U-Turns

I never know what I am going to receive in my e-mail regarding this column. Recently it was a tongue in cheek request to save a marriage by settling the question about U-turns between husband and wife. Neither one of them realized that there are really very few places in British Columbia where a driver can make a U-turn legally.

No U-Turns: The Law

Section 168 MVA regulates making a U-Turn, also known as a reverse turn.

Intersection With Traffic Lights

Unless there is a sign stating that u-turns are permitted, you must not make them at an intersection that is controlled by a traffic control signal.

"traffic control signal" means a traffic control device, whether manually, electrically or mechanically operated, by which traffic is directed to stop and to proceed.

Lined Roadway

First of all, if there is any type of line painted down the centre of the highway one must not make a U-turn over it. It doesn't matter if it is double solid, single solid, solid and broken or a single broken line. Only the complete absence of a line allows the maneuver, subject to other limitations.

Section 155 MVA regulates crossing lines painted on the road and in general only allows crossing them to pass another vehicle or in some cases to avoid and obstruction.

Limited Visibility

Next, a U-turn must not be made where visibility is limited or it would be unsafe to do so. This would include places like on a curve or at the approach to a hillcrest.

Business Districts

U-turns are forbidden in a business district unless the turn is made at an intersection without traffic lights. However, the general prohibition of a U-turn at any intersection with traffic lights doesn't apply if there is a sign posted by the municipality permitting the action.

"business district" means the territory contiguous to a portion of a highway having a length of 200 m along which there are buildings used for business, industrial or public purposes occupying

(a) at least 100 m of frontage on one side of that portion, or

(b) at least 100 m collectively on both sides of that portion,

and includes that portion of the highway;

Municipalities

Finally, we've mentioned municipalities, and they are allowed to regulate U-turns within their boundaries through a bylaw. These bylaws can range from what has been outlined here to a total prohibition. This just adds to the difficulty because bylaws change from municipality to municipality.

Offences & Penalties

Offence	Section	Fine	Penalty Points
Unsafe U-Turn	168 (a)	$121	2
Prohibited U-Turn	168 (b) (iii)	$121	2
U-Turn at Intersection	168 (b) (iv)	$167	2
U-Turn in Business District	168 (b) (v)	$121	2

Provincial Driving Manual

Page 52 of Learn to Drive Smart says:

If you find you are going in the wrong direction, you may be tempted to make a U-turn. U-turns are often risky.

When you are deciding whether to make a U-turn, think about some alternatives, like driving around the block or continuing on to a side road where you can turn more safely.

Where Can You Make a U-Turn?

Everywhere else, as long as it is safe!

U-Turn Video

Share This Article

U-Turn Collision

Thanks for posting this up, I'm in a situation with ICBC having determined the driver of my car was 50% at fault in a collision and I'm trying to argue againt it. These links are the relevant sections I think, that suggest that a vehicle driving down a narrow street in a business district such as downtown Vancouver cannot legally do a u-turn to get into a car park on the other side of the road.

We were reversing a couple of meters to allow the car in front of us to reverse into a carpark, when another vehicle travelling in the opposite direction tried to do a quick u-turn to get into the same parking spot, colliding with the rear of our vehicle at 90 degrees to the traffic direction.

U-turn rules vary considerably by province

I didn't realize BC rules were so restrictive. Alberta allows U-turns at unsignalized intersections (but not at alleys) and outside of urban municipalities as long as you don't need to cross a double solid line to do so.

Ontario is far more flexible. U-turns can be made pretty much anywhere they are not prohibited, as long as you have at least 150 metres of visibility when you are near a hill, curve or a bridge or you are at least 30 metres from a railway crossing (s. 143 Highway Traffic Act). The lines on the pavement don't affect this; to the best of my knowledge centre lines on Ontario roadways are primarily advisory, e.g. it is not unlawful to pass on a double-solid - only if there are signs prohibiting passing.

I learned to drive in the early 1980s, and in our high school driver education class we were taught how to do U-turns on residential streets - they were called K-turns if the street was too narrow and you had to back up to complete the manuevre. It never seemed to create a problem for anyone.

This is clearly an area where the law could be relaxed without compromising safety.

Change of Direction

I learned to drive in the early 1980s, and in our high school driver education class we were taught how to do U-turns on residential streets - they were called K-turns if the street was too narrow and you had to back up to complete the manuevre. It never seemed to create a problem for anyone.

This is clearly an area where the law could be relaxed without compromising safety.

A good Driving School will teach about the various methods of changing direction. Three rights and a left, or three lefts and a right, can achieve it without reversing (always a good idea). If the roadway is of sufficient width, or at the end of a cul-de-sac, drivers can also accomplish their goal without reversing. Meanwhile, for a 2-point turn, if using a driveway, it's always preferable to reverse into one on the right side of the road before then making a left turn. And yet, what's the commonest thing we see? Some fool turning left into a driveway, and then reversing out of it back onto the roadway.

Here in BC, applicants for a Class 5 license (typically Class 7 drivers or experienced drivers from a jurisdiction we don't have a reciprocal agreement with) won't be asked for a parallel park - but they will be asked to change direction mid-block, in a situation that demands a 3-point turn using the road width. It might become a 5-point or 7-point turn if they're in a longer wheelbase car. It allows the Driver Examiner to assess vehicle control skills, observation skills, signalling appropriately, etc. But, they can't do that in every municipality - such as the City of Vancouver, which has its own bylaw prohibiting a U-turn.

Update

I recently learned that the changing direction manuever has been replaced with a hill parking, and/or reversing, maneuver on road tests. Basically because of the bylaw problem in some areas that makes a 3-point turn impracticable. Then again, try to find a hill in Richmond, eh?

I believe that this will apply for Class 4 (both Restricted & Unrestricted) and Class 5 applicants.

Can a bylaw over-rule the Motor Vehicle Act & Regs?

Finally, we've mentioned municipalities, and they are allowed to regulate U-turns within their boundaries through a bylaw.

I'll tell you something that gave me pause for thought, recently. Check out the intersection of King George Hwy & 64th Ave in Surrey.

Now how is it that, although this is a traffic light controlled intersection, U-turns are clearly permitted at certain phases of the traffic light?

Yes, When the MVA Gives Permission

Reverse turn

168 Except as provided by the bylaws of a municipality or the laws of a treaty first nation, the Nisg̱a'a Nation or a Nisg̱a'a Village, a driver must not turn a vehicle so as to proceed in the opposite direction ...

U-Turn Bylaw enforcement

Does a municipality have an obligation to post signage regarding such bylaws, as they do for parking and tow-away?

Posting Signs

In a case like this, signs are usually used to prohibit something that is usually allowed or vice versa. So other than publishing the bylaw, I don't think so.

Case Law

Certainly from an ICBC licencing standpoint, (and at least one now retired RCMP Corporal) we would consider applying section 155 to U-turns an overuse of the section .

We always limited prohibitions against U-turns to section 168.

Do you have any experience of case law on this topic?

Judgement Example

Yes, as a matter of fact there is case law on this:

2013BCSC332 Ferguson v Yang

[39] Here, the defendant failed to observe the rules regulating traffic. In particular, he breached s. 155(1)(c) of the Act by performing a u-turn over the solid yellow line on 8th Street. The exception set out in s. 156 of the Act is inapplicable because the defendant was not in the process of entering or leaving the street. The defendant was also in violation of s. 168 of the Act by performing a u-turn (referred to the in Act as a “reverse turn”) in a “business district”. I am satisfied on the evidence before me that there was an excess of 100 meters of frontage of buildings used for public purposes on the roadway in question, thereby meeting the definition of “business district” in the Act.

With the act definiton of

With the act definiton of Laned Roadway being:

"laned roadway" means a roadway or the part of a roadway that is divided into 2 or more marked lanes for the movement of vehicular traffic in the same direction;

I always thought the laned roadway rules around crossing a solid line only applied to 3+ lane roads. It's interesting to note that the keep to the right rule from 155 is also being used.

Turns