Restricted speed signage?

[awa355]

How long is a Restricted Speed Sign 'supposed' to be in place after the completion of roadworks? ( untill the local cops have their quota's? )

This road was sealed last week, has been cleared of loose chips. I could understand a 70kph restriction in place untill roadmarkings are painted, but this is a back road that doesn't have shoulder lines, just a center line. There are three stretches of repaired surfaces, all with 30kph signs at both ends.

[Jantar]

I would suspect that this is one of the many cases where either a TMP hasn't been approved by the roading authority, or has been ignored by the contractors.

[TrentNz]

the best question is why are you complaining :facepalm:

[awa355]

the best question is why are you complaining :facepalm:


Read my post!! I was asking how long a tempary sign should be left up after roadworks.

[jellywrestler]

Read my post!! I was asking how long a tempary sign should be left up after roadworks.

it's not always about the loose chip. fast vechiles over fresh seal can rip up the surface, most of the time this is why there's a limit

[rastuscat]

Read my post!! I was asking how long a tempary sign should be left up after roadworks.

I read your post.

The Police have nothing to do with the placing or removal of signs, so shove the quota comment up your.............no, forget I said that, feeling a bit sensitive.

48 hours after the seal is down, I think. I attended a course a few years ago and woke up long enough to hear someone say 48 hours.

[SMOKEU]

I'm always amazed at the idiots who drive at 90kmh on the open road, then slowing down to 50kmh in the 30kmh zones.

[steve_t]

I'm always amazed at the idiots who drive at 90kmh on the open road, then slowing down to 50kmh in the 30kmh zones.

I think you mean 80km/h on the open road and 80km/h in a 30 zone or 50 zone...

[Berries]

How long is a Restricted Speed Sign 'supposed' to be in place after the completion of roadworks? ( untill the local cops have their quota's? )

This road was sealed last week, has been cleared of loose chips. I could understand a 70kph restriction in place untill roadmarkings are painted, but this is a back road that doesn't have shoulder lines, just a center line. There are three stretches of repaired surfaces, all with 30kph signs at both ends.
It depends on quite a few things, there is no fixed timeframe. If you think they should be removed and it is a shitty back road then the chances are the contractors have forgotten them. Ring the council and they will tell you either a) they are up for this reason for another x days or b) the contractor should have taken them down and they will get on to them. If it is a 30 speed limit and there is no apparent reason, and no cones or other traffic management after a week then I would say it is the latter.

[awa355]

It depends on quite a few things, there is no fixed timeframe. If you think they should be removed and it is a shitty back road then the chances are the contractors have forgotten them. Ring the council and they will tell you either a) they are up for this reason for another x days or b) the contractor should have taken them down and they will get on to them. If it is a 30 speed limit and there is no apparent reason, and no cones or other traffic management after a week then I would say it is the latter.

Thanks for your reply. The road had been re sealed last week, and 30k's seemed excessively slow. As jellywrestler says, maybe there needs to be a period for the seal to harden before receiveing the full impact of high speeds.

Which brings up another question, why do we get so much tar melting on both old and new sealing?

[Berries]

To summarise - $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

[MSTRS]

The Police have nothing to do with the placing or removal of signs, so shove the quota comment up your.............no, forget I said that, feeling a bit sensitive.

There there, he didn't mean any upset. But his comment was fair enough. Be they temporary, necessary or no, those speed signs are legal as/when displayed and provide a wealth of opportunities for those of your profession (whether you/your colleagues DO anything is another matter)...



48 hours after the seal is down, I think. I attended a course a few years ago and woke up long enough to hear someone say 48 hours.
I think it's 48 days round these parts. Honestly...
I've seen the 30 temp signs out for a patch of repair that was left of the left wheel track (ie the lane edge marking), where the repair was not mint fresh and had obviously been completed some days before. Signs were still out 5 WEEKS later. This is on HW50, a popular and well-travelled 100kph road.

[oneofsix]

There there, he didn't mean any upset. But his comment was fair enough. Be they temporary, necessary or no, those speed signs are legal as/when displayed and provide a wealth of opportunities for those of your profession (whether you/your colleagues DO anything is another matter)....

There was a period, seems to have quietly disappeared, where there was a rule that it the temp sign was up when it shouldn't be the contractor could end up the one wearing the fine but can no longer find any ref to it on NZTA. Wish they would bring it back cause at the moment, with sooo many of them being misplaced jokes, people are no longer taking any of them serious, thus placing the workmen at risk. As per your example quoted below.


I've seen the 30 temp signs out for a patch of repair that was left of the left wheel track (ie the lane edge marking), where the repair was not mint fresh and had obviously been completed some days before. Signs were still out 5 WEEKS later. This is on HW50, a popular and well-travelled 100kph road.

Now the next time you see a 30k sign and a patch on the shoulder it would be natural to ignore the sign but this time there may actually be someone working just up the road and the sign not be related to the patch at all.

Getting one ticket for blasting through a dumb sign like the one in the quote just reinforces the scam attitude but of course rustuscat and so wouldn't do that now would they? Well rustuscat might not but ... on takes one :corn:

[davereid]

Now the next time you see a 30k sign and a patch on the shoulder it would be natural to ignore the sign but this time there may actually be someone working just up the road and the sign not be related to the patch at all.

Yes this has already happen with no passing lines.

Once upon-a-time they meant "Even if you are sure you can see, you can't - there is something obscuring your vision of on coming traffic so don't pass"

And I took them seriously.

Now they are everywhere, used just to ensure everyone travels at the speed of the lowest common denominator.

This ensures higher traffic densities, higher accident rates and the resultant increase in funding that the NZTA get.

So now, yellow lines mean check for cops, use your own judgment, pass if you think its safe.

[MSTRS]

Now the next time you see a 30k sign and a patch on the shoulder it would be natural to ignore the sign but this time there may actually be someone working just up the road and the sign not be related to the patch at all.


I mostly ignore those signs as a matter of course. I am not oblivious to the fact that there is just the speed sign - no cones, no 'men working' signs, no contractor vehicles. Observation and commonsense tells me that, barring some rozzer 'hiding in the bushes' there is no need to slow down.

The utter stupidity of such speed signs was brought home to me one fine evening on SH5. One section after another with 30kph repair zones where there was nothing but completed reseals, and patched bits off to the side, that appeared to have been swept already - and then, what do we have here? A 70kph sign. Best ignore that too, eh? Wrong!! Deep, uncompacted base coarse, rocks as big as your fist, spread over a torn up section several hundred metres long across both lanes. How the hell does that work? 30kph for nothing, 70kph for something that could kill. Fuckers...

[oneofsix]

Yes this has already happen with no passing lines.

Once upon-a-time they meant "Even if you are sure you can see, you can't - there is something obscuring your vision of on coming traffic so don't pass"

And I took them seriously.

Now they are everywhere, used just to ensure everyone travels at the speed of the lowest common denominator.

This ensures higher traffic densities, higher accident rates and the resultant increase in funding that the NZTA get.

So now, yellow lines mean check for cops, use your own judgment, pass if you think its safe.

yep and they are painted for cages, now do they think the cagers would react if the painted the yellow lines based on trucks? Ok where there is a place where say a dip in the road causes you to possibly think you have the visibility when you don't but otherwise the general overtaking rule should apply and no yellow paint. Just cause some idiot cause a yellow line to be painted there doesn't make it unsafe. My first encounter was one painted in perfect visibility because there was a side road, ignored the fact you could see down the side road as well.

[MSTRS]

Since the use of yellow lines for 'traffic calming' they have been turned into a joke, just like the 30kph signs. Relying on their presence (or lack of) to tell you what to do is a hiding to nothing.
There is one spot on SH5, heading towards Napier at the end of the plains, where the road dips and veers left before climbing back into sight. The dip is deep enough to hide a truck. There are NO yellow lines there and if you didn't know the road...

[Lelitu]

Since the use of yellow lines for 'traffic calming' they have been turned into a joke, just like the 30kph signs. Relying on their presence (or lack of) to tell you what to do is a hiding to nothing.
There is one spot on SH5, heading towards Napier at the end of the plains, where the road dips and veers left before climbing back into sight. The dip is deep enough to hide a truck. There are NO yellow lines there and if you didn't know the road...

this is where you need double yellows.
where even a sensible person, applying the rules correctly, would be deceived by geography into thinking visibility is better than it is.

there are lots of places that have double yellows that are just silly.
either so obviously unsafe to pass that anyone that does is clearly guilty of dangerous driving
or so obviously safe except in peak traffic, as to make a mockery of the markings

[steve_t]

this is where you need double yellows.
where even a sensible person, applying the rules correctly, would be deceived by geography into thinking visibility is better than it is.

there are lots of places that have double yellows that are just silly.
either so obviously unsafe to pass that anyone that does is clearly guilty of dangerous driving
or so obviously safe except in peak traffic, as to make a mockery of the markings

Bear in mind that overtaking at 104 km/h to get past someone going at 80-90km/h does mean you're on the wrong side of the road for quite a long time :jerry:

[MSTRS]

this is where you need double yellows.


Why? Only a problem in one direction. The other way, there is good visibility because of the topography.

[oneofsix]

Bear in mind that overtaking at 104 km/h to get past someone going at 80-90km/h does mean you're on the wrong side of the road for quite a long time :jerry:

and because you are "creeping" past them they speed up to match you without even realising they are doing it. :doh:

[Bassmatt]

Bear in mind that overtaking at 104 km/h to get past someone going at 80-90km/h does mean you're on the wrong side of the road for quite a long time :jerry:

Someone (AA perhaps) calculated the time required and if my recollection is correct it was around 30 secs on the WRONG side of the road.
Fuck that, my philosophy is wot until past. Takes about 5 seconds.

[steve_t]

Someone (AA perhaps) calculated the time required and if my recollection is correct it was around 30 secs on the WRONG side of the road.
Fuck that, my philosophy is wot until past. Takes about 5 seconds.

5 seconds? Should be less than that. Leave enough space in front of you to accelerate and already have a decent speed differential between you and the car you're passing so that the time in the wrong lane is minimal. I always facepalm when I see idiots driving up the arse of another car and then pull out to pass only to have it take them AGES to accelerate and get past. They spend way too much time in the wrong lane.
But yeah, same for me with WOT. No way I'm going past another vehicle at 104km/h. If I get busted, I'll cop the fine but spending the least amount of time on the wrong side of the road is generally more important to me than money. Big long straights are obviously less of an issue

[davereid]

100 km/hr is 27.7 metres per second.

If you pull out when 2 seconds (stopping distance) behind the car you intend to pass, and pull in two seconds in front of it you have 120 m of vehicle space to pass, more of less.

if you are doing 4 km/hr faster than the vehicle you are passing you are doing 1.1 m per second more than he is. It will take you 109 seconds to complete your overtaking legally.

You will have travelled more than 3 km.

[Berries]

Be they temporary, necessary or no, those speed signs are legal as/when displayed.
Well that's not strictly true and I would hope that before going in to enforce a temporary speed limit the Police actually check the layout of the site against the approved Traffic Management Plan to make sure what is out there is correct. Too often, especially when it comes to 30 and 50km/h limits on the open road, the site is not set out in accordance with COPTTM leaving its legality open to question.

[Lelitu]

Why? Only a problem in one direction. The other way, there is good visibility because of the topography.

my bad for assuming, I figured if the dip compromised visibility from one end
then it would from the other as well

apparently I was wrong.