Preventing overheight trucks from crashing into freeway overpasses.
May 19, 2009, 8:21 pm
Filed under:
Quality, Excellence & Design | Tags:
clearance,
freeway,
government,
improvement,
incremental improvement,
overheight detection,
overpass,
planning,
prevention,
quality,
safety,
social responsibility,
trafficThis was a blog post that was going to start out as criticism, but as time has progressed, the British Columbia Ministry of Transportation has addressed the problem admirably and taken the wind out of those critical sails, so you will get to hear the story of what they did to improve the quality of one of BC’s freeway overpasses to prevent accidents and protect infrastructure.
The story
In the 1960s, the overpasses above Highway 1 were built to similar design and varying clearance. Perhaps in those days it was inconceivable that trucks would stretch 4.4 Meters (almost 15 feet) into the air, or perhaps years of additional paving shaved inches off of that clearance. Whatever the case, we find clearance signs with various “heights” recorded on most of the overpasses East of Vancouver 4.6 Meters being the most common I’ve observed.
Overpass Clearance (one of many)
Overpass clearance - 2
Overpass clearance - 3
Year before last, some surprised trucker plowed into the Glover Road freeway overpass Eastbound on Highway 1 in Langley. That particular overpass was a little lower than some of the others, so conceivably he might have driven quite some way before having his big rig stopped (the hard way). The damage to the overpass was significant enough that traffic on Glover Road was reduced to 1 way alternating traffic for the several months it took for repairs.
I’m sure someone in the Ministry of Transportation thought “Wow, that was shocking, that guy’s truck just hit the overpass. Hope that doesn’t happen again…”
Last year, another surprised trucker plowed into the same Glover Road overpass. Same damage, same road closure with alternating traffic. The repairs made one side of the overpass solid, presumably to lend additional strength to the bridge (under siege). Since that second repair, there have been additional precautions taken, which together have formed a system to try and prevent this from happening again.
Overpass under siege (repaired again)
Preventing the collisions
First there were 2 signs positioned further up the road on either side which re-stated the clearance information printed on the bridge. With advance warning a trucker could conceivably stop before hitting the bridge. The signs used bright contrasting colours to draw attention.
Bright clearance signs (with enough room to stop)
Next, a bunch of yellow and black reflective signs were added to the bridge to draw attention to the bridge.
So if a trucker was overheight, knew he was overheight, read the signs, did the math and stopped in time he could avoid hitting the bridge. But what if he didn’t know he was overheight?
A series of bright yellow warning / informational signs were deployed, starting with a sign warning trucks to use the right lane for the overheight detection system.
Truckers Keep Right for overheight detection system
Then the overheight detection system which triggers a flashing overhead sign that would warn when a truck was overheight.
Glover Road Overheight detection system uses beams (of light) when interupted, flashing signals are triggered.
When flashing give that overheight truck that isn't stopping lots of room
Then a small pull-out was built where trucks could pull off the freeway to check their loads. It had a large bright yellow “pull-out” sign for easy identification, and a series of bright yellow signs warning that the pullout was approaching. At the pullout there is an informational sign intended for those who have used the pull-out (my eyes are good, but at 100km/h that font is too small even for me 🙂 )
overheight truck pullout ahead
overheight truck pullout ahead (getting closer)
overheight truck pullout NOW! (no seriously, NOW)
So now overheight trucks can be detected and “flashed”, and there is an illuminated pullout available for these trucks. Assuming that works and the driver notices he is overheight, this challenge remains for a driver who is overheight. He either needs to back up the freeway for 2-3 miles, or he needs a crane to unload him so he can drive underneath the bridge.
Now the Ministry has added a “detour route” informational sign West of the 200th street interchange in the same bright yellow colour, warning drivers of overheight vehicles to detour off of the freeway.
Good job guys, hopefully we don’t see another accident at that freeway overpass like the last two.
The unmeasured cost
Glover road was reduced to single lane alternating traffic next to a university on the main road leading from Langley to the Albion ferry crossing (on the Fraser river). Thousands of people had to wait each day while traffic changed direction to cross the freeway. This took them away from their families, their jobs, their volunteer engagements. This time was simply lost. Add to that unmeasured cost, the construction costs and the real cost of not putting signage up after the first incident becomes more apparent. The albion ferry is reported to have moved about 4,500 people per day, so this number would be reasonable for forming an estimate. Assuming a 1 minute delay for 4500 cars per day for 180 days (2 years 3 months out of service each year), with commuters earning $25/hour, the inconvenience could have cost citizens. $337,500 over 2 years. That number will never appear in a government balance sheet, but it is a cost that was paid by citizens, and it is a cost we may be able to avoid paying in the future thanks to the improvements brought by the Ministry of Transportation.
Traffic congestion HWY 1 Eastbound
I find it ironic that the train bridge overpass to the East of Glover Road (bearing scars from previous impacts) is even lower… We’ll wait and see if that has been taken into account.
The "even lower" railway overpass to the East (notice the repairs from past collisions...)
Cheers,
Greg
Observations on Mexican Transportation
April 17, 2009, 6:00 am
Filed under:
Quality, Excellence & Design | Tags:
bus,
carpool,
collectivo,
environmental,
excellence,
freeway,
government,
interstate,
mexican,
mexico,
money,
roads,
sustainable living,
taxi,
tips,
traffic,
transportation,
travelFor those of you who know my passions, you will recognize the sparkle in my eyes since traffic is the topic.
I couldn’t believe my eyes as we left the Cancun International Airport. A divided highway with overhead lights on the median. Not only in the city , but in the country stretching for many kilometers. The highway was well marked, well signed, well maintained and in most ways as safe as any other north American Highway.
Good Highway in Mexico South of Cancun
Illuminated LEDs embedded in the roadway guided vehicles to merge. it was impressive even if this tourist highway was not typical of highways elsewhere in mexico.
This highway was a “1/2 freeway” not Interstate standards, but pretty close.
The highway was limited access, had some at grade crossings as well as overpasses. Also seperating it from freeway standard was the provision of the uturn “retournos” where traffic could exit the fast lane, turn around and enter the opposite fast lane. The roadways in mexico often use metal speedbumps embeeded at different interfals where traffic is expected to stop for a police check or an at grade intersection.
Mexican Police checkpoint
I noticed other modes of transportations in cities. Playa del Carmen had more scooters than I’m used to. and more bicycles. Playa had dedicated bidirectional bicycle lanes seperated from traffic by a curb. Practical tricycles pedalled by union tricyclests carry many local deliveries.
Taxis (Playa is a tourist area) are plentiful as well as busses and collectivos. The taxis were similar to anywhere else except for the reputation that Mexican taxi drivers have for being daring. Taxis are not metered there, so negotiate your price before you get it and pay when you get there.
The busses are like the greyhound or charger coaches seen in Canada and USA. Plush seats, airconditioning, TVs, curtains (some seatbelts). Taking a 20 minute ride between towns cost only $1.80 which is a bargain considering a similar trip would cost $5-15 in Canada. It seems that those busses run very regularly. Hourly or every 15 minutes. In Canada you are lucky to get 1/2 a dozen busses in a day. So as a Canadian I can’t help feel like we are being ripped off here. A poorer country like Mexico can make nice regular cheap bus service an option? (Maybe everybody owning a car up here has made that a difficult challenge for the operators here?) I wonder what I’m missing here?
Mexico has something special I haven’t seen elsewhere in North america. Collectivos are 15 passenger vans that operate somewhere between bus and taxi. Heading down the freeway they will pick up people who need a lift as long as there is room left. When full, the collectivo will travel at alarming speeds to get you to your destination and it becomes more like a taxi at that point, leaving main roads to drop you at your destination.
Collectivo
Those are the neat observations I made about Mexican transportation. Thanks for listening, I’m glad I could share some of the things that impressed and surprised me.
Peace
Greg.
We need to Plan and Build Roads Better
April 6, 2009, 1:29 pm
Filed under:
Quality, Excellence & Design | Tags:
arterial,
classification,
collector,
commercial,
community planning,
effectiveness,
excellence,
government,
highway,
improvement,
limited access,
non-commercial,
planning,
quality,
residential,
road design,
roads,
safety,
service road,
traffic,
urban planning,
zoningI love the freeway. I get on it, I drive as far as I want and I get off. It isn’t like some of the other roads we have around here. You know the ones where you stop every block or two because there is a single car pulling out of some mini-mall. In fact there are some pretty hillarious roads around here. One of them is the “Langley Bypass”. Historically most of the vehicle traffic going through Langley travelled on Fraser Highway, which was 1 lane in each direction with businesses down both sides of the street (the typical downtown for a small town). People on Fraser Highway were stopping at stored, looking for parking, backing out of parking spots and basically making this road a very poor choice for anything other than shopping. A plan was designed to bypass langley (appropriate name). As a provincial highway it connected Fraser Highway to itself, bypassing the city as well as connecting to glover road 200th street, the route to the ferries. With 2 lanes in either direction, it moved traffic quite well. At first. Then the township decided to allow zoning all along the bypass for shopping. 3 starbucks, countless restaurants, RV dealerships, audio video stores, and of course we will need some traffic lights to let the shoppers in and out. So rather than this area being a “bypass” to allow through traffic to flow efficiently, it became a traffic magnet attracting more vehicles, and disrupting the flow of the traffic.
What happened? The planners forgot what they were doing. They forgot the purpose of the road. To “bypass” Langley.
Often there will be a visionary who will present a great idea like a “bypass road” if it remains true to its vision it works well. BUT somebody always wants to make plans work for their own interests. The land owners won’t make as much money selling farmland as they would selling land with potential for “retail development”… so they lobby government to change the zoning. If the city / municipality doesn’t have a zoning plan (or doesn’t stick to the plan) “good luck”. If we could stay “on vision” we would have roads that performed their designed function well, instead of doing a mediocre job of many contradictory functions.
Freeways work so very well because they are “limited access” (You can only get on or off at certain points), because they have no “at level” intersections (meaning the traffic can carry on at speed despite the presence of other roads crossing), and they are built to a very consistent standard (meaning the road is predictable in signage and design). Can you imagine if Freeways started having pedestrian crosswalks installed? or if a business was forced to have their driveway onto the freeway? It’s the wrong road for those purposes.
We need to classify our roads, and we need to build them to meet their function, and protect them from those who would dilute their function.
From my limited experience I’m familiear with the following types of roads;
- Residential
- Collectors
- Non-Commercial Arterial
- Commercial Arterial
- Limited Access
- Highways
- Service
You look for a Residential street when you are ready to buy your first house and you are ready to settle down and have children, you want to avoid a “busy street”. You are essentially choosing to avoid living on a “collector” or “arterial” road. A road fit for the purpose of living on.
Collector roads have more traffic and bring folks in from residential areas to the higher speed roads that actually go someplace.
Non-commercial Arterial roads are urban roads that act as the main routes for carrying traffic through a city. Their focus is on the efficient flow of traffic through a city. If you want to go somewhere quickly get on a non-commercial arterial road.
Commercial arterial roads provide easy access to businesses, with mini malls, mom and pop shops, big box stores and any number of opportunities to stop your car and spend your money. The flow of traffic is less efficient because of the abundant access to businesses. If you want to buy something get on a commercial arterial road.
Limited access roads such as free-ways, seriously limit where traffic can get on or off, which makes for very efficient travel on these roads. This is why the freeway moves so well, there is little turbulence from new traffic entering, and in this case, no interference to the flow of traffic caused by traffic lights. I remember a number of years ago, the embarassment that was expressed in North Vancouver, that they had the only traffic light on the transcanada highway. (It isn’t true, there are traffic lights along the highway in towns like Golden BC or Revelstoke BC, but perhaps North Van was the last in a developed urban area.
Highways allow for travelling further, without significant business or residential access, but they often do allow more access to collector roads.
Service roads provide a unique function with highways. Where highways come into town (like in Rocky Mountain House AB) “service roads” are employed to provide access to businesses such that the function of the highway isn’t impaired by the business access. Its a smart idea.
Understanding why Business Frontage is only of benefit sometimes
When a motorist wants to get from point A to point B in a timely manner, Business frontage or access on the streets the motorist drives on, has no advantage for the motorist or the business owner. For the business owner, he is NOT a potential customer. For the motorist, the buesiness access just slows things down by congesting traffic and introducing more traffic lights where he needs to wait on his trip. So a word of wisdom to the cities and municipalities that consider introducing commercial development on non-commercial arterial roads. Don’t. The old fashioned idea that business frontage is good for property value and taxes does not hold on these roads. It is a compromise of the road’s primary purpose which is to move traffic efficiently. That thinking only holds when you are considering a commercial arterial road. In Abbotsford, there is an commercial arterial road called “South Fraser Way” which has shopping malls and auto centres, and strip malls, and car dealerships, and it is a place where people go to buy things. Maclure is a non-commercial arterial road in Abbotsford which stretches almost the entire length of the city, with almost no commercial at all. It is limited access (every 1/2 mile or so, rather than every block) and it is 2 lanes with a median. It is the most efficient road in Abbotsford for travelling across town and a testament to the prior city leaders who had the vision for a road with no drive-ways.
The different types of roads above look different. residential and collector are likely to have sidewalks, arterial might, but limited access, highways and service are unlikely to have sidewalks. Speed limits are different too. A commercial arterial road should have lower speed limits than a non-commercial arterial road that is limited access.
I see anomolies. Perhaps someone is working on our behalf to keep things simple, but in our cities, a standard speed limit of 50 Km/h applies unless it is otherwise posted. South Fraser way is a major 2-3 laned commercial road with a speed limit of 50, and my small dead end residential road full of young families with children has no posted limit meaning that it’s limit is also 50. This does not make sense. Perhaps there should be a sliding scale based on road classification;
- Residential 40 KM/H
- Collector 50 KM/H
- Non-Commercial Arterial 60 KM/H
- Limited Access 70-100 KM/H
Now I’ll introduce you to a radical idea of which I am quite an advocate… Ready? Roads are for driving on. They exist only to move people from place to place. They are not for parking or any other purpose. They are to provide space for people to move from one location to the next. With the context of this truly revolutionary idea the next points will fall into line.
The idea of allowing car parking on roads is silly. Regardless of what has happened in the past, why do we need to build roads 4 lanes wide just because somebody decided to leave their car “out” on the street? We see car parking on some commercial. arterial and collector roads as well as residential. The idea that people view this as a right rather than a privilege, that people don’t consider whether they have space to park a car before they buy one is bizarre. Since the roads are built with your tax dollars, and you are forced to go work to earn that money I think this should be a point that is dear to you. In progressive countries like Japan, you need to prove that you have room to park your vehicle before you are allowed to purchase one. (Smart)
In Canada we have very wide lanes. Our lanes are much wider than our vehicles. Most vehicles will have an extra 1-2 meters of space beside them in their lane. Its hard to estimate exact distances while driving on the freeway, and no I’m not walking out there with a tape measure. We also (at least in the lower mainland of BC) have this annoying habit of making roads wide enough for 2 lanes and then not putting lane markings on them. So where you could safely have people passing each other allowing for a smoother flow of traffic, you have this ambiguity.
Or there might be times where you want to restrict people from passing to make a safer stretch of road, or where you could have a bike lane that is then swept clean where bikes would be safe to travel with less interference from cars. Often there is just a single lane and then there are 2 lanes, with no sign or warning. the dotted lines come out of nowhere, making the road and the traffic on the road unpredictable and therefore less safe. Plus if you need to increase the capacity of a road, a can of paint is a pretty cheap way to improve your road’s carrying capacity.
So this post feels like a plane circling in the air looking for a place to land, and I think it will have to be a work in progress. It holds some examples of the need for design, but isn’t really a comprehensive treatment… yet.
Share your ideas in the comments below.
Greg.
Trucks in Rush-Hour Traffic
April 2, 2009, 7:30 pm
Filed under:
Quality, Excellence & Design | Tags:
carpool,
cars,
effectiveness,
government,
improvement,
planning,
prevention,
rush hour,
safety,
speed limit,
traffic,
truckToday was the “most exciting” carpool moment in commuting I’ve had in the last 6 years. Following a flatbed semi with a double trailer I noticed a pilot truck down the bank in the center of the freeway with the driver standing in the bed of his truck. Just then the truck in front of me locked up his brakes, producing clouds of smoke while his trailers tried to stop with the cab. Fortunately reactions kicked in and the other drivers and I were able to get stopped without incident. As the adrenaline worked its way out of my system I thought again that there must be some ways to make our roads safer by controlling how trucks and cars share the road.
The truck ahead of me was driving in the fast lane, and had been for 7 miles…
(flickr credit: C.P.Storm)
The good and bad of Professional truck drivers
I have a love-hate relationship with the commercial truck drivers on the road while I commute.
For the good, they are generally better drivers than the people in the cars. Professional drivers often don’t get the consideration they deserve (which would make their jobs easier and less stressful). Because of their experience, training and the weight of their trucks, they tend to be patient and less impulsive. They perform very well in traffic and goodness knows many of these drivers are being watched with the “1-800 watch my driving” stickers and GPS logging. Sitting higher in traffic they often have better perspective than other drivers. Truck drivers are often proactive in traffic, using their rigs to smooth out traffic, turning potentially dangerous stop and go traffic into steady traffic (which queueing theory leads us to understand should improve the overall throughput of the highway). Often they can administer a unique kind of justice with the massive size of their trucks, returning the shoulders to their intended purpose from the “impromptu kamakaze right hand passing lanes”. The professionalism is necessary because of the greater responsibility truck drivers have to keep their heavy vehicles and heavier loads from squishing families in mini-vans.
Normally “truckers” are great, but there are certainly a percentage of truckers whose impatience, indifference to human life, or incompetence regularly puts the lives of other drivers at risk. One day a truck travelled all the way from 176st in Surrey to Mt lehman in Abbotsford in the fast lane, which is a distance of 35 Km, then got out of the fast lane to exit the freeway. I’ve seen poorly adjusted brakes for empty or full trailers result in an impaired ability to stop in time. I’ve seen trucks blowing tires and not even noticing (or deciding that stopping isn’t their best option) despite the obvious risk of flying steel belt radials on the freeway.
I’m interested in what strategies could be employed to make our roads safer within the bounds of our current transportation infrastructure.
Recording devices to help drivers obey traffic laws
I recall seeing on a trip to Europe that commercial buses and trucks at that time had a recording device (some use paper disks) which tracks the driver’s speed, stops, breaks, sleep and other items relevant to safe vehicle operation. In any participating country, police can ask to see the record (paper disk), and can fine the driver for any infraction in the last 3 days, regardless of which country the driver was in when they committed the offence. It is remarkable to observer how obediently the trucks and buses follow the posted speed limit and other regulations. An environment is created where the rules apply whether there is a police officer in attendance or not, and as the driver of our tour bus explained, the fines imposed by automated systems like red light cameras, follow the license plate and then the driver themselves.
Most trucks I see on the freeway are driving close to the posted speed limits, others (like the dump truck with trailer that passed us doing about 140KM/H) need to be fined out of business and off the road for the safety and reputation of the other “good” drivers. No I didn’t get the license because it was covered in mud.
Treating Trucks Differently
First of all; Trucks ARE different. Trucks are;
- slower to accelerate or climb a hill. In rush hour traffic, trucks appear to be the rocks in the stream with the cars being the water flowing around them.
- more intimidating if they choose to use their size and weight to “force” a lane change where it really shouldn’t take place.
- generally travelling farther than other traffic
- more likely to throw rocks up at car windshields than other vehicles. (I suspect tire tread and weight is a factor)
- prone to kick up far more spray (reducing visibility) on wet roads, in rain storms and in loose dry snow
- big and reduce visibility by blocking the view of vehicles travelling behind them.
- heavier, harder to stop and much more deadly if they
- driven by drivers who typicaly have more training and experience than the rest of us.
I’ve observed three really useful strategies for “treating trucks differently”;
- The first strategy I’ve see involves encouraging trucks to use some roads and cars to use others. Many cities have signs indicating “truck routes” and other signs indicating that only trucks making local deliveries are allowed on certain streets. In industrial areas, where corners are wider to allow for the special turning needs of the trucks, cars are the minority. Because cars and trucks typically don’t mix, many of the issues that emerge when they mix are avoided.
- The second strategy I observed in Washington, Oregon & California, where they have a lower speed limit for trucks. The trucks are in the right hand lane (except to pass) abiding by a speed limit which is adequate, but 5-10 miles/hour slower than the cars. There is something predictable about trucks being on the right while other traffic flows past on the left. This ensures excellent visibility for the cars because the trucks are not impeding their vision.
- The third strategy I observed was in Germany on statutory holidays like “Fathers Day” when law requires that all transport trucks be off of the roads. “It is because so many more people are travelling for the holidays was the explanation offered by our bus driver”. Every road side pullout or rest-stop was full of trucks, pennants draped across the front windows, drivers discussing European Football and catching up on sleep.
(flickr credit: austrini)
Perhaps those strategies have their place in British Columbia in the Lower Mainland. I think that our current highways require trucks and cars to use the same roads to go to the same places, so separate routes may not currently be feasible. While a lower speed limit for trucks might help trucks behave more predictably, I know all too well what happens when one driver gets stuck climbing a hill… everyone tries to pass, and here there are only two lanes so the problem snowballs and both lanes slow right down. It won’t be a complete solution to our problem. I think however that the third solution might have merit if it were applied to rush-hour.
A suggested solution for improving rush hour traffic on the #1 highway in the lower-mainland is to create a time when cars can move without having trucks on the road.
In the past 40 years zero lanes have been added to widen the freeway. Our capacity to move traffic has not grown with the population and the traffic. Peak load on the freeway (6-8AM and 3-5PM) occurs because people must arrive at work within a limited time-frame. The absense of truly viable transit or any form of commuter rail in the South Fraser corridor means commuters are in cars. We must reduce the number of vehicles travelling on the freeway during rush “hour”. The transport of many non-perishable goods in many cases is date sensitive and not time sensitive. Did the lumber arrive at 7PM or 3PM? It is still usable lumber. So truck traffic in many cases could be loading and unloading “at the dock” during rush hour, and then hitting the road as the commuters come off of those roads. If we were to regulate that commercial trucks could not be on the road during those hours, suddenly the “truck/car” dynamics would be gone and the roads would be largely homogenous and less full. Clearly there is more definition work to be identified. Where do the in-coming trucks “wait” if they arrive from outside the lower mainland? Chilliwack from the East or South Surrey from the USA? What trucks if any are exempt. are the 3ton cube trucks fine, but 18wheelers are out?
This may not be the idea that solves the interaction of commuters and heavy trucks during rush hour in the lower mainland of BC, but we need to do something… maybe several things to make life more reasonable for car and truck alike, in the interests of safety and efficiency.
Thanks for listening. I’m interested to hear your ideas.
Greg.
Crying Wolf in Traffic
February 25, 2009, 8:36 pm
Filed under:
Quality, Excellence & Design,
Sustainable Living & Social Issues | Tags:
abbotsford,
construction,
construction zone,
cried wolf,
crying wolf,
danger,
exagerating,
excellence,
freeway,
highway,
reasonable warnings,
safety,
school zone,
signs,
speed limit,
traffic,
transcanada,
warning
When we cry wolf in traffic, we desensitize drivers to real dangers and real warnings and reduce the overall safety of traffic.
Growing up I was told a fable about a bored little shepherd boy who “cried wolf” to amuse himself. The townsfolk responded quickly, coming to the boys aid only to learn there was no wolf. Several times he played this game and each time the townsfolk rushed to the field to defend boy and sheep. At last a time came when there was a wolf, but no willing townsfolk to answer the boy’s cries. For the little boy who cried wolf, was the threat real? not at first. There was no wolf, until he had consumed the good will of the townsfolk.
Crying Wolf in construction zones
We see the same principle of crying wolf applied in traffic warning signs located at construction zones. Now I’ll start by stating that being cautious around construction workers and construction zones is important. Where it gets silly is when the warnings stop protecting workers and instead start desensitizing people and effectively teaching them that the signs don’t mean what they say.
Construction Zone Warning Fines Double
At 3 AM in the middle of the night on the weekend when there are no construction workers around, the construction speed zone sign applies just as much as it does in the middle of the weekday when workers are just feet away from the roadway. So when there is no obstacle or risk to workers, the signage causes motorists who would normally drive 110 KM/H must slow to 80 KM/H although the road may be clear, safe and intact. Do you think the public can continue to take the warning signs seriously? I suggest to you that we are not doing these workers the justice of making the construction zone safer during work hours because we wear on the patience of motorists with unreasonable demands. One such work zone is on the Transcanada highway near Abbotsford which has been in place for about a year, while a freeway improvement was being made. A year of reduced speeds? (where full speed still seems safe) It is silly to stretch our warnings to cover too much time.
We also do a disservice to these workers by exagerating the area where speed must be reduced. Often in BC, 1-2 KM before the construction zone, there are signs telling drivers to drop their speed by 30 KM (20 below the limit since the limits in BC seem to be arbitrarily about 10KM/h too low and most drivers compensate.) So you drive for 2 KM at that speed limit until the “real” construction zone begins. As you drive slower, everybody is piled up on your bumpers because nobody else is willing to obey the ridiculous speed reduction. If I drive at the reduced speed, before, during and after the construction, I impede the flow of the other drivers who (reasonably) are not slowing. Likely I’m contributing to an increase in their frustration and that makes the roadway less safe, not more safe. Most drivers know that the sign isn’t to be taken seriously, even though there is an accompanying sign saying that “traffic fines double in a work zone”, and another flashing sign warning that “speed limits are strictly enforced” (which they aren’t) It is another lying sign. I know they are not enforced, it is another rule with no teeth. The police are never there when I go by, pulling over the entire freeway to give it a ticket. STOP LYING!
So too many of these warnings exagerate the danger in area and time. A reasonable person looks at these warnings and they disregard them as silly. I’ve watched ambulance drivers, truck-drivers, Police officers and normal commuters all ignore the “STRICTLY ENFORCED CONSTRUCTION SPEED ZONE” and drive 110 KM/H through the 80 KM/H. In fact the other day there was a whole freeway of us driving at 110KM/h in an 80 zone, nobody flinching or looking guilty, nobody checking nervously for police officers. These freeway commuters have been completely desensitized to the speed limit signs and just don’t believe them anymore because the signs are not reasonble. I imagine that they must be set by some beaureucrat who has never seen how wide and straight and flat this highway is, or how little construction there really is out here, who is out of touch with reality. One of the signs I saw today was a bright orange diamond shaped construction sign, saying “warning no lane markings!”. I drove past that sign on a road that bore, probably the finest lane markings I’ve ever seen, crisp and clear and bright, not confusing in the least. I drove for kilometer after kilometer after kilometer over these new lane markings. It doesn’t make sense that thousands of dollars would be spent on painting the markings on the lanes, only to leave up the warning signs. The irrelevant sign clearly needed to come down the night the lane markings were painted. Construction signs in particular tend to be irrelevant in this area. “Sign Management” does that have to become part of the project manager’s job? Is it already? It doesn’t make sense to start saying something unless we know when to stop. It doesn’t make sense to overstate the danger. Just looking at how people drive indicates how ineffective the signs are. (and should be if they are unreasonable).
Crying wolf in school zones
Here is another example. All summer long I see school zone signs warning motorists to slow to 30 KM/H. but I know that school zones are only in effect on school days, but school days are not during the summer unless “summer school” is in session. But how would a member of the public who did not have a child in summer school know which schools had a summer school running and which didn’t? A law abiding citizen who wants to stay on the right side of the law would have to drive 30 KM/H through every school zone year round just in case a summer school was in session. The same problem extends for the rest of the school year when there are professional development days when the students are not in school. The average commuter has no way of knowing that this is a day when the school zones are not in effect, whereas the 16 year old driver who gets the day off would know this and would drive 50KM/H through the school zone. This is a case of special knowledge. Not enough information is available for the driver to make an appropriate decision. The people have to obey a warning, that really doesn’t apply, they have to drive 30 KM/H just in case the school zone is in effect. How simple it would be to make the principal of the school (who could certainly delegate this) responsible for covering the signs on days when no school is in session. Issue the principal some heavy burlap sacks with zippers he could use, or make the sign hinged, so it could be locked open or closed.
Another traffic oddity I’ve seen in school zones is those “extra” bright yellow little plastic bag signs handed out by the auto insurance companies, which are posted in school zones as children head back to school. Saying “Drive Carefully” “School Zone”. The problem is not with handing these out or setting them up when school is back in session in September, those are great ideas, the problem comes when they get left up all year long and they mean nothing, or even worse, when the school principal and all the teachers have grown so incredibly numb to these signs, that when the school breaks for summer holidays and there are no children at the school, they continue to leave the signs up throughout the summer, only to replace them with new signs when the students actually return to school in the fall. (You can’t make this stuff up!)
Crying wolf at the local Thrift store.
Now not related to traffic I saw something similar the other day in a Christian thrift shop here in Abbotsford. There was a sign there warning about the security camera that was recording people and that shoplifters would be prosecuted. As I looked around at the $0.30 teacups and other discarded items that had been donated. I thought this was ridiculous, who would prosecute anyone for stealing such low value items? Then I looked carefully at the camera, and sure enough it was one of those fake cameras you can purchase at a novelty store with some silly name l ike “view all” or “sky eye” or something. Cheaply composed from plastic. The sign was an attempt to scare people to do the right thing. There was no means of enforcing it, and it was a Lie! “DON’T STEAL OR WE WILL VIDEO TAPE YOU”, well you aren’t going to video tape me, so don’t make that threat. How about you just say “Don’t steal”. In the case of a Christian thrift shop perhaps the sign should have read; “If you need something just take it” since that would fit more with Christian charity and giving to someone who is in need.
We need to be asking ourselves these questions; “Is the warning reasonable?”, “Is the threat real?”.
Conclusion
When I ask you to do something for me and you do it because you honestly believe you are helping me, I’m relying on your good will to meet a need. Now if I keep asking you and you keep helping me because you believe it is benefiting me, this is good, we have a healthy relationship and there is trust. Now if you find out that I’m asking you to do something I don’t really need, but I’m just amused by watching you serve me, or I’m too lazy to stop you when I don’t really need your help, then you will get tired of helping me, and rightly so. This is what is taking place on the freeway. The whole “enforcement side of things” would not be necessary at all if we could ensure that we are not abusing the good will of people.
Thanks for reading, maybe you will find yourself in a position to offer an unreasonable heavy handed warning and you can instead offer something more reasonable. Maybe you put up construction signs. The point is that you can make changes to improve the world we live in. This is about improving things for all of us, because we’re all in this together.
Thanks,
Greg.
Transcanada Highway Lower Mainland
March 10, 2007, 4:31 am
Filed under:
Quality, Excellence & Design | Tags:
congestion,
cost benefit,
excellence,
freeway,
Golden Ears Bridge,
improvement,
interchange,
lower mainland,
meter,
off-ramp,
on-ramp,
overpass,
planning,
quality,
safety,
traffic,
transcanadaThe Trans-Canada highway in the lower mainland of BC South of the Fraser river has remained virtually unchanged since the 1960s. As you drive over the 40 year old overpasses, you can see the date of their construction stamped in the concrete. Each overpass following the same 2 lane bidirectional model with few exceptions. In recent years three of these interchanges have been upgraded or replaced. First the 208th street overpass (+2 lanes) in Langley was built to relieve pressure on 200th street, then 200th street (+2 lanes), Vedder Rd (+2 lanes) in Chilliwack, and Mt Lehman (+5 lanes) in Abbotsford. The total increase in lanes crossing the freeway since 1960 appears to be 11 for a distance spanning approximately 85KM. This is in an area where the total number of lanes crossing is now 66 lanes increasing from the 55 provided in the 1960s.
Now the Lower Mainland and Victoria areas of BC account for 9% of the population of Canada. In 1961 the population of BC was 1,629,082 just 20 years earlier it had been half of that. 30 years later it had doubled to 3.2 Million in 1991. At that time there had been no increase in lanes, with the 208th overpass being added some time in the 1990s. In 2006 the population of BC was 4,1 Million. That population increased 2.5 times from 1961 to 2006. In 2006, the combined population of the area south of the Fraser in the lower mainland including Chilliwack, Abbotsford, the Langleys and Surrey was 692,000. We can infer a similar increase in the population of the lower mainland that is accurate enough for this discussion.
The population increases to 250% of 1960 levels, but the overpasses increase of 20% of 1960 levels. Clearly the capacity enjoyed in the 1960s is not enjoyed today and the Federal and Provincial Governments have not paid close attention to maintaining our transportation network.
The 200th street fiasco got delayed for years (6 years?) because as I understand it, the provincial government tried to avoid paying cash for the interchange, and instead managed to trade adjacent land and favourable zoning to the developers. This delay affected thousands of area residents who were forced to queue for years to cross the freeway. Nowhere in the cost savings, was the inconvenience to citizens measured. Eventually the existing 2 lanes crossing the freeway were torn down and replaced with other lanes crossing the freeway, and a big box shopping centre was installed in every adjacent piece of property to the detriment of the traffic.
Now to area residents, it seems that when the Golden Ears Bridge comes in 2009, that the 200th st interchange with its multitudes of traffic lights and single lanes will be completely overwhelmed. It has been obvious for the last 10 years or so that the only logical location (the empty place in the river where the roads have been aligning) for the Maple Ridge Langley bridge to exist is at 201st street near the water treatment plant on the Fraser river. However, area traffic has been queuing excessively between freeway and big box retail area and industrial area for 15 years. In 2009 when the bridge traffic joins the freeway at 200th we’ll see what happens. Currently, in the mornings, Westbound commuters have found traffic trying to exit Northbound at 200th from the Freeway. These vehicles are often lined up for 1/2 a mile along the side of the freeway. Naturally some of these vehicles stick into the Freeway lanes, creating an extreme traffic hazard for the 100 KM/hour traffic. The exit needs to have double the capacity to carry traffic from Westbound Freeway to North and Southbound 200th. The Lights at the interchange at 88th North of the freeway need to function so they do not impede the flow of traffic off of the freeway. Sensors in the roadway on the exit ramp should be linked to these lights, such that when there is a backup of traffic attempting to leave the freeway, the light stays green allowing the traffic to continue to flow North across 88th and off the the Freeway. It is much more important that a traffic light not impede the flow of the freeway, than that cars are allowed to get onto the freeway. It comes back to our methods for handling intersections and our fascination with traffic lights despite their implicit need to stop “some” traffic at all times. So 200th looks like too little too late, and time will tell us this year whether the engineers and architects planned well or planned poorly
Apart from inadequate overpasses to get local populations across the freeways, truck traffic, has not been given fair treatment on our freeway. Nowhere except at the East bound truck scales (near 160th) do we find a third lane provided for trucks to gain speed as they climb a hill. [EDIT: since I started drafting this article, a climbing lane has been added Westbound at Mt-Lehman THANKS]. This “feature is missing in many locations including but not limited to: 200th to 216, 232 to 208, 232 to 264, Mt Lehman, Sumas way to Macallum Road and Peardonville to MtLehman. Since our society seems to have embraced freight bearing trucks and largely dispensed with rail, it is strange to see that government is not adequately supporting the needs of trucks on our roads. Clearly there is much to be said about how freight trucks on our roads interact with other drivers, but that will have to wait for another article.
Interchanges, trucks, another deficiency of the Transcanada highway in the lower mainland that bears mentioning is that we do not find reasonable on-ramps. There does not seem to be a standard for a safe on-ramp despite the pretty illustrations in the Province’s driver’s handbook. Almost every freeway interchange is designed uniquely and differently from other interchanges. In some cases these on-ramps and off-ramps, and these are becoming increasingly dangerous as the level of traffic congestion increases. One feature that we sometimes see on the freeways in other cities which is absent in our own is the feature of a lane that links the on-ramp at one interchange with the off-ramp at the next. By way of example, in Abbotsford Westbound between Sumas and Macallum exits, there is a relatively short distance of about 1 km where such a lane would allow traffic to merge less suddenly, allow traffic leaving the freeway to get out of the flow of traffic earlier, would have a limited cost and would reduce congestion by smoothing the flow of traffic onto and off of the freeway while increasing capacity between interchanges.
As fragile and full as our freeway traffic may be here in the lower mainland on the transcanada highway, another factor that contributes to the overall situation, is that we allow overloading the freeway with spikes of traffic. For example at 232 Eastbound in the afternoon rush, traffic coming in on the on ramp is equal in volume and speed to the traffic in the fast-lane. The slow-lane has emptied itself of cars at the other side of the interchange as everyone preemptively avoids the merging traffic. Imagine with me, that if the freeway is at 100% capacity before the merge, then it is at 150% after the cars merge on. They come in bunches. The bunches overwhelm the freeway’s ability to smoothly absorb the traffic. There is a bunch and then nothing and then another bunch. Bunches are equal to the density of traffic in the fastlane. Other jurisdictions address these spikes in traffic volume by leveling or smoothing the traffic admitted to the freeway. Metering the on-ramp would lower the density of the traffic coming on to the freeway, spreading it out and allowing for a responsible and sustainable merge into the slow-lane from the on-ramp. This should better allow the freeway to retain its flow (its speed). When the speed of the freeway drops to a crawl the people who just merged on, can force their way across to the fastlane, further disrupting the flow of traffic. Ideally where there are merge points, there would be some method to reduce lane switching to reduce the “turbulence” created by merging traffic.
If that isn’t bad enough, some commuters, knowing about this issue, choose to exit the freeway and drive in the decelleration lane only to re-enter the freeway at the point of congestion. They effectively drive around all of the patient drivers who are slowing prior to the congestion, but they compound the problem by further disrupting the flow of traffic at the merge point, perpetuating the situation they “avoided”.
Congestion on this highway is such that it took me 37KM from the 160th exit in Surrey to exit 87 in Abbotsford BC to catch up with a semitrailer hauling large sections of steel pipe. With uphill sections and that kind of weight, you can appreciate he wouldn’t be the fastest vehicle. It goes to show you how inefficiently our freeway is working, when a capable vehicle cannot pass a lumbering vehicle , much less catch sight of it. This suggests the need to pro-actively increase the number of lanes to maintain traffic capacity.
I have hear the argument time and time again that if we build better roads, more people will drive their cars. While it is probably true that people who already drive their cars will drive further because they will get there in the same or less time than they currently do. We are currently experiencing a dramatic increase in the number of cars on the road despite no new roads being built. The argument would be fair if there was an alternative that was cost effective, reasonable and efficient. Unlike much of Europe and many major US centers, we do not have an effective rail transportation system unless you live and work within a 1/2 mile of the sky train. Bus service is “spotty” at best especially if you live outside of the Vancouver core. Traveling from Fleetwood in Surrey to BCIT in Burnaby by bus and skytrain takes 1 hour longer per day than making the same trip in a car on the freeway. How a 45 minute trip could take 30 minutes longer by using transit (1:15) highlights the situation that the lower mainland’s transit is in many cases 60% less effective at moving people. So we must have our roads alongside other solutions. If we neglect the roads we neglect the citizens who must travel them to hospitals, to work, to return home, we neglect the freight corridors that bring food to the supermarket etc.
We need to think twice about only doing what is “cost effective” and need to start doing what is “traffic effective”. The whole point of building a transportation infrastructure is not to “save money”, the point is to provide transportation. It is expected to be costly because it is a long term investment which yields continuing dividends in terms that may never appear on the bottom line. Reduced pollution, shorter commute times, higher efficiency, improved commerce, improved health through lowered stress, better safety resulting in fewer injuries and medical costs. It is like the cost of minting a penny. some people object to a penny costing more than 1 cent to mint, thinking that somehow there is a loss, but in reality, a penny allows for commerce, and will be used and re-used many hundreds of times in its lifetime creating a value that far outstrips the cost of minting it.
Quality In Life - Living Smarter... 