TECHBRIEF Field Evaluation of a

Restricted Crossing 

U-Turn Intersection 

FHWA Publication No.: FHWA-HRT-12-037

FHWA Contacts: Joe Bared, HRDO-20, (202) 493-3314, 

joe.bared@dot.gov, Brian Philips, HRDS-30, (202) 493-3468, 

brian.philips@dot.gov, and Wei Zhang, HRDS-10, (202) 493-3317, 

wei.zhang@dot.gov.

This document is a technical summary of the Federal Highway 

Administration (FHWA) report, Field Evaluation of a Restricted 

Crossing U-Turn Intersection (FHWA-HRT-11-067).

Objective

This TechBrief describes comparisons of field observations 

of the operations of an unsignalized restricted crossing U-turn 

(RCUT) intersection in Maryland with a roughly comparable

conventional stop-controlled intersection on the same 

corridor. It also summarizes the results of several crash analysis approaches for intersections converted from conventional 

designs to RCUT designs along two four-lane divided highway 

corridors in Maryland.

Introduction

An RCUT intersection is a promising treatment used to mitigate 

right-angle crashes where two-lane minor roads intersect with 

rural four-lane divided highways.

The RCUT design allows left turns from the highway onto 

intersecting minor roads, but it restricts turns from the minor 

road. Drivers desiring to make left or through movements from 

the minor road must first turn right and then make a U-turn 

to continue their desired movement. Figure 1 shows the RCUT 

intersection observed in this study.

Research

One objective of the RCUT study was to observe an operational 

RCUT intersection on a rural four-lane divided highway to 

evaluate its safety and operations from a human factors 

perspective. The observations were intended to support design 

guidance for future RCUT designs. To provide perspective on 

Research, Development, and 

Technology

Turner-Fairbank Highway 

Research Center

6300 Georgetown Pike

McLean, VA 22101-2296

www.tfhrc.gov/research/

3

they were channelized to permit U-turns 

originating from the direction of the main 

intersection. If the U-turns were made at a 

conventional intersection at the deployment 

date, then the U-turn location is labeled “Inter.” 

If drivers making through or left movements 

needed to use another RCUT intersection to 

make the U-turn, then the RCUT label is used. 

Before-and-after comparisons of traffic crashes 

were made for each RCUT intersection, the 

sections of road between the RCUT intersection, and the U-turn locations. The approach 

is intended to capture the total impact of the 

RCUT treatment on crash probability.

Results and Conclusions

Based on the number of turning movements 

from the minor road, there were proportionally fewer traffic conflicts at the RCUT intersection. In particular, the RCUT intersection 

eliminated conflicts between vehicles turning 

left off of the highway and vehicles from the 

minor road turning left onto the highway. 

Additionally, the RCUT design appeared to have 

little or no effect on induced weaving movements on the highway. 

The RCUT design that forced left and through 

traffic from the minor road to turn right and 

travel 1,800 ft to a directional U-turn crossing 

added about 1 min to total travel time. The travel 

time penalty would likely decrease if the main 

road volume reduced the number of available 

gaps for direct left and through movements.

Although acceleration lanes are not an intrinsic part of the RCUT design, they were part of 

the design at the RCUT observed in this study. 

Drivers who made left or through movements 

from the minor road appeared to make effective 

use of them.

Three approaches were used to estimate the 

affects of an RCUT conversion on crashes, 

and they all led to the same conclusion: 

the RCUT design reduces crashes. A simple 

3-year before-and-after analysis suggested a 

30 percent decrease in the average number 

of crashes per year. An analysis that adjusted 

the observed crash rate at RCUT locations 

for the observed crash rate at nearby conventional intersections on the same corridors 

suggested a 28 percent decrease in the average 

annual number of crashes. An Empirical Bayes 

analysis that adjusts for the expected number 

of crashes at similar intersections and average 

annual traffic suggested a 44 percent decrease 

in crashes.

Not only did the expected number of crashes 

decrease between 28 and 44 percent, but the 

crash data also suggest that the overall severity

Table 1. Maryland RCUT intersections.

Intersection Log Milea Deployment Date

Number 

of 

Approaches

Southern U-Turn 

Location 

(Log Mile)

Northern U-Turn 

Location 

(Log Mile)

US-15 at Hayward Road 16.180 9/1988 4b DDUT at 15.829 Inter at 16.530

US-15 at Willow Road 17.070 11/1992 4 Inter at 16.530 Inter at 18.020

US-15 at Biggs Road 18.020 11/1992 4 RCUT at 17.070 RCUT at 18.330

US-15 at Sundays Lane 18.330 11/1992 4 RCUT at 18.020 RCUT at 18.870

US-15 at College Avenue 34.210 8/1994 4 DDUT at 33.823 DDUT at 34.619

US-15 at US 15 Business 35.020 9/1988 4 DDUT at 34.619 DDUT at 35.477

US-301 at Main Street 12.380 1/2003 4 U-turn Inter at 12.880

US-301 at Del Rhodes 

Avenue 12.880 1/2003 4 Inter at 12.380 DDUT at 13.146

US-301 at Galena Road 43.670 1/2002 4 DDUT at 43.360 DDUT at 43.905

a

The log miles are from Maryland State Highway Authority crash records except where offsets were added at county 

boundaries to adjust for changes in the way log miles were recorded by various agencies.

b

This intersection has since been converted from a four-way to a three-way intersection.
4

Researchers—This study was performed by the FHWA Research, Development, and Technology 

Human Factors Team. The principle investigator was Vaughan W. Inman of SAIC. Robert P. Haas of 

SAIC co-authored the technical report.

Distribution—This TechBrief is being distributed according to a standard distribution. Direct 

distribution is being made to the Divisions and Resource Center.

Availability—The report may be obtained from the FHWA Product Distribution Center by email to 

report.center@dot.gov, fax to (814) 239-2156, phone to (814) 239-1160, or online at http://www.fhwa.dot.

gov/research.

Key Words—Restricted crossing U-turn, Superstreet, J-turn, Alternative intersection design, Highway 

safety, Driver behavior, Divided highway, Intersection safety.

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 highquality 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.

of crashes that occurred was lower with the 

RCUT design than a conventional stopcontrolled intersection. A 9 percent reduction 

was observed in the proportion of crashes that 

result in injuries or fatalities.

Recommendations

The observational data and the crash analyses 

indicate that the RCUT design has a substantial 

safety benefit. The travel time penalty is small 

and would likely decrease with higher volumes 

of traffic on the major road.

RCUT acceleration lanes for right turns and 

U-turns are strongly recommended to reduce 

traffic conflicts and minimize the delay incurred 

while drivers wait for acceptable gaps in the 

mainline traffic.

july 2012 FHWA-HRT-12-037

HRDS-30/07-12(WEB)E