Contradictory signs

[noelbotevera]

Thanks. That was totally needed.

Don't see a problem there.

There's two No Left Turn signs. One's at the very left of the shot, and there's one under the stop sign.

Except they don't contradict each other

They both relate to the same intersection, despite being placed at different places.

[kj3400]

Thanks. That was totally needed.

Don't see a problem there.

There's two No Left Turn signs. One's at the very left of the shot, and there's one under the stop sign.

Except they don't contradict each other

They both relate to the same intersection, despite being placed at different places.

Yes, but the point is they don't contradict each other, they more or less just emphasize the prohibition on the left turn. If anything, this would go in the redundancy thread.

[jeffandnicole]

And personally, I kinda like a no left turn sign to the left, since a potential left turner is probably looking left.

[noelbotevera]

Thanks. That was totally needed.

Don't see a problem there.

There's two No Left Turn signs. One's at the very left of the shot, and there's one under the stop sign.

Except they don't contradict each other

They both relate to the same intersection, despite being placed at different places.

Yes, but the point is they don't contradict each other, they more or less just emphasize the prohibition on the left turn. If anything, this would go in the redundancy thread.

Ugh, it's 3 AM, and now I noticed my brain failed...yup.

[CNGL-Leudimin]

It was 9 AM (CET ) when you posted. Anyway, why you were awake at that hour?

Back to contradictory signs, this one is in my area. Are Huesca and Zaragoza to the left or to the right?


And an explanation. Since this part of N-330 was built in the early 90s, from this point one turned left in order to enter the road Southbound towards Huesca. Recently, and as part of the upgrade to A-23 freeway, they built a new access to the right, but the one to the left is still open and will be closed later (notice that the sign is patched). As of last Christmas, the right access was blanked out.

[Roadsguy]

This setup in SW Pennsylvania, where destination signs point you through a restricted turn. The same is true for the opposite turn.

[jakeroot]

(Sorry for dashcam quality)

Saw this on my way home from Seattle yesterday. Hwy 99 near Federal Way. They're doing some construction work, and they have to close the right lane from time to time, so the middle lane sometimes becomes the right lane (and also an option lane). They usually cover up the incorrect sign, but this time, they just left both up. Sigh...

[wanderer2575]

A U-turn lane and a divided crossroad, with signs for both mounted on the same post:

[jakeroot]

Come on, WSDOT...https://goo.gl/EvHocq (I get the point of the sign, but it's probably best if no sign was used at all).

[webny99]

Bump warning!

I realize this is a very old thread, but I'm bumping because I found something that fits perfectly. In fact, I was considering starting a new thread with the exact same title, and was pleasantly surprised to find that this already existed.

Absolute craziness on Allegany CR 27 (the image is mine, taken in 2019; Street View here):

[Big John]

^^ 55 is regulatory, 20 is advisory, so 55 holds.

With that I would move the 55 sign to the end of the curves.

[kphoger]

Bump warning!

I realize this is a very old thread, but I'm bumping because I found something that fits perfectly. In fact, I was considering starting a new thread with the exact same title, and was pleasantly surprised to find that this already existed.

Absolute craziness on Allegany CR 27 (the image is mine, taken in 2019; Street View here):

Go over 55, and you can get a speeding ticket.  But you might want to slow down on the curves.

Similar to this

[webny99]

Go over 55, and you can get a speeding ticket.  But you might want to slow down on the curves.

Similar to this

Might want to slow down? Imagine if you didn't? 30 and 45 are at least in the same ballpark. 20 and 55 are not in the same ballpark. 55 is the second-highest limit in the entire state, and 20 is the second-lowest.

[kphoger]

Go over 55, and you can get a speeding ticket.  But you might want to slow down on the curves.

Similar to this

Might want to slow down? Imagine if you didn't? 30 and 45 are at least in the same ballpark. 20 and 55 are not in the same ballpark. 55 is the second-highest standard limit in the entire state, and 20 is the second-lowest.

Yeah, but |Big John|'s point still stands:  if your car can handle the G-forces at 55 mph, it's perfectly legal.

The 55 sign basically says "you're not in Wisco anymore, so the default state speed limit applies from this point forward".  The 20 sign says "watch out for tight curves ahead".

[Rothman]

See NY, where the rural speed limit is 55.  Same thing.  No biggie.

[webny99]

The 55 sign basically says "you're not in Wisco anymore, so the default state speed limit applies from this point forward".  The 20 sign says "watch out for tight curves ahead".

If the signs were in the reverse order, then yes.

My point is that 20 mph is significantly lower even than the previous speed limit of 35 mph, so if the advisory speed really needs to be 20 mph, then it's irrelevant whether the default state limit applies, and 55 mph should not be posted until after the curves. Alternatively, 55 mph could be posted far enough in advance that you could reach that speed and then slow down for the curves, but that's obviously not practical for this location.

See NY, where the rural speed limit is 55.  Same thing.  No biggie.

Yes, the location in question is in NY...

[interstatefan990]

Not my picture. Gotta love the Arial!

There's technically nothing wrong with this. No Stopping signs legally exclude stopping to avoid conflicting with other traffic, at the direction of an officer, or in compliance with a traffic control device. So it's perfectly okay to post a STOP sign right along with a No Stopping sign.

[Rothman]

The 55 sign basically says "you're not in Wisco anymore, so the default state speed limit applies from this point forward".  The 20 sign says "watch out for tight curves ahead".

If the signs were in the reverse order, then yes.

My point is that 20 mph is significantly lower even than the previous speed limit of 35 mph, so if the advisory speed really needs to be 20 mph, then it's irrelevant whether the default state limit applies, and 55 mph should not be posted until after the curves. Alternatively, 55 mph could be posted far enough in advance that you could reach that speed and then slow down for the curves, but that's obviously not practical for this location.

See NY, where the rural speed limit is 55.  Same thing.  No biggie.

Yes, the location in question is in NY...

Heh.  If only I squinted at the sign...

[kphoger]

If the signs were in the reverse order, then yes.

Irrelevant.  The 55 mph speed limit begins right at the sign.  The 20 mph advisory is required to be posted in advance of the condition to which it applies.  Ergo, no matter which order the signs are in, the speed limit on that stretch is 55 mph, but the curves are advised to be taken at 20 mph.

My point is that 20 mph is significantly lower even than the previous speed limit of 35 mph, so if the advisory speed really needs to be 20 mph, then it's irrelevant whether the default state limit applies, and 55 mph should not be posted until after the curves. Alternatively, 55 mph could be posted far enough in advance that you could reach that speed and then slow down for the curves, but that's obviously not practical for this location.

But the 35 mph zone is for the populated place you just left–as evidenced by the fact that it's referred to by signage as a speed zone.

Now I'm curious to know if a speed study is required for posting an advisory tab, same as it would be for posting a lower regulatory speed limit.  Anybody know?

[Rothman]

If the signs were in the reverse order, then yes.

Irrelevant.  The 55 mph speed limit begins right at the sign.  The 20 mph advisory is required to be posted in advance of the condition to which it applies.  Ergo, no matter which order the signs are in, the speed limit on that stretch is 55 mph, but the curves are advised to be taken at 20 mph.

Not in NY regarding where the state speed limit starts, but your conclusion is correct.

[kphoger]

If the signs were in the reverse order, then yes.

Irrelevant.  The 55 mph speed limit begins right at the sign.  The 20 mph advisory is required to be posted in advance of the condition to which it applies.  Ergo, no matter which order the signs are in, the speed limit on that stretch is 55 mph, but the curves are advised to be taken at 20 mph.

Not in NY regarding where the state speed limit starts, but your conclusion is correct.

So where does a speed limit officially begin in NY?  Is it one of those places that requires every speed limit to be legislatively defined and therefore the placement of the sign is legally irrelevant?

[Rothman]

If the signs were in the reverse order, then yes.

Irrelevant.  The 55 mph speed limit begins right at the sign.  The 20 mph advisory is required to be posted in advance of the condition to which it applies.  Ergo, no matter which order the signs are in, the speed limit on that stretch is 55 mph, but the curves are advised to be taken at 20 mph.

Not in NY regarding where the state speed limit starts, but your conclusion is correct.

So where does a speed limit officially begin in NY?  Is it one of those places that requires every speed limit to be legislatively defined and therefore the placement of the sign is legally irrelevant?

Usually at the boundary of a municipality, but then you may see a reassurance sign somewhere.  Doesn't change the fact that the state speed limit on rural roads is 55 mph and a lot of roads are unsigned in that regard.  This case looks like one of those rare reassurance instances.

[interstatefan990]

Irrelevant.  The 55 mph speed limit begins right at the sign.

Actually, if there's an "END XX MPH LIMIT" before the 55 sign, then it would start there unless another limit is posted. Doesn't apply in this situation, but you get my point.

[webny99]

Ergo, no matter which order the signs are in, the speed limit on that stretch is 55 mph, but the curves are advised to be taken at 20 mph.

So I guess the question is, in the context of the previous 35 mph limit, why post the 55 mph speed limit before the curves? "We advise that you slow down to 20 mph, but you may now speed up to 55 mph" makes no sense.

Usually at the boundary of a municipality, but then you may see a reassurance sign somewhere.  Doesn't change the fact that the state speed limit on rural roads is 55 mph and a lot of roads are unsigned in that regard.  This case looks like one of those rare reassurance instances.

Hmmm. In my experience, it seems like there's almost always a 55 mph reassurance sign (or an "END XX MPH LIMIT") at the end of a speed zone. Whereas it would be unsigned in cases where the adjacent roads are also 55 mph or if its 55 from end to end.

[JoePCool14]

Ergo, no matter which order the signs are in, the speed limit on that stretch is 55 mph, but the curves are advised to be taken at 20 mph.

So I guess the question is, in the context of the previous 35 mph limit, why post the 55 mph speed limit before the curves? "We advise that you slow down to 20 mph, but you may now speed up to 55 mph" makes no sense.

At the end of the day, it's probably just sloppy placement. It's similar to putting a speed limit sign just before a stop sign or a signal. Or like putting a speed limit sign one block away from the end of the street. It's not technically wrong... it's just illogical.