> Someone better add the routing restriction to this: > > https://maps.google.com/maps?q=dale+mabry+and+ehrlich,+tampa&hl=en&ll=28.08305,-82.505677&spn=0.000588,0.000426&sll=28.083838,-82.505216&sspn=0.002339,0.001706&t=h&hnear=Dale+Mabry+Hwy+%26+Ehrlich+Rd,+Tampa,+Florida+33618&z=21 > > Along with the thousands of other places where this occurs. >
Not necessarily - it is the 'system' of markings in a particular situation, See offline comments below. Michael ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Michael Patrick <geodes...@gmail.com> Date: Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 1:55 PM Subject: Re: [Talk-us] Turn restriction dispute FHP To: Nathan Edgars II <nerou...@gmail.com> > That passage from the Florida Driver Handbook is not based in law, but seems to have been made up. Florida has adopted the MUTCD, which defines a single white line as having no restrictive meaning. The FHP's ignorance of the law is troubling but not surprising. The engineer here says there is no one specific meaning for a single white line ( 'sort of'', I think what you mean). That being said, it's the full * system* of markers that deliver the intent and meaning, a single white line can appear in many different places, to restrict movement in and out from 'trap lanes', or more specifically, when it is used in sequence with normal dashed line, to close dashes (warning), to a solid line (lane restriction, and eventually to the gore triangle. He said the solid white line is for all intents and purposes regarded as part of the gore marking and is illegal to cross ( even though it is not 'doubled' as mentioned below). See http://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/htm/2009r1r2/part3/fig3b_08_1_longdesc.htm ) The MUTEC is a design guideline, state and local standards can supersede or deviate with their own published standards, and there is a huge amount of legacy markings which are gradually upgraded during maintenance. Law enforcement 'interprets' MUTEC in conjunction with other guidelines ("Uniform Vehicle Code (UVC)" from the National Committee on Uniform Traffic Laws ), and local ordinance. For what it's worth, if I had pulled off on the exit, checked my trailer lights, and proceeded to the top of the lamp, I probably would have went straight through, because of the double signal configuration and position ( unless both green were left arrows), and the gore line isn't awfully visible, and traffic probably would have been stopped on all three lanes on Buena Vista Drive. Having done it once, though, I personally wouldn't do it again. > ... it's a little ridiculous that this dispute is going so far that anyone even consulted an expert. Ooops! Sorry, I talked to an expert. Again. Sigh. I should have realized that the routing in question is transecting the intersection of two alternate realities, OSM and also within a mile of The Magic of Disney Animation. So instead of the Florida Highway Patrol, I've forwarded the question to the staff at the co-located Twilight Zone Theater and the cast and characters of 'Cars'<http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/3/34/Cars_2006.jpg> for a more OSM suitable answer. > Obviously NE2 is wrong; we get it. Even a stopped clock is right twice a day. (Once if it's showing 24 ... ) Michael ----Reference:------ Not exactly the same situation, but related: http://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/knowledge/faqs/faq_part3.htm#q7 1. *Q: Does a solid white lane line prohibit crossing to change lanes on the approach to an intersection?* *A:* MUTCD Section 3B.04 says to use a single solid white line to "discourage" crossing the lane line and a double white line to prohibit crossing it. A single solid white line is used for a variety of lines that drivers should be discouraged from crossing in "normal" situations but which drivers do need to cross in some situations. An example is the "edge line"---the line that separates the rightmost travel lane from the shoulder. The single solid white line discourages crossing onto the shoulder but does not prohibit it because it is obviously desirable and/or necessary to cross it in some situations, such as an emergency stop. The MUTCD sets the national standards for pavement markings, but it does not establish what the laws of the individual States may define as the legal meanings of various types of lines in each State. Some States may have laws that prohibit crossing a single solid white line in specific circumstances. Some states also have laws that go beyond just the meaning of the lines, by making certain driving maneuvers illegal under certain situations regardless of the markings, such as changing lanes when it is "unsafe to do so". http://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/knowledge/faqs/faq_part3.htm#q8 1. *Q: How far in advance of a lane drop should the special lane drop markings begin?* *A:* For a lane drop on a freeway or expressway, Section 3B.04 and Figure 3B-10 both note that a lane drop marking consisting of a wide, white dotted line, 3 feet in length with a 9 feet gap separation, shall be used and that it should begin at least ½ mile in advance of the theoretical gore of the freeway exit ramp. For lane drops on conventional roads, where a through lane becomes a "trap lane" (that is, a turn only lane), Section 3B.04 states that a lane drop marking consisting of a wide, white dotted line, 3 feet in length with a 9 feet gap separation shall also be used and should begin a distance in advance of the intersection that is determined by engineering judgment as suitable to enable drivers who do not desire to make the mandatory turn to move out of the lane being dropped prior to reaching the queue of vehicles that are waiting to make the turn. The lane drop marking should begin no closer to the intersection than the most upstream regulatory or warning sign associated with the lane drop. Section 3B.04 also requires the use of a wide, white dotted lane line for auxiliary lanes of 2 miles or less between interchanges and for auxiliary lanes between intersections of 1 mile or less (see Figure 3B-10.) It is also important to note that where the number of through travel lanes is reduced between interchanges or intersections, that is not a "lane drop" but rather that is considered a "lane reduction transition", the markings for which are prescribed in Section 3B.09 and Figure 3B-14.
_______________________________________________ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us