Here’s Roadguy’s column from the the Sunday paper. If you’ve already read it elsewhere, please skip on down to the comments below. Thanks.

DRIVER TAKES A DIM VIEW OF FREEWAY WITH NO LIGHTS

Alert reader Pam has been driving through darkness and thinks it would be great to see some light:

I am wondering if you can explain the reason behind turning most of the lights off on the Crosstown in the construction zone. Can’t they string temporary lights?

There is one stretch between Penn and [the] I-35W south exit that is so dark that there have been several times I have not known where the middle concrete barrier was located and had to drive closer to the middle line than comfortable for fear of sideswiping the median, and because it seems my headlights’ beams just disappear into the pavement.

Have there been any accidents in the area, maybe due to the no lights?

Steve Barrett, a Minnesota Department of Transportation engineer on the Crosstown project, says it’s not easy keeping the lights on in a construction zone. The original lights often have to be removed, and temporary lights have various challenges — they may short out or burn out, it’s hard to find room for them when everything’s torn up and their overhead electrical wires can get in the way of cranes and other equipment.

Because lighting can’t always be counted on, Barrett says, MnDOT emphasizes striping and signs to keep cars in their lanes, and the lower speed limit through the Crosstown zone — 45 miles per hour — is also aimed at encouraging safe navigation. Barrett didn’t have numbers handy but said the crash rate through the corridor is about the same as before the project began.

Barrett says there are temporary lights in the stretch Pam is talking about, so brighter nights should be ahead.

Roadguy drove through the northern part of the construction zone on I-35W this past week, and there are definitely some dark spots. But he didn’t want to complain — after all, some freeways don’t have much lighting at all. What’s up with that?

Amr Jabr, traffic and operations guru for MnDOT’s metro district, says lighting makes roads safer, but it costs money to install and maintain. So traffic volumes, nighttime crash rates and the number of lanes are used to help determine which freeways get lights.

Jabr says the eventual goal is to have continuous lighting on the 494/694 loop and all the freeways inside it. Lights are added as money and road work allow; the area around the Wakota Bridge, for example, will get continuous lighting as part of that project.

So someday Pam will be able to drive all over the place and see the medians clearly — as long as construction crews don’t pull the plug.

Ramp meters rarely make news these days, but they managed to grab a headline or two yesterday when MnDOT announced that some meters might be used for longer hours (Strib story here, KSTP-TV version here). The news reminded Roadguy of an e-mail he received from alert reader Eric. Half of the e-mail was talked about in this post; Eric’s other question is here:

My wife and I have lived in the Cities for just under a year. Needless to say, there are a few things we’ve had to get used to in the realm of driving. One is the stoplights on highway entrance ramps. Never seen those before, and between the two of us, we’ve lived in about eight states. I’m sure you’ve addressed this at some point before, but what is the history of those things? Whose idea are they, and if they really work, why don’t they have them elsewhere?

Roadguy’s first instinct was to refer Eric to the massive ramp meter study, but Eric seems nice and doesn’t deserve to wade through a pile like that. So, lacking the time to come up with my own ramp meter dissertation, I’ve decided to open it to the floor: How do you explain ramp meters to an inquisitive out-of-towner? I’ve heard them called everything from a civic duty to a variety of unprintable words, so share your thoughts below. (Prose, haiku, sonnets — all are welcome)

Here’s Roadguy’s column from the Sunday paper. If you’ve already read it elsewhere, please skip on down to the comments below.

Freeway drivers tend to have little affection for a lane that’s about to end, but they harbor a great deal of love for exit-only signs.

After last week’s column about the removal of such signs along Interstate 394, several alert readers wanted a better understanding of the Minnesota Department of Transportation’s motivations, so Roadguy got more info from Heather Lott, a MnDOT sign guru.

Lott says that exit-only signs were developed to let drivers on the main part of a highway know that their lane is ending, not to tell drivers entering from a ramp that they’re in a short acceleration/deceleration lane.

“Exit-only signs create a strong reaction from drivers, resulting in many leaving the auxiliary lane immediately, even if they have not accelerated sufficiently to merge into mainline traffic,” Lott wrote, using italics for emphasis. “This defeats the primary purpose of the auxiliary lane.”

So to reduce driver panic, MnDOT has decided that auxiliary lanes that are a half-mile long or longer should get exit-only signs, while shorter ones generally get the “dotted” lane striping and sometimes a black-and-white “right lane must exit” sign. Lott says that, compared with other states, Minnesota had been “overusing” exit-only signs on auxiliary lanes.

Lott encourages drivers entering a freeway to look at the sign near the end of the ramp. An added-lane sign…

…is used for lanes that are going to stick around for a while, whereas a standard merge sign…

…indicates ramp traffic should plan to merge into mainline traffic.

So the answer is still there in black and yellow; it’s just at the end of the ramp instead of overhead.

Here’s Roadguy’s column from the Sunday paper. If you’ve already read it elsewhere, please skip on down to the comments below. Thanks.

SHOVELING YOUR WAY OUT OF TROUBLE

Who should shovel out Twin Cities bus stops? After reading last week’s column, alert reader Jeff from Brooklyn Park had an idea:

How about getting those offenders that are sentenced to community service [to do] the shoveling at the bus stops? It would get the snow shoveled and wouldn’t cost “us” anything.

By sheer coincidence, Roadguy received an e-mail two days later from another Jeff from Brooklyn Park:

I just finished a couple days of community service for Hennepin County. The days were spent cleaning snow around the bus stop signs. We would clean about three feet on either side of the sign.

When passengers would exit the bus, we could see that they were pleased with what we were doing. Just a little something to pass on to your readers about their tax dollars at work.

(Roadguy called both Jeffs and learned that Jeff No. 2 was working off a transportation-related penalty: He’d gotten a DUI.)

Mike Kennedy, who is not named Jeff, is in charge of snow removal for Minneapolis, and he says that community-service crews do snow removal work at bus stops and intersections around town.

But who shovels in, say, certain suburbs? Alert reader Peter wants to know:

It took a whole week from when the snow started falling for Columbia Heights personnel (presumably) to clear snow from the [bus] stop for people going downtown.

Peter has put his foot right in the middle of the slushy mishmash of Twin Cities shoveling. Bus stops are not part of Columbia Heights’ snow-removal plan, said public works director Lauren McClanahan, though the city will clear some of them if it’s finished with other priorities.

Metro Transit, meanwhile, clears many shelters but doesn’t do stops, while some shelters are shoveled out by private companies that sell advertising on them. Private firms also handle ad-covered benches, which have a phone number you can call about snow or other problems.

And bike racks? Yes, in our snowy metropolis, someone asked about unshoveled bike racks at the 38th Street light-rail station. Bob Gibbons of Metro Transit says that during the first snowstorms, there was some confusion involving a contractor, and that from now on the bicycle rack areas will be shoveled.

THE LAST WORD ON PLATES

Roadguy is more than ready to stop talking about license plates, but some alert readers aren’t quite there yet.

A few vehicle owners with the letters F and S in their plates wrote in because they were mystified to read that those letters aren’t used in randomly assigned plates. To clarify: The letters weren’t taken out of rotation until late 2005.

And for those of you eager to get your new flat digitally produced plates (or obtain a final set of embossed ones), the state folks say the transition will happen early next year. Digital plates will first be available by mail, then appear at the 173 deputy registrar offices in spring or summer as shipments are made.

Roadguy was so excited about the snow emergencies that he nearly forgot to post his column from the Sunday paper, so here it is:

WITH LICENSE PLATES, SOMETIMES “W” STANDS FOR “WHOOPS”

What do repeat drunken drivers and ham radio operators have in common?

They both might have license plates that start with W.

That was the major lesson of this past week, after Roadguy wrote that plates beginning with W are restricted plates that are subject to impoundment if the driver messes up again. The amateur radio folks — very few of whom are drunken drivers or otherwise in trouble — were quick to let Roadguy know that W doesn’t always stand for “whisky.”

My apologies.

Kris Chapin of the Department of Public Safety, who has been Roadguy’s guide to all things plate-related, was a bit red-faced as well.

She clarified that all restricted plates are plain white with blue lettering and have two letters and four numbers, with the first letter always a W.

The amateur radio plates, meanwhile, have the standard blue-and-white Minnesota plate design, complete with woodsy scene and canoe, “so the distinction is obvious” even if the plate number begins with a W, Chapin said in an e-mail.

Some plates showing a ham radio operator’s call letters start with a W, followed by up to five letters or numbers, she said.

And personalized plates belonging to neither bad drivers nor radio buffs may also begin with W, such as the exuberant “WHEEE” and the even more exuberant “WHEEEEE.” Roadguy sincerely hopes that those drivers stay well below the legal limit.

What about F, S, I, O and Q?

While the radio folks questioned Roadguy’s intelligence, other readers just had more questions. For example, what about S?

For several years, Driver and Vehicle Services has excluded F and S from nonpersonalized plates “because their similar sounds caused problems with our internal voice-recognition system,” Chapin wrote. “However, they’ll start using S (but not F) as they make the transition to flat, digital plates because they need another letter to create more combinations.”

And because of “readability issues for law enforcement,” the letters I, Q and O only appear in personalized plates.

What about unfortunate three-letter combinations that might pop up and resemble four-letter words or otherwise fail to be universally appreciated?

Whenever a new numbering series begins, an internal committee reviews the possible combinations and omits any that might be objectionable, questionable or otherwise eye-opening, said the state folks, who cited DFL and APE as two that wouldn’t make the cut for random assignments.

But before any DFLers write in, relax: You can still request that combination for your personalized plates.

Here’s Roadguy’s column from today’s paper. If you’ve read it elsewhere, please skip on down to the comments section and leave some thoughts. Thanks.

SWITCHING LANES IN TUNNEL DISCOURAGED BUT NOT ILLEGAL

Questions keep landing in Roadguy’s inbox, so let’s start with alert reader Mary, who wants to know about lines on the freeway:

Way back in my early days of learning to drive, I recall driving through the Lowry Hill Tunnel and making a lane change. My passenger gave me a worried look and said, “No passing in the tunnel — see the solid white lines?” Since then I’ve been keenly aware of it.

The last six months I’ve been driving through the tunnel daily, and without fail every time I’m going through at least one car is changing lanes. Is this lawful? Obviously it’s a bad idea, as a traffic accident would cause [a] major headache. But there don’t seem to be signs reminding drivers that no passing is allowed, unless of course it is. … So, what’s the deal?

Mary’s instincts are good, says Maj. Kent O’Grady of the State Patrol. Changing lanes in the tunnel is indeed a bad idea, and that’s basically what a solid white line means — it’s used to “discourage” lane changing. However, there’s no statute covering such lines, O’Grady says, so a sign would be needed to make crossing solid lines an enforceable offense.

Next we have a question from alert reader Becky, who has been feeling a chill in the air:

I was wondering if you knew the logic to the bus shelter heat lamps. … [Early last week] on Nicollet Mall, I only saw one activated, but when I tried to activate two others, they wouldn’t turn on. Luckily it wasn’t too cold out last night, but waiting for the bus would have been a nicer experience with the heat lamps.

Roadguy couldn’t quite unravel Becky’s specific mystery, but he learned a few things about the heat lamps.

First, most of the bus shelter lamps around town are run by Metro Transit, and spokesman Bob Gibbons said they’re designed to work only when the temperature is 45 degrees or lower. He said maintenance folks were checking on them last week to make sure they’re in working order for the winter.

Most of the ones along Nicollet Mall, on the other hand, are operated by the city of Minneapolis, which uses a system based on the calendar rather than temperature. Spokesman Matt Laible said they generally flip the switches for the lamps about Nov. 15.

(In a second e-mail, Becky reported that the lamps were working the next day, so perhaps the switch was flipped a bit early.)

Our last question is from, well, Roadguy himself.

On my drive to work downtown a few weeks ago, I received an unexpected bonus: One of the “No Turn on Red” signs was missing. This shaved about 45 seconds off my commute from south Minneapolis, though I tried not to act too visibly excited as I didn’t want to become a suspect in the sign’s disappearance.

I spoke with Laible about it, and he told me that the sign was officially (and legally) removed on Oct. 15. Since 2005, he said, Minneapolis has been evaluating its numerous signs forbidding turns on red, and a consultant deemed this one unnecessary.

The city considers such factors as visibility for drivers and whether an intersection gets a lot of pedestrian traffic. Minneapolis residents can request to have a “No Turn on Red” sign removed — or installed — by calling 311 or visiting www.ci.minneapolis.mn.us/traffic/NTOR.asp.

I’d tell you where the sign on my commute used to hang, but I don’t want anyone asking that it be put back.