Q. RIDOT installed a new traffic light at the intersection of the Route 95 north off-ramp and Jefferson Boulevard. I was thrilled! Soon I wouldn’t be stuck sitting in traffic, waiting for someone to make a left turn. (I even hoped DOT might stripe the off-ramp for left and right turn lanes.) It seems the new light was just a tease, because it’s been set on flashing red ever since. Do you know when they will be turning the signal on?

A. Currently motorists exiting from Route 95 north, Route 37 east and Route 37 west all eventually merge before exiting onto Jefferson Boulevard, or continuing onto Route 95 north. To add to the complexity of this interchange, the traffic trying to enter onto Jefferson Boulevard sometimes backs up onto the exit. This creates a difficult area for traffic exiting Route 37 west that would like to continue onto Route 95 north rather than exiting onto Jefferson Boulevard.

A traffic signal was recently installed at the bottom of this off-ramp to control the traffic entering Jefferson Boulevard. This signal will help minimize the traffic backup on the off-ramp. It should also make it easier for motorists exiting Route 37 west, who would like to get into the left lane on the exit, to continue onto Route 95 north.

This signal was in flash operation for a long time because RIDOT’s engineers noticed a sight distance issue for motorists traveling south on Jefferson Boulevard who were approaching the signal. The overpass for Route 95 limits the line of sight for this signal and motorists might not have been able to see the signal in time to react to it.

To mitigate this, RIDOT installed a sign on the overpass facing southbound motorists coming from Route 95 south and Ford Lane and O’Keefe Lane. The sign reads “Signal Ahead” and has an LED flasher light that works in conjunction with the signal that turns red when the signal is red. When the signal is green and yellow, the flasher will not be on, and the sign will simply say “Signal Ahead.” The signal was turned on for full operation on June 17.

Merges aren’t so simple

Q. This question pertains to merging and right of way. On the Thurbers Avenue entrance to Route 95 north, traffic also enters the ramp from an entrance at Allens Avenue. Both of these entrance ramps obviously have to “merge” and proceed onto 95 north near the I-Way. There is a yellow sign with a black illustration between the two roads depicting what looks like a merge. Looking at how the image is drawn, it would seem that the traffic from Allens Avenue has the right-of-way, and the traffic from Thurbers Avenue has to yield, but there is no yield sign and cars from both entrances are constantly confused.

I’ve noticed the same type of problem at the Routes 6 and 10 north junction with Route 95 south, where traffic coming onto 95 south from Memorial Boulevard in downtown Providence also have to merge with Routes 6 and 10 north traffic. There is a sign there perhaps indicating the Routes 6 and 10 traffic has the right-of-way at this junction, but no yield sign is posted for either side.

So who has the right of way in these scenarios? Wouldn’t a clear posted yield sign for either side be clearer and more effective?

A. An on-ramp to Route 95 north exists on Allens Avenue, as well as Thurbers Avenue nearby. The traffic on these on-ramps merges at a point before the entrance to Route 95 north. Your question asks which ramp has the right of way, and which ramp must yield the right of way.

There is a merge sign facing traffic on the ramp from Allens Avenue, telling motorists that the traffic from Thurbers Avenue is merging ahead. A merge sign is not a legally enforceable device to indicate who has the right of way; however, it is typically installed facing the more heavily traveled road.

According to the Federal Highway Administration’s publication, Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices , which is a nationally accepted manual outlining rules and guidelines for the standardization of traffic control devices, “a merge sign may be used to warn road users on the major roadway that merging movements might be encountered in advance of a point where lanes from two separate roadways converge as a single traffic lane and no turning conflict occurs.”

The manual also states that “where two roadways of approximately equal importance converge, a Merge sign should be placed on each roadway.” In a case such as this, where two on-ramps of equal importance merge, a merge sign should be placed on both on-ramps.

We will notify our Maintenance Division of this and have it install an additional merge sign facing motorists on Thurbers Avenue, because in this instance neither ramp has the right of way over the other.

With regard to the other merge described in your question, where motorists from the on-ramp to 95 south from Memorial Boulevard merge with the traffic on the on-ramp to 95 south from Route 6 east, the same situation exists where neither road has the right of way. Both roads are of equal importance, and therefore should both have a merge sign. In this case, however, both of these ramps already have an existing merge sign.

A yield sign would not be effective as suggested in either case, since a yield sign would most likely increase the possibility of rear-end crashes, as well as create a long backup of vehicles waiting to enter the ramp. Both merge areas have heavy traffic volumes entering from each way, and a yield condition would only impede the motorists that it faces, creating unnecessary queues. Motorists must be considerate of one another and take turns.

Dana Alexander Nolfe, chief public affairs officer for the state Department of Transportation, has agreed to answer questions of general interest posed by Journal readers about state roads and other state transportation matters.

The DOT is responsible for the state’s transportation infrastructure, which includes highways, bridges, traffic signals and bikeways.

To ask a question that would also be of interest to other readers, send a letter to Ask RIDOT, Features Department, The Providence Journal, 75 Fountain St., Providence, RI 02902. You can also e-mail your question to projocars@projo.com. Please put “Question for the DOT” in the subject field.

Questions or complaints of a specific nature should be posed to the DOT directly and will not be answered in this column.

Still lost? Find archived answers to past transportation questions at projocars.com.