Merging is not an ‘on-the-spot’ negotiation: Roadshow

Q: The column about merging reminded me that merging into highway traffic has been a point of frustration for me since I got to California 40-plus years ago.

Ohio signage is clearer that ongoing traffic has the right of way in a merge situation. Incoming traffic is given a road sign that says “yield.” Not everyone here understands who has the right of way, and I have seen plenty of occasions when the yielder thought it was an on-the-spot negotiation. The lack of signs only reinforces that.

As long as I am writing, I might as well mention another pet peeve: I think the DMV written/computer test you take when renewing a license should be on questions that show you know the most important things to be a safe driver, such as who has the right of way when two lanes merge. Instead, the last two times I took the test, I answered questions about axles (I am a little vague on what these are anyway, but my driving is not impaired by my axle knowledge) and what the fine is for throwing an animal on the highway.

Susan Yost, San Jose

A: You raise very valid points. California safety officials say that yield signs on on-ramps could cause more harm than good, leading some drivers to stop on ramps. Changes in merging signage are not presently being discussed in the state.

Q: I enjoyed your article on merging and the tips you gave. I frequently travel south on Highway 85 in Mountain View to 280 north to San Francisco. If readers want to practice merging, this is the perfect place. You’ll get practice here avoiding being run up an embankment while you’re trying to make a safe merge onto 280.

Don Markley, Mountain View

A: This is a tricky merging spot.