Why the freeway message signs don’t say ‘have a nice day’
Posted on May 26th, 2008 – 7:10 PMBy Roadguy
Here’s my column from the Sunday paper. If you’ve already read it elsewhere, please skip on down to the comments below. Thanks.
Alert reader Mark from Chanhassen has a vision for those message boards on the freeways:
I think it would be a good idea to utilize these message boards in down times for friendly messages for freeway drivers, such as please don’t tailgate, use cell phones sparingly, allow cars to merge, don’t drink and drive … MnDOT could even have an in-house contest to come up with best phrase.
Todd Kramascz, the MnDOT traffic guru in charge of the boards, said the messages must relate to traffic congestion, crashes, hazards such as flooding, or emergencies such as Amber Alerts.
That’s because researchers have found that drivers are more likely to pay attention to signs that aren’t always displaying a message, Kramascz said. And he noted that blank signs also convey information: “They’re stating essentially that all is well.”
Seat-belt reminders and DWI enforcement alerts do appear on the signs, but only at certain times of the year under an arrangement with other state agencies, he said. Some Twin Cities signs had a “Thanks for buckling up” message on Saturday.
LIGHT RAIL UP IN THE AIR?
Alert reader David has a question about the Central Corridor light-rail line:
Why don’t they create an elevated track on Washington Avenue for the light rail line like they have in Chicago?
Roadguy has heard various versions of this question — why aren’t they building a flyover at Snelling Avenue, why not elevate the whole line, etc.
The main answer is money, said Laura Baenen, a spokeswoman for the project — it’s much more expensive to build a bridge over the street than to set rails into the ground.
There are other reasons, too: More right-of-way is required because of support structures; track noise is louder and travels farther; access for disabled passengers requires elevators; maintenance is more difficult. Baenen said she “could go on and on” — much like the debate over the line itself.
SEAT-BELT EXEMPTIONS
Last week, when we talked about how there are no seat-belt law exemptions for police or taxi drivers, I neglected to give examples of actual exemptions, so here are a few:
• A person driving in reverse.
• Rural mail carriers.
• A driver or passenger in a car made before 1965.
• A person with a doctor’s note.
There’s also a provision for “a person who is actually engaged in work that requires the person to alight from and reenter a motor vehicle at frequent intervals” — and who doesn’t drive more than 25 miles per hour between stops.
That means your garbage guy is more or less covered. Cabbies, not so much.
17 Responses to "Why the freeway message signs don’t say ‘have a nice day’"
someone asked: “Why don’t they create an elevated track on Washington Avenue for the light rail line like they have in Chicago? ”
The answer is because MnDont doesn’t ever do anything right. They would rather do it over and over again than do it right the first time. It gives them more work, and thus more job security. Just take a look at 35W/62, 35W/94, 35E/694, (we could add 35W/494, 169/494, and others) or spagetti junction in St Paul. Just do it, doesn’t matter if it’s done well.
Additionally, the transit people are so anxious, they just want it done. Doesn’t matter if it’s the best solution, just getteer done!
Lastly, the DFL keeps spending all our tax dollars. Read in todays Strib where ‘they are looking for $39 million dollars’ for a new planatarium. We need one of those like we need another……
Overheard tracks are also loud and ugly…
Or do facts get in the way of your constant negativity?
Because nobody wants to drive under an elevated line. If I recall correctly (and someone surely will point out if I am wrong), people generally don’t drive under the tracks in Chicago. I thought that it was too thin of a lane.
I’m a big supporter of the northern route, but I’d take it running right down the middle of Washington before I’d elevate it - even if money weren’t a factor.
Some the large bridges are stacked (like Verrazanno Narrows). It’s LRT not a freight train.
Lake, Wabash, Wells (among others) are streets in the Loop that are coincident with elevated tracks.
Keep the message boards off if there is no reason to say anything. I’ve see it enough times where congestion opens up right after a board with a message. All it takes is one person to slow down to read it during rush hour and traffic is screwed.
Agree with botski, there are enough bozos who feel the need to slow down to read three lines of text and end up creating traffic jams.
I agree with keeping the boards off.
About two years ago, on an icy winters day, I was traveling north on 35E, just north of the bridge.
I witnessed an accident caused by someone braking, so they could read the sign!
That’s because researchers have found that drivers are more likely to pay attention to signs that aren’t always displaying a message, Kramascz said. And he noted that blank signs also convey information: “They’re stating essentially that all is well.”
This research should be shown to our local weather experts who instist on having weather specials for every flipping rain storm. Then when we have a tornado nobody listens….
“The answer is because MnDont doesn’t ever do anything right.”
Perhaps MNDOT doesn’t ever do anything right because they don’t ever get the necessary money to do it right the first time. The Crosstown rebuild was delayed for several years because the money wasn’t available to start the project. Remember Pawlenty’s ‘wimpy’ proposal? Like Wimpy, of Popeye fame, Pawlenty told the construction companies “I will gladly pay you Tuesday, for road construction today.” He wanted the contractors to self-fund the project until Federal dollars were available. Predictably, nobody wanted to do the project under those conditions. Result: delay & higher project cost, thanks to stubborn cheapskates who won’t free up the dollars to do it right the first time.
I think MnDont is gonna do the wrong thing again. Check out this link about the elimination of over 1000 parking spaces on Universtiy Ave:
http://www.startribune.com/local/stpaul/19178399.html?location_refer=Minneapolis
To quote the article: “As planners press forward to design the proposed Central Corridor light-rail line, it has become clear that nearly 1,000 of University Avenue’s 1,150 on-street parking spaces could disappear. Two sets of tracks, two lanes of traffic, left-hand turn lanes, traffic lights, stations and sidewalks take up room. In many areas, the combination of those things means parking has to go.
That has many small businesses along the avenue concerned about getting customers through their doors. Planners and project leaders acknowledge the potential for hardship and are working on ways to lessen the pain, but there won’t be a perfect solution for everyone.”
I predict that this project will dwarf the Hiawatha Ave diaster by atleast 1 power of 10.
The fact that businesses think they will die because people can’t park directly in front of their store, but will need to park on the nearest side street (by definition less than a block away) speaks poorly of that business, our collective laziness, or both.
The more likely result of the LRT is that people who would otherwise never see those stores because they are traveling along I-94 may become new shoppers.
“dwarf the Hiawatha Ave diaster ”
Hiawatha Ave disaster? New development? Neighborhood cleanup? Rising property values?
What disaster?
I’ve got mixed feelings on the Central Corridor, but don’t blame Mn/DOT for it. LRT is a Metropolitan Council project, not Mn/DOT.
Once it’s approved, the Met Council hands it over to Mn/DOT to build it, just because they’re the only agency that is set up for major construction projects like that. Once it’s built, Mn/DOT is out of it again, the Met Council (MetroTransit) operates and maintains it.
Joe G says: “but don’t blame Mn/DOT for it. LRT is a Metropolitan Council project, not Mn/DOT.”
It should be illegal for an unelected committee to make such important and expensive decisions.
Then you’re telling me MnDont has no input, no choice. If so why do they exist?
It’s great from a government perspective: They can all say “it’s nobody’s fault, we were just doing what we were told.”
They exist to do highway projects and maintenance, where they do have input. On transit projects, not so much. On transit operations, Mn/DOT pretty much has no input at all.
Also, the met council, while not directly elected, isn’t “making the decision”, only the recommendation to the Legislature on what to fund. The Legislature, which is elected, can choose not to go forward with it.
