|
|
| Re: Fighting the DOT S(BS) on Woodhaven Blvd (317263) | |||
 |
|||
| Home > BusChat | |||
|
[ Read Responses | Post a New Response | Return to the Index ] |
|
||
|
Re: Fighting the DOT S(BS) on Woodhaven Blvd |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Mon Aug 15 22:59:11 2016, in response to Re: Fighting the DOT S(BS) on Woodhaven Blvd, posted by BrooklynBus on Mon Aug 15 21:48:51 2016. Because DOT should have not ruled it out.That may be true. But the fact is they already ruled it out for whatever reasons. Unless your solution successfully addresses all (or at least most) the reasons they ruled it out, then it is not constructive to recommend to DOT an alternative they already dismissed. You seem to be of the opinion that government agencies are always correctI don't know why you'd say that. I've not said nor done anything to even remotely suggest that. This is yet another example of you completely misunderstanding what is going on and then getting all insulted when I tell you you're flat out wrong. You're flat out wrong! when they make mistakes and errors all the time.They make mistakes. They are human. I am in Atlantic City right now and the entrance to the Atlantic City Expressway from Baltic Avenue is marked "Exit Only" when it should have been marked "Entrance Only". You do not typically exit off local streets. It was confusing and appeared you should not enter through an "exit." But that was the way to get on the expressway.Dude. First of all, no, it is not confusing. Second of all, no, it in no way, shape, or form appears that you should not enter through an exit. If they didn't want you to enter, there would be completely different signage. It is quite clear that this is an EXIT off of Baltic Ave and/or an EXIT out of Atlantic City, and onto the AC Expressway to Philadelphia. Third of all, I spent a brief amount of timing looking at the MUTCD and the results are inconclusive. It shows this particular sign in the context of when you are already on a freeway/expressway. And in the context of a local road meeting a freeway/expressway, it provides examples of other signs that use the word entrance. However, it does not have this exact example situation of the lane layout leading to the entrance ramp. It also does not have the exact situation of this being one of the few exits off of an island. However, looking at another similar entrance to the AC Expressway from Atlantic City, I see more typical signage, though I see now that's it not really a similar situation as it is still local street and not really the point of no return. Finally, I see a sign that says "Expressway Only" with two arrows pointing ahead. That's a good sign, but it is beyond the intersection so again not a good example. I conclude at this time that the example you brought up seems to be non-standard, but there also does not seem to be a standard that correctly covers the situation. There's also the issue that Google Maps says this is a toll road, but all the advance signage leading to it does not mention a toll. Maybe there is an exit before the toll. You can tell me. It's a separate issue and I don't care to dive into that at the moment. I only mention it because it seems to be another non-standard issue in the area. But I assume there is a reason for it. I'm not going to first assume, like you often do, then the gov't is just plain wrong. I would do research before coming to even an initial high-level conclusion. Confusing signage is a cause of accidents.I don't see why you example would be confusing or the cause of accidents. The sign's meaning is very clear. |
|
|
|