Youthful Misconceptions

[D-Dey65]

Here's a non-youthful misconception: A guy at my office who is older than I am was adamant one day recently that federal law prohibits any speed limit higher than 55 mph.

Seriously, he didn't believe me when I said that law was repealed in 1995 and that it had been amended in the late 1980s to allow 65 on some roads. I showed him an 85-mph sign on TX-130 and he seemed to think it was fake.

I can't fathom how limited one's travel must be to believe the old 55-mph version of the NMSL is still in effect.

You're both in Virginia, right? He must know that's not true in your state. Or maybe he never left Northern Virginia (like that's much of an excuse for him not knowing it was repealed).

[1995hoo]

Here's a non-youthful misconception: A guy at my office who is older than I am was adamant one day recently that federal law prohibits any speed limit higher than 55 mph.

Seriously, he didn't believe me when I said that law was repealed in 1995 and that it had been amended in the late 1980s to allow 65 on some roads. I showed him an 85-mph sign on TX-130 and he seemed to think it was fake.

I can't fathom how limited one's travel must be to believe the old 55-mph version of the NMSL is still in effect.

You're both in Virginia, right? He must know that's not true in your state. Or maybe he never left Northern Virginia (like that's much of an excuse for him not knowing it was repealed).

He lives in DC (I work downtown). It's possible to travel in Northern Virginia, including Arlington County, and see 65-mph speed limits (the I-395 reversible roadway and the I-495 HO/T lanes).

[J N Winkler]

He lives in DC (I work downtown). It's possible to travel in Northern Virginia, including Arlington County, and see 65-mph speed limits (the I-395 reversible roadway and the I-495 HO/T lanes).

I still find it surprising that a person who presumably works in a law firm thinks the national 55 limit is still in effect.  I wonder how he would react if a third party asked him nondirectionally for a citation to the relevant provision in law or regulation.

[hbelkins]

A misconception of mine that was debunked just today-I thought the arrows/shields on BGSs were either painted on or was vinyl graphics. That is not the case, the for the arrow in the picture would have went with the other part of the sign

That is actually not a misconception--the sign in the photo has what appears to be a demountable arrow, but there are many signs where shields, arrows, and other copy are direct-applied or produced by a screen process.  I have also heard of a sign fabrication procedure where the background (not the foreground elements such as legend, arrows, etc.) is applied on top of a reflective substrate, but I do not think I have ever seen any examples in the field.  (Supposedly this process is favored for signs subject to vandalism since it leaves no foreground elements that can be peeled off to change the message.)

Kentucky uses demountable elements (border, route markers, lettering, arrows) on its contractor-installed guide signs.

Years ago, for state-installed small guide signs, Kentucky used a process where a green film was applied to a white reflective background. Then the sign elements -- border, arrows, lettering -- were cut out of a reflective substance and applied to the sign. It would be simple for someone to peel off a letter or two. In fact, I know of one sign not far from here that has the "I" missing in in "BEATTYVILLE."

Now, the state cuts out the letters in the green sheeting that is overlaid on the white reflective background.

[bm7]

I thought that "EXIT ONLY" meant that the exit was the only way to get to the place mentioned on the sign. I presume I somehow misunderstood it as "ONLY EXIT".

[bandit957]

I used to think the modern highway sign font didn't exist before the 1960s. That was before I realized how old yellow stop signs that used it were.

[jeffandnicole]

I thought that "EXIT ONLY" meant that the exit was the only way to get to the place mentioned on the sign. I presume I somehow misunderstood it as "ONLY EXIT".

I think this is one of the most misunderstood messages on our roads anywhere. If it needs to be explained to so many motorists, and there's so much confusion at the exits, the Feds should revised the message and/or the lane markings long ago. This message also is one not generally taught to new drivers, adding to the confusion.

[J N Winkler]

People who have never visited the US but are nevertheless familiar with American signs have told me that they have interpreted "Exit Only" as meaning that re-entry at the same exit is not possible.  (Some states do sign this latter condition, typically using a separate black-on-yellow sign.)

[jakeroot]

I think ["EXIT ONLY"] is one of the most misunderstood messages on our roads anywhere. If it needs to be explained to so many motorists, and there's so much confusion at the exits, the Feds should revised the message and/or the lane markings long ago. This message also is one not generally taught to new drivers, adding to the confusion.

I couldn't agree more; I've had similar thoughts for years. Several users and I have debated about the merits of using, for example, "EXIT ONLY" messages on arrow-per-lane signs, despite the arrows clearly displaying the exit as being a mandatory movement (the curved arrow should be warning enough).

If the 2009 MUTCD is any indication, Americans have a tendency to confuse white-on-green arrows as being "only messages", at least when directly adjacent to an "EXIT ONLY" plaque. If this is the case, why even bother with the EXIT ONLY message to begin with? I'm aware that the message has been around for decades, and was the result of studies ("NAME & NAME" that I can't recall at this moment), but I guess I'm uncertain if the current signage style is still necessary, and/or needs rethinking, and/or if that original study is still relevant.

[1995hoo]

People who have never visited the US but are nevertheless familiar with American signs have told me that they have interpreted "Exit Only" as meaning that re-entry at the same exit is not possible.  (Some states do sign this latter condition, typically using a separate black-on-yellow sign.)

I've seen articles written by Americans asserting the interpretation you note. It says to me that "Exit Only"  isn't as clear as the FHWA would like to believe. I always liked Delaware's older signs that said either "Must Exit"  or "This Lane Must Exit"  (the latter stacked on two lines).

[Eth]

People who have never visited the US but are nevertheless familiar with American signs have told me that they have interpreted "Exit Only" as meaning that re-entry at the same exit is not possible.  (Some states do sign this latter condition, typically using a separate black-on-yellow sign.)

Georgia is among those states, though the message is white-on-green here. It would probably be better as black-on-yellow.

[kphoger]

When I was a kid, I thought that US Highways were built to higher standards than regular State highways.

Note, however, the following:

Establishment and Development of United States Numbered Highways
(Retained from October 13, 1991, Revised October 6, 1996)

ESTABLISHED POLICIES

14.  No route should be considered for inclusion in the U.S. numbered system that does not substantially meet the current AASHTO design standards.

[OracleUsr]

That "Vehicle towed at owner's expense" meant only as much as the owner could pay.

[kphoger]

When I was seven years old or so, I had a grotesque idea of what "body shop" meant.  I imagined it was some sort of doctor's office where you could go to swap out body parts or something.

[WestDakota]

I thought all curves in a road were 90 degrees, so I had a hard time understanding the layout of areas with roads going diagonal directions like SW/NE.

[thspfc]

I thought all curves in a road were 90 degrees, so I had a hard time understanding the layout of areas with roads going diagonal directions like SW/NE.

I understand how you might think that if you live in the Dakotas.

[stevashe]

I thought that "EXIT ONLY" meant that the exit was the only way to get to the place mentioned on the sign. I presume I somehow misunderstood it as "ONLY EXIT".

I think this is one of the most misunderstood messages on our roads anywhere. If it needs to be explained to so many motorists, and there's so much confusion at the exits, the Feds should revised the message and/or the lane markings long ago. This message also is one not generally taught to new drivers, adding to the confusion.

Really?? I've don't think I know anyone who doesn't understand what it means, and this is the first time I've ever heard anyone say it's confusing

[TheGrassGuy]

I used to believe...

...that all states used a circle for their state route sign. I grew up in New Jersey. Google Maps, which used ovals for all state routes, helped reinforce this belief. The first state I visited was New York (only the city), and I somehow never noticed the signs for NY-9A. The next states were Delaware and Maryland. Delaware reinforced my belief because it also used the circle, and as for Maryland, I thought the boxes they were using as state shields represented "local" routes, based on the AAA map legend (county routes also used boxes, but I knew it HAD to be different because county routes OBVIOUSLY used pentagons everywhere, see below for more). But when I took a trip to Pennsylvania, the keystone for Route 332 shocked me. 'What the heck,' I thought, 'did a keystone mean? Some new kind of freeway? Some weird toll road?'

...that every state numbered their county routes like New Jersey.

...that every county in New Jersey numbered their county routes like New Jersey. My first trip to the Jersey Shore was eventful.

...that the whole NJTP was I-95. It took me a while to learn that the whole segment below I-276 wasn't I-95.

...that New Jersey Route 27 and New York Route 27 were two separate highways. After all, both ended in New York City, didn't they? I always thought that if you started in Princeton and kept going north along Route 27, you'd eventually reach a dead end at the tippy top of Long Island in Montauk.

...that, although freeways were found in every state, they were only officially called "freeways" in California. Thanks a lot, daddy.

...that the Bronx River Parkway, the Sprain Brook Parkway, and the Taconic State Parkway were one long highway. This belief was reinforced by Google Maps' usage of orange (indicating a freeway) on the contiguous route up north, and yellow (indicating a non-freeway) for the other parts that came past the Sprain Brook Parkway.

I followed the Garden State Parkway on Bing Maps down to its southern terminus. My 5-year-old brain thought that Cape May was Florida. Yep, I was THAT stupid.

One day, I was just browsing through southern Indiana, when I came across a short segment of what was marked as I-69, which had just been realigned and therefore had no street view. It screwed with my mind, like, 'how the heck can a 2-digit interstate be THAT short?' I legit thought for almost a year after that that I-69 was less than a mile long.

And finally, this is not really a misconception per se, but I never knew that you could pass on dotted yellow lines until my parents did so on a road trip. I always thought that you were never allowed to pass the yellow line no matter what, and that the lines were dotted just for decoration. Dumb, isn't it? Well, it made sense to me as a child, because of head-on collisions and so on.

Bonus: My dad once told me that I-78 went all the way to California. Luckily, I wasn't that dumb by then, but my brother believed it.

[J3ebrules]

^^ I also used to believe that the entire Turnpike was I-95. I couldn't wrap my head around the famous 95 gap when I was younger.

[ozarkman417]

When I went on a road trip up to St. Louis as a kid I used to believe that MO supplemental route letters were only used once in the entire state. So when I found a Route D in St Louis County (Page Ave) I said "What if we took Route D home?" as there is a Route D in Springfield as well (Sunshine St). 

[J N Winkler]

I had trouble with the I-95 gap in NJ when I was dealing with it as a driver, which was largely before the emergence of the online road enthusiast culture.  I think at one point I got lost trying to follow signs to make the jump from I-95 in Pennsylvania to I-95 on the New Jersey Turnpike.  (I can't verify this since the signs posted in the mid-1990's are now largely gone and neither NJDOT nor the NJTA have their respective as-built plans libraries on open online public access.)  Eventually I developed a vague sense that I-95 in the general area of Trenton was somehow not to be relied on, and moved to a strategy of using its loop/spur routes to make the connection to the Turnpike.

I also had no idea that numbered routes could exist in multiple disjoint segments without having so much as a shadow existence in between.

[TheGrassGuy]

When I went on a road trip up to St. Louis as a kid I used to believe that MO supplemental route letters were only used once in the entire state. So when I found a Route D in St Louis County (Page Ave) I said "What if we took Route D home?" as there is a Route D in Springfield as well (Sunshine St).

So basically what I believed for State Routes 27 in NJ and NY? Hey, at least I knew from the start that U. S. Highways could be freeways (we took the Pulaski Skyway a lot).

Here's another one propagated by Google Maps: I thought that U. S. 1 Business in NJ-PA and Trenton was State Route 1, and that the same road somehow leaded to Delaware and became a toll road.

[jakeroot]

I'm *extremely* unfamiliar with southern NJ and the Philly area. Can anyone explain to me how the gap in the 95 developed? Seems like it could have been routed to interchanges with ramps. I know the plans for original 95 freeway route were scrapped, but why was the original routing plan itself not scrapped and 95 rerouted to another stretch of pavement? I'm sure this is an easy answer; I assume it's something to do with tolls?

[J N Winkler]

I'm *extremely* unfamiliar with southern NJ and the Philly area. Can anyone explain to me how the gap in the 95 developed? Seems like it could have been routed to interchanges with ramps. I know the plans for original 95 freeway route were scrapped, but why was the original routing plan itself not scrapped and 95 rerouted to another stretch of pavement? I'm sure this is an easy answer; I assume it's something to do with tolls?

This has been discussed at some length in the thread dealing with the I-95/Pennsylvania Turnpike interchange, but in brief, the freeway plan that was scrapped in 1982 (the Somerset Freeway) would have run in or close to the US 1 corridor between Trenton and what is now I-287, a bit to the north of the Turnpike.  The language removing it from the Interstate network provided for I-95 to be routed along the Pennsylvania Turnpike (via a direct connection that did not exist until last year) and across the Delaware River and then along the New Jersey Turnpike.  Although it took almost 40 years to develop the interchange project, it was never abandoned, and to do so would likely have involved giving up Interstate Construction funds.  (It has been described as the "golden spike" in the Interstate system because it was the last segment for which IC funds could be used.)

Stranger drivers in my situation--going from DC to NY and wishing to stay on freeways while avoiding both the Delaware Memorial Bridge and the bottom segment of the NJ Turnpike--would have benefited from interim signing guiding us along what is now I-295 and I-195 (past the then missing direct connection) to the NJ Turnpike access point.  I do not recall that this was provided, and in all honesty, this is a bit of a gumboil routing around the north of Trenton.

[thspfc]

I thought that the entirety of US-12 fell on the Madison Beltline. I was perplexed when I was on US-12 outside of Madison.