The ANNOYANCES of road work

[kkt]

Areas closed off for ages and ages and no actual work is evident...

[Super Mateo]

Obviously, you've never tried it around Chicago.  Here, they don't like to yield to anyone.  They'd rather just bull their way in and everyone else be damned.

I can confirm this to be true.  Also, if there is an available shoulder on the road, there is a 50/50 chance it will turn into a driving lane, whether striped for it or not.

And yes, the IL work zone limits apply regardless of the actual conditions present.  What bugs me most is what IL defines as a work zone.  In my opinion, a work zone needs to have at least one of the following present:  workers, construction vehicles, horses, barrels, extra barriers, lane closures, etc.  In some cases, the reduced limit is placed on roads that are clearly not under construction at the time.  There are no lane closures, no cones or horses set up, no workers there, nothing.  Then they wonder why everyone ignores the speed limits, to the point where IL put commercials on tv to "Embrace the Orange."

[kkt]

Horses?

[74/171FAN]

Pennsylvania's practice of leaving up work zone speed limits even when there is no evident work zone (i.e., either before cones are put up or after they are put down).  Ticks me off to no end.  There's a section on Washington Avenue Extension here in Albany that suffers from the same injustice (45 mph work zone signs have been up for weeks without a work zone on it).

I do like those states where they have the work zone speed limits only pertain during activity and signal this to drivers through signs highlighted with flashers.

I'm surprised to hear this because the only place I've actually seen this (speed limit X when flashing) is PA, mostly the PA Turnpike, but I think other places too. I wish NJ did that. That said, when the NJ Turnpike widening between exits 6 and 9 was in progress, I believe that entire stretch was sign "Speed Limit 55" with long stretches of 45 or worse, and everyone ignored it without being stopped by police.

Perfect example of the speeding issue, IMO, is the US 422 freeway in Pottstown that has been reduced to a speed limit of 40 mph due to practically no shoulders and a section reduced to one lane in each direction, as a result of the replacement of the Schuylkill River Bridges there.  Basically, when I drove it, I had to go 50 mph as I felt that I could get turned into the inside concrete barrier.

[Mergingtraffic]

I notice here in CT, for big projects like widening of repaving, they are not allowed to close a lane during the day, only after 9pm or so.
But then, they do tree clearing or rail repair and they close a lane during the day.

It doesn't matter for what reason the lane is closed, if it's closed it'll back up period. But the powers that be don't seem to get that. 

I-95 in Greenwhich was backed up for 6 miles b/c of tree clearing. Get spotlights and do it at night

[authenticroadgeek]

How about in the city I live in (will not say) they decided to put off all and any road work until 2 months ago which caused every road in the city to either:
A. Have a lane shift
B. The road is converted to a one-way as they do the work
C. Closed completely, even to people who LIVE on the street
It's really annoying!

[Big John]

Horses?

sawhorses, aka barricades.

[Max Rockatansky]

The worst is when they take a two direction street and make it one way and detour the other direction.  Another is speed reductions in minor road work zones that nobody is going to follow.  ADOT is infamous for cranking Interstates from 75 MPH down to 45 MPH while the surrounding states will maintain at least 65 MPH if it isn't too heavy.  Right now the 101 in the East Valley is posted at 55 MPH for a widening but you'll get run over if you try to go anywhere near that speed because the road is unobstructed due to the construction mostly being on the inside median.

[wanderer2575]

Michigan's practice of grinding the pavement to remove lane striping for lane closures or traffic shifts.  Then laying down temporary lane markings in paint, which gets ground away later, instead of marking tape.  By the time a project is finished the pavement looks like a war zone.  And all that grinding shows up great in dim light in the rain.  Sometimes you can't tell where are the current lane markers.

Multiple projects along a road with no coordination of signage.  Leads to stupidity like an "End Road Work" sign in the middle of a progression of signs for the next project a mile away, or conflicting detour signage.

Contractors who don't cover up or remove lane closure and detour signs when in fact all lanes are open and there's no detour.  I don't care if it's a daily or nightly closure and so you have to send a crew around to put up the signs and then take them back down every day, do it!

How long it takes!!  They built the entire Ohio Turnpike in just over three years, but it takes MDOT two years to rebuild a five-mile stretch of I-75 near Monroe??

[Joe The Dragon]

Contractors who can't read a damn drawing.

This.

Also, the draconian 24/7 speed limits that Illinois puts into effect in a construction zone.  They are very unnecessary, and could be done better (as in some other states).  I personally prefer Michigan's where the lower speed limit applies when the following two conditions must be met at the same time: 1. workers present & 2. separated by cones or barrels only, not a concrete barrier.

at least they have some 55 MPH work zones.

[jakeroot]

I must live in the only state without any sort of work zone speed limit. I can't say I've ever encountered one.

[cbeach40]

Michigan's practice of grinding the pavement to remove lane striping for lane closures or traffic shifts.  Then laying down temporary lane markings in paint, which gets ground away later, instead of marking tape.  By the time a project is finished the pavement looks like a war zone.  And all that grinding shows up great in dim light in the rain.  Sometimes you can't tell where are the current lane markers.

Tape has a life expectancy of about half an hour (or so it seems sometimes).      That being said, a pavement marking subcontractor with half an ounce of competency can soda blast a marking off with minimal scarring.

Of course, asking for (or in the case of a lot of DOTs, paying for) competency is a big qualifier.

Multiple projects along a road with no coordination of signage.  Leads to stupidity like an "End Road Work" sign in the middle of a progression of signs for the next project a mile away, or conflicting detour signage.

Conflicting detour signage is a problem the DOT should have caught. In terms of having something like the "End Road Work" sign in the midst of the next contractor's pre-advance signs, that really gets into a case of demarcating liability. Clearly defining where one work zone ends and the other begins is extremely critical.

How long it takes!!  They built the entire Ohio Turnpike in just over three years, but it takes MDOT two years to rebuild a five-mile stretch of I-75 near Monroe??

Greenfield construction is incredibly cheap and easy compared to staging active traffic. MDOT's rather bold in terms of impact to traffic for doing things like closing I-96 in Detroit a couple of years ago, but there's no question that it probably cut the duration of work down to a fraction of what staging it would be.

[Ned Weasel]

A zipper merge is actually better for traffic congestion. By not forcing an earlier merge, you have more space and time to merge safely.

Thank you for reminding people.  I get really annoyed when most people merge early, creating a slow line of traffic in one lane while leaving an adjacent lane mostly empty.  To make matters worse, in recent years, I've seen construction zones in my home state with "DO NOT PASS" signs well in advance of the merge point.  This practice can make it extremely difficult to advance to the merge point at a reasonable, moderate speed when one of the lanes is crawling.  Have people not read the literature on why the zipper merge is better than early merging?  It's embarrassing.  The only place I've seen a construction zone merge handled intelligently is Pennsylvania.

[Zeffy]

Road work that results in uneven pavement on sections of the roadway are my pet peeve, especially when it's a simple resurfacing job that takes 3 weeks to complete. I had to contend with one on the road that leads to my office building and there were some pretty large variances in the road height while they ripped up the old one.

[bzakharin]

A zipper merge is actually better for traffic congestion. By not forcing an earlier merge, you have more space and time to merge safely.

I'm not so sure about this. Assuming enough traffic that it even matters (if there are no cars to merge with it doesn't matter which lane you're in), travel time is not impacted, only the location of the bottleneck. As for safety, if you see a safe window to merge early, how do you know there will be another one later on? It's likely to be more and more packed the closer to the merge you get. If you're not looking for a safe window until your lane has already ended you are creating a hazard for yourself and others, especially if you are zipping along while the other lane is backed up. Personally, I try to stay away from the merging lanes whenever possible (e.g. if there are 3 lanes and the right lane ends, I tend to be in the left lane). Of course, if everybody did that, it would create a worse backup, but they don't.

[jeffandnicole]

How long it takes!!  They built the entire Ohio Turnpike in just over three years, but it takes MDOT two years to rebuild a five-mile stretch of I-75 near Monroe??

Conditions were way different back when roads were built.  OSHA didn't exist.  Fair work practices didn't exist.  If they wanted you to work 14 hours a day 7 days a week, you either worked it, or gave up your job to someone that would.  If someone died, it was just part of the job.

They weren't also worried about building a roadway while trying to safely get thousands of other cars thru the same area at the same time. 

[roadman]

in the "uneven pavement" category others have mentioned, one of my biggest pet peeves is when they do trenching for utility work and then "restore" the surface with a cheap patch.  It's especially annoying when the trench runs along the road instead of across it.

[Brandon]

How long it takes!!  They built the entire Ohio Turnpike in just over three years, but it takes MDOT two years to rebuild a five-mile stretch of I-75 near Monroe??

Conditions were way different back when roads were built.  OSHA didn't exist.  Fair work practices didn't exist.  If they wanted you to work 14 hours a day 7 days a week, you either worked it, or gave up your job to someone that would.  If someone died, it was just part of the job.

In 1952-55?  I doubt the unions would've allowed for that, 14 hours a day, 7 days a week.  Remember, Ohio was a very unionized state, even in the 1950s.

[vdeane]

A zipper merge is actually better for traffic congestion. By not forcing an earlier merge, you have more space and time to merge safely.

I'm not so sure about this. Assuming enough traffic that it even matters (if there are no cars to merge with it doesn't matter which lane you're in), travel time is not impacted, only the location of the bottleneck. As for safety, if you see a safe window to merge early, how do you know there will be another one later on? It's likely to be more and more packed the closer to the merge you get. If you're not looking for a safe window until your lane has already ended you are creating a hazard for yourself and others, especially if you are zipping along while the other lane is backed up. Personally, I try to stay away from the merging lanes whenever possible (e.g. if there are 3 lanes and the right lane ends, I tend to be in the left lane). Of course, if everybody did that, it would create a worse backup, but they don't.

Exactly.  People should merge wherever they can do so without affecting traffic behind them.  If the road is backing up due to the merge, where the merge is starts to matter much less than having only one merge, so in that situation, people should do a zipper merge wherever traffic has decided to do it, not blow by everyone and then force people to stop (right after they had finally started accelerating from the backup to boot!) to let you in.  It's an asshole move and all the talk of "late merging" does in practice, no matter what the intent, is give these people an excuse to act this way.

While late zipper merging might be able to help in preventing these backups from forming, it just makes them worse once they do, so the late merging advocates would do well to shut up to the public and confine their arguments to DOT employees who do work zone traffic control.

[kkt]

Conditions were way different back when roads were built.  OSHA didn't exist.  Fair work practices didn't exist.  If they wanted you to work 14 hours a day 7 days a week, you either worked it, or gave up your job to someone that would.  If someone died, it was just part of the job.

They weren't also worried about building a roadway while trying to safely get thousands of other cars thru the same area at the same time. 

I don't think the work week you estimate is accurate for the 1949-1955 time period when (according to Wikipedia) the Ohio Turnpike was being built.  Or the attitude about safety.  Unionization was very strong then.  The 40 hour work week became a national law in 1940, and many states and businesses had it before then, especially unionized ones.
http://www.businessinsider.com/history-of-the-40-hour-workweek-2015-10

In the 1950s workplaces weren't as safe as they became later, but the era of treating workers as disposable was long over.  By the 1920s, almost all states had workers' comp laws, so if a worker got injured or killed it cost the employer money.
http://eh.net/encyclopedia/history-of-workplace-safety-in-the-united-states-1880-1970/

[Rothman]

A zipper merge is actually better for traffic congestion. By not forcing an earlier merge, you have more space and time to merge safely.

I'm not so sure about this. Assuming enough traffic that it even matters (if there are no cars to merge with it doesn't matter which lane you're in), travel time is not impacted, only the location of the bottleneck. As for safety, if you see a safe window to merge early, how do you know there will be another one later on? It's likely to be more and more packed the closer to the merge you get. If you're not looking for a safe window until your lane has already ended you are creating a hazard for yourself and others, especially if you are zipping along while the other lane is backed up. Personally, I try to stay away from the merging lanes whenever possible (e.g. if there are 3 lanes and the right lane ends, I tend to be in the left lane). Of course, if everybody did that, it would create a worse backup, but they don't.

Exactly.  People should merge wherever they can do so without affecting traffic behind them.  If the road is backing up due to the merge, where the merge is starts to matter much less than having only one merge, so in that situation, people should do a zipper merge wherever traffic has decided to do it, not blow by everyone and then force people to stop (right after they had finally started accelerating from the backup to boot!) to let you in.  It's an asshole move and all the talk of "late merging" does in practice, no matter what the intent, is give these people an excuse to act this way.

While late zipper merging might be able to help in preventing these backups from forming, it just makes them worse once they do, so the late merging advocates would do well to shut up to the public and confine their arguments to DOT employees who do work zone traffic control.

Phooey.  Utilize the full capacity of the road.  Merge at the lane closure.

[doorknob60]

Rediculous speed limit drops. When they do work on I-84 in Oregon (like between La Grande and Pendleton as a somewhat recent example), they lower the Speed Limit of the entire section (pretty long, maybe 10 miles or so at times) to 45 MPH. Yes, it dropped to one lane in each direction for the most part, but there is still a concrete barrier in between lanes, and even a few passing lanes! If normal 2 lane highways can have speed limits as high as 55 in the past, and since March, now as high as 70, why does it need to be lowered to 45? I fully admit to hitting 80 MPH in that particular work zone to pass a truck before the end of a passing lane. In Idaho, when they closed down I-84 between Caldwell and Ontario to 1 lane each direction, they kept a reasonable 65 MPH (though traffic was often too heavy to maintain that speed...), so at least some states have common sense.

[jeffandnicole]

A zipper merge is actually better for traffic congestion. By not forcing an earlier merge, you have more space and time to merge safely.

I'm not so sure about this. Assuming enough traffic that it even matters (if there are no cars to merge with it doesn't matter which lane you're in), travel time is not impacted, only the location of the bottleneck. As for safety, if you see a safe window to merge early, how do you know there will be another one later on? It's likely to be more and more packed the closer to the merge you get. If you're not looking for a safe window until your lane has already ended you are creating a hazard for yourself and others, especially if you are zipping along while the other lane is backed up. Personally, I try to stay away from the merging lanes whenever possible (e.g. if there are 3 lanes and the right lane ends, I tend to be in the left lane). Of course, if everybody did that, it would create a worse backup, but they don't.

Exactly.  People should merge wherever they can do so without affecting traffic behind them.  If the road is backing up due to the merge, where the merge is starts to matter much less than having only one merge, so in that situation, people should do a zipper merge wherever traffic has decided to do it, not blow by everyone and then force people to stop (right after they had finally started accelerating from the backup to boot!) to let you in.  It's an asshole move and all the talk of "late merging" does in practice, no matter what the intent, is give these people an excuse to act this way.

While late zipper merging might be able to help in preventing these backups from forming, it just makes them worse once they do, so the late merging advocates would do well to shut up to the public and confine their arguments to DOT employees who do work zone traffic control.

Phooey.  Utilize the full capacity of the road.  Merge at the lane closure.

Yep.  Assuming traffic is congested: Wherever the merge point is, whether it be at the lane closure point or a mile away, it involves a zipper merge.  When the zipper merge occurs prior to the merge point, it creates aggression issues down the road because of those that don't merge at that artificial point.

Another example: On NJ 55, it merges from 2 lanes to 1 lane about a 1/2 mile prior to Rt. 42.  The standard for a few decades now is use both lanes to the end and zipper merge.  55 is used both as a commuting route and a shore route, especially with those living in PA.

When there's issues, it's bound to be a PA driver coming back from a rare trip to the Jersey Shore that sees the "Lane Ends 1/2 Mile Ahead" and tries to use their 6' wide car to straddle 2, 12' wide lanes, thinking that they will control traffic.   Or, a slower vehicle will merge over to the left way before they needed to, and people zoom by on the right.

Because of this, the lane reduction almost always functions better during weekdays (which it's nearly 100% regular drivers on their normal commutes) than weekends.

What's frustrating is that the overpass to merge onto Rt. 42 was built to allow 55 mph driving.  Probably because there's so many overpasses with sharp turns, many motorists have a habit of slowing down more than they need to, which at minimum causes, and generally exacerbates, the traffic congestion.

[kalvado]

Phooey.  Utilize the full capacity of the road.  Merge at the lane closure.

You know, capacity of the road is not the same as capacity of the parking lot. It is determined mostly by the throughput of the bottleneck, not by the total area of the pavement.  And 1 foot of single lane bottleneck is not much better than half a mile in terms of traffic capacity
Actually "only one merge, wherever that is located" sounds more than reasonable. Zipper will fail once incoming traffic approaches bottleneck capacity - even if that happens as  a very short spike. Think about early merge as about "zipper merge" with adjustable storage area for traffic fluctuations - and you may understand why merging late is actually against the entire "zipper" concept.

[vdeane]

Exactly.  People flying by the stopped traffic and butting in at the last second while everyone else decided to merge earlier is essentially the OPPOSITE of a zipper merge because you're artificially increasing the number of merge points.  Plus, now everyone has to wait while someone else slams on their brakes to let you in, when they could have been accelerating up to speed.  Now, for the Church of the Late Mergers, this might be OK, akin to God punishing the sinners for merging at the wrong point, but I find it to be quite rude.

Here's how I do it:
-If no traffic: merge close to end of lane
-If traffic: merge when I get a gap in the other lane big enough that I do not affect the other drivers there
-If a parking lot: merge wherever the zipper merge by consensus happens to be