Trenton, NJ One-Way Streets

[corco]

A) Many common terms aren't defined.  "Speed Limit" isn't defined.  "The" isn't defined.  So if you want to argue to a judge that 'speed limit' and 'one way' aren't defined, go for it.  He will probably tell you to look up the definition of 'guilty'.

B) You've never seen it because you probably have never looked it up.  But roads can't be signed nilly-willy.  If a road is going to be declared a one-way road, it has to be approved by the town/city/county/state. Same with speed limits: NJ has code detailing every single speed limit, and the boundaries of that speed limit.  Every other town/city/county/state in this country has it defined as well.  NJ makes it fairly easy to locate it online.

B) is absolutely not true. It is apparently true in New Jersey, but I know Montana's code inside and out because I deal with the relationship between municipal codes and state statute as part of my job on a daily basis in this state and know for certain that one-way streets are allowed to be adopted by a municipality's administrative decision, not one that is required to be coded in statute.

Where did I say it's required to be coded in statute?  I think I said "If a road is going to be declared a one-way road, it has to be approved by the town/city/county/state", which is the EXACT SAME THING you said.

There's no paper list of one-way roads in Montana. This does not exist. There does not have to be a list.The signs on the ground determine the directionality of a road. (The exception would be state maintained divided highways where there might be something, not sure).  The Montana statute that enables one way streets is very broad and has no such requirement- http://leg.mt.gov/bills/mca/61/8/61-8-206.htm. As long as the signage conforms to the MUTCD, one way streets are legal. There's no requirement for a public hearing, no requirement for formal council action, etc, since no law is being amended.

You were responding to my statement that having the list was code clutter, and I maintain that it is-  I don't think there's any good reason to codify one way streets.

But, duh, a government would have to approve a street being one way before a government put up signs declaring a one way street. I figured that went without saying. As an administrative decision that's something entirely different from codifying it in your city code.

[kphoger]

You are wrong about it being illegal to turn left out of the garage.

[citation needed]

Citation being . . . the left-turn arrow painted onto the pavement by authority of the city/county, the yellow center stripes surrounding a traffic island clearly intended to separate opposing directions of traffic by authority of the city/county, the absence of any one-way sign governing Livingston Street at the courthouse exit or the exit across the street or between there and the roundabout, the presence of five southwest-facing traffic signs (no parking, keep right, ped and bike warning, yield, roundabout flow) by authority of the city/county, and what we must assume is a daily precedent of use as a two-way facility.

–or–

It's the obvious intent.

[corco]

To re-lay my point out as clearly as possible as to why the argument that it is a one way street would fall flat on its face:

In this country, state law is supreme to municipal law. Any law any municipality can legally adopt  in this country is adopted because the state has passed enabling legislation allowing them to adopt said law. Some states give their municipalities more power than others, such as with New York and New York City, but even then the state of New York authorizes the city of New York to have extra leeway- the city of New York does not inherently have that power.

In the state of New Jersey, Revised Statute Title 39, Section 4-85.1 authorizes the use of one way streets. That authorization is stated below:

42.The commissioner with respect to highways under his jurisdiction may by regulation, and local and county authorities with respect to highways under their jurisdiction may by ordinance or resolution designate any such highway or any separate roadway of such highway for one-way traffic and shall erect appropriate signs giving notice thereon.

Upon a highway or roadway properly designated and signed for one-way traffic, a vehicle shall be driven only in the direction designated.

The city of Trenton has opted to designate highways by ordinance per said statute as one way streets in their municipal code, including the street in question. I don't think that's in question.

However, it's a two-pronged test. The authorizing statute states twice that signs must be erected appropriately to give notice and that the road shall be signed for one-way traffic. This road is not signed for one-way traffic, therefore it does not meet the requirements for a one-way street as indicated in state statute. In designating the street as one-way but not signing it as such, the city fails to meet half of the requirement of the state statute they have to meet in order for the street to be a one-way street. Since municipal code is subservient to state statute, the fact that the municipal code notes it as a one-way street is meaningless without signage.

Therefore, it is a two-way street.

[mrsman]

I have seen signs that direct you to left turns that are not allowed as well as that "RAHWAY" sign on NJ 27 SB at Cherry Street in Elizabeth that was there for decades long after Cherry was made a one way still directing NJ 27 SB motorists for Rahway into a one way street.

Then at Ford Avenue in Woodbridge Township at US 1 a New Brunswick sign was still in place after the left turn prohibition was put into place heading NB on Ford saying that "New Brunswick" is to the left on US 1 (which it is, but you have to go around a reverse jug handle to make that left) where now you cannot make the left turn legally.

Also New Jersey showing directions of routes on their overhead street blades is also in place where left turns are not allowed such as on Stuyvesant Avenue in Union at NJ 82.  Left turns were always never allowed at that intersection, but NJDOT has it showing NJ 82 W and E with arrows even to the left where one cannot make the left turn either to go West or East on Route 82.

The thing is follow the sign and a cop most likely will tell you "There is also a NO LEFT TURN sign there as well" and that is the main governing device with safety.  Remember Traffic Control Devices are more law than guide signs as shields and directional signs are not considered for safety, but as an aide.

Exactly.  And who's to say that the guide signs were meant for vehicular TRAFFIC.  They could be for bikes or peds or to let drivers know what's over there, without necssarily permitting them to turn. 

Here's an example in Downtown LA:  http://goo.gl/maps/4Fss4

9th Street is one-way eastbound.  The portion of 9th west of Figueroa was renamed James Wood Blvd.  But you can't turn onto James Wood Blvd, but the sign is there to let you know that it is indeed James Wood Blvd.  Also, there is a very clear no left turn sign here.