Contradictory signs

[webny99]

So, it stands to reason, that your fellow motorists are not all Mensa members.

In any event, you're the only person here who views this as contradictory.

What remains unclear is which side of this argument is proving |jeffandnicole|'s point.

Oh, I don't think it's unclear at all. This entire discussion is proof that us roadgeeks tend to be much more exacting and technical about this stuff than the general population.

Case in point: the semantics of whether or not the signs are "contradictory" are not on my side, but I think the vast majority of drivers would see these signs as contradictory, in large part because they're not familiar with the difference between regulatory and advisory, and thus would view each sign as telling them to do something contrary to the other. That is not the technically correct view, as we have established, but I strongly believe it's the view most people would have.

See also:

Why do you insist that drivers are this stupid?

I don't see it that way at all. I see it as an awareness that posting the two messages so close together is in poor taste and should be avoided. Most people that notice the two signs are probably thinking about the huge variance between the two and how laughable it is, while very few are thinking about the freedom they've been granted to choose their speed or the difference between a regulatory and an advisory sign.

[hotdogPi]

Based on personal experience, you can be ticketed for advisory speeds in Massachusetts.

As in, you were ticketed yourself?

My mother was (remember, I don't drive). It was on an exit ramp.

The policeman didn't show up to court, so it was dismissed immediately.

[GaryV]

Suppose you are in the middle of a long stretch of 55 mph.  Are you saying any advisory sign in that stretch, maybe 20 mph, is contradictory with the 55 mph sign you passed 2 miles back?

If not, then what does the closeness of the signs do to make it contradictory?

Certainly you are given different information by the signs.  But because one is regulatory and the other is advisory, that doesn't make them contradictory.  Just different info for different reasons.

[hotdogPi]

Suppose you are in the middle of a long stretch of 55 mph.  Are you saying any advisory sign in that stretch, maybe 20 mph, is contradictory with the 55 mph sign you passed 2 miles back?

If not, then what does the closeness of the signs do to make it contradictory?

Certainly you are given different information by the signs.  But because one is regulatory and the other is advisory, that doesn't make them contradictory.  Just different info for different reasons.

If they're two miles apart, the second one would normally overwrite the first. Not the same situation.

[kphoger]

Suppose you are in the middle of a long stretch of 55 mph.  Are you saying any advisory sign in that stretch, maybe 20 mph, is contradictory with the 55 mph sign you passed 2 miles back?

If not, then what does the closeness of the signs do to make it contradictory?

Certainly you are given different information by the signs.  But because one is regulatory and the other is advisory, that doesn't make them contradictory.  Just different info for different reasons.

If they're two miles apart, the second one would normally overwrite the first. Not the same situation.

If they're ten yards apart, the second one still overrides the first.  Same situation.

[kphoger]

("Override" or "overwrite" is not the correct word anyway, as we've already established the signs have different meanings.)

[Rothman]

I nominare jakeroot for Forum Nanny.

[SectorZ]

I came across a few today...

Newton, MA Rest Area on I-95, https://goo.gl/maps/HgJthdJBqXLf2NYs6

You can argue the sign is for walking to the entrance, but driving in a lot you don't quickly interpret it that way. Also, you can see that sign from far away but can't see the do not enter until on top of it

Taunton, MA on Myles Standish Blvd, one of the busiest heavy industrial roadways in the state
First sign, https://goo.gl/maps/eXCQ22jK1ezC3YTG6
Second sign a few hundred feet later, https://goo.gl/maps/yva6hArBpbJ2Ktey5

[vdeane]

Based on personal experience, you can be ticketed for advisory speeds in Massachusetts.

As in, you were ticketed yourself?

My mother was (remember, I don't drive). It was on an exit ramp.

The policeman didn't show up to court, so it was dismissed immediately.

My understanding is that a court told MA that they couldn't enforce advisory limits, to which MA responded by replacing their advisory limits with regulatory ones.

[kphoger]

I nominare jakeroot for Forum Nanny.

I second.

Mods/Admin:  Can you make a custom plaque for him?  Kind of like [DOT Employee], except [Forum Nanny].

[SectorZ]

Based on personal experience, you can be ticketed for advisory speeds in Massachusetts.

As in, you were ticketed yourself?

My mother was (remember, I don't drive). It was on an exit ramp.

The policeman didn't show up to court, so it was dismissed immediately.

My understanding is that a court told MA that they couldn't enforce advisory limits, to which MA responded by replacing their advisory limits with regulatory ones.

Just like with the EZ-Pass lanes (then Fast Lane). Years ago they had speed limit signs (of 15 MPH) that were yellow instead of white. Someone won in court over the definition of the color of the sign, and instantly after they switched the signs to white ones.

[vdeane]

Something I found on the Lake Ontario State Parkway: commercial vehicles prohibited and then commercial vehicles must exit.  It seems to me like it would be easier to have them exit at Latta like the second sign says rather than have them turn right onto Lake and then left a block or two later like the first sign requires.

[jakeroot]

I nominare jakeroot for Forum Nanny.

I second.

Mods/Admin:  Can you make a custom plaque for him?  Kind of like [DOT Employee], except [Forum Nanny].

With an outline of Mary Poppins for the icon.

[webny99]

Something I found on the Lake Ontario State Parkway: commercial vehicles prohibited and then commercial vehicles must exit.  It seems to me like it would be easier to have them exit at Latta like the second sign says rather than have them turn right onto Lake and then left a block or two later like the first sign requires.

The first sign could really be relocated to the other side of the Latta Rd. exit, since the Latta Rd. bridge itself isn't a hazard for any commercial vehicles that make it that far.

[vdeane]

Something I found on the Lake Ontario State Parkway: commercial vehicles prohibited and then commercial vehicles must exit.  It seems to me like it would be easier to have them exit at Latta like the second sign says rather than have them turn right onto Lake and then left a block or two later like the first sign requires.

The first sign could really be relocated to the other side of the Latta Rd. exit, since the Latta Rd. bridge itself isn't a hazard for any commercial vehicles that make it that far.

I swear I remember a brief period where there was also a "commercial vehicles must exit" sign prior the Greenleaf Road exit (yep, there were three).

[Scott5114]

My wife just got a job in Oklahoma City, which she isn't very familiar with driving-wise (usually when we go up to the city I drive). Today, she went up there, which led to this exchange:


She's southbound on Meridian Avenue at I-40. Technically contradictory, although you can kind of grok OKC's/ODOT's intent when you've been through a few interchanges set up this way. But still, there is no signage indicating that the "left turn" here is for the eastbound I-40 service road (and thus the eastbound I-40 ramp) after the bridge.

As is my tendency when I run across a squirrelly ODOT practice, I went to check how KDOT handles the same sort of situation, and it's much clearer (southbound 78th Street at I-70 in Kansas City):

[webny99]

[img snipped]
Technically contradictory, although you can kind of grok OKC's/ODOT's intent when you've been through a few interchanges set up this way.

As is my tendency when I run across a squirrelly ODOT practice, I went to check how KDOT handles the same sort of situation, and it's much clearer:
[img snipped]

Yikes. I am not a fan of the painted turn arrows being used in advance of the "no left turn" intersection, or really any other intersection than the one it's for.

The left turn lane opening up prior to the over/underpass is something I've noticed is common in other states, but it's somewhat rare here in NY. There were only two examples that immediately came to mind, and I was pleasantly surprised to find that both are signed similar to how KDOT does it: here and here (notably, these are both one-off interchanges; I can't think of any examples on our actual freeway network).

[SkyPesos]

My wife just got a job in Oklahoma City, which she isn't very familiar with driving-wise (usually when we go up to the city I drive). Today, she went up there, which led to this exchange:
[img]

She's southbound on Meridian Avenue at I-40. Technically contradictory, although you can kind of grok OKC's/ODOT's intent when you've been through a few interchanges set up this way. But still, there is no signage indicating that the "left turn" here is for the eastbound I-40 service road (and thus the eastbound I-40 ramp) after the bridge.

As is my tendency when I run across a squirrelly ODOT practice, I went to check how KDOT handles the same sort of situation, and it's much clearer (southbound 78th Street at I-70 in Kansas City):
[img]

This is my first time seeing left turn lane markings before the first intersection (the one that disallows left turns) in a diamond interchange, and going to say outright that it will confuse people that way. I found a MoDOT (St Louis) example with the 2 left lanes marked as lanes to get onto I-64 E, but not as left turn lanes until past the first signals set.

Here's an Ohio example, similar to your Kansas example.

[Scott5114]

This is my first time seeing left turn lane markings before the first intersection (the one that disallows left turns) in a diamond interchange, and going to say outright that it will confuse people that way.

Well, as you can see, it certainly confused my wife (who I am proud to say is a pretty sharp woman). But, I mean, remember, this is ODOT we're talking about; is it any wonder they did something confusing?

[interstatefan990]

Here is another NY example of this kind of left turn-lane.

https://goo.gl/maps/251BfYFvrc7dUtr69

Notice how the I-684 ramp is signed as "SECOND LEFT" instead of an overhead lane arrow:

https://goo.gl/maps/BQFQu3o86bgtxzo7A

[kphoger]

This is my first time seeing left turn lane markings before the first intersection (the one that disallows left turns) in a diamond interchange, and going to say outright that it will confuse people that way.

Well, as you can see, it certainly confused my wife (who I am proud to say is a pretty sharp woman). But, I mean, remember, this is ODOT we're talking about; is it any wonder they did something confusing?

Oh, it gets worse.  Forget the painted arrows.  Just look at the signs themselves.

[jmacswimmer]

My wife just got a job in Oklahoma City, which she isn't very familiar with driving-wise (usually when we go up to the city I drive). Today, she went up there, which led to this exchange:
[img]

She's southbound on Meridian Avenue at I-40. Technically contradictory, although you can kind of grok OKC's/ODOT's intent when you've been through a few interchanges set up this way. But still, there is no signage indicating that the "left turn" here is for the eastbound I-40 service road (and thus the eastbound I-40 ramp) after the bridge.

As is my tendency when I run across a squirrelly ODOT practice, I went to check how KDOT handles the same sort of situation, and it's much clearer (southbound 78th Street at I-70 in Kansas City):
[img]

This is my first time seeing left turn lane markings before the first intersection (the one that disallows left turns) in a diamond interchange, and going to say outright that it will confuse people that way. I found a MoDOT (St Louis) example with the 2 left lanes marked as lanes to get onto I-64 E, but not as left turn lanes until past the first signals set.

Here's an Ohio example, similar to your Kansas example.

Here's one from Maryland that instantly came to mind upon seeing these: I-270 exit 1.

The most recent streetview makes it look like MDOT SHA is content to let the left-turn arrows gradually fade out, and the use of 2 "NO Left/U-turn" signs makes me wonder if somewhere along the way, drivers have attempted to turn left at the first light.

I imagine the "Left 2 Lanes" verbiage on the ground-mounted sign was chosen intentionally (overhead signage upstream says "Keep Left" rather than "Next Left"), but I wonder if "Left at Second Signal" would be better?  I seem to recall seeing something like that on a sign elsewhere, but can't remember where.

(Update: found an example of this from MD 97 @ MD 200 - different situation here, but IMHO would also be good verbiage to use at these situations being discussed in the last couple posts)

[vdeane]

[img snipped]
Technically contradictory, although you can kind of grok OKC's/ODOT's intent when you've been through a few interchanges set up this way.

As is my tendency when I run across a squirrelly ODOT practice, I went to check how KDOT handles the same sort of situation, and it's much clearer:
[img snipped]

Yikes. I am not a fan of the painted turn arrows being used in advance of the "no left turn" intersection, or really any other intersection than the one it's for.

The left turn lane opening up prior to the over/underpass is something I've noticed is common in other states, but it's somewhat rare here in NY. There were only two examples that immediately came to mind, and I was pleasantly surprised to find that both are signed similar to how KDOT does it: here and here (notably, these are both one-off interchanges; I can't think of any examples on our actual freeway network).

There's a few.  I-90 at Everett Road, Main Street/Corinth Road at I-87, and Elmwood Avenue at I-590 come to mind.

[webny99]

The left turn lane opening up prior to the over/underpass is something I've noticed is common in other states, but it's somewhat rare here in NY. There were only two examples that immediately came to mind, and I was pleasantly surprised to find that both are signed similar to how KDOT does it: here and here (notably, these are both one-off interchanges; I can't think of any examples on our actual freeway network).

There's a few.  I-90 at Everett Road, Main Street/Corinth Road at I-87, and Elmwood Avenue at I-590 come to mind.

Ah, yes. Forgot about that sneaky partial interchange. Arrows are in use there, but quite contrary to the Oklahoma example, they tell you to go straight at the first intersection instead of turning left, as shown here (note the traffic signal as well as the arrows on the pavement).

[jakeroot]

With regards to Washington State's preferences: exit-only markings are the preferred style, or solid lines. Turn arrows are not used before the first signal. More often, straight arrows are used, with no arrows in the through lanes:

Union Ave @ WA-16, Tacoma
NE 4th St @ I-405, Bellevue
NE 40th St @ WA-520, Redmond
So 277th @ WA-167, Kent

There is this non-interchange example in Tacoma that is marked in advance with a left turn arrow, but it should be pretty clear that you turn left at the second signal.