Is disobeying a guide sign against the law?

[codyg1985]

I present to you the second video (DYC: Memorial Pkwy) from a traffic segment of WHNT in Huntsville about a very busy stretch of freeway.

I pose this to everyone that is familiar with the MUTCD and other fellow roadgeeks. The frontage road of Memorial Pkwy here in Huntsville just north of Governors Drive (where US 431 joins US 231) is often times used as a passing lane. People will exit off the main lanes of the parkway onto the frontage road and then merge back onto at the next entrance ramp without staying on the frontage road. According to this reporter, it is against the law.

This stretch of road handles 112,000 vehicles per day, which is busier than most interstates in Alabama. Rush hour is especially bad. People use the frontage road often because there is less traffic on the frontage road than the main lanes.

While I agree it drives me crazy, I don't think it is against the law. What does everyone else think?

[Bryant5493]

I didn't think so. I use the Langford Parkway/S.R. 166 access road often to bypass traffic on the I-85 North ramp, because the ramp narrows to two lanes one lane upon merging with I-75 North.


Be well,

Bryant

[corco]

That's a really weird interpretation of "Exit Only" and I'm 99% sure that's not what that means. It is dangerous and should be discouraged, but I think an extra sign would have to be erected saying "Parkway re-entry illegal" or something to that effect before it became illegal.

[realjd]

[citation needed]

I fail to see how that's illegal.

[vdeane]

That's a really weird interpretation of "Exit Only" and I'm 99% sure that's not what that means. It is dangerous and should be discouraged, but I think an extra sign would have to be erected saying "Parkway re-entry illegal" or something to that effect before it became illegal.

Exit only merely means that the lane leaves the road and that traffic staying on the road should move over.  It says nothing about exiting onto the frontage road and merging back on.  While this is against the spirit of the guide signs, it's not against the letter of them.

[agentsteel53]

it's against the spirit of the feeder road, but I can think of much more annoying "time-saving" driver tricks, like squeezing past a bunch of cars on the right, in a lane that does not actually exist, just to be able to make a right turn 3.2 seconds earlier.

[myosh_tino]

We have a similar problem at cloverleaf interchanges where there are c/d lanes to handle all the exiting and entering traffic.  Some drivers have the nerve to exit the freeway, stay left on the c/d roadway and then reenter.

This tactic does work and is legal in California but an active metering light certainly discourages this behavior during commute hours.

[huskeroadgeek]

That's a really weird interpretation of "Exit Only" and I'm 99% sure that's not what that means. It is dangerous and should be discouraged, but I think an extra sign would have to be erected saying "Parkway re-entry illegal" or something to that effect before it became illegal.

Exit only merely means that the lane leaves the road and that traffic staying on the road should move over.  It says nothing about exiting onto the frontage road and merging back on.  While this is against the spirit of the guide signs, it's not against the letter of them.

That's exactly what I thought too. It refers to the lane exiting the freeway, and that's all it refers to. It's no different than a "left turn only" lane from that standpoint. The phrase "exit only" has never been intended to imply that the exit itself is only for exiting and not for reentry. If you took it that literally, than not only would driving on the frontage road and reentering going the same direction be illegal, but so would using the cross street to turn around and go back the opposite direction on the freeway.

[roadfro]

Although I certainly agree with the consensus here that this is against the spirit of the feeder/C-D road.

A guide sign or a warning sign carries no enforceable action, as both are used for guiding and warning drivers only. The "EXIT ONLY" panel, with its black-on-yellow color scheme, is used to warn drivers that that the lane ends at the exit. In order for that to be enforceable, the exit only panel would have to be white, or another black-on-white regulatory sign must be present (such as Nevada's "Right Lane MUST Exit" sign that sees frequent use).  Even still, the cars are technically exiting, as they use the ramp to exit onto the feeder road--they're simply not going to the intended exit ramp and merging back to the main highway. Without a specific regulatory sign prohibiting this practice, I cannot find anything illegal going on here--although it certainly goes against the intent of the C/D road and driver expectation, which could pose safety risks.

[mightyace]

The only time I used a collector/distributor road to bypass the mainline was when an accident blocked the main lanes on I-75 north of Atlanta.  I was originally intending just to get off and get back on I-75 further up the road, but as I was heading for the second ramp to go west, we passed the crash site.  When I saw that, I just went straight to get back on 75.

[RustyK]

I'm not sure if it's strictly illegal here in Washington, but on I-405 there was an exit that was heavily used for this purpose, so they put up signs stating that vehicles MUST exit, except for buses, as it's illegal to re-enter the freeway otherwise.  I've wondered if this means if you get off at that exit accidentily, are you barred from reentry?   The state patrol also pulls people over for doing this very thing.

[agentsteel53]

I'm not sure if it's strictly illegal here in Washington, but on I-405 there was an exit that was heavily used for this purpose, so they put up signs stating that vehicles MUST exit, except for buses, as it's illegal to re-enter the freeway otherwise.  I've wondered if this means if you get off at that exit accidentily, are you barred from reentry?   The state patrol also pulls people over for doing this very thing.

when the guide sign says you MUST exit, it means the lane physically turns into a lane on the collector/distributor road, and you can't do anything but exit unless you want to cut across the gore in an illegal (and jackassed!) fashion.

if there is a law against rejoining the mainline in the natural course of the collector-distributor lane becoming an on-ramp again, I don't see the problem with that.  Once you have exited, you're on the c-d lane and you may proceed to take the exit, or return back onto the freeway. 

If Washington State Patrol pulls you over for that, they're really hurting for money.

[corco]

I'm not sure if it's strictly illegal here in Washington, but on I-405 there was an exit that was heavily used for this purpose, so they put up signs stating that vehicles MUST exit, except for buses, as it's illegal to re-enter the freeway otherwise.  I've wondered if this means if you get off at that exit accidentily, are you barred from reentry?   The state patrol also pulls people over for doing this very thing.

I used to do that on I-5 North all the time during rushhour where it splits to serve Madison/James. I actually got the idea to do it from a bus. Never got pulled over, and my thought was always that if a bus is allowed to do it in a non-special use lane, I should be too.

I also can't imagine they'd actually write tickets for that- I've found that a lot of people are fairly retarded when it comes to following giant signs that say "I-5 NORTH" (or anything else), and tend to incorrectly follow lanes in big cities, especially when multiple lanes have to  exit. It seems like while there are probably several people doing it on purpose, there are probably almost as many innocent screwups, so it should be fairly easy to play stupid