When PennDOT officials outlined their plans for the state's construction-debris dump site inside one of the "cloverleaf" ramps at the Tilghman Street interchange of I-78/Route 309, they assured us that they'd properly tend the site to prevent it from becoming an eyesore.

Spokesman Ron Young said the debris dumped at the site would be covered with earth periodically and the site on the southeast quadrant of the interchange would be landscaped.

I share my the concerns of some of my fellow warriors about the wisdom of dumping construction debris here in the first place. It's a safety challenge for the trucks entering and exiting the gated site, given the fact that many people drive too fast on Tilghman and slow-moving trucks could become obstacles. No accidents have been reported so far.

I must say though, they've kept their word about maintaining the sight of the site. In the last few weeks, the bank on the east side has been smoothed over and covered with wood chips. It doesn't look bad -- for a debris site.

I still don't really like the idea, money-saving though it might be (officials said that otherwise they'd have to truck the broken concrete and other roadwork debris to landfills or suitable sites much farther away). But apparently its within the law and regulations.

As reported by PRNewswire Monday, PennDOT has launched its own channel on Youtube, posting among other information a cool time-lapse video of emergency repairs to a portion of the I-81 overpass in Harrisburg that was damaged May 9 by the intense heat of flames from a fuel-tanker accident. Educational and safety videos and other promotional information is featured as well.

Already a presence on Facebook and Twitter, PennDOT officials see value in these relatively new media for getting their message out, according to Transportation Secretary Barry Schoch's comments to the wire service.

“Our YouTube channel is our next step in communicating with our customers in more personal, interactive ways,” Schoch said. “The channel is a great way to provide important information to a universal audience. I encourage people to share these resources with their family and friends, or anyone who can benefit from the information.”

The I-81 video is the coolest offering on the channel currently. It appears to be taken from one of the state's highway cameras, and it compresses many hours' worth of work -- day turns to night and back again -- into just under 26 minutes of viewing, with workers and machinery in comedic fast-motion activity.

Check it out:

www.facebook.com/pennsylvaniadepartmentoftransportation.

I can't help thinking of the late Allentown Mayor Joe Daddona when considering the impressive sight of three Hummerian construction cranes looming over the city skyline as I drive into work. I consider Daddona to have been a pretty good mayor. He certainly was a nice guy, and as far as I could ever tell, an honest politician.

I'm sure you'll be able to find people to criticize this or that Daddona policy or even cite some kind of allegedly unfair treatment at his hands--that's probably true of any elected official--but my sense is that most people would agree that, by and large, his legacy is a positive one.

Through no particular fault of his own, or really anyone's, Daddona faced the many challenges of a quickly and vastly changing city, mostly not for the better. Best known among them was the shifting of the Lehigh Valley's population, and particularly its retail and consumer economy, away from the cities and toward the fast-growing suburbs. Daddona and other city leaders did the best they could, I think, to put the drag-brake on this vehicle, but it could not be stopped.

The infamous Plexiglas "roof" over the downtown Hamilton Street sidewalks, and other facets of the "Hamilton Mall" conversion, are examples. After Zollinger's, Leh's and all the rest, culiminating in the former Hess's, finally went to the junkyard, many Monday-morning quarterbacks scoffed at the "mall" changes as utter failures, or even factors that contributed to the downtown's decline.

I think that's a lot of tailpiple exhaust. In the view through my windshield, the mall converson DID down-shift the speed of the decline, anyway, possibly by 15 or 20 years (though we can never know for sure, the road not taken being always an utter mystery). I'm convinced it helped, and was worth every penny (much of it state and federal grant funding, if I recall correctly, which likely would have been steered elsewhere if not spent here).

Joe spoke often--pretty much constantly is probably more accurate--about the city's "renaissance" being just around the proverbial corner. So did every other mayor since, pretty much, and why not? What should they say? "This city is going straight to hell, folks, and there's nothing anyone can do about it."? Don't think so.

So maybe Daddona and the others were guilty of over-optimism and hyperbole in their promotional efforts.

I think of Daddona these days because, for the first time in 40 years, it looks like a genuine shortcut has been discovered as the route to the long-awaited renaissance. No hyperbole this time, folks. Criticize some of the road-building tactics if you will--and some of that might be accurate--but state Sen. Pat Browne and other legislators and business leaders surely seem to have steered this wayward vehicle in a genuinely optimistic direction. (And incidentally, PPL Corp., and Alvin H. Butz Inc., both showed considerable horsepower by investing in the downtown well before this hockey-arena bend in the road came along, sending things in the right direction. The Butz people in particular deserve credit, seeing as how they put their own private capital on the double-yellow line.)

Daddona's long-awaited rebirth is around the next bend, this time for real. Saturday's story about yet another major office-building complex being developed downtown adds to the steady traffic in the right direction. Are there some speed-bumps ahead? Well, duh. Of course there are. We all know the litany by now: Crime and all the other problems inevitably hitched to poverty's rear axle. But for the first time, the millions of dollars in development being poured into the downtown give Allentown the best shot at true, long-road revival in memory.

Am I right, or am I foolishly optimistic, as some thought of Daddona? Let me know, fellow warriors. And before citing all the reasons city remains doomed, consider my colleague Matt Assad's excellent story (Friday on the website; Saturday in the paper paper) about the latest office-complex development:

http://www.mcall.com/news/breaking/mc-allentown-niz-butz-fiber-optic-20130517,0,5580943.story

Some people wonder if the symbols identify designated bicycle-only lanes where car tires should fear
to tred. That is not the case; the markings sometimes are painted on bike lanes, but bike lanes should be set apart from vehicle lanes by white lines, and informational signs should be posted as well.

"I thought there might be a bicycle race or something" planned for the weekend, a colleague said of the symbols recently painted on the streets around the Call's offices.

I couldn't immediately reach city officials to determine how many "sharrows" (for "shared-road" markings) will be added, and on what streets. A previous city proposal to convert specified two-lane, one-way streets, including Linden and Turner, to one-lane streets with designated bicycle-only lanes, has lost traction in the past year or so.

The May 3 column on panhandlers drew some interesting responses, including South Whitehall Township resident Everette Carr's observation that, though I dispensed advice from experts on how to deal with homeless people begging at the roadside, one of that column's questions specified that some groups of fund-raisers appear to be perfectly healthy and hearty, without the typical look of those with drug or alcohol problems.

In short, some folks who clearly appear to have stable lives and permanent shelter can be found panhandling, and their motives for doing so can be suspect. Fund-raisers from genuine, widely accepted programs such as student "canners" from Penn State's "THON" drives have clearly marked ID's. What about other, more autonomous groups, Everette and others rightfully ask.

Here's the way Everette put it:

-------------------------------------------------------------------

"Your article on May 3rd addressing the panhandlers on Hamilton Blvd responded to only one of two inquires. The inquires addressed two different scenarios;  while the second had to do with pan handlers; clearly the first inquiry had to do with groups (generally teenagers soliciting funds for various organizations).

"This is a totally different situation. Usually they appear only on Saturdays and consist of about seven teens or early 20's individuals at both the East & West Intersections of Cedar Crest & East and West intersections of Hamilton Blvd. They only appear periodically but will give you a card identifying their if you donate. This does not validate their legitimacy but does allow you to verify their validity after the fact and for future purposes."

--------------------------------------------------------------------

She's right, and though I think the column covered it briefly, in retrospect I should have been clearer: If you suspect unethical or illegal behavior of any kind when you come across panhandlers at roadside or anywhere else, by all means call police. If you feel threatened in any way, don't so much as roll down your window, or if it is down, close it and lock the car doors. Don't mess around with non-emergency numbers; call 911, and get the car out of there as soon as you can. I would think this a rare circumstance, generally, but it's certainly possible that theft, a "car-jacking" or some other crime is intended.

If you're pretty sure it's just a harmless homeless person, like the guy I encountered, call the Rescue Mission, Lehigh County Conference of Churches or another social-services agency that provides homeless assistance.

Some of the other comments were a bit on the cynical side, including this from a Donald Nace:

--------------------------------------------------------------------

"Of course Allentonians should be allowed to panhandle on their streets. After all, the republican party (The Bushes) have helped drive Allentown into poverty by opening the flood gates to illegals all around our United States. I”d rather have them panhandle than collecting welfare checks like the Boston bombers or collecting social security checks for Mexican babies brought across the border and giving these illegals free schooling, wic ,food stamps, health care and all the other FRILLS they get living here for FREE.

"Yes Mr. Hartzell, Panhandlers are the least of our problems in Allentown, it”s only because people can visually see these people that prompts our attention. I myself would rather see my enemy (panhandlers) than have illegals hiding in the shadows preparing to bring harm to me or my fellow Americans !!!!"

---------------------------------------------------------------------

An acquaintance of mine also pointed out that his wife encountered a group at Hamilton and Cedar Crest recently whose members did not appear threatening, but when his wife asked the reason for their effort, she was told it was "some kind of church," the friend said. That sounded suspicious to my friend and his wife, and it does to me as well. Most legitimate churches or religious groups don't need to be begging at the side of the road. I think a call to the non-emergency number of the relevant police department would be a good approach in a case like that. Let the police determine if the individuals legitimately are exercising their First Amendment rights.

I got a hand-written, and quite touching (or maybe I'm just being a sap) letter from an anonymous man (it was signed "The Homeless Yahoo") that's too long to transcribe here. Suffice to say he contends that he panhandles occasionally, out of necessity, and that he is, indeed, ready and able to work, as his sign indicates, but that for over five years, "not one time have I been asked to work." His overall message best can be described as, "But for the grace of God ... "

Finally, this rolled into my email garage from someone who truly does know what he's talking about. No cynicism here, for sure; quite the contrary:

---------------------------------------------------------------------

"Dan,

"Your recent article about the panhandlers on Cedar Crest and Hamilton just scratched the surface regarding the situation.  I, too, have seen the legitimate solicitors (the 'canners') collecting donations for various causes at multiple intersections along Cedar Crest. These folks are clearly energetic and motivated. I do worry about their safety at times.
 
"The other 'homeless, will work for money' types are more suspect.  I’ve seen a man (and a woman) at various times, all bundled up against the weather, looking very pathetic. These folks are young-looking, well groomed, etc, just looking like they are down on their luck. What I’ve heard but have not been able to verify is that they actually live in a motel, using panhandling as their source of income. I haven’t given money to them, either.
 
"There is one individual who spends his time walking up and down Cedar Crest, or on Hamilton, or on W. Tilghman. He is not at all like the others – he is truly homeless, trying to pass each day as best he can, without being a burden or menace to others.
 
"At a recent [Allentown] City Council meeting, it was reported that there are 'only 8 homeless [people]' in the city. I suspect that that number represents the truly hard-core rough sleepers, those who would never ever seek assistance. During this past winter, 15-20 people were sleeping on the floor at the Manse of St. Paul’s Lutheran Church, at a ministry called Safe Haven. That was after 22 people were provided interim housing in a downtown hotel by a grass-roots alliance who subsidized the rent.
 
"So, yes, the concluding words of your column – 'do something to help; the need…is vast' – are so very very true. I would be glad to speak with you further about the plight of the homeless and how various organizations are trying to help.
 
"Some references/resources:

--Commission to End Chronic Homelessness and the 10-Year Plan (on allentownpa.gov)
 
--The many programs of Allentown Rescue Mission, the Lehigh County Conference of Churches, Salvation Army, Valley Youth House, New Bethany Ministries, Center for Independent Living, CACLV’s Sixth St. Shelter, etc.
 
www.endhomelessness.org

www.100khomes.org  
 
"With regards,


Dale W. Smith
Lehigh Valley Advocate, 100K Homes Campaign
Co-founder, GRAND of the Lehigh Valley, Inc.
(grandofthelv.nationbuilder.com)"

---------------------------------------------------------------------

Thanks to all contributors!

“We agreed to put up signs for the businesses to help direct traffic” to their locations on restricted streets in the borough, PennDOT spokesman Ron Young said after the meeting. Portions of three of the four closed streets will be opened to one-way traffic for the first block off Route 412, or Main Street in the borough, Young said.

In addition, a temporary traffic signal will be installed at Main Street and Kiernan Avenue, said PennDOT engineer Al Picca. The permanent signal had to be removed to make way for the road work.

Hellertown Borough Manager Cathy Kichline generally was pleased with the borough hall session. “The meeting was very productive, in the spirit of cooperation among all involved,” she wrote in an email. Mayor [Richard] Fluck and borough council want to especially thank [state] Rep. Bob Freeman for his assistance in coordinating this meeting.”

The changes on the Hellertown, or southern side of the interchange probably won’t do much to improve Route 412 traffic flow to the north, toward Bethlehem and the popular Sands Casino, Picca said. Engineers will continue to consider signal-phasing changes in an effort to keep things moving as efficiently as possible. Priority must be given to preventing lines of traffic from extending all the way back to the interstate, he said.

“We’ll keep evaluating,” Young said.

Traffic tie-ups on Route 412 between I-78 and Bethlehem are not a new model by any means, having tormented motorists since improvements on that section of 412 commenced a year ago (after several years' delay).

After a winter-season lull in construction (PennDOT officials insisted that a limited scope of work continued, but a number of motorists told me they saw virtually nobody out there), work crews and heavy equipment have returned in earnest, and the results have been ugly. Complaints about traffic jams of an hour or more prompted Hellertown officials, borough business people, state Rep. Bob Freeman and others to map a course to possible improvements.

In response, PennDOT officials have scheduled a meeting with those parties for Friday afternoon at Borough Hall, spokesman Ron Young said Tuesday.

Young could only speculate about possible reasons for tie-ups to have worsened dramatically in the last week or so, but he agreed with my suggestion for one such factor: A four-lane portion of 412 between Daly and Wagner avenues, near Sands Casino, was restricted to two-lane travel as of April 22, and will remain so for the next year. Like water filling a funnel too fast, traffic queues there might quickly extend in both directions, but particularly east and south, toward the interstate, where most casino traffic originates.

Rush hours always have been challenging at the interchange itself, which is the reason behind the entire project in the first place. PennDOT's Park-and-Ride lot on the opposite side of 412 from the interchange ramps cause a lot of problems, and the extra turn lanes and other improvements there should help -- AFTER all this work is done, at the end of 2015.

So this could be a long ride either way. Young would not speculate on possible steps that could be taken to address the immediate concerns, but said the relevant engineers and officials form PennDOT and its contractors will attend Friday's meeting to try to help.

More details on the interchange and Route 412 improvements can be found in the following column from May 14 of last year:

Headline: Route 412 and I-78 Hellertown project in gear at last

According to the newsletter, Kaiser, 74, of South Whitehall Township started as a planner with the former Joint Planning Commission of Lehigh and Northampton Counties in August 1963, became assistant director in April 1976, acting director four months later, and secured his current position in January 1968.

Created by the two counties in 1961, the municipal planning organization changed its name to Lehigh Valley Planning Commission in 1997. Kaiser has served for all but two of the commission's 53 years in existence.

There was no immediate word on a replacement. Kaiser could not immediately be reached for comment today.

According to the newsletter:

As we learned in Friday's paper, South Whitehall Township officials want to reduce the speed limit on Cedar Crest Boulevard in the township from 40 mph to 35 mph. A Cedar Crest resident suggested the change, telling township officials that too many motorists drive too fast on the boulevard.

I don't doubt that people routinely go fast on Cedar Crest. The problem is, that's the rule, not the exception. Where is speeding not a problem? To what degree is speeding on Cedar Crest worse than on every other road in America, from limited-access highways to narrow neighborhood streets.?

To determine if the lower limit is warranted, a PennDOT traffic study is planned. If the specified accident, road-design and other standards are met, the township will foot the bill for going out and changing all the speed-limit signs. And that will make no difference whatsoever.

Folks, nobody's ever gonna go 35 mph on wide, open portions of Cedar Crest Boulevard, which describes most of the thoroughfare in South Whitehall. That was the idea behind dropping the limit on Route 100 north of Route 22 from 55 to 45 a few years ago, in response to a fatal accident at the Kernsville/Claussville roads intersection. Drive on 100 in that area today, and see how many people are doing 45. On most portions with wide expanses between traffic signals and long sight-distances, it's 60 mph or more.

Another example: The relatively new Route 222 Bypass is designed for 60 mph traffic, but posted at 45 mph. PennDOT says it's for safety -- nothing to do with traffic-ticket revenue. I know of no evidence that traffic-ticket revenue was the rationale, or even a factor in the decision. But I do think it's ridiculous to build a modern road, with the curves and other features designed for safe 60 mph travel, and impose a 45 mph speed limit on that road.

The vaunted "fast-paced lifestyle" we've imposed upon ourselves (nobody held a gun to our heads) makes artificially low speed limits irrational. In addition, engineering studies show that unreasonably low limits ironically can result in a slight increase in average speed. Many people are more likely at least to stay close to a reasonable limit, but they tend to utterly ignore unreasonable postings, instead going as fast as they please.

And since everyone's in such a big hurry to hew to the frenetic pace of modern life, going as fast as we please means going quite fast indeed. It's a big competition, after all -- a race, though the destination is unclear.

In October and November of 2009, PennDOT made emergency repairs to the Cementon Bridge, which links the Cementon area of Whitehall Township with Northampton borough via Route 329 over the Lehigh River. When the work was completed, PennDOT lifted the 13-ton weight limit that had precluded tractor-trailers and even school buses from using the bridge. A weight limit remained after the repairs were made, but it was a far more liberal 37 tons, which allowed all but the heaviest of commercial vehicles to pass.

Not much more than three years later, continuing deterioration to structural members of the 81-year-old bridge have prompted the a reduction in the limit to 31 tons, PennDOT reported today.

Not to be cynical, but part of the motivation could be the desire to promote Gov. Tom Corbett's budget proposal to the Legislature, particularly the transportation portions. PennDOT's news release prominently mentions the need to raise more revenue to fix the Cementon Bridge (and many others like it across the state).

By the way, how much difference is there between 37- and 31-ton weight limits? The six-ton (16 percent) difference seems to distinguish between a heavily laden tractor-trailer and a REALLY heavily laden one. Most passenger cars and trucks fall in the two- to four-ton range. My tiny Fiat 500 tips the scale at 2,500 pounds, or a mere 1.25 ton.

There's also a question of how this narrow variation will be determined, and who will enforce the stricter limit. Will PennDOT set up a scale capable of weighing tractor-trailers on Route 329 near the bridge? If not, how will Whitehall or Northampton cops determine which trucks violate the regulation?

PennDOT spokesman Ron Young addressed these issues when I reached him late this afternoon. He said the amount of restriction is determined by an engineering analysis, which in this case showed that 31 tons is "what [the bridge] can take" without sustaining further structural damage too quickly. The degree of this kind of restriction is derived by engineering calculation, and is not arbitrary, he said. I would think some engineering judgement would be involved as well, but basically, he's probably right.

Truck drivers are responsible for observing the weight restrictions and other regulations on this bridge, and on all bridges, Young said. If police suspect a rig is too hefty, they can at least check the operator's paperwork to make sure everything's in order, he said. Some commercial trucks are weighed regularly as part of standard procedure, including many of those that load up at the nearby cement plant; I would assume some type of verification is available to authorities.

And even if politics played some I have no doubt that the span's continued deterioration justifies the slightly-more-stringent restriction. Corbett's proposal includes his "not truly a gas-tax increase" gas-tax increase -- a vital measure that would generate the bulk of the new annual revenue needed to repair or replace our dangerously deteriorating bridges more quickly. It's kind of important to address this matter before one of our bridges falls into a river, as happened in Minneapolis not so long ago, or onto a road beneath it.

Here's the release, with only minor editing to meet our paper's style standards:

-----------------------------------------------------------------

New Weight Restriction Posted on the Route 329/Cementon Bridge over the Lehigh River in Whitehall Township, Lehigh County and Northampton borough, Northampton County

PennDOT today (May 1, 2013) lowered the posted weight restriction on the Route 329/Cementon Bridge from 37 tons (40 tons for tractor trailers) to 31 tons (37 tons for tractor-trailers). The Bridge traverses the Lehigh River in Whitehall Township, Lehigh County and Northampton borough, Northampton County.

"For the safety of the motoring public, our engineers are immediately implementing this new weight restriction," said District Executive Michael W. Rebert. "We hope to make repairs to the bridge soon, but ultimately this bridge needs to be replaced ... [and] we currently don't have the resources to do that. If Gov. Corbett's transportation funding plan is passed, the state will be able to make investments like this that are so important to keeping our communities moving."

 A recent inspection showed significant deterioration to several of the floor beams on the bridge. The new weight restriction will remain in place until emergency repairs are made to restore 37 ton limit. For now, vehicles weighing over 31 tons or tractor-trailers weighing more than 37 tons must seek an alternate route.

 The Cementon Bridge is a through truss bridge built in 1932. An average of 16,500 vehicles use the bridge in both direction each day.

It's very likely that the lane restrictions, which make it more difficult than usual to enter 22 from 309, contributed to the crash.

Good luck with the insurance company, Alistair!

---------------------------------------------------------

I feel the pain,

I’ll start by saying we were lucky , and no one was hurt….

On Saturday I came up the ramp from N/B 309 to W/B 22, and saw a car stopped at the stop sign. I watched him move away, and turned my own attention back to the traffic flowing towards me, saw my space, and accelerated, only to discover that the minivan in front of me had chickened out. I had my foot to the floor, hit his left rear quarter (as he had pulled as far to the right as he could), and hit him so hard my airbag deployed.

Goodbye 1999 Z3 BMW Z3 M Coupe (only 2,750 ever made). It’s likely it’ll be written off. The front right wheel was only being held on by the spring, the control arm and axle having been disconnected.

Sad day.

Regards,

Alistair Hull

Monday's column on whether owners of pickup-trucks, SUVs and other oversize vehicles tend to drive more aggressively than average drew a couple of interesting comments:

-------------------------------------------------------

Your column on pickup drivers was surprising.  One of my daughters drove a large pickup for a number of years.  I said something about them being intimidating to drivers seeing that big grill in their rear view mirrors.  Of my three daughters, she is the least aggressive driver.  Her answer to my comment was, “Yeah, people do seem to get out of the way.” 

--Art Preble, Kutztown

---------------------------------------------------------

Hi,

My own personal experience from driving rental SUVs / minivans and friends' pickup trucks is that, the higher you sit in a vehicle, the faster you tend to drive - because you have less of a sense of the ground moving beneath you than you do in a car that's closer to the ground. Also your vision ahead is better in vehicles that sit higher - you can see things happening and react just a bit quicker.

And I know, despite the contrary commentary from insurance folks, that some SUV drivers drive SUVs more aggressively than smaller cars, because they know they can intimidate them a bit. These SUV drivers "throw their weight around."

So it behooves all of us to watch our speed and recognize that other drivers, and the vehicles they drive, might not be able to react to situations as quickly as we can...thus traffic regulations and defensive driving tactics need to be established for the safety of all drivers, not just those behind the wheel of taller / larger vehicles.

--Richard Cuff, South Whtehall Township

Generally I think the construction crew at the Route 22/MacArthur Road interchange work site has done a decent job of filling cracks and potholes that inevitably have developed on heavily traveled MacArthur.

The appearance of these blemishes is to be expected; the travel lanes have shifted repeatedly as workers build the first half of the new bridge over 22, shift traffic to the other side, and then build the final portion of the bridge. This procedure conveys the tremendous benefit of retaining four lanes of traffic throughout the two-year reconstruction and reconfiguration of the busiest interchange in the region. Four lanes are being maintained on 22 as well. Shutting down one lane in each direction on either road, not to mention both simultaneously, would be unimaginable.

As I noted when the lane-shifting began, it's important for crews to keep up with surface problems sure to develop in conjunction with the lane shifting. They've done that, for the most part.

Here's one that clearly needs attention as soon as possible: A void has developed at the right edge of the northbound right-hand lane, at the seam where the north end of the bridge meets solid ground. It was pretty bad when I hit it Wednesday; six days down the road, it's even worse.

Por favor, PennDOT, patch that pothole.

Right on red, legal in Pennsylvania under specified conditions since 1978, is much more familiar, because it's allowed at intersections of one- or two-way streets unless the 'no turn on red' or 'no turn' sign is posted. Engineers forbid 'no turn on red' when they determine the movement might not be safe, because of conditions including short or obstructed sight-distance or heavy pedestrian traffic. Left on red also is allowed in Pennsylvania, but only from one one-way street to another, and of course, all the usual regulations apply  come to a full stop, yield to traffic with the right-of-way and to pedestrians).

(One thing motorists should always remember before turning right on red is to look back to the right before making the turn; sometimes you can become so intent on watching oncoming traffic to the left, waiting for it to clear, that you forget to look right before turning. I learned that lesson the hard way many years ago when I almost hit a guy walking right in front of my car; he had emerged from a retail store in downtown Bethlehem, and within a few paces was in front of my car just as the traffic to my left cleared. I stopped in time, but he glared at me for a long moment, as well he should have.)

Anyway, I happened to thing of this issue one recent morning when I noticed that 'no turn on red' is posted for Seventh Street traffic at Turner Street in Allentown. The sign is at the east, or left-hand, end of the traffic-signal mast arm, to the left of the signals. Normally, of course, they're to the right, for a clear view for potential right-turning motorists.

This one applies to left on red, I realized. The sight distance seems OK, so it's probably pedestrian traffic -- heavy there, to say the least -- that tipped the scale for traffic officials. I agree with their decision in that case.

I received this excellent commentary from Joe Schell of Allentown recently, regarding the massive April 1 pileup of more than 100 cars on I-95 in Virginia, killing three people and injuring many more.

Couldn't have said it better myself, Joe, so I won't bother trying. Thanks!

--------------------------------------------------

"Fog To Blame For Fatal, 95 Vehicle Crash"

Yes, that is the headline ... concerning the April 1 collisions ... in Virginia.     (Although it does state in one of the articles that "The crashes were mostly caused by drivers going too fast for conditions")

Maybe I'm just a relic from the past, but I do recall that one of the main driving rules that was taught in high school driver-ed classes was that you are to keep one car length between your vehicle and the the vehicle in front of you for every 10 mph you are traveling.  And so if you are driving at 60 mph, there should be as least enough space to fit in 6 vehicles between you and the vehicle in front of you.   And this is with perfect driving conditions.   More space should be there in the event of poor conditions.

Maybe this not taught anymore, or maybe it is and no one listens.   I was driving on I78 in New Jersey a few days ago, at the speed of 65 mph.   Countless times there was a vehicle behind me that was so close that I could not see his headlights in my rear view mirror.  Plus I saw countless incidents where vehicles were passing me, and those vehicles, probably doing 75-80 mph where following each other with less than a car length between them.  They don't realize that if the vehicle in front of them brakes suddenly, by the time their eyes tell their brain to hit the brakes and they then react, they will be in the other vehicles back seat.   

My favorite is when a driver will follow a tractor-trailer close, with about one vehicle space between them.   Being that close, they can't see around the tractor-trailer, and have no idea what lies ahead.   Of course, they are probably texting anyway, so they don't care.

Sorry to be on a soap-box here, but I'm on a roll.   I had a thought that perhaps all the speed limit signs should be removed and not replaced.   Why have them up?   No one obeys the speed limits and the speed limits are not enforced, except for that one in a thousand motorist who gets pulled over and slapped with a jaw-dropping, budget breaking fine of $100 to $150.

The texting while driving law, as you covered in your recent article, is a joke.   $50 fine and no points?   Oh, what heartache that must be to get one of those!!!  I don't know why they wasted time passing a law like that.   The cellphone company lobbyists must have been busy with that one.

If the lawmakers REALLY wanted to make the roads safer, this is what they should do.   Change the laws and the fines.   No one is going to slow down, stop aggressive driving,  stop texting while driving, stop using a cell phone while driving, or stop driving drunk with the repercussions being as light as they are.

Here are some suggestions for fines:

--Exceeding the speed limit: $500 fine, 6 points on your license.

--Using Cell Phone or Texting while driving (including while waiting for a traffic light to change: $1000 fine, license suspended for 60 days.

--DUI: $10,000 fine, 30 days in prison, license suspended for one year.

I am sure that many people (possibly even you) will say "Oh those fines are excessive!".   But think about it.   If these suggestions were the law, and were enforced, it would make most (but not all) people think twice.  They wouldn't want to take the chance, slight as it would be, of being caught.   

What it comes down to is this: Do people want this nonsense to stop, or not? 

--Joe Schell, Allentown

In what I consider another example of why red-light cameras should be approved for statewide use, revenue from red-light runners in Philadelphia will be distributed to municipalities across Pennsylvania, including five in our region, for projects to protect kids at school crossings and otherwise bolster traffic safety.

Revenue from fines imposed on motorists who blow through red lights in Philly, where the cameras have been used for about a decade, will fund $4.7 million in traffic-safety grants overall, PennDOT reports. Allentown and four Valley boroughs will get nearly a quarter-million dollars of that Automated Red Light Enforcement funding.

To qualify for the program, projects are supposed to improve safety, enhance mobility, or reduce traffic congestion. Municipalities requested some $25.4 million in more than 265 applications, so there's not nearly enough money to go around. Harrisburg approved red-light cameras for use outside the City of Brotherly Love last year, but unfortunately, only for municipalities in four counties in the Philly area. I am aware of no red-light cameras being installed outside of Philly as yet.

According to PennDOT, projects are selected by an eight-member committee whose members use criteria such as benefits and effectiveness, cost, local and regional impact, and cost-sharing. The five projects awarded in District 5, which covers Lehigh, Northampton, Berks, Carbon, Monroe and Schuylkill counties:

--Allentown, for pedestrian improvements as part of the Allentown Safe Routes to School Infrastructure Plan, $135,240.

--Wind Gap, for traffic-signal timing upgrades, $85,238.

--Pen Argyl, converting traffic signals from incandescent bulbs to energy-saving light-emitting diodes (LEDs), $8,074.

--Bath, also traffic-signal LED upgrades, $7,392.

--Bangor, traffic-signal LED upgrade at 1st and Market streets, $6,500.

These interesting comments turned into my email garage recently from frequent contributor Richard Cuff of quaint Cetronia, South Whitehall Township, in the driver seat. You're on the right road as usual, Richard. It's interesting that PennDOT traffic engineer Tom Walter made the same "creep up past the line after stopping" suggestion.

You're thinking like a traffic engineer in this instance, Richard. Thanks for the email.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I've seen a bunch of instances where an intersection's stop line was too far back to provide good sight lines for turning right on red. Seems to be a no-brainer to me:  Stop at the line first, since that's the law, then creep up past the line and turn if feasible.

What if a tractor trailer - whose turning radius necessitated the stop line in the first place - comes up? Simple ... let them begin their left turn and then execute your right turn while they're "shielding" you from any approaching traffic.  You clear the space that they would need to take up while making the turn. No muss, no fuss. At least to me anyway.

Speaking of stop lines, I'm always amazed at people who ignore stop lines at straight-ahead intersections, pulling ahead of the line, which then gets them off the inductive loop that cycles the signal. And then they wonder why the signal never turns for them. I see that all the time at Haines Mill Road at the Hamilton Boulevard Bypass, as well as our favorite intersection, Cedar Crest & Tilghman.

Have a nice weekend!

Richard Cuff, quaint Cetronia

One of the Warrior's multitude of spies has noticed that "do not block intersection" signs have been posted at some of the troublesome intersections of MacArthur Road in Whitehall Township, where the replacement of the bridge over Route 22, and the construction between Mechanicsville Road and the municipal building to the north, have further complicated the normal spate of traffic slowdowns that plague MacArthur, especially on weekends because of the shopping malls (and even more so during the winter-season shopping rush, which is a long way off, thankfully).

I don't know why the jam-ups seem to have advanced to a new level of frustration in the past month or so, but it seems that they have, at least in the view through my windshield. I normally use MacArthur southbound for the stretch between Mickley Road and 22 on Saturdays and Sundays, and I had learned to detour MacArthur on particular days, when it appeared to plagued by more of a traffic crawl then usual as I approached, opting instead to cross MacArthur and take Mickley to Lehnert Road, Scherersville Road and on home "the back way."

However, recently it's gotten even worse, as frustrated motorists cross the intersection even when traffic is backed up to the opposite side of it, hoping the light stays green long enough for the traffic ahead to unjam, and for them to clear the intersection before the light changes. Some folks even go through on yellow, or even red, making things even worse.

Now the cross-traffic can't even take advantage of the green phase its motorists have been eagerly anticipating. That jacks up their frustration level -- apparently to the point, in some cases at which they decide to employ the same blocking technique perpetrated on them. When a great enough proportion of drivers embark upon this course of action, the result is what's commonly called "gridlock."

I'm not sure what can be done about it. Whitehall officials can post all the signs they want; people already know you're not supposed to block intersections. Enforcement might help, but one wonders whether Whitehall (or any other municipality) can afford to dedicate the time required of its police officers. Maybe a marked patrol car simply lurking at, say, the Mickley Road, Grape Street and Fairmont Street intersections would help.

They could probably place cardboard cut-out of a cop in the driver's seat, and the effect would be the same. People respond to the mere presence of the patrol car.

That's the bad news. The good news is, they've limted the restrictions to the dark of night. Here's the scoop, direct from PennDOT's press people.

Lane Restrictions and Traffic Stoppages Next Weekend at the Route 22 / MacArthur Road Interchange Project

"Motorists will experience lane restrictions and traffic stoppages next weekend in the area of the interchange of Route 22 and MacArthur Road in Whitehall Township. The traffic restrictions will allow workers to safely set beams for the new MacArthur Road Bridge over Route 22. 

"Beginning at 10 p.m. next Friday night (April 12), a lane will be restricted on MacArthur Road south between Grape Street and Fairmont Avenue, and a lane will be restricted in both directions on Route 22 between Fullerton Avenue and 15th Street. These restrictions are expected to be in place until 6 a.m. Saturday (April 13). In addition, there will be several brief total traffic stoppages on 22 in both directions during the same hours. Motorists should expect delays and use caution driving through the work zones."

Construction is coming to the Route 22 bridge over Route 309 tomorrow as well, though thankfully, long-term lane closures are not planned, according to PennDOT. However, as is the case at the MacArthur Road interchange, lane shifts, and narrowed lanes, will be the order of the day -- and night -- as the work could apply around the clock, according to a PennDOT news brief. The bridge repairs are expected to continue through the month of June.

Regarding Monday's column on the frequency of motorists making left turns such that they encroach into the opposing-traffic lane of the road they're turning onto, I was happy to find that many people also consider this among their pet peeves. So many people do it so routinely I was beginning to think I was the only one noticing.

Bethlehem Traffic Engineer Tiffany Geklinsky had suggested that rumble strips along the dashed "radius lines" that mark the turn lanes through intersections might help, though she cautioned that PennDOT might not approve the idea, and added that motorist might object because through traffic would "feel" some of the rumbling as well.

Her suggestion got me thinking that the strips could be cut into the road surface surrounding the edge of the stop bar that get worn away prematurely by the frequency of intrusive left-turners, and that raised reflective road markers like those used for lane lines on roads without illumination also could work to some degree.

That and a couple of other concepts have been suggested in the comments so far (see below). Thanks for the input, fellow warriors!

----------------------------------------------

Demarcate lanes with rumble strips or temporary vertical cones....

--Steve Krawiec

----------------------------------------------

For another fun left turn where people routinely cut into the opposing lane, try going south on Schoenersville Road and turn left onto Macada Road.

--Ron Horvath, Bethlehem

-----------------------------------------------

Dan:

You have landed on my favorite thing to hate about driving today. Drivers making left turns into my lane at intersections is an extremely common occurrence down here with drivers turning off of Lanark Road onto Hopewell or Spring Drive.  To be safe, you have to stop well short of the cross bar and sneak up to the corner while looking for the idiot who may turn right into you.  I have actually had to back up on occasions.

The problem is especially bad at Hopewell as there is a house on the corner that blocks your line of sight which is another big problem here that the police department apparently does not care to do anything about. (Trees and shrubbery.)  I have been so tempted to submit a Thumbs Down in the PennyPower saying “Hey stupid, that circular thing in front of your face is a steering wheel. Use it.”  But of course these drivers are often just ignorant, lazy, in a big hurry and maybe even on a cell phone requiring them to steer with just one hand.  Like many things today, its an attitudinal problem for which there is no answer let alone an easy one.

There have been times, especially when people are driving with their window down, that it appears they are taking the corner using body English, leaning out the window and all. I could almost reach out and slap them on the head.

Keep up the good work.

 Chuck Graves, Upper Saucon Township

------------------------------------------------------

Dan,

Reegarding your answer to today’s question and request for any ideas, perhaps a SOLID white line and some signage advising motorists to stay in their lane would help keep drivers in their lane. At Route 378-Third Street, it may have the effect of having motorists visualize the intersection as a more of a turn in the road where the lines can guide them, if you know what I mean. I do not know of a reason why the line have to be dashed. Thanks!

--Bruce S. Spadaccia, Bethlehem Township

--------------------------------------------------------

Re your Monday article concerning the encroachment made by offending vehicles turning left over established left turn lanes,about the only feasible thing that comes to mind would be an effort to better identify the inbound-outbound lane separation.

Normally, in cases such as this,the current lane widths may allow reducing the normal pavement widths by 12" to 18" for each opposing lane to permit a painted separation of 24"to 36" between lanes for approximately 150 feet to 200 feet,or as much as possible, in advance of the limit line.

The 24" to 36" width would be striped with the proper diagonal lines at a distance of 20 feet apart within this separation.

This concept is probably grasping at straws but the image of a painted "barrier" may influence a left-turning motorist to stay in his proper lane and not encroach over the limit line and opposing traffic lane.

A single or a double painted line is so prevalent motorists tend to ignore them given a chance.A hatched separation just may keep them apart.  

--William A. Winkler, Coopersburg

------------------------------------------------------------

Note: This post originally said roundabouts were planned at both intersections; that was incorrect. PennDOT considered roundabouts at both, but eventually opted for the conversion at only one of them. The information below has been corrected. Sorry for the error. --Road Warrior, March 21

PennDOT officials plan to release more details on the roundabout they plan to install on Route 222 at Tamarack Boulevard/Genesis Drive in Berks County at a public meeting from 6:30 to 8:30 p.m. Wednesday, March 20 at Fleetwood High School, 803 N. Richmond St., Fleetwood. A roundabouts will replace the conventional signalized intersection at thois locations west of Kutztown over the next few years. PennDOT decided against a roundabout at nearby Routes 222 and 63, but instead opted for widened and upgraded signalized intersection.

As is the trend in this type of public meeting, there will be no formal program; rather, informational displays including maps, graphics and texts will be accompanied by PennDOT officials providing details and answering questions. It's an efficient format that allows those interested to visit whenever it's convenient throughout the two-hour span without worrying about missing key presentations or information.

I won't be attending that night, but I'll try to get the pertinent information updated here on my blog as soon as possible afterward. Roundabouts are controversial, but they're coming down the road with increasing frequency. These examples will help motorists in our region get a better idea how the new designs will work.

PennDOT officials flatly deny that their engineers went out for a three-martini lunch before designing the expansion of the Park & Ride lot on William Penn Highway off Route 33. It was one martini each, and not a drop more, they insist!

Ha ha. Just kidding, fellow warriors, obviously.

Regarding Monday's blog item steered my way by motorist Tom Kozlowski of Bethlehem, officials explained that the out-of-kilter line of concrete islands on the southern lot was designed that way intentionally, with a purpose: Squeezing as many parking spaces from the available space as possible. (Check Monday's blog, below, for Tom's question and the relevant photos.)

The simplest answer, according to PennDOT engineer Jay McGee, is that if the middle island of the three that form the crooked line were moved to the left to align perfectly, the island would cover two parking spaces. By shifting the island slightly to the right, its center falls on a dividing line between spaces, allowing enough room for the two spaces.

If you look at an aerial view on Google maps or another service, McGee's explanation makes sense, or at least, it does to me. This broader perspective reveals that moving the center island -- the only one out of kilter -- to the left would put it smack-dab in the middle of the two spaces to its left.

The "bird's eye" view also shows that perspective is a Hummer of a factor in determining the degree to which the islands fail to form a straight line. In my ground-level photo, they appear to be way out of whack. From on high, it's barely noticeable.

Many other factors can come to play in the design of this type of facility, according to McGee and PennDOT spokesman Ron Young. Easements for a gas line running beneath the lot, for example, might limit an engineer's choices as to where the lighting fixtures can be placed because underground conduit for utilities might have to be routed to avoid conflicting with the gas line.

To be honest, I was surprised at the difference when I saw the aerial view, having visited the site and photographed the alignment. Viewed from the ground, the islands appear to be placed carelessly. From the air, by comparison the design looks more like a virtual masterpiece of symmetry.

Thanks for the email, Tom, and thanks to the PennDOT folks for the information -- and for taking my martini jag in the spirit (get it?) in which it was meant.

Motorist Tom Kozlowski noticed what might be an anomaly regarding the design of PennDOT's expanded Park & Ride lot just off Route 33: All of the light poles and raided-concrete dividing islands in both the old and new portions of the lot are aligned in straight rows -- except for one particular row in which they're offset. (Three respective photos posted below).

Tom steered this email my way last summer:

------------------------------------------------

"Hi Dan,

"Kindly take a ride over there and determine why the concrete islands with light poles are out of alignment as are the painted parking-space lines, in one section of the lot."

Regards,

Tom"

-------------------------------------------

I have no idea why this might be, Tom. Obviously perfect alignment isn't absolutely necessary, and I'm not sure whether it's even an advantage.

Can any actual engineers out there enlighten us? It might be fun for fellow non-engineers to test-drive this issue as well. Could it have been an error or oversight? Are any parking spaces lost to the creative design? Does it matter one way or the other?

Let us know, fellow warriors!

Some fellow warriors may have noticed that the soft, red lighting that has bathed Allentown's iconic PPL Tower building for -- well, for as long as I can remember -- has experienced an outage. Or most of the red lighting, anyway.

The three recessed levels at the peak of the building normally are illuminated this way, but for the past few months only the top level has glowed. In addition, the red lighting had graced the four recessed corners at the highest six or eight stories of the building; those, too, are under blackout. The flashing-white safety beacon continues to operate, of course.

At 322 feet high, the PPL Tower was the Lehigh Valley's tallest building from its completion in 1928 till the 1973 debut of Bethlehem's Martin Tower, then the headquarters of Bethlehem Steel Corp. Impressive as it is, Martin Tower, located well outside of center city Bethlehem, never assumed the kind of landmark status enjoyed by the former Pennsylvania Power & Light Co. building -- a symbol of the city itself. The subsequent demise of "the Steel" at the hands of bankruptcy make it unlikely that Martin Tower will secure iconic status any time soon.

Enviable Bethlehem has passed beleaguered Allentown in the public psyche in many ways in the past 25 years, but the tall-building battle isn't one of them. Martin Tower is about 10 feet higher, but only in the literal sense. And by the way, this whole "arena thing" in Allentown could scramble the race considerably. I came to admire quaint, historic Bethlehem when I worked there for 12 years, mostly in the 1980s. But now I'm rooting harder for good ol' Allentown, cause it's in greater need of good vibes.

PPL spokesman Jim Brinckman didn't know exactly when the lights went out, but said the masonry repairs began last year. The work is expected to be completed, and the red glow restored, this autumn, he said.