While on I-91 NB in Springfield, MA I noticed this. The three-lane NB is restriped and narrowed to two-lanes only to open back up to three-lanes just before an entrance and exit. What is the point of that? I thought maybe to let merging traffic have a lane to merge onto, but I don't think so b/c the third lane re-opens before the entrance.
(you might have to move the map to the beginning of the two-lane section to see what I'm talking about)
http://www.google.com/maps?q=Springfield,+MA&hl=en&ll=42.074849,-72.582791&spn=0.00229,0.00375&sll=41.500765,-72.757507&sspn=1.182785,1.919861&oq=Springfield&hnear=Springfield,+Hampden,+Massachusetts&t=k&z=18
Would the bridge pillars be too close to the flow of traffic if it were striped as a travel lane? Just a guess w/o actually seeing it.
This would be my guess as well. I'd assume I-91 was originally 4 lanes when that overpass was built, and when they widened it to six, they realized they couldn't quite fit six lanes under that bridge.
As for why they don't just wait for the on-ramp to add the lane back, that I couldn't tell you.
ETA: There's a somewhat similar situation on I-5 SB in Tacoma here (http://goo.gl/maps/rjTgy). I centered it on a pedestrian bridge; you have to pan slightly north to see the fourth lane drop, then south to see the lane added back with 38th Street onramp. What's funny about this is that the overpass that forced I-5 SB down to three lanes is no more. Early on in the ongoing SR 16 interchange construction, they demolished the old pedestrian bridge (which did have a pillar in the way of a fourth lane) and replaced it with this one. As for why they didn't restripe the roadway when the new bridge was built, that I couldn't tell you.
It used to be 3 in the area, the restriping there is recent, in the last few years.
Quote from: doofy103 on January 14, 2013, 09:05:08 PM
It used to be 3 in the area, the restriping there is recent, in the last few years.
Then perhaps rather than not physically being able to fit, the sightlines were too poor to be safe? But, yeah, I stand corrected. :/
Didn't seem to stop the designers when they widened the Tri-State Tollway to 4 lanes each way just south of the Wisconsin line. They pull the same trick by stealing a bit of the right shoulder to jam it under an existing overpass.
One small stretch of Westbound U.S. 12/20 between Utah Street and I-65 in Gary is a weird one.
As you pass the Utah Street traffic light, two lanes become three. As you approach the Toll Road junction, the left lane is dropped, only to form a "Left Turn Only" lane for I-65 traffic some 500 feet later. Immediately past the I-65 traffic light, the third lane is there again. Meanwhile, the eastbound lanes are completely unaffected. You can see the lane drop here, (https://maps.google.com/?ll=41.595427,-87.301569&spn=0.004606,0.009645&t=h&z=17&layer=c&cbll=41.595336,-87.3012&panoid=hkeITVpVbiMC8R3OZf-svA&cbp=12,285.1,,0,19.72) and the subsequent addition here. (https://maps.google.com/?ll=41.59793,-87.305646&spn=0.004637,0.009645&t=h&z=17&layer=c&cbll=41.597793,-87.305662&panoid=cVjImNJ5m7V9p7_ypiQf4g&cbp=12,305.34,,0,0)
How about this cluster funk?
http://maps.google.com/?ll=37.688159,-97.309781&spn=0.000008,0.005284&t=m&z=18&layer=c&cbll=37.688154,-97.310125&panoid=kj_7bNKN_aeZ88h0PT7wZw&cbp=12,95.15,,0,13.16
This is becuase of a bike lane added on First Street near Grove in Wichita... follow the GSV forward to see what comes of it.
ICTRds
Bike lanes are full of shitty lane configurations. Where else do you have a right turn lane to the left of a straight lane (without complicated phasing)?
But this example in Wichita looks like a very standard installation. New right turn lane begins to the right of the bike lane.
I can tell you, though, that it's a bit unnerving for a cyclist to have vehicular traffic merging across a bike lane. I used to drive that street every day, so I'm very familiar with it. Instead of cycling that stretch of road, in fact, I would usually use the sidewalks along the 3rd Street canal.
Quote from: kphoger on January 15, 2013, 04:20:58 PM
I can tell you, though, that it's a bit unnerving for a cyclist to have vehicular traffic merging across a bike lane.
What's the alternative (assuming the bike lane stays)? Having motor vehicular traffic turning right across the bike lane? At least in merging, standard practice is to look for traffic approaching from the rear.
I don't know of anyone who considers entering a right turn lane "merging", regardless of whether there's a bike lane or not.
What I meant is that vehicles turning right are required to completely cross over the bike lane. Maybe 'merge' isn't the right word, but it's no less unnerving for a cyclist (more so, perhaps).
Same here. Doesn't change my point that drivers will just ignore the bike lane.
Quote from: deanej on January 16, 2013, 11:30:24 AM
Same here. Doesn't change my point that drivers will just ignore the bike lane.
Very true. The opposite is also a hazard: stopping in your lane for thirty seconds in order to wait for a slow cyclist to cross your path.
Along the lines of the original post, here's an incomprehensible lane-use control I pass three days a week. Look to the left-center of the image below the corner of the parking garage and notice how the right lane of the two general-purpose lanes (i.e., the two above the bus lane) has a peculiar striped-off area that presumably indicates not to drive there (this because other nearby uses of that sort of striping indicate just that). This is at the Franconia—Springfield Metrorail stop in Virginia.
http://binged.it/YbsGaP
I wouldn't so much call this "outrageous" as "weird," but I didn't think it merited its own thread when this one existed.
What constitutes, a newly constructed lane on a widened road to be striped for use. I see many road widening projects, where several miles of roadway is under construction and work from one end to the other. Most times (especially in Florida) they will have a good portion of widened roadway completed, yet they will wait until the whole construction project is completed before striping it to open it. Meanwhile, a mile section of new road is completely widened, and striped as a wider shoulder, or if they have that top layer of asphalt down, it will be striped for all the new lanes, but barricaded off will be the additional lane.
John Young Parkway, was originally two lanes each way, but when it was widened from I-4 to the FL Turnpike Bridge, it was started from I-4 and literally done down the line until they reached the end of the zone, before opening all lanes. It was many weeks where JYP was finished from I-4 to Oakridge Road as a six lane facility, yet the two mile segment was not allowed to have its intended configuration until the whole project was completed.
Yet, in Louisiana on the I-10 rebuilt Lake Ponchartrain Bridge, in 2010 when I crossed it both new bridges were 80 percent completed, with the exception of the new WB Bridge that could not be constructed until the two original Katrina damaged bridges were partially removed enough to make way for the touchdown of the new WB bridge. Traffic at both ends of the new facility was using the EB bridge with a jersey barrier in the middle and narrowed the roadway down to two lanes each direction, then at one point a temporary crossover was made to convert WB traffic over to its new home, and again near the other shore where a temporary crossover was made and diverted traffic back to the two side sharing one road configuration. In the middle all six lanes (3 east and 3 west respectively) were all open to traffic!
Is there a mandate on when construction workers are to allow a road to be opened, or how long a segment must be to warrant its opening?
^ It mostly depends on what the engineers on the project specify and what the agency policy is. Sometimes it will cause traffic problems (or headaches in construction phasing or other issues) to open the new lane before the rest of the project is done. A key issue to consider is whether introducing a slew of new traffic patterns/changes periodically is better than one major change done all at once. It is, in my experience, project-specific.
A current example of what could happen is on I-95 North in Delaware, approaching US/DE 202. The road was slightly widened from 3 lanes (2 thru lanes, 1 exit only lane for 202) to 4 lanes (2 thru lanes, 1 exit only lane for US 202 North & 1 exit only lane for DE 202 South). The widened road is open.
BUT...the permanent overhead signs haven't been installed yet. Instead, they are using confusing orange construction signs off the right shoulder. The right lane (for DE 202) has a normal-looking slanted right arrow, the right center lane (for US 202) has a slanted left arrow...even though it's a right exit. Additionally, they painted the route number in the lane, but relied on cheap, temporary construction paint on the roads, much of which is already worn off.
The resulting mess indicates they should've waited to open all lanes until the proper signage was in place.