News:

why is this up in the corner now

Main Menu

Pavement Markings

Started by Michael, October 11, 2012, 09:25:47 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Michael

I had a few thoughts about various aspects of pavement markings that didn't fit into other threads, so I figured I'd create a topic, and hopefully it can be used by others in the future.

First, does anyone know why NYSDOT is repainting dedicated turn lane arrows?  I just emailed NYSDOT (see the quote below for the message), and will post their response when I get one.

Quote
Within the past few weeks, I've noticed that the markings for dedicated turn lanes have been ground out and repainted at a different spacing.  Instead of having the word "ONLY" directly before the arrow, the word and arrows are evenly spaced apart on both ends.  I was unable to find any new and/or changed requirements in the 2009 Federal MUTCD (the original revision from December 2009) or the 2012 NYS Supplement.  Most of the new arrows I've seen are located on Route 5 between Half Acre Road in Aurelius (listed as CR 5A HALF ACRE RD on the Traffic Volume Report) and Turnpike Road in Sennett (listed as CR 10A SENNETT in the Traffic Volume Report).  Any information would be greatly appreciated.




My second thought would apply to a "Pavement Markings with Design Errors" thread, but I thought that was too specific of a topic to make.  I took this photo yesterday on Genesee Street westbound at Loop Road here in Auburn.  It was repainted about a month ago, but my original photo from then was too blurry.



Central Avenue

I had to stare at that for like 2 minutes to figure out what the design error was, and now that I've seen it I feel appropriately stupid.
Routewitches. These children of the moving road gather strength from travel . . . Rather than controlling the road, routewitches choose to work with it, borrowing its strength and using it to make bargains with entities both living and dead. -- Seanan McGuire, Sparrow Hill Road

agentsteel53

Quote from: Central Avenue on October 12, 2012, 03:46:28 AM
I had to stare at that for like 2 minutes to figure out what the design error was, and now that I've seen it I feel appropriately stupid.

I don't know if it's all that stupid of an error - it just so happens that "ONLY" has been restricted by the MUTCD to mean a lane which can go in one direction.  It is probably of smaller utility (but not so much smaller as to make the discussion a waste of time) to have "ONLY" mean one or two directions.  that lane still needs a restriction to indicate that a left turn from there is prohibited - it just so happens to be the case that the MUTCD, in that situation, specifies a two-headed arrow and no "ONLY".

so yes, it is an error, but it isn't an egregious one. 
live from sunny San Diego.

http://shields.aaroads.com

jake@aaroads.com

jeffandnicole

I think it's more of an error that the straight arrow doesn't stick out more.  The arrowhead is practically touching the right curve.

Scott5114

In Oklahoma, it seems like much of the time "ONLY" has been removed in favor of just including the left-turn arrows at a smaller interval. This may be limited to Norman, however; I think ODOT still uses ONLY.

Oklahoma City has an interesting pavement marking to indicate a school zone–a wavy line extending down the middle of the lane, between the tire treads. Is this used elsewhere? I don't think it's in the MUTCD.
uncontrollable freak sardine salad chef

Roadsguy

NYSDOT and NJDOT both have close-together turning lane striping. I always thought that looked really awkward, but probably because PennDOT spaces it out more. Some districts seem to also omit "ONLY" and have two or more arrows only, like OKDOT (no K?) apparently does.
Mileage-based exit numbering implies the existence of mileage-cringe exit numbering.

Scott5114

No K. All three states starting with "O" just call it ODOT.
uncontrollable freak sardine salad chef

kphoger

Quote from: agentsteel53 on October 12, 2012, 12:16:54 PM
Quote from: Central Avenue on October 12, 2012, 03:46:28 AM
I had to stare at that for like 2 minutes to figure out what the design error was, and now that I've seen it I feel appropriately stupid.

I don't know if it's all that stupid of an error - it just so happens that "ONLY" has been restricted by the MUTCD to mean a lane which can go in one direction.  It is probably of smaller utility (but not so much smaller as to make the discussion a waste of time) to have "ONLY" mean one or two directions.  that lane still needs a restriction to indicate that a left turn from there is prohibited - it just so happens to be the case that the MUTCD, in that situation, specifies a two-headed arrow and no "ONLY".

so yes, it is an error, but it isn't an egregious one. 

There's also a dashed line instead of a solid line between the lanes.
Keep right except to pass.  Yes.  You.
Visit scenic Orleans County, NY!
Male pronouns, please.

Quote from: Philip K. DickIf you can control the meaning of words, you can control the people who must use them.

1995hoo

Quote from: Scott5114 on October 12, 2012, 12:43:19 PM
In Oklahoma, it seems like much of the time "ONLY" has been removed in favor of just including the left-turn arrows at a smaller interval. This may be limited to Norman, however; I think ODOT still uses ONLY.

Oklahoma City has an interesting pavement marking to indicate a school zone–a wavy line extending down the middle of the lane, between the tire treads. Is this used elsewhere? I don't think it's in the MUTCD.

The Virginia DOT has tried a wavy line near a bike trail crossing near Leesburg. When they put it there the reports were that the FHWA granted permission for it as an experiment. I haven't heard anything about whether it's worked to call drivers' attention to the crossing. Apparently the concept was that drivers would say "WTF!" and either slow down or pay more attention to their surroundings.

They claimed at the time that they were inspired by lines in the UK, although normally the lines of this sort there are closer to the curb and denote a "no stopping" area.

   
"You know, you never have a guaranteed spot until you have a spot guaranteed."
—Olaf Kolzig, as quoted in the Washington Times on March 28, 2003,
commenting on the Capitals clinching a playoff spot.

"That sounded stupid, didn't it?"
—Kolzig, to the same reporter a few seconds later.

us175

Quote from: 1995hoo on October 12, 2012, 02:56:40 PM

   

That looks like a pavement striper or parking lot striper was asleep/drunk/whacko.
US 175 on Facebook and Twitter

jemacedo9

I've noticed this in the Rochester area too...old arrows ground out and then repainted in a slightly different place.  It seems like a waste of money to me, but I'm curious to hear what the reply will be when you get one...

vdeane

Quote from: jemacedo9 on October 12, 2012, 07:17:41 PM
I've noticed this in the Rochester area too...old arrows ground out and then repainted in a slightly different place.  It seems like a waste of money to me, but I'm curious to hear what the reply will be when you get one...
I think it's happening everywhere; I've seen it too many times to count.
Please note: All comments here represent my own personal opinion and do not reflect the official position of NYSDOT or its affiliates.

Scott5114

That's along the lines of what Oklahoma City uses, but it's a bit narrower and it has smooth curves instead of angles. Example: https://maps.google.com/maps?ll=35.500605,-97.610078&spn=0.000639,0.001029&t=k&z=21
uncontrollable freak sardine salad chef

burgess87

I've seen the same in Western New York - turn arrows  & "ONLY" statements being ground out & then the turn arrows replaced in a different area . . . and the "ONLY" coming back only in some situations (no pun intended).  Very interested to hear any reply.

roadman

Quote from: 1995hoo on October 12, 2012, 02:56:40 PM

The Virginia DOT has tried a wavy line near a bike trail crossing near Leesburg. When they put it there the reports were that the FHWA granted permission for it as an experiment. I haven't heard anything about whether it's worked to call drivers' attention to the crossing. Apparently the concept was that drivers would say "WTF!" and either slow down or pay more attention to their surroundings.

They claimed at the time that they were inspired by lines in the UK, although normally the lines of this sort there are closer to the curb and denote a "no stopping" area.

   

Last time I saw a line like that was in the movie Vanishing Point (the original 1970s version). It was used to denote an approach to a temporary single lane bridge and appears in the scene where the Challenger is racing a Jaguar.
"And ninety-five is the route you were on.  It was not the speed limit sign."  - Jim Croce (from Speedball Tucker)

"My life has been a tapestry
Of years of roads and highway signs" (with apologies to Carole King and Tom Rush)

realjd

Quote from: 1995hoo on October 12, 2012, 02:56:40 PM
They claimed at the time that they were inspired by lines in the UK, although normally the lines of this sort there are closer to the curb and denote a "no stopping" area.

I recall them being used most commonly around crosswalks in the UK: http://goo.gl/maps/LU4DG

Virginia, Hawaii, and a few other locations have been experimenting with zigzag crosswalk markings, including some that are similar to the British style:
http://traffic.hawaiicounty.gov/faded-traffic-markings/
http://www.virginiadot.org/vtrc/main/online_reports/pdf/11-r9.pdf (full paper with multiple pictures)

1995hoo

Quote from: realjd on October 23, 2012, 08:44:36 AM
Quote from: 1995hoo on October 12, 2012, 02:56:40 PM
They claimed at the time that they were inspired by lines in the UK, although normally the lines of this sort there are closer to the curb and denote a "no stopping" area.

I recall them being used most commonly around crosswalks in the UK: http://goo.gl/maps/LU4DG

....

Correct. But notice the fundamental difference between those and what Virginia did. In the British example, one of the zig-zag lines represents the center stripe that separates the two directions of traffic. The other two lines represent "No Stopping" areas along the curbs (or perhaps I should say "kerbs"). Virginia's lines aren't like that at all because they essentially take up almost the entire lane.
"You know, you never have a guaranteed spot until you have a spot guaranteed."
—Olaf Kolzig, as quoted in the Washington Times on March 28, 2003,
commenting on the Capitals clinching a playoff spot.

"That sounded stupid, didn't it?"
—Kolzig, to the same reporter a few seconds later.

realjd

Quote from: 1995hoo on October 23, 2012, 09:30:14 AM
Quote from: realjd on October 23, 2012, 08:44:36 AM
Quote from: 1995hoo on October 12, 2012, 02:56:40 PM
They claimed at the time that they were inspired by lines in the UK, although normally the lines of this sort there are closer to the curb and denote a "no stopping" area.

I recall them being used most commonly around crosswalks in the UK: http://goo.gl/maps/LU4DG

....

Correct. But notice the fundamental difference between those and what Virginia did. In the British example, one of the zig-zag lines represents the center stripe that separates the two directions of traffic. The other two lines represent "No Stopping" areas along the curbs (or perhaps I should say "kerbs"). Virginia's lines aren't like that at all because they essentially take up almost the entire lane.
Quote from: 1995hoo on October 23, 2012, 09:30:14 AM
Quote from: realjd on October 23, 2012, 08:44:36 AM
Quote from: 1995hoo on October 12, 2012, 02:56:40 PM
They claimed at the time that they were inspired by lines in the UK, although normally the lines of this sort there are closer to the curb and denote a "no stopping" area.

I recall them being used most commonly around crosswalks in the UK: http://goo.gl/maps/LU4DG

....

Correct. But notice the fundamental difference between those and what Virginia did. In the British example, one of the zig-zag lines represents the center stripe that separates the two directions of traffic. The other two lines represent "No Stopping" areas along the curbs (or perhaps I should say "kerbs"). Virginia's lines aren't like that at all because they essentially take up almost the entire lane.

The Virginia ones in the picture go right down the middle of the lane. But they (and other locations like Hawaii) are also experimenting with more British style ones where the zigzag markings are the lane dividers and along the curbs.

jeffandnicole

Quote from: Scott5114 on October 13, 2012, 01:12:44 AM
That's along the lines of what Oklahoma City uses, but it's a bit narrower and it has smooth curves instead of angles. Example: https://maps.google.com/maps?ll=35.500605,-97.610078&spn=0.000639,0.001029&t=k&z=21

Are you sure someone didn't just spill some paint, then they came in after-the-fact and said, "Hey, let's just say this is a new warning strip?".  OK - I see the line is approaching a School Speed Limit sign...but why not, say, in front of the school, in the road where there's no sidewalk, etc!  :-/

Michael

Quote from: Roadsguy on October 12, 2012, 01:52:02 PM
NYSDOT and NJDOT both have close-together turning lane striping. I always thought that looked really awkward, but probably because PennDOT spaces it out more. Some districts seem to also omit "ONLY" and have two or more arrows only, like OKDOT (no K?) apparently does.
That's exactly what NYSDOT is doing, but I was having trouble explaining it.  I personally prefer the closer spacing.

Anyway, I received a reply last Monday, but am just getting around to posting it.  I was all ready to resend my message that night since it had been two weeks.
Quote
Your question about arrows and ONLY's in turn lanes has been forwarded to me for reply.  Allow me to give you some history on pavement markings specifically and traffic control devices in general in New York State.

The use of traffic control devices (signs, markings, and signals) in the United States is governed by the Manual on Traffic Control Devices which is published by the Federal Highway Administration and updated about every 5 years.  New York State had its own Manual which was accepted by FHWA, but by the early 2000's it became clear that it would be more efficient to use the edition published by FHWA and issue a NY Supplement for the devices that are unique to New York and in 2007 New York adopted the 2003 MUTCD with a state supplement.  The NY MUTCD specified that the ONLY be "between 5 and 10 feet"  in advance of the arrow.  The 2009 Edition of the MUTCD published by FHWA requires that the ONLY be between 32' and 80' in advance of the arrow (see Section 3B.20, paragraph 08 ), so we had to update our markings.

I hope this answers your question.  Thank you for your interest in our highways.

The paragraph referenced in the reply is the same in both the 2003 and 2009 MUTCDs, and was not modified by either NY Supplement:
Quote
Except for the two opposing arrows of a two-way left-turn lane marking (see Figure 3B-7), the longitudinal space between word or symbol message markings, including arrow markings, should be at least four times the height of the characters for low-speed roads, but not more than ten times the height of the characters under any conditions.

Going back even further, the 2000 MUTCD had the same numbers with very similar wording:
Quote
The longitudinal space between word or symbol message markings, including arrow markings, should be at least four times the height of the characters for low-speed roads, but not more than ten times the height of the characters under any conditions.

The quoted paragraphs are Guidance statements in all three MUTCDs.

The spacing of words is mentioned in the same section as TWLTL arrows, which had the 4-10x spacing added in the 2003 version, along with a compliance date of five years after the Final Rule of the 2003 MUTCD.  Since the most recent revision of the 2003 MUTCD was released in 2007, five years would be 2012.

For reference, here's a link to the 2007 and 2012 NY Supplements.



Quote from: jeffandnicole on October 12, 2012, 12:40:20 PM
I think it's more of an error that the straight arrow doesn't stick out more.  The arrowhead is practically touching the right curve.

The short arrow is partly an illusion because of the angle of the photo. I had to go back and look at it in person to be sure.  It's higher up the straight arrow shaft than normal, but the arrow heads don't actually touch.

P.S.: After typing this message, I feel like JN.

Michael

When I was checking my Facebook News Feed earlier, this showed up from How It's Made:


From the article that was linked:
Quote
The Netherlands will start experimenting with photoluminescent paint on roads that charges in sunlight and then glows at night to denote lanes, traffic markers and even cold weather conditions.

tradephoric


ET21

Quote from: Michael on January 08, 2013, 01:18:54 PM
When I was checking my Facebook News Feed earlier, this showed up from How It's Made:


From the article that was linked:
Quote
The Netherlands will start experimenting with photoluminescent paint on roads that charges in sunlight and then glows at night to denote lanes, traffic markers and even cold weather conditions.

Now this would be excellent out in rural areas
The local weatherman, trust me I can be 99.9% right!
"Show where you're going, without forgetting where you're from"

Clinched:
IL: I-88, I-180, I-190, I-290, I-294, I-355, IL-390
IN: I-80, I-94
SD: I-190
WI: I-90
MI: I-94, I-196
MN: I-90

Brandon

Quote from: ET21 on February 03, 2014, 02:13:35 PM
Quote from: Michael on January 08, 2013, 01:18:54 PM
When I was checking my Facebook News Feed earlier, this showed up from How It's Made:


From the article that was linked:
Quote
The Netherlands will start experimenting with photoluminescent paint on roads that charges in sunlight and then glows at night to denote lanes, traffic markers and even cold weather conditions.

Now this would be excellent out in rural areas

My biggest concern is how would they perform with snowplows and snow covered roads.
"If you think this has a happy ending, you haven't been paying attention." - Ramsay Bolton, "Game of Thrones"

"Symbolic of his struggle against reality." - Reg, "Monty Python's Life of Brian"

jakeroot

Quote from: tradephoric on February 02, 2014, 11:03:07 PM
Poor crosswalk placement at a roundabout in Minnesota:
IMG

Please, baby Jesus, let that be a joke...PLEASE!!

I found my own odd pavement marking near Tacoma, WA:

http://goo.gl/tZEA7F



Two errors in this one:

1) "centre" -- spelled wrong. Emailed Gig Harbor chief engineer, they are going to fix it next time the markings are updated.
2) the calligraphy is painted from top to bottom, instead of bottom to top. I personally prefer this, but technically it's wrong.




Opinions expressed here on belong solely to the poster and do not represent or reflect the opinions or beliefs of AARoads, its creators and/or associates.