New U-turn Flyovers On Route 7 Highway To Pattaya

[Mobi]

Has anyone driven down the route 7 highway, from the end of the Motorway to the Rayong turn off lately?

If you have you will be aware of the massive disruption to traffic caused by the additional lanes being added.

That's all fine and good, but yesterday, for the first time, I noticed that thay are building at least 6 - maybe more - flyovers along this this road to accommodate vehicles wishing to to do U - turns.

Now I'll be the first to admit that I know nothing about road construction, but it is patently obvious that these flyovers are going to cost a massive amount of money, and wll take forever to construct.

Try to imagine it, they are going to lift an 8 lane road, and create an elevated section so that cars can U-turn underneath it. And this is being done at least 6 times between the end of the moptorway and the Rayong turn off.

Surely it would have been much cheaper and quicker to build U-Turn bridges? (Make the turning vehicles go up and over the highway)

And to make matters even more mystifying - I can't see any reason for most of these these U - turns - they are no where near any major (or minor) junctions, either right or left as far as I can see.

Someone please tell me that I have got this all wrong.

[buriramboy]

Quite simple really, the more they build, the higher the construction costs and the more chances for backhanders.

BB

[Mobi]

Quite simple really, the more they build, the higher the construction costs and the more chances for backhanders.

BB

I thought I'd leave it to someone else to state the obvious.

The scale of the extra costs is really mind boggling, and what pisses me off is that it will probably add another year to the completion dates, which I had previously reckoned to be about the end of 2007.

In the meantime, all the valued visitors to Pattaya, and all the thousands of trucks rolling along the highway to and from Laem Chabang, will be stuck in endless, gas guzzling traffic jams.

Just so that a few billionaires can add a few more billions to their offshore accounts.

Edited February 7, 2007 by Mobi D'Ark

[COBBER]

Making u-turns on major highways from the centre (fast lane to fast lane) is extremely dangerous and it slows up the traffic, and when you add crossing motor bikes to the mix, its a recipe for major collisions. Perhaps this is why they are building overpasses.

[Mobi]

Making u-turns on major highways from the centre (fast lane to fast lane) is extremely dangerous and it slows up the traffic, and when you add crossing motor bikes to the mix, its a recipe for major collisions. Perhaps this is why they are building overpasses.

If you read my post carefully you will see that I said that U-turn bridges would be a much easier, cheaper and quicker alternative. Instead of raising 8 lanes of motorway, they could build a two lane bridge, which you enter from the extreme left hand side of the road and exit on the extreme left side of the road in the other direction.

Not only would they be cheaper and quicker to build, but they could also be built after the road has been widened, and the traffic could flow freely on the widened road while they were building the bridges. As it is, the main road has bloodly great concrete walls strung across it, and no traffic will be able to go on the main part of the road until all the work is complete - maybe sometime in 2009

I agree about U-turns in the center of the road which enter the fast lanes are very dangerous - but since when did anyone in Thailand give a toss about dangerous U-Turns?

They would have probably put them on this road if they didn't want to make money doing something a bit more expensive.

[sumrit]

I agree a U-Turn bridge would have been a cheaper option but since they've used the central reservation area to increase the number of lanes in both directions with only a narrow barrier separating them there is nowhere to put the support pillars to build a U-Turn on.

Although on second thoughts they could have left the central reservation wider just in those areas to take the pillars.

Edited February 7, 2007 by sumrit

[Tammi]

I would think that they know what they are doing and all will be revealed. They will have done all sorts of traffic studies.

But I would think that they are lifting the 8 lanes so's to get over existing and future waterways.

[Tammi]

I agree a U-Turn bridge would have been a cheaper option but since they've used the central reservation area to increase the number of lanes in both directions with only a narrow barrier separating them there is nowhere to put the support pillars to build a U-Turn on.

Although on second thoughts they could have left the central reservation wider just in those areas to take the pillars.

Exactly, and I'm sure that's what they have done/will do. Alternatively, they will use 'goal posts', one post on each side of the highway.

[Mobi]

I would think that they know what they are doing and all will be revealed. They will have done all sorts of traffic studies.

But I would think that they are lifting the 8 lanes so's to get over existing and future waterways.

You're sure about that are you, Tammi?

Just like the studies they did at Suvarnabhumi?

Edited February 7, 2007 by Mobi D'Ark

[Tammi]

I would think that they know what they are doing and all will be revealed. They will have done all sorts of traffic studies.

But I would think that they are lifting the 8 lanes so's to get over existing and future waterways.

You're sure about that are you, Tammi?

Just like the studies they did at Suvarnabhumi?

They've had lots of practice in road building, not much at all in international airports.

Edited February 7, 2007 by Tammi

[Mobi]

They've had lots of practice in road building, not much at all in international airports.

And a few hundred years practice at corruption......

[Cuban]

Having spent two hours in slow moving traffic North on Highway 9 to find three blokes painting yellow lines during the afternoon/evening rush hour after placing cones to block off one of the two lanes I know that Thais don't have a clue.

Look at any major junction in Bangkok or even Khorat for example, the interchange between Highway 2 and the Khorat by-pass, I am sure it was designed to use the most building materials possible, thus to insure both building back handers and matainace contract back handers.

Sensible traffic design assumes sensible drivers, look at the farce that is any Thai traffic circle/roundabout. I'm sure the use of the normal Thai U turn on most highways we see is the result an old Thai traffic law that provisions for elephants.

[JohnC]

I'm sure the use of the normal Thai U turn on most highways we see is the result an old Thai traffic law that provisions for elephants.

Nah can't be that, everyone knows Elephants only use Trunk Roads!

[Mobi]

I always thought the general concensus was that Thai trafiic practices evolved from boats on waterways.

[tuky]

I just wish they would do something about having to turn left, the u-turn if you wanted to turn right in the first place. This is one of the most dangerous things and cloggs the traffic something cruel.

Soi Assumption in Sriracha is a classic, they widened the road to about 5 lanes then filled the middle three lanes with brick paving. All the trucks wanting to turn right off Highway 7 and go towards Suan Sua block the road so that ordinary traffic has to use the shoulder. All the cost that went into upgrading that section was spent making it harder to negotiate, more dangerous and worse for traffic flow.

Not one second of traffic planning or forethought went into that section.

[Clipped]

i havent driven to pattaya for a long time....will this effect the sukhumvit route? or just the motorway route?

[wilko]

the basic idea of U-turns is that it decreases the costs, as you have less full intersections and let people drive back to the last one. the central U-turn is just a cheap and dangerous way of doing this. It looks to me as if now they are creating an intersection as well as a U-turn in these places as they "upgrade the road to international motorway standards to bring it in line with other great engineering feats....like Suvarnabhumi Airport and the route 9 bridge over the river and the over the sea road past Chonburi and the bypass for Pattaya.........well maybe not......

[Mobi]

IT does not affect the Sukhumvit (Route 3) road that goes through Bang Saen, Sri Racha etc. This road is pretty good these days, but unfortunately the plethora of traffic lights means relatively slow progress.

I reckon the road construction on highway 7 will get worse before it gets better. (at least 6, eight lane flyovers to be built)

Several times recently I have taken the Bang Saen turn off when leaving the motorway and driving down Sukhumvit (Route 3). In peak traffic conditions this definitely quicker - or at least you keep going and don't get stuck for hours in horrendous jams behind smoke belching container trucks in potholed diversions.

Or depending where you are coming from in Bangkok, you can take the elevated Bang Na / Chon Buri Expressway. This is an excellent road, but the problem is the bit when the expressway finishes, and before you hit the Sukhumvit highway just south of Chon Buri city.

Edited February 8, 2007 by Mobi D'Ark