TURN CONFLICT INTERSECTIONS 

Many agencies use the unsignalized RCUT design for their rural four-lane divided highways to 

improve safety. But in areas with higher volumes, signalized RCUTs and MUTs can also increase 

capacity and improve trafic eficiency. 

⯀ A signalized RCUT provides great flexibility in trafic signal timing to accommodate unbalanced 

trafic flow, because it allows for unique cycle lengths in each major street direction. 

⯀ A signalized MUT intersection can particularly improve trafic flow for the through movements 

on the major street by reducing the number of signal phases (from four to two) and shortening 

the overall signal cycle length. This can provide more “walk” time for pedestrians to cross the 

intersection, as well as more frequent crossing opportunities on an hourly basis. 

Overall, reduced lef-turn conflict intersections are ofen comparable in cost to an equivalent 

conventional design. When compared to a full, grade-separated interchange, RCUTs and MUTs cost 

much less while still meeting trafic demand, having fewer right-of-way impacts, and being faster 

to construct. 

Signalized RCUT 3:1 When considering safety only 

When considering both safety 4:1 and operations 

Source: Safety Evaluation of Signalized Restricted Crossing U-Turn Intersections, FHWA-HRT-17-082. 

Source: @2018 Google Map Data, https://goo.gl/maps/8sML3WGT3v12 

RCUT intersection at US 169 and Dodd Road in Traverse Township, Minnesota. 

5 
FWHA PROVEN SAFETY COUNTERMEASURE 

What Do I Need To Know To Implement RCUTs and MUTs? 

Design and User Considerations 

Some of the basic elements agencies will need to consider when 

implementing RCUT and MUT intersections include acceleration/ 

auxiliary lanes, crossover spacing, median width, signing and 

pavement marking, and accommodations for large trucks, 

pedestrians, bicycles, emergency vehicles, and transit. 

Signing, pavement marking, and geometric design are especially 

important for the success of RCUTs and MUTs. Providing suficient 

guidance and direction to motorists reduces the chance of driver 

error and discourages prohibited turns. 

The RCUT and MUT designs are adaptable and useful not only as a 

corridor treatment, but also as a treatment for single intersections. 

In addition, the designs can support community mobility and safety 

goals for both pedestrians and bicyclists. 

FHWA has developed comprehensive informational guides for both 

RCUTs and MUTs. The guides provide multiple design options for 

accommodating pedestrians, bicyclists, and transit. Transportation 

practitioners looking to learn more about detailed design elements 

and overall guidance should refer to these publications. 

Source: FHWA. 

CLICK TO VIEW 

CLICK TO VIEW 

FHWA Informational Guides for 

RCUT and MUT Intersections. 

Source: MoDOT, https://flic.kr/p/8YT2t5. Source: North Carolina DOT. 

Extra pavement or loons may be necessary 

at the U-turn location to accommodate large 

vehicles where narrow medians are present. 

Providing suficient guidance and direction to 

motorists reduces the chance of driver error. 

6 
REDUCED LEFT-TURN CONFLICT INTERSECTIONS 

Public Outreach and Education 

Public meetings are now commonplace for most 

transportation projects, but outreach becomes more 

important when implementing an unconventional 

intersection, especially in an area that has not 

experienced an RCUT or MUT design. 

“In Missouri, converting from two-way 

stop-controlled intersections to RCUT 

intersections cut the average wait 

time in half.” 

Source: Evaluation of J-turn Intersection 

Design Performance in Missouri One common concern from the public is ofen 

related to the “perceived” extra travel time they 

think will occur by using the u-turn designs. Most 

implementations have demonstrated that travel time actually improves, and the resulting safety 

benefits that the RCUT and MUT intersections ofer are substantial. 

To help address public concerns and explain the benefits of the designs, FHWA provides multiple 

case studies, fact sheets, brochures, and videos to help support State and local transportation 

agencies in their communication and education eforts. Many State DOTs have also developed their 

own materials; for example, Virginia DOT developed an Innovative Intersections and Interchanges 

website that features valuable information for the public on RCUTs and MUTs, as well as other 

designs. 

Source: Virginia DOT. 

Graphic that shows how to navigate an RCUT (available on Virginia DOT’s website): 

http://www.virginiadot.org/info/innovative_intersections_and_interchanges/rcut.asp. 

7 
FWHA PROVEN SAFETY COUNTERMEASURE 

What Else Can I Learn from Others? 

Exceptional Outreach and Education in Utah 

When Utah DOT (UDOT) decided to implement 

the ThrU Turn—the first MUT in the western 

United States—the agency knew that public 

education and outreach needed to be a priority. 

UDOT developed numerous materials to help 

stakeholders understand the reduced lef-turn 

conflict concept and how it will improve safety, reduce congestion, and support the economy. 

UDOT representatives visited businesses along the targeted corridors multiple times to explain the 

new design, provide information, and answer questions. The agency also hosted public meetings 

to provide opportunities to learn about the project, express concerns, and ask questions. To reach 

even more people, UDOT arranged for the ThrU Turn design informational videos to show at local 

theaters prior to the main feature. UDOT’s ThrU Turn Intersection videos are available on UDOT’s 

YouTube channel. 

Reducing Left Turns in Orange Beach, Alabama 

From 2012 to 2014, Highway 182 in Orange Beach experienced 227 total crashes, 49 injury crashes, and 

4 fatalities – 50 percent of the fatalities were pedestrians. Alabama DOT (ALDOT) found that more than 

70 percent of the crashes in this area involved lef-turning trafic. To address these safety concerns, 

in 2016, ALDOT started a phased-construction roadway project on Highway 182 that included 

adding signalized median u-turns, 

redesigning intersections to restrict 

lef-turn movements, and installing 

additional pedestrian crosswalks. 

With this reduced lef-turn conflict 

intersection project, ALDOT sought 

to balance the needs of pedestrians, 

bicyclists, and motorists. While safety 

is the primary benefit, the project 

also allowed the City of Orange Beach 

to add landscaping to the medians, 

improving the overall aesthetics of 

the corridor, which is important for 

this vacation-destination city. 

For More Information: 

⯀ FHWA’s Ofice of Safety U-Turn-based Intersections Website 

Source: UDOT 

Reduced lef-turn conflict intersections can be designed to 

safely accommodate pedestrians and bicyclists, as shown in 

this preliminary concept graphic from Alabama DOT. 

Source: Alabama DOT 

8 

For More Information:

https://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/provencountermeasures/

FHWA Office of Safety

Updated July 2020

FHWA-SA-18-048