Cones

[Leothebear]

In my area work undertaken on roadsides will mean miles of perfectly good road coned off causing the usual havoc.
Recently, grass trimming in the central reservation was accompanied with 5 miles of the outer lane being closed, on a local, well used, length of dual carriageway. This caused a flare of ill-temper on my part. I was sorely tempted to drive freely in the coned off lane.

I realise that safety for the workers is paramount but I can't see what's wrong with a rolling system where just 2-300 metres is coned off at a time.

Leo

[terminal7]

Cones - just when you thought it was safe . . . they're BACK.

T7

[bungeejumper]

Yes, five miles at a time is excessive, and the council is only doing it that way because it sets the byelaws and it just can. But how short should the sections be? Although the idea of a quarter-mile coned section sounds attractive at first hearing, I have this nagging feeling that constantly moving it around would slow everything down pretty badly, and that all you'd really end up with is a slower job at much higher expense to the council.

I'm really not the person to give chapter and verse on elf and safety , but I expect DrF will be along in a minute with some proper info. In the meantime:

The first thing I'd expect is that moving the start and finish of the cones line on a dual carriageway would involve at least five men each time you did it - two at each end, plus a gaffer to record each move, inform the police and, for all I know, update the council on progress. And watch that the tail-enders don't get massacred as they remove their end of the cones out of the way. Do that every two hours, and you've got a bigger workforce and a slower job.

And did we mention the lane closure truck with the big illuminated arrow, without which it's damn hard to close a high-speed traffic lane? Or the people who'll have to keep moving the speed limit signs around?

But the most persuasive argument for keeping the cone closure sections tolerably long is that, each time you change the section it's an opportunity for some goon to misunderstand, or get in the wrong lane, or swerve out into somebody else's path because the effing cones weren't there a couple of hours ago, and now they are, and it's bound to be somebody's fault, etc etc etc.....

And if the changes cause "a flare of ill-temper" in which a sane and sensible Fool is "sorely tempted to drive freely in the coned off lane", then we've got an anger management issue that will be all the more serious among the usual eejits who habitually weave between the cones. (Bikers, I'm looking at you. )

And at the end of the day, we're all going to be dead a long time when it eventually happens, and every road death costs somebody a million quid or thereabouts, and somebody in the road maintenance system has got to carry the can for all that. It isn't that surprising that road menders place their own convenience over that of the fuming motorists.

[mc2fool]

The first thing I'd expect is that moving the start and finish of the cones line on a dual carriageway would involve at least five men each time you did it - two at each end, plus a gaffer to record each move, inform the police and, for all I know, update the council on progress.

Or ... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_YkGYm387A8

[Dod101]

I don't always agree with bungeejumper but I absolutely do in this case. Vehicles driven at relatively high speeds are potentially highly dangerous and for somebody to get uptight about a set of cones restricting their progress seems at the very least selfish. Is their time that important? Presumably it is at worst only for one day anyway.

Still I must say if it is a five mile stretch that does seem a bit excessive. Is that the distance a grass cutting tractor gets in the course of a working day?

Dod

[kiloran]

I would question whether cutting the grass is really necessary. If it creates a safety issue then it's understandable, but often I feel the grass cutting is just for cosmetic purposes. I'd rather see the grass left in its natural state, and the council's money (our money!) used for other purposes.

--kiloran

[didds]

I'd imagine its cos the cone-putter-outers-and-collectors are contracted out to a CPOAC company and thats all they do and its cost effective to just hire them twice per 5 mile straetch than to have then on contact call to shift them in 440 yard bursts


or summat

[tjh290633]

You can have a rolling coned off section with two lorries, the rear one with a lane indicator arrow picks up the cones and the front one.sets them down. I've seen it done in the past.

TJH

[Dod101]

I would question whether cutting the grass is really necessary. If it creates a safety issue then it's understandable, but often I feel the grass cutting is just for cosmetic purposes. I'd rather see the grass left in its natural state, and the council's money (our money!) used for other purposes.

--kiloran

I suspect that a lot of the grass cutting is, especially on a dual carriageway, simply cosmetic. It might be argued that the money would be better spent on picking up rubbish. However it would soon become an unsightly mess, and it seems sensible in a reasonably civilised society to try to keep grass verges tidy and neat if possible.

Dod

[genou]

I would question whether cutting the grass is really necessary. If it creates a safety issue then it's understandable, but often I feel the grass cutting is just for cosmetic purposes. I'd rather see the grass left in its natural state, and the council's money (our money!) used for other purposes.

--kiloran

I suspect that a lot of the grass cutting is, especially on a dual carriageway, simply cosmetic. It might be argued that the money would be better spent on picking up rubbish. However it would soon become an unsightly mess, and it seems sensible in a reasonably civilised society to try to keep grass verges tidy and neat if possible.

Dod

Cutting verges is more complex than you might think, and really should have sod all to do with neat and tidy.

https://www.nhm.ac.uk/discover/why-road ... %20beetles.

[Dod101]

I suspect that a lot of the grass cutting is, especially on a dual carriageway, simply cosmetic. It might be argued that the money would be better spent on picking up rubbish. However it would soon become an unsightly mess, and it seems sensible in a reasonably civilised society to try to keep grass verges tidy and neat if possible.

Dod

Cutting verges is more complex than you might think, and really should have sod all to do with neat and tidy.

https://www.nhm.ac.uk/discover/why-road ... %20beetles.

I know that very well and of course they can become havens of wild life if left undisturbed. Cutting verges is not complex; it is the considerations that should go into that decision that should be. I was assuming that we were discussing the fact that it is agreed that verges should be cut and the arrangements made to do so safely.

Dod

[DrFfybes]

You can have a rolling coned off section with two lorries, the rear one with a lane indicator arrow picks up the cones and the front one.sets them down. I've seen it done in the past.

TJH

I have, but not on roads with a speed limit over 40 mph.

Most points probably covered - the cone company will be contracted to put out and clear up, won't be the people doing the work these days, so they go out one night and in the next (which is why you get middle of the night closures on motorways when the work was either finished 3 hours ago or not starting for another 3 hours).

The coned length will be the area planned for the day.

Central res on a dual carr can often contain drainage systems and so needs to be kept clear and to check and maintain the barrier, especially ones with old wooden posts. Also not ideal to encourage animals to build homes there on a high speed road.

Prsonally I think people speeding through coned areas shouldn't be fined, they should be made to spend a shift working on the other side of them.

Paul

[MrFoolish]

I use a particular dual carriageway and every single summer the same short section gets coned off for repairs. One year, fix the barriers, next year do some drainage upgrades, next year repair a bridge, next year do the barriers again. And so it goes on. Amazingly they've never resurfaced the road, which is in a terrible state. That will be next year I suppose. One could hope they could combine some of these repairs when things are coned off, but that would be too much to ask it seems.