“Do not enter” not signed or visible from main road, is this enforceable?

[LPCJr]

https://maps.app.goo.gl/FWCS4Q2QyHE6G2As5?g_st=ic

This side street has a "do not enter"  sign posted for certain hours of the day. On the main road which intersects there are no signs whatsoever indicating that turns are prohibited at certain hours. As a result, one does not see the do not enter sign until after they have commenced the turn.

It seems like this would be a very easy ticket to fight and win. If I enter the left turn lane and make a left turn, I am breaking the law during restricted hours. If I enter the left turn lane, maybe happen to turn my head and notice the do not enter sign, I am also breaking the law if I go straight or try to exit the turn lane.

It seems to me that for this to be enforceable, a driver would need to have proper notice so as to avoid entering the turn lane.

The interesting thing is that this sign has been there well over 20 years and there's never been any changes. The road is a shortcut and there are times I'm tempted to make the turn, knowing that I would have (I think) a really good defense if I was stopped. That said, I haven't followed through.

Any thoughts on whether this signage is enforceable?

[ran4sh]

I've never heard of it being against the law to change lanes, including changing from a turn lane to a thru lane. They are single white lines for a reason.

But I do agree that "no left turn" and "no right turn" must be posted where it applies.

[1995hoo]

I've never heard of it being against the law to change lanes, including changing from a turn lane to a thru lane. They are single white lines for a reason.

...

I remember in driver's ed in Virginia some 34 years ago they emphasized that once you're in a turn-only lane, there are three legal ways to leave that lane: turn in the direction of the turn-only restriction, follow directions from a police officer or other emergency responder to leave the lane, or call a tow truck. Whether that's true everywhere, who knows.

[jeffandnicole]

I've never heard of it being against the law to change lanes, including changing from a turn lane to a thru lane. They are single white lines for a reason.

...

I remember in driver's ed in Virginia some 34 years ago they emphasized that once you're in a turn-only lane, there are three legal ways to leave that lane: turn in the direction of the turn-only restriction, follow directions from a police officer or other emergency responder to leave the lane, or call a tow truck. Whether that's true everywhere, who knows.

The problem with teaching any subject is that if the instructor's knowledge is wrong, they pass it along to their students who then learn it wrong.

[MultiMillionMiler]

I've never heard of it being against the law to change lanes, including changing from a turn lane to a thru lane. They are single white lines for a reason.

...

I remember in driver's ed in Virginia some 34 years ago they emphasized that once you're in a turn-only lane, there are three legal ways to leave that lane: turn in the direction of the turn-only restriction, follow directions from a police officer or other emergency responder to leave the lane, or call a tow truck. Whether that's true everywhere, who knows.

The problem with teaching any subject is that if the instructor's knowledge is wrong, they pass it along to their students who then learn it wrong.

Call a tow truck because you're in a turning lane by accident LMAO

[CtrlAltDel]

https://maps.app.goo.gl/FWCS4Q2QyHE6G2As5?g_st=ic

This side street has a "do not enter"  sign posted for certain hours of the day. On the main road which intersects there are no signs whatsoever indicating that turns are prohibited at certain hours. As a result, one does not see the do not enter sign until after they have commenced the turn.

It seems like this would be a very easy ticket to fight and win. If I enter the left turn lane and make a left turn, I am breaking the law during restricted hours. If I enter the left turn lane, maybe happen to turn my head and notice the do not enter sign, I am also breaking the law if I go straight or try to exit the turn lane.

It seems to me that for this to be enforceable, a driver would need to have proper notice so as to avoid entering the turn lane.

The interesting thing is that this sign has been there well over 20 years and there's never been any changes. The road is a shortcut and there are times I'm tempted to make the turn, knowing that I would have (I think) a really good defense if I was stopped. That said, I haven't followed through.

Any thoughts on whether this signage is enforceable?

You might be right:  Section 3111(b) of Title 75 of the 2021 Pennsylvania Consolidated and Unconsolidated Statutes states:

No provision of this title for which official traffic-control devices are required shall be enforced against an alleged violator if at the time and place of the alleged violation an official device is not in proper position and sufficiently legible to be seen by an ordinarily observant person. Whenever a particular section does not state that official traffic-control devices are required, the section shall be effective even though no devices are erected or in place.

It all depends on whether "in proper position and sufficiently legible to be seen by an ordinarily observant person" includes some idea of lead time. I can see that going either way.

[SectorZ]

A day after Lord Carhorn gets banished and someone posts something about a roadway named "Flat Rd".

[Mapmikey]

It looks like they are just trying to prevent short cuts during rush hour.  And these predate GMSV and before there was a stoplight at PA 29.

Note on the other end of Flat Rd they have the same prohibition during the morning rush.
https://goo.gl/maps/VWVJW2RcEiu4JdEM6

Also, they have a morning prohibition on the only road that goes to Flat Rd between its endpoints
https://goo.gl/maps/j4YMCtFGTYW35psX9

This second EB prohibition effectively keeps people from their homes, so my guess is that this is not actively enforced and the signs should really be No Thru Traffic instead of Do Not Enter.

There is another escape from being in the left turn lane on PA29 north.  A U-turn (no sign prohibiting this)

[hbelkins]

A day after Lord Carhorn gets banished and someone posts something about a roadway named "Flat Rd".

Did he seriously get banned? I missed that announcement, although I did read the drama that led to that thread being locked.

[JoePCool14]

A day after Lord Carhorn gets banished and someone posts something about a roadway named "Flat Rd".

Did he seriously get banned? I missed that announcement, although I did read the drama that led to that thread being locked.

Most likely. His name doesn't show up in the Members tab anymore.

[KEK Inc.]

This case reminds me of these on US-2 in WA. 


https://www.google.com/maps/@47.8672448,-121.7346735,3a,51.3y,38.43h,90.23t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sgTked1P6-3hpdbJk51E2Iw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Traffic gets bad for recreation traffic, especially Sunday afternoons as people return from their weekend adventures to Seattle.

They use yellow warning signs to indicate "local traffic only, no US-2 bypass", and I've heard these towns have local police enforcing it.  I wonder if anyone has ever contested the legality of the sign, since it's not a regulatory sign.

[LilianaUwU]

A day after Lord Carhorn gets banished and someone posts something about a roadway named "Flat Rd".

Did he seriously get banned? I missed that announcement, although I did read the drama that led to that thread being locked.

Most likely. His name doesn't show up in the Members tab anymore.

He did get banned.

[MultiMillionMiler]

A day after Lord Carhorn gets banished and someone posts something about a roadway named "Flat Rd".

Did he seriously get banned? I missed that announcement, although I did read the drama that led to that thread being locked.

What thread was that?

[hotdogPi]

A day after Lord Carhorn gets banished and someone posts something about a roadway named "Flat Rd".

Did he seriously get banned? I missed that announcement, although I did read the drama that led to that thread being locked.

What thread was that?

https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=31553.100. Start with reply #104.

[jemacedo9]

That Flat Rd prohibition has been in place as far back as the mid 1990s (I worked in that area).  At that time, the 4-lane section of PA 29 ended there, so headed north was only 2-lanes and the traffic was brutal.  Traffic would back up from there up to the PA 29/Charlestown Rd/Phoenixville Pike intersection.  The Warner Lane cut-off hadn't been built yet.

At the west end of Flat Rd, that area was mainly residential and they complained about the cut-through traffic, enough to get the prohibition in place. 

[Revive 755]

There's a somewhat similar time of day do not enter setup in Elmhurst, Illinois, but it appears the Elmhurts example can be seen from the cross street.

[mrsman]

These types of signs are pretty common around here (MD suburbs of DC) as well as in the L.A. area (and other places I've been).  But in almost all cases, there is also a turn restriction sign on the main street.  I think the sign is enforceable without the side signs, but as a matter of fairness, there should be other signs with turn restrictions.

In almost all of the cases, the restriction is from a big street to a small street.  Sometimes it is a turn restriction from one direction, but in other cases, it is a restriction for all moving traffic from the intersection with the big street (left, right, and straight).  In many cases, there is a corresponding set of signs at the other side for the opposite rush hour, but not always.  The people who live on the side street can get home, they just have to go around the longer way

There are some cases where the restriction is on the side street for a turn onto the main street.  These are significantly rarer, because if the motivation is to cut down on side street bypass traffic, it is usually better to restrict the traffic from entering in the first place, not to allow them in and prevent them from leaving in the natural way.  Yet, I know of two such situations, both in Los Angeles.

https://www.google.com/maps/@34.0818877,-118.3443442,3a,75y,112.01h,76.86t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sDwfLzx0lanJEVQt8fv8ZfQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Clinton at La Brea has right turn restriction from Clinton (small) to La Brea (large).  There is also a similar restriction to turn on the alley west of La Brea.  Arguably, these signs are for school children safety as the restriction only applies on school days, and the afternoon restriction is typically earlier than most rush hour restrictions (that typically go to 6, 6:30, or 7).  The restriction on the sign is from 7 to 9 am and 1 to 5 pm and school buses are exempt.  There is a private Jewish school (yeshiva) with buildings on both the SE and SW corner of La Brea/Clinton that has a schedule different from the local public schools and also has school on most Sundays.  I don't know how drivers are supposed to know which days the sign is applicable if they are unaware of the school's calendar.  Basically, don't make this turn -- take either Melrose or Rosewood to reach La Brea.

https://www.google.com/maps/@34.0919771,-118.258664,3a,37.5y,258.16h,89.82t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s-I4t0Bt14yilFiioxVMiYw!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3D-I4t0Bt14yilFiioxVMiYw%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D273.58615%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192

https://www.google.com/maps/@34.091966,-118.2638206,3a,75y,279.13h,90t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sQcLIu7iOmK_EmsxRQRDATg!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DQcLIu7iOmK_EmsxRQRDATg%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D280.9772%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192

The other side street to main street restriction that I am familiar with is at teh corner of Duane and Silver Lake.  No left turn from 6-10 am and 4-7 pm.  There are warning signs about this restriction at the intersection of Glendale/Waterloo/Fargo.  That intersection also happens to be the second to last exit off of the CA-2 freeway (which ends abrutply at a stub a little further south on Glendale Blvd).  Caltrans plans from the 1970's indicated that this freeway was supposed to continue to reach US 101 (and then further west as the Beverly Hills Freeway, paralleling Santa Monica Blvd) to at least I-405.  Naturally a lot of the traffic is headed toward US 101 and it seems that during rush hour, it is faster to take side streets to Silver Lake rather than following the traffic on Glendale Blvd to Alvarado, which is the signed route of CA-2.  [Not sure if this has been decomissioned, but the signs clearly guide traffic to US 101 via Glendale and Alvarado.]  This neighborhood is full of narrow and steep streets and should not bear a freeway's worth of traffic.  The sign very clearly limits rush hour bypasses




In many states, regular one-way streets can be signed with just a one-way sign, no need for turn restrictions from the side street or do not enter.  (This is particularly true in NYC, but in other places as well.)  Of course, it is a good idea to have the extra signs, but it is not strictly necessary.  So many streets are one-way in NYC, that people come to expect to look for the one-way signs, even though the turn signs are not also present.  I would venture to guess that the signs for OP's example are also enforceable, even though it would be a good idea to include turn restriction signs visible from the main street.

[kphoger]

https://maps.app.goo.gl/FWCS4Q2QyHE6G2As5?g_st=ic

This side street has a "do not enter"  sign posted for certain hours of the day. On the main road which intersects there are no signs whatsoever indicating that turns are prohibited at certain hours. As a result, one does not see the do not enter sign until after they have commenced the turn.

It seems like this would be a very easy ticket to fight and win. If I enter the left turn lane and make a left turn, I am breaking the law during restricted hours. If I enter the left turn lane, maybe happen to turn my head and notice the do not enter sign, I am also breaking the law if I go straight or try to exit the turn lane.

It seems to me that for this to be enforceable, a driver would need to have proper notice so as to avoid entering the turn lane.

The interesting thing is that this sign has been there well over 20 years and there's never been any changes. The road is a shortcut and there are times I'm tempted to make the turn, knowing that I would have (I think) a really good defense if I was stopped. That said, I haven't followed through.

Any thoughts on whether this signage is enforceable?

Is there anything legally preventing you from doing a U-turn there?

[Flint1979]

I went down the street in GSV and at the other end of the road they have DO NOT ENTER M-F between 7-9am. https://www.google.com/maps/@40.0613616,-75.5591354,3a,16.4y,38.78h,86.47t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sF-tRT332uYCH5TIBULjfpg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

[kphoger]

For what it's worth, here's a similar example in Carmi, IL:  https://goo.gl/maps/QDhFUTTVizSjpTMo6

That sign was actually erected because of me.  The building on the right side of the street was a customer on my delivery route.  I parked along the side, next to the ramp.  While I was making my delivery, one of the employees told me the school buses would be lining up soon.  I used the restroom and went back out to the truck.  I went into the back, rearranged my cargo a little bit to make sure nothing would fall over during the drive, checked my next couple of tickets to make sure I had what they'd ordered, and got back in the cab.  (I might have even been picking up a machine, which means I would have had to strap it in securely.)  By this point, there were a zillion school buses waiting for me.  I drove away, and they all lined up, double-file, filling Rice Street.

A day or two later, my boss confronted me and said that I had rudely ignored the employee's instruction to move my truck.  I replied that nobody had told me to move my truck, just that they'd told me the buses would be lining up soon.  Furthermore, I clarified that I was parked along a public street.  Apparently, the buses filled up that block every day at a certain time, ready to go pick up students, and everyone in town just kind of knew that.  No signage telling people not to park there at that time or anything.  I put my foot down, insisting that I had every legal right to park on a public street.

Not long after that, the sign you see in the GSV shot appeared.  (Ironically, it was always from the other end of the block that I entered, where no sign was posted.)

[1995hoo]

I've never heard of it being against the law to change lanes, including changing from a turn lane to a thru lane. They are single white lines for a reason.

...

I remember in driver's ed in Virginia some 34 years ago they emphasized that once you're in a turn-only lane, there are three legal ways to leave that lane: turn in the direction of the turn-only restriction, follow directions from a police officer or other emergency responder to leave the lane, or call a tow truck. Whether that's true everywhere, who knows.

The problem with teaching any subject is that if the instructor's knowledge is wrong, they pass it along to their students who then learn it wrong.

Except the instructor wasn't wrong under Virginia law. The signs and the pavement markings requiring traffic in that lane to turn in a certain direction are mandatory. If you fail to obey them, it's chargeable under a state statute as failure to obey a traffic control device.

[kphoger]

Except the instructor wasn't wrong under Virginia law. The signs and the pavement markings requiring traffic in that lane to turn in a certain direction are mandatory. If you fail to obey them, it's chargeable under a state statute as failure to obey a traffic control device.

That's why you change lanes out of the turn lane prior to the intersection.

[Troubleshooter]

https://maps.app.goo.gl/FWCS4Q2QyHE6G2As5?g_st=ic

This side street has a "do not enter"  sign posted for certain hours of the day. On the main road which intersects there are no signs whatsoever indicating that turns are prohibited at certain hours. As a result, one does not see the do not enter sign until after they have commenced the turn.

It seems like this would be a very easy ticket to fight and win. If I enter the left turn lane and make a left turn, I am breaking the law during restricted hours. If I enter the left turn lane, maybe happen to turn my head and notice the do not enter sign, I am also breaking the law if I go straight or try to exit the turn lane.

It seems to me that for this to be enforceable, a driver would need to have proper notice so as to avoid entering the turn lane.

The interesting thing is that this sign has been there well over 20 years and there's never been any changes. The road is a shortcut and there are times I'm tempted to make the turn, knowing that I would have (I think) a really good defense if I was stopped. That said, I haven't followed through.

Any thoughts on whether this signage is enforceable?

Is the road one way at certain times of the day?

Is it a private road with signs installed by the property owner?