Back to Road Works

Result menu:

Austria: A 1 near Traun
Best test result

Rating: Very good

Location:	Vienna - Salzburg
	between Traun and Sattledt
Work:	General refurbishment
Length:	21.5 kilometres
Traffic routing:	4+0
Duration:	November 2003 to October 2005
Time of testing:	8 and 9 April 2005

Strengths and weaknesses:

• Signs provide information on the type, length and duration of the work 
• Flashing lights to warn motorists in advance
• Speed is gradually reduced in advance of the road work zone, the speed limit is not enforced too early
• Good visual guidance and sufficient room for HGVs in the lead-in/exit tapers
• All the required traffic signs are in place and are understandable, signs showing the speed limit are provided at least every 1,000 metres
• Road work zone has a clear layout at night, traffic guiding and protection equipment fitted with reflectors
• Constant speed limit of 100 kilometres per hour permits traffic to flow
• Lanes can be clearly recognised thanks to good road markings 
• Opposite-way traffic separated by guiding/protective barriers
• Road surface in a good and clean condition
• Lay-bys provided with emergency phones
• Points of entry/exit can be recognised on time, acceleration/deceleration lanes provided
• Adequate safety zone in front of the work area

• Number of lanes reduced in the direction of Salzburg 
• No guiding humps on the traffic lanes at entry/exit points
• Lay-bys in the direction of Salzburg are spaced too far apart

To Top

Austria: A 8 near St Georg

Rating: Good

Location:	Salzburg - Vienna
	between Mondsee and St. Georgen
Work:	General refurbishment
Length:	16 kilometres
Traffic routing:	4+0
Duration:	November 2004 to September 2006
Time of testing:	9 April 2005

Strengths and weaknesses:

• Signs provide information on the type, length and duration of the work
• No reduction in the number of lanes
• Flashing lights to warn motorists in advance
• Speed is reduced gradually, speed limit is not too early
• Good visual guidance and sufficient room for HGVs in the lead-in/exit tapers
• All the required traffic signs are in place and are understandable, signs showing the speed limit are provided at least every 1,000 metres
• Traffic guiding and protection equipment fitted with reflectors
• Constant speed limit of 80 kilometres per hour permits traffic to flow
• Lanes can be clearly recognised thanks to good road markings
• Opposite-way traffic separated by guiding/protective barriers
• Road surface is clean
• Lay-bys provided with emergency phones
• Points of entry/exit in the direction of Salzburg can be recognised on time, acceleration/deceleration lanes provided
• Adequate safety zone in front of the work area

• Not enough room for HGVs in the taper zone in the direction of Vienna
• Layout of road work zone is unclear at night
• Lanes too narrow in the direction of Vienna
• Lay-bys are too far apart (at least every 1,000 metres)
• No guiding humps on the traffic lanes at entry/exit points
• The exit in the direction of Vienna cannot be recognised on time, no deceleration lane
• No indication of exit taper of the lanes in the direction of Salzburg

Austria: A 10 near Golling

Rating: Good

Location:	Villach - Salzburg
	between Lueg Pass and Golling
Work:	Refurbishment of two tunnels
Length:	5.1 kilometres
Traffic routing:	2+0
Duration:	September 2004 to July 2005
Time of testing:	7 and 8 April 2005

Strengths and weaknesses:

• Signs provide information on the type and duration of the work, information about the remaining length provided within the road work zone
• Speed is gradually reduced in advance of the road work zone, the speed limit is not enforced too early
• Good visual guidance in the lead-in/exit tapers
• All the required traffic signs are in place and are understandable, signs showing the speed limit are provided at least every 1,000 metres
• Road work zone has a clear layout at night, traffic guiding and protection equipment fitted with reflectors
• Lanes can be clearly recognised thanks to good road markings
• Road surface in a good and clean condition
• Lay-bys fitted with emergency phones
• Adequate safety zone in front of the work area

• No signs providing information about the overall length of the road work zone
• Number of lanes reduced, difficult merging of traffic due to closure of the slow right lane
• No flashing lights to warn motorists in advance
• Sudden change in road surface slope (edge) in the taper zone in the direction of Salzburg
• Speed limit of 60 kilometres an hour slows down the flow of traffic
• No guiding/protective barriers to separate bi-directional traffic in the tunnel
• Overtaking is not possible

Note:

• This road work zone is to a large extent located in the tunnel

To Top

Austria: A 1 near Amstetten

Rating: Good

Location:	Salzburg - Vienna
	between Amstetten east and west
Work:	Expansion to three lanes
Length:	8.4 kilometres
Traffic routing:	2n+2
Duration:	February 2005 to November 2007
Time of testing:	10 April 2005

Strengths and weaknesses:

• Signs provide information on the type, length and duration of the work
• Flashing lights to warn motorists in advance
• Speed is gradually reduced in advance of the road work zone, the speed limit is not enforced too early
• Good visual guidance and sufficient room for HGVs in the lead-in/exit tapers
• All the required traffic signs are in place and are understandable, signs showing the speed limit are provided at least every 1,000 metres
• Layout of road work zone is clear at night
• Constant speed limit of 100 kilometres per hour permits traffic to flow
• Lanes can be clearly recognised thanks to good road markings
• Road surface is clean
• Lay-bys provided with emergency phones
• Points of entry/exit can be recognised on time, acceleration/deceleration lanes provided
• Adequate safety zone in front of the work area

• Reduction in the number of lanes
• Speed limit sign was concealed by information about lane tapering
• Lay-bys are too far apart (at least every 1,000 metres)
• No guiding humps on the traffic lanes at entry/exit points

To Top

Austria: A 7 near Linz

Rating: Acceptable

Location:	Linz - Salzburg
	between Linz/ Salzburger Straße and Linz/ Voest
Work:	Erection of a new tunnel and a bridge
Length:	3.8 kilometres
Traffic routing:	2+2
Duration:	October 2003 to March 2006
Time of testing:	8 and 10 April 2005

Strengths and weaknesses:

• Signs provide information on the type, length and duration of the work
• No reduction in the number of lanes
• Flashing lights to warn motorists in advance
• Good visual guidance and sufficient room for HGVs in the lead-in/exit tapers
• Signs are understandable, the speed limit in the direction of Linz is indicated at least every 1,000 metres
• Lanes can be clearly recognised thanks to good road markings
• Opposite-way traffic separated by guiding/protective barriers
• Road surface is clean
• Lay-bys provided with emergency phones
• Points of entry/exit can be recognised on time, acceleration/deceleration lanes provided

• Information on the road work zone in the direction of Salzburg is provided too late
• Flashing lights to warn motorists in advance are blinding at night
• The intervals in speed reduction are too short
• Sudden change in road surface slope (edge) in the taper zone in the direction of Salzburg
• Some of the required traffic signs are missing, the speed limit in the direction of Salzburg is not indicated at least every 1,000 metres
• Traffic lanes are difficult to recognise at night
• Speed limit of 60 kilometres an hour slows down the flow of traffic
• Lay-bys are too far apart (at least every 1,000 metres)
• No guiding humps on the traffic lanes at entry/exit points
• No adequate safety zone in front of the work area

To Top

Austria: A 13 near Gries am Brenner

Rating: Acceptable

Location:	Innsbruck – Brenner
	between Nößlach and Brenner
Work:	Refurbishment of the Luegbrücke (bridge)
Length:	3.5 kilometres
Traffic routing:	4+0
Duration:	November 2003 to November 2005
Time of testing:	15 April 2005

Strengths and weaknesses:

• No reduction in the number of lanes
• Flashing lights to warn motorists in advance
• Speed is gradually reduced in advance of the road work zone, the speed limit is not enforced too early
• Good visual guidance in the lead-in/exit tapers
• All the required traffic signs are in place and are understandable, signs showing the speed limit are provided at least every 1,000 metres
• Road work zone has a clear layout at night, traffic guiding and protection equipment fitted with reflectors
• Opposite-way traffic separated by guiding/protective barriers
• Road surface is clean
• Points of entry/exit can be recognised on time, acceleration/deceleration lanes provided
• Adequate safety zone in front of the work area

• No signs with information on the type, length and duration of the work
• Information on the road work zone in the direction of Innsbruck is provided too late
• Flashing lights to warn motorists in advance are blinding at night
• Speed limit is not enforced until a short distance from road work zone
• Information about lane tapering is provided too late
• Not enough room for HGVs in the taper area
• Road markings in the direction of Brenner are not clear, remains of the original markings lead to confusion at night
• Lanes are too narrow
• No lay-bys
• No guiding humps on the traffic lanes at exit points

To Top

Belgium: A 4 near Libramont-Chevigny

Rating: Acceptable

Location:	Arlon - Brussels
	between Libramont-Chevigny and Tellin
Work:	Road renewal
Length:	12 kilometres
Traffic routing:	2+0
Duration:	March to September 2005
Time of testing:	22 March 2005

Strengths and weaknesses:

• Flashing lights to warn motorists in advance
• Speed is gradually reduced in advance of the road work zone, the speed limit is not enforced too early
• Good visual guidance in the lead-in/exit tapers
• All the required traffic signs are in place and are understandable, signs showing the speed limit are provided at least every 1,000 metres
• Traffic guiding and protection equipment fitted with reflectors
• Lanes can be clearly recognised thanks to good road markings
• Opposite-way traffic separated by guiding/protective barriers
• Road surface in a good and clean condition
• Points of exit/entry can be recognised on time

• No signs with information on the type, length and duration of the work
• Reduction in the number of lanes
• The angle of lane tapering is too acute
• Speed limit of 70 kilometres an hour slows down the flow of traffic
• Despite reflectors, it is not possible to clearly recognise the separation of bi-directional traffic
• Overtaking is not possible
• No lay-bys
• No acceleration/deceleration lanes at points of entry/exit in the direction of Brussels, no guiding humps on the exit lanes
• No safety zone in front of the work area

To Top

Belgium: A 4 near Neufchâteau

Rating: Acceptable

Location:	Arlon - Brussels
	between Habay and Neufchâteau
Work:	Road refurbishment
Length:	15.5 kilometres
Traffic routing:	1+1
Duration:	March to September 2005
Time of testing:	22 March 2005

Strengths and weaknesses:

• Flashing lights to warn motorists in advance
• Speed is gradually reduced in advance of the road work zone, the speed limit is not enforced too early
• Good visual guidance in the lead-in/exit tapers and during the reduction of traffic lanes
• All the required traffic signs are in place and are understandable, signs showing the speed limit are provided at least every 1,000 metres
• Road work zone has a clear layout at night and is illuminated, traffic guiding and protection equipment fitted with reflectors
• Opposite-way traffic separated by guiding/protective barriers
• Road surface in the direction of Brussels in a good and clean condition
• Points of exit/entry can be recognised on time
• Adequate safety zone in front of the work area

• No signs with information on the type, length and duration of the work
• Flashing lights to warn motorists in advance are blinding at night
• Reduction in the number of lanes
• Speed limit of 70 kilometres an hour slows down the flow of traffic
• Some of the road markings in the direction of Arlon have been worn away by vehicles
• Lane too narrow in the direction of Brussels
• Lane in the direction of Arlon is in a poor condition
• Overtaking is not possible
• No lay-bys
• No acceleration/deceleration lane at points of entry/exit in the direction of Brussels
• No guiding humps on the traffic lanes at entry/exit points
• No indication of exit taper

To Top

Belgium: A 26 near Houffalize

Rating: Acceptable

Location:	Liège - Neufchâteau
	between Mont and Bastogne
Work:	Road surface renewal
Length:	9.5 kilometres
Traffic routing:	2+0
Duration:	March to September 2005
Time of testing:	23 March 2005

Strengths and weaknesses:

• Flashing lights to warn motorists in advance
• Speed is reduced gradually
• Good visual guidance in the lead-in/exit tapers and during the reduction of traffic lanes
• All the required signs are provided and are understandable
• Road work zone has a clear layout at night and is illuminated, traffic guiding and protection equipment fitted with reflectors
• Lanes can be clearly recognised thanks to good road markings
• Opposite-way traffic separated by guiding/protective barriers
• Road surface in a good and clean condition
• Points of exit/entry can be recognised on time
• Adequate safety zone in front of the work area

• No signs with information on the type, length and duration of the work
• Reduction in the number of lanes
• Flashing lights to warn motorists in advance are blinding at night
• The angle of lane tapering is too acute
• Signs showing the speed limit are not provided at least every 1,000 metres
• Speed limit of 70 kilometres an hour slows down the flow of traffic
• Overtaking is not possible
• No lay-bys
• The acceleration/deceleration lanes at points of entry/exit are too short
• No guiding humps on the traffic lanes at entry/exit points
• Three road work zone entries/exits in the direction of Neufchâteau

To Top

Switzerland: A 2 near Zofingen

Rating: Good

Location:	Basel - Lucerne
	between Reiden and Wiggertal interchange
Work:	Road renewal, noise protection measures
Length:	10 kilometres
Traffic routing:	4+0
Duration:	April to November 2005
Time of testing:	17 April 2005

Strengths and weaknesses:

• Signs provide information on the type and duration of the work
• No reduction in the number of lanes
• Flashing lights to warn motorists in advance
• Speed is gradually reduced in advance of the road work zone, the speed limit is not enforced too early
• Good visual guidance and sufficient room for HGVs in the lead-in/exit tapers
• All the required signs are provided and are understandable
• Road work zone has a clear layout at night, traffic guiding and protection equipment fitted with reflectors
• Constant speed limit of 80 kilometres per hour permits traffic to flow
• Lanes can be clearly recognised thanks to good road markings
• Opposite-way traffic separated by guiding/protective barriers
• Lay-bys provided with emergency phones
• Points of entry/exit can be recognised on time, acceleration/deceleration lanes provided
• Adequate safety zone in front of the work area

• Motorists are not informed of the road work zone until 230 metres before it begins, this information is provided too late
• Last indication of lane tapering is provided too late
• The traffic lane in the direction of Basel is too narrow
• Lay-bys are too far apart (at least every 1,000 metres)
• No guiding humps on the traffic lanes at entry/exit points
• No signs with information on the remaining length of the road work zone

To Top

Switzerland: A 1 near Rorschach

Rating: Acceptable

Location:	St. Gallen - Bregenz
	between St. Gallen-Neudorf and Rheineck
Work:	Road refurbishment
Length:	17 kilometres
Traffic routing:	4+1
Duration:	April to October 2005
Time of testing:	16 April 2005

Strengths and weaknesses:

• Signs provide information about the type and duration of the work as well as information about the total and remaining length of the road work zone
• No reduction in the number of lanes
• Speed is gradually reduced in advance of the road work zone, the speed limit is not enforced too early
• Sufficient room for HGVs in the taper area
• All the required signs are in place
• Layout of road work zone is clear at night
• Speed limit of between 80 and 100 kilometres per hour permits traffic to flow
• Lanes can be clearly recognised thanks to good road markings
• Opposite-way traffic separated by guiding/protective barriers
• Road surface is in a good condition
• Lay-bys fitted with emergency phones
• Points of entry/exit can be recognised on time, acceleration/deceleration lanes provided
• Adequate safety zone in front of the work area

• In the direction of Bregenz, motorists are not informed of the road work zone until 460 metres before it begins, this information is provided too late
• In the direction of Bregenz, no flashing lights to warn motorists in advance
• Sudden change in road surface slope (edge) in the taper zone
• Taper zone is not illuminated at night
• Sign showing the speed limit in the direction of St. Gallen is positioned near the ground
• Insufficient number of reflectors on the protective barrier separating the opposite-way lanes
• The speed limit changes along the road work zone
• No guiding humps on the traffic lanes at entry/exit points
• Lay-bys in the direction of St. Gallen are spaced too far apart

To Top

Switzerland: A 2 near Arisdorf

Rating: Acceptable

Location:	Basel - Berne
	Augst and Sissach
Work:	Renovation of the Arisdorf tunnel
Length:	2.5 kilometres
Traffic routing:	2+0
Duration:	April to December 2005
Time of testing:	17 and 18 April 2005

Strengths and weaknesses:

• Signs provide information on the type and duration of the work
• Flashing lights to warn motorists in advance
• Speed is reduced gradually in advance of the road work zone
• Road work zone has a clear layout at night, traffic guiding and protection equipment fitted with reflectors
• Constant speed limit of 80 kilometres per hour permits traffic to flow
• Lanes can be clearly recognised thanks to good road markings
• Road surface is in a good condition
• Points of entry/exit can be recognised on time, acceleration/deceleration lanes provided
• Adequate safety zone in front of the work area in the direction of Basel

• No information provided about the length of the road work zone
• Reduction in the number of lanes
• Taper zone is not illuminated at night
• Opposite-way traffic is not separated by guiding/protective barriers
• Overtaking is not possible
• No lay-bys
• No guiding humps on the traffic lanes at entry/exit points
• No adequate safety zone in front of the work area in the direction of Berne
• No indication of exit taper
• Distance to the next road work zone in the direction of Berne is less than five kilometres

Note:

• This road work zone is to a large extent located in the tunnel

To Top

Switzerland: A 9 near Clarens

Rating: Acceptable

Location:	Simplon - Lausanne
	between Montreux and Villeneuve
Work:	Renovation of the Glion tunnel
Length:	10.5 kilometres
Traffic routing:	2+0
Duration:	April to November 2005
Time of testing:	18 April 2005

Strengths and weaknesses:

• Congestion warning system in place
• Flashing lights to warn motorists in advance
• Speed is reduced gradually in advance of the road work zone
• All the required signs are provided and are understandable
• Road work zone has a clear layout at night, traffic guiding and protection equipment fitted with reflectors
• Constant speed limit of 80 kilometres per hour permits traffic to flow
• Lanes can be clearly recognised thanks to good road markings
• Road surface is in a good condition
• Points of entry/exit can be recognised on time, acceleration/deceleration lanes provided
• Adequate safety zone in front of the work area

• No signs with information on the type, length and duration of the work
• In the direction of Simplon, motorists are not informed of the road work zone until 260 metres before it begins, this information is provided too late
• Reduction in the number of lanes
• In the direction of Simplon, lighting in the lane reduction area is blinding at night
• Overtaking is not possible
• Opposite-way traffic is not separated by guiding/protective barriers
• No lay-bys
• No guiding humps on the traffic lanes at entry/exit points

Note:

• This road work zone is to a large extent located in the tunnel

To Top

Germany: A 6 near Heilbronn

Rating: Good

Location:	Heilbronn - Mannheim
	between Heilbronn-Neckarsulm and Bad Rappenau
Work:	Bridge refurbishment
Length:	3 kilometres
Traffic routing:	4+1
Duration:	March 2003 to June 2005
Time of testing:	27 March 2005

Strengths and weaknesses:

• Signs provide information on the type, length and duration of the work
• Flashing lights to warn motorists in advance
• No reduction in the number of lanes in the direction of Mannheim
• Speed is gradually reduced in advance of the road work zone, the speed limit is not enforced too early
• Sufficient room for HGVs in the taper area
• Signs showing the speed limit and no-overtaking are provided at least every 1,000 metres
• Road work zone has a clear layout at night, traffic guiding and protection equipment fitted with reflectors
• Constant speed limit of 80 kilometres per hour in the direction of Heilbronn permits traffic to flow
• Lanes can be clearly recognised thanks to good road markings
• Opposite-way traffic separated by guiding/protective barriers
• Road surface in a good and clean condition
• Points of entry/exit can be recognised on time, acceleration/deceleration lanes provided
• Adequate safety zone in front of the work area

• Number of lanes reduced in the direction of Heilbronn
• Many signs that have nothing to do with the road work zone
• Speed limit of 60 kilometres an hour slows down the flow of traffic in the direction of Mannheim
• No lay-bys
• Guiding humps are either too short or not provided at all on the traffic lanes at entry/exit points
• Several road work zone entries/exits in the direction of Mannheim
• No indication of exit taper in the direction of Mannheim

To Top

Germany: A 7 near Göttingen

Rating: Good

Location:	Hanover - Kassel
	between Göttingen and Friedland
Work:	Expansion to six lanes
Length:	7.5 kilometres
Traffic routing:	4+0
Duration:	September 2003 to December 2005
Time of testing:	1 June 2005

Strengths and weaknesses:

• Signs provide information on the type, length and duration of the work
• No reduction in the number of lanes in the direction of Kassel
• Flashing lights to warn motorists in advance
• Speed is gradually reduced in advance of the road work zone, the speed limit is not enforced too early
• Sufficient room for HGVs in the taper area
• Signs are understandable, the speed limit and no-overtaking is indicated at least every 1,000 metres
• Road work zone has a clear layout at night, traffic guiding and protection equipment fitted with reflectors
• Lanes can be clearly recognised thanks to good road markings
• Opposite-way traffic separated by guiding/protective barriers
• Road surface in a good and clean condition
• Points of entry/exit can be recognised on time, acceleration/deceleration lanes provided
• Adequate safety zone in front of the work area

• Number of lanes reduced in the direction of Hanover
• The speed limit changes along the road work zone
• Lanes are too narrow
• No lay-bys
• No guiding humps on the traffic lanes at entry/exit points
• No indication of exit taper in the direction of Hanover

To Top

Germany: A 6/ A 620 near Saarbrücken

Rating: Good

Location:	Mannheim - Saarbrücken
	between St. Ingbert and Saarbrücken-Bismarckbrücke (bridge)
Work:	Road and bridge refurbishment
Length:	4 kilometres
Traffic routing:	3+1
Duration:	March to August 2005
Time of testing:	26 March 2005

Strengths and weaknesses:

• Signs provide information on the type, length and duration of the work
• No reduction in the number of lanes
• Flashing lights to warn motorists in advance
• Speed is gradually reduced in advance of the road work zone, the speed limit is not enforced too early
• Signs are understandable, the speed limit and no-overtaking is indicated at least every 1,000 metres
• Road work zone has a clear layout at night, traffic guiding and protection equipment fitted with reflectors
• Constant speed limit of 80 kilometres per hour in the direction of Saarbrücken permits traffic to flow
• Lanes can be clearly recognised thanks to good road markings
• Opposite-way traffic separated by guiding/protective barriers
• Road surface is clean
• Points of entry/exit can be recognised on time, acceleration/deceleration lanes provided
• Adequate safety zone in front of the work area

• The speed limit changes along the road work zone in the direction of Mannheim
• Overtaking is not possible in the direction of Mannheim
• Lanes are too narrow
• No lay-bys
• No guiding humps on the traffic lanes at entry/exit points
• Several road work zone entries/exits in the direction of Saarbrücken
• No signs with information on the remaining length of the road work zone
• No indication of exit taper in the direction of Mannheim

To Top

Germany: A 1 near Hamburg

Rating: Good

Location:	Hanover - Lübeck
	between Hamburg-Moorfleet and Hamburg-Billstedt
Work:	Expansion to six lanes
Length:	2.8 kilometres
Traffic routing:	4+0
Duration:	April 2005 to May 2006
Time of testing:	6 June 2005

Strengths and weaknesses:

• Signs provide information on the type, length and duration of the work
• No reduction in the number of lanes
• Flashing lights to warn motorists in advance
• Speed is reduced gradually
• Sufficient room for HGVs in the taper area
• All the required traffic signs are in place and are understandable, the speed limit and no-overtaking are indicated at least every 1,000 metres
• Road work zone has a clear layout at night, traffic guiding and protection equipment fitted with reflectors
• Lanes can be clearly recognised thanks to good road markings
• Road surface in a good and clean condition
• Adequate safety zone in front of the work area

• Speed limit of 60 kilometres an hour slows down the flow of traffic
• Opposite-way traffic is not separated by guiding/protective barriers
• No lay-bys
• Points of entry/exit cannot always be recognised on time, no acceleration/deceleration lanes
• No guiding humps on the traffic lanes at entry/exit points
• No indication of exit taper in the direction of Hanover
• Distance to the next road work zone is less than five kilometres in both directions

To Top

Germany: A 13 near Berlin (south)

Rating: Good

Location:	Berlin - Dresden
	between Schönefelder Kreuz and Groß Köris
Work:	Expansion of the road in the direction of Dresden
Length:	7 kilometres
Traffic routing:	4+0
Duration:	May 2004 to July 2006
Time of testing:	31 March 2005

Strengths and weaknesses:

• Signs provide information on the type, length and duration of the work
• No reduction in the number of lanes
• Flashing lights to warn motorists in advance
• Speed is gradually reduced in advance of the road work zone, the speed limit is not enforced too early
• Sufficient room for HGVs in the taper area
• All the required traffic signs are in place and are understandable, the speed limit and no-overtaking are indicated at least every 1,000 metres
• Traffic guiding and protection equipment fitted with reflectors
• Opposite-way traffic separated by guiding/protective barriers
• Road surface in a good and clean condition
• Points of entry/exit can be recognised on time, acceleration/deceleration lanes provided
• Lay-bys fitted with emergency phones
• Adequate safety zone in front of the work area

• Sudden change in road surface slope (edge) in the taper zone in the direction of Dresden
• Lane markings are partially missing, and original road markings are at times irritating
• Speed limit of 60/40 kilometres an hour slows down the flow of traffic
• Lanes too narrow in the direction of Berlin
• Guiding humps on the traffic lanes at entry/exit points are too short
• Lay-bys are too far apart (at least every 1,000 metres)
• Many road work zone entries/exits
• No signs with information on the remaining length of the road work zone
• No indication of exit taper in the direction of Berlin

To Top

Germany: A 9 near Munich

Rating: Good

Location:	Nuremberg - Munich
	between München-Fröttmaning and München-Frankfurter Ring
Work:	Expansion to six lanes, noise protection measures
Length:	1.7 kilometres
Traffic routing:	4+0
Duration:	June 2004 to October 2005
Time of testing:	15 June 2005

Strengths and weaknesses:

• Signs provide information on the type, length and duration of the work in the direction of Nuremberg
• Flashing lights to warn motorists in advance
• Speed is gradually reduced in advance of the road work zone, the speed limit is not enforced too early
• Good visual guidance and sufficient room for HGVs in the lead-in/exit tapers
• Traffic signs and road markings are clear, intact and easy to spot
• All the required signs are provided and are understandable
• Road work zone has a clear layout at night, traffic guiding and protection equipment fitted with reflectors
• Lanes can be clearly recognised thanks to good road markings
• Opposite-way traffic separated by guiding/protective barriers
• Road surface in a good and clean condition
• Points of entry/exit can be recognised on time, acceleration/deceleration lanes provided

• No signs providing information on the type, length and duration of the work in the direction of Munich
• Reduction in the number of lanes
• The angle of lane tapering is too acute
• Speed limit of 60 kilometres an hour slows down the flow of traffic
• Lanes are too narrow
• No guiding humps on the traffic lanes at entry/exit points
• No lay-bys
• No safety zone in front of the work area
• Distance to the next road work zone is less than five kilometres in both directions

To Top

Germany: A 3 near Cologne

Rating: Good

Location:	Leverkusen - Frankfurt
	between Köln-Dellbrück and Heumar (motorway merging point)
Work:	Expansion to eight lanes
Length:	3.3 kilometres
Traffic routing:	4+3
Duration:	October 2003 to December 2005
Time of testing:	25 March 2005

Strengths and weaknesses:

• Signs provide information on the type, length and duration of the work
• Flashing lights to warn motorists in advance
• Speed is reduced gradually
• All the required traffic signs are in place, signs showing the speed limit are provided at least every 1,000 metres
• Traffic guiding and protection equipment fitted with reflectors
• Opposite-way traffic separated by guiding/protective barriers
• Road surface in a good and clean condition
• Points of entry/exit can be recognised on time, acceleration/deceleration lanes provided, sometimes with guiding humps
• Adequate safety zone in front of the work area

• Number of lanes reduced, difficult merging of traffic in the direction of Frankfurt due to closure of the slow right lane
• Speed limit of 60 kilometres an hour slows down the flow of traffic
• Lane markings are irritating and torn off in some places
• Guiding humps are not provided everywhere at the traffic lanes at entry/exit points
• No lay-bys

To Top

Germany: A 9 near Bayreuth

Rating: Acceptable

Location:	Berlin - Nuremberg
	between Bayreuth and Trockau
Work:	Expansion to six lanes
Length:	8 kilometres
Traffic routing:	4+0
Duration:	July 2003 to October 2006
Time of testing:	29 March 2005

Strengths and weaknesses:

• Signs provide information on the type and duration of the work
• Flashing lights to warn motorists in advance
• Speed is gradually reduced in advance of the road work zone, the speed limit is not enforced too early
• Sufficient room for HGVs in the taper area
• All the required traffic signs are in place, the speed limit and no-overtaking are indicated at least every 1,000 metres in the direction of Nuremberg
• Road work zone has a clear layout at night, traffic guiding and protection equipment fitted with reflectors
• Opposite-way traffic separated by guiding/protective barriers
• Road surface in a good and clean condition
• Points of entry/exit can be recognised on time, acceleration/deceleration lanes provided
• Adequate safety zone in front of the work area

• No signs with information on the total and remaining length within the road work zone
• Reduction in the number of lanes
• Speed is reduced too abruptly
• Sudden change in road surface slope (edge) in the taper zone
• Not enough room for HGVs in the taper zone in the direction of Berlin
• In the direction of Berlin, signs showing the speed limit are not provided at least every 1,000 metres
• The speed limit changes along the road work zone
• Lane markings are partially torn off, some road work zone and original road markings overlap and are hence irritating for motorists
• No guiding humps on the traffic lanes at entry/exit points
• No lay-bys
• The acceleration lane at one point of entry is too short

To Top

Germany: A 9 near Hermsdorf

Rating: Acceptable

Location:	Berlin - Nuremberg
	between Hermsdorfer Kreuz and Triptis
Work:	Expansion to six lanes
Length:	8.5 kilometres
Traffic routing:	2n+2
Duration:	October 2004 to October 2005
Time of testing:	30 March 2005

Strengths and weaknesses:

• Speed is gradually reduced in advance of the road work zone, the speed limit is not enforced too early
• Sufficient room for HGVs in the taper area
• All the required traffic signs are in place and are understandable, the speed limit and no-overtaking are indicated at least every 1,000 metres
• Constant speed limit of 80 kilometres per hour permits traffic to flow
• Lanes can be clearly recognised thanks to good road markings
• Traffic guiding and protection equipment fitted with reflectors
• Road surface in a good and clean condition

• No signs with information on the type, length and duration of the work
• No flashing lights to warn motorists in advance
• Reduction in the number of lanes
• The lead-in/exit taper zones are not illuminated
• No lay-bys
• No safety zone in front of the work area
• Several points of entry/exit along the road work zone
• Distance to the next road work zone in the direction of Nuremberg is less than five kilometres

To Top

Spain: A 7 near Valencia

Rating: Good

Location:	Alicante - Barcelona
	between the A 7/ A 3 motorway junction and Torrent
Work:	Construction of a point of exit
Length:	1.4 kilometres
Traffic routing:	2+2
Duration:	November 2002 to 2006
Time of testing:	13 March 2005

Strengths and weaknesses:

• No reduction in the number of lanes
• Speed is reduced gradually
• Good visual guidance and sufficient room for HGVs in the lead-in/exit tapers
• All the required signs are provided and are understandable
• Road work zone has a clear layout at night, traffic guiding and protection equipment fitted with reflectors
• Constant speed limit of 80 kilometres per hour permits traffic to flow
• Lanes can be clearly recognised thanks to good road markings
• Road surface in a good and clean condition
• Hard shoulder with emergency phones along the entire length of the road work zone in the direction of Alicante
• Points of entry/exit can be recognised on time, acceleration/deceleration lanes provided
• Adequate safety zone in front of the work area

• No signs with information on the type, length and duration of the work
• Sign informing motorists of the road work zone is not provided in the direction of Barcelona until after the first reduction in speed
• Flashing lights to warn motorists in advance were not working correctly
• Motorists are informed of the taper zones too late
• No guiding humps on the traffic lanes at entry/exit points

To Top

Spain: C 31 near Barcelona

Rating: Acceptable

Location:	Barcelona - Hospitalet
	between L'Hospitalet de Llobregat and Barcelona centre
Work:	City motorway refurbishment and bridge conversion
Length:	1 kilometre
Traffic routing:	4+4, 3+3
Duration:	September 2003 to June 2006
Time of testing:	12 March 2005

Strengths and weaknesses:

• No reduction in the number of lanes
• Flashing lights to warn motorists in advance
• Speed is reduced gradually, speed limit is not too early
• Signs are understandable
• Road work zone has a clear layout at night and is illuminated, traffic guiding and protection equipment fitted with reflectors
• Lanes can be clearly recognised thanks to good road markings
• Opposite-way traffic separated by guiding/protective barriers

• No signs with information on the type, length and duration of the work
• No sign indicating the road work zone in the direction of Barcelona
• Not enough room for HGVs in the taper area
• Speed limit of 50 kilometres an hour slows down the flow of traffic
• No guiding humps on the traffic lanes at entry/exit points
• The exit in the direction of Barcelona cannot be recognised on time, no deceleration lane
• No lay-bys
• No safety zone in front of the work area
• Distance to the next road work zone in the direction of Hospitalet is less than five kilometres

To Top

Spain: A 64 near Villaviciosa

Rating: Acceptable

Location:	Oviedo - Santander
	between Lieres and Villaviciosa
Work:	Road refurbishment
Length:	4.3 kilometres
Traffic routing:	2+0
Duration:	No details available
Time of testing:	15 and 16 March 2005

Strengths and weaknesses:

• Flashing lights to warn motorists in advance
• Speed is gradually reduced in advance of the road work zone, the speed limit is not enforced too early
• Bumps fitted in front of the taper area
• Good visual guidance in the lead-in/exit tapers and during the reduction of traffic lanes
• All the required traffic signs are in place and are understandable, signs showing the speed limit are provided at least every 1,000 metres
• Traffic guiding and protection equipment fitted with reflectors
• Road surface in a good and clean condition
• Adequate safety zone in front of the work area

• No signs with information on the type, length and duration of the work
• Information about the road work zone is provided too late
• Reduction in the number of lanes
• Motorists are informed of the lane reduction and taper zones too late
• Speed limit of 20 kilometres an hour in the taper zone slows down the flow of traffic
• Layout of the road work zone is unclear at night, lane markings cannot be clearly recognised
• Speed limit of 60 kilometres per hour slows down the flow of traffic, changes along the road work zone in the direction of Santander
• Lane markings in the direction of Oviedo are confusing
• Bi-direction traffic is only separated by traffic cones and single protective barriers
• Overtaking is not possible
• No lay-bys

To Top

Spain: M 30 near Madrid
Poorest test result

Rating: Poor

Location:	Valencia - Cordoba
	between Madrid-Vinateros and Madrid-Vallecas
Work:	Removal of the city motorway
Length:	2.9 kilometres
Traffic routing:	Changing
Duration:	September 2004 to February 2007
Time of testing:	18 March 2005

Strengths and weaknesses:

• Flashing lights to warn motorists in advance
• Sufficient room for HGVs in the taper area
• Signs are understandable
• Road work zone has a clear layout at night and is illuminated, traffic guiding and protection equipment fitted with reflectors
• Opposite-way traffic separated by guiding/protective barriers
• Road surface is clean
• Adequate safety zone in front of the work area

• No signs with information on the type, length and duration of the work
• No sign indicating the road work zone in the direction of Cordoba
• The intervals in speed reduction are too short
• At times difficult for traffic to merge due to closure of the slow right lane
• Not all of the required traffic signs are in place
• Speed limit of 40 kilometres an hour slows down the flow of traffic
• Continuous change in lane routing
• Lane markings are sometimes confusing
• Points of entry/exit cannot always be recognised on time, at times no acceleration/deceleration lanes provided
• No guiding humps on the traffic lanes at entry/exit points
• No lay-bys
• Road work zone entries/exits in the direction of Valencia
• Distance to the next road work zone is less than five kilometres in both directions

To Top

France: A 9 near Mèze

Rating: Good

Location:	Perpignan - Montpellier
	between Agde and Sète
Work:	Road refurbishment
Length:	5.8 kilometres
Traffic routing:	4+0
Duration:	No details available
Time of testing:	11 March 2005

Strengths and weaknesses:

• Speed is gradually reduced in advance of the road work zone, the speed limit is not enforced too early
• Sufficient room for HGVs in the taper area
• Bumps in place in the direction of Montpellier
• All the required traffic signs are in place and are understandable, signs showing the speed limit are provided at least every 1,000 metres
• Layout of road work zone is clear at night
• Constant speed limit of 90 kilometres per hour in the direction of Perpignan permits traffic to flow
• Lanes can be clearly recognised thanks to good road markings
• Opposite-way traffic separated by guiding/protective barriers
• Road surface in a good and clean condition
• Lay-bys fitted with emergency phones
• Points of entry/exit can be recognised on time, acceleration/deceleration lanes provided
• Adequate safety zone in front of the work area

• No signs providing information on the type and length of the roadworks
• In the direction of Montpellier, no flashing lights to warn motorists in advance
• Reduction in the number of lanes
• The intervals in speed reduction are too short in the direction of Perpignan
• Speed limit of 50 kilometres an hour in the taper zone in the direction of Montpellier slows down the flow of traffic
• In the direction of Perpignan, signs showing the speed limit are not provided at least every 1,000 metres
• Traffic guiding and protection equipment are not fitted with reflectors in the taper zone
• No guiding humps on the traffic lanes at entry/exit points

To Top

France: A 46/ A 6 near Lyon (north)

Rating: Good

Location:	Paris - Lyon
	between Villefranche-Sur-Saône and Trévoux/ Genay
Work:	Work on the embankment
Length:	4.8 kilometres
Traffic routing:	3n+3
Duration:	April 2005
Time of testing:	19 April 2005

Strengths and weaknesses:

• Signs provide information on the type and duration of the work
• No reduction in the number of lanes
• Flashing lights to warn motorists in advance
• Speed is gradually reduced in advance of the road work zone, the speed limit is not enforced too early
• Sufficient room for HGVs in the taper area
• Road work zone has a clear layout at night and is illuminated, traffic guiding and protection equipment fitted with reflectors
• Constant speed limit of 90 kilometres per hour permits traffic to flow
• Lanes can be clearly recognised thanks to good road markings
• Road surface in a good and clean condition
• Points of entry/exit can be recognised on time, acceleration/deceleration lanes provided at points of exit
• Adequate safety zone in front of the work area

• No signs with information on the total and remaining length within the road work zone
• Flashing lights to warn motorists in advance are blinding at night
• Signs showing the speed limit are not provided at least every 1,000 metres
• No guiding humps on the traffic lanes at entry/exit points
• No lay-bys

To Top

France: A 7 near Lyon (south)

Rating: Acceptable

Location:	Valence - Lyon
	between Pierre Benite and Lyon-Rive-Gauche
Work:	Refurbishment of the concrete wall on the central reserve
Length:	1.8 kilometres
Traffic routing:	3n+2
Duration:	No information available
Time of testing:	20 April 2005

Strengths and weaknesses:

• Speed is reduced gradually
• All the required traffic signs are in place and are understandable, the speed limit and no-overtaking are indicated at least every 1,000 metres
• The road work zone has a clear layout at night and is illuminated
• Good visual guidance thanks to original lane markings
• Road surface in a good and clean condition
• Points of entry/exit can be recognised on time, acceleration/deceleration lanes provided
• Adequate safety zone in front of the work area

• No signs with information on the type, length and duration of the work
• Reduction in the number of lanes
• No flashing lights to warn motorists in advance
• Transverse closure only with traffic cones and direction signs
• Some of the traffic signs are positioned on the ground
• The speed limit changes along the road work zone
• No lay-bys
• No guiding humps on the traffic lanes at entry/exit points
• The work area is only separated by traffic cones

To Top

France: A 7 near Vienne

Rating: Acceptable

Location:	Lyon - Marseille
	between Vienne-North and Condrieu
Work:	Erection of a new supporting wall
Length:	2.6 kilometres
Traffic routing:	3n+2
Duration:	April to July 2005
Time of testing:	20 April 2005

Strengths and weaknesses:

• Speed is gradually reduced in advance of the road work zone, the speed limit is not enforced too early
• All the required signs are provided and are understandable
• Constant speed limit of 90 kilometres per hour permits traffic to flow
• Good visual guidance thanks to original lane markings
• Road surface in a good and clean condition
• Adequate safety zone in front of the work area

• No signs with information on the type, length and duration of the work
• Number of lanes reduced, difficult merging of traffic due to closure of the slow right lane
• No flashing lights to warn motorists in advance
• Transverse closure only with traffic cones and direction signs
• Signs showing the speed limit and no-overtaking are not provided at least every 1,000 metres
• Traffic signs are positioned close to the ground
• No lay-bys

To Top

France: A 26 near Bully les Mines

Rating: Acceptable

Location:	Reims - Calais
	between Thélus and Béthune
Work:	Care of the motorway verge
Length:	5.1 kilometres
Traffic routing:	2n+1
Duration:	April to July 2005
Time of testing:	17 May 2005

Strengths and weaknesses:

• Speed is gradually reduced in advance of the road work zone, the speed limit is not enforced too early
• All the required signs are provided and are understandable
• Constant speed limit of 90 kilometres per hour permits traffic to flow
• Traffic signs and road markings are clear, intact and easy to spot
• Good visual guidance thanks to original lane markings
• Traffic lanes are wide enough
• Road surface in a good and clean condition
• Points of exit can be recognised on time, deceleration lanes provided
• Adequate safety zone in front of the work area

• No signs with information on the type, length and duration of the work
• Number of lanes reduced, difficult merging of traffic due to closure of the slow right lane
• Reduction area cordoned off by traffic cones only that are a considerable distance apart
• No flashing lights to warn motorists in advance
• Signs showing the speed limit are not provided at least every 1,000 metres
• Overtaking is not possible
• No guiding humps on the traffic lanes at exit points
• No lay-bys
• The work area is cordoned off by traffic cones only that are a considerable distance apart

Note:

• It was not possible to evaluate the layout of the road work zone at night because it was removed on the evening of the test.

To Top

Croatia: A 3 near Kutina

Rating: Acceptable

Location:	Rijeka - Zagreb
	between Novska and Popovaca
Work:	Road surface refurbishment
Length:	3.8 kilometres
Traffic routing:	2n+1
Duration:	March to May 2005
Time of testing:	11 and 12 April 2005

Strengths and weaknesses:

• Speed is gradually reduced in advance of the road work zone, the speed limit is not enforced too early
• All the required signs are provided and are understandable
• Road work zone has a clear layout at night and is illuminated, traffic guiding and protection equipment fitted with reflectors
• Good visual guidance thanks to original lane markings
• Road surface in a good and clean condition
• Lay-bys provided
• Points of exit/entry can be recognised on time
• Adequate safety zone in front of the work area

• No signs with information on the type, length and duration of the work
• Number of lanes reduced, difficult merging of traffic due to closure of the slow right lane
• No flashing lights to warn motorists in advance
• Lanes are too narrow
• Overtaking is not possible
• No guiding humps on the traffic lanes at entry/exit points, acceleration/deceleration lanes are too short

To Top

Croatia: A 3 near Ivanic Grad

Rating: Poor

Location:	Zagreb - Slavonski Brod
	between Zagreb east and Sisiak
Work:	Road surface refurbishment
Length:	3 kilometres
Traffic routing:	1+1, 2+1
Duration:	April to October 2005
Time of testing:	11 and 12 April 2005

Strengths and weaknesses:

• Speed is gradually reduced in advance of the road work zone, the speed limit is not enforced too early
• Points of entry/exit can be recognised on time, acceleration/deceleration lanes provided
• Adequate safety zone in front of the work area

• No signs with information on the type, length and duration of the work
• Information on the road work zone in the direction of Brod is provided too late
• Number of lanes reduced, difficult merging of traffic due to closure of the slow right lane
• No flashing lights to warn motorists in advance
• No indication of lane tapering
• In the direction of Zagreb, signs showing the speed limit are not provided at least every 1,000 metres
• The speed limit changes along the road work zone
• No road work zone markings, original road markings in the direction of Slavonski Brod are confusing
• Lane too narrow in the direction of Zagreb
• Overtaking is not possible
• No lay-bys
• Distance between the beacons used to separate the work are is too long
• No signs and no markings for the exit taper

To Top

Italy: A 28 near Portogruaro

Rating: Poor

Location:	Conegliano - Portugruaro
	between Sesto Al Reghena and Portugruaro
Work:	Renewal of the central reserve crash barrier
Length:	1.7 kilometres
Traffic routing:	2n+2
Duration:	Until August 2005
Time of testing:	14 April 2005

Strengths and weaknesses:

• All the required signs are provided and are understandable
• Good visual guidance thanks to original lane markings
• Road surface in a good and clean condition
• Points of entry/exit can be recognised on time, acceleration/deceleration lanes provided

• No signs with information on the type, length and duration of the work
• Reduction in the number of lanes
• Flashing lights to warn motorists in advance are hardly visible at night
• Gradual reduction in speed is too abrupt
• Traffic signs are positioned close to the ground
• Signs showing the speed limit are not provided at least every 1,000 metres
• Speed limit of 60 kilometres an hour slows down the flow of traffic
• Overtaking is not possible
• No lay-bys
• No guiding humps on the traffic lanes at entry/exit points
• Work area is separated by small beacons and direction signs only
• Lane reduction ends abruptly and without any routing

To Top

Italy: A 10 near Taggia

Rating: Poor

Location:	Ventimiglia - Genoa
	between Imperia and San Remo
Work:	Refurbishment of the tunnel
Length:	3.4 kilometres
Traffic routing:	2+0
Duration:	March to May 2005
Time of testing:	9 March 2005

Strengths and weaknesses:

• Flashing lights to warn motorists in advance
• Speed is gradually reduced in advance of the road work zone, the speed limit is not enforced too early
• Traffic guiding and protection equipment fitted with reflectors in the taper zone
• All the required signs are provided and are understandable
• Road surface is clean
• Adequate safety zone in front of the work area

• No signs with information on the type, length and duration of the work
• Number of lanes reduced, difficult merging of traffic in the direction of Genoa due to closure of the slow right lane
• Lighting is poor in the reduction area
• Speed limit of 40 kilometres an hour in the taper zone slows down the flow of traffic
• Original road markings in the taper zone are confusing
• Potholes in the taper zone in the direction of Genoa
• Traffic signs are positioned close to the ground
• Signs showing the speed limit are not provided at least every 1,000 metres
• Layout of the road work zone is unclear at night, separation of opposite-way traffic without reflectors
• The speed limit changes along the road work zone
• Overtaking is not possible
• Opposite-way traffic is not separated by guiding/protective barriers
• Lanes are too narrow
• No lay-bys in the direction of Genoa

Note:

• This road work zone is to a large extent located in the tunnel

To Top

Italy: A 6 near Mondovì

Rating: Poor

Location:	Savona - Turin
	between Mondovì and Carrù
Work:	Bridge refurbishment
Length:	2.4 kilometres
Traffic routing:	2+0
Duration:	Until June 2005
Time of testing:	10 March 2005

Strengths and weaknesses:

• Flashing lights to warn motorists in advance
• Direction signs and arrows in the taper zone
• All the required traffic signs are in place and are understandable, signs showing the speed limit are provided at least every 1,000 metres
• Road surface in a good and clean condition
• Points of exit/entry can be recognised on time

• No signs with information on the type, length and duration of the work
• Number of lanes reduced, difficult merging of traffic in the direction of Turin due to closure of the slow right lane
• Speed is not reduced gradually
• The angle of lane tapering is too acute
• Traffic signs are positioned close to the ground
• Speed limit of 60/40 kilometres an hour slows down the flow of traffic
• Lane markings in the direction of Turin are confusing
• Small beacons and lane markings are difficult to see at night
• Overtaking is not possible
• Opposite-way traffic is not separated by guiding/protective barriers
• No guiding humps on lanes at entry/exit pints, one entry point has no acceleration lane but a stop sign
• No lay-bys
• The work area is separated by small beacons only
• Lane reduction ends abruptly and without any routing
• Distance to the next road work zone is less than five kilometres

To Top

Italy: A 15 near Pontrémoli

Rating: Poor

Location:	Parma - La Spezia
	between Berceto and Pontrémoli
Work:	Bridge and tunnel refurbishment
Length:	5.7 kilometres
Traffic routing:	2+0
Duration:	Until March 2005
Time of testing:	8 March 2005

Strengths and weaknesses:

• Good visual guidance thanks to original lane markings in the direction of Parma
• Road surface is clean
• Points of entry/exit can be recognised on time, acceleration/deceleration lanes provided

• No signs with information on the type, length and duration of the work
• Reduction in the number of lanes
• No flashing lights to warn motorists in advance
• Gradual reduction in speed is too abrupt
• Number of lanes reduced, difficult merging of traffic in the direction of La Spezia due to closure of the slow right lane
• Lane tapering is too short and at a sharp angle, sudden change in road surface slope (edge)
• Signs showing the speed limit are not provided at least every 1,000 metres
• Speed limit of 60 kilometres an hour slows down the flow of traffic
• Overtaking is not possible
• Opposite-way traffic is separated not by guiding/protective barriers but by small beacons that have been driven over or have disappeared, difficult to see at night
• No lay-bys
• No guiding humps on the traffic lanes at entry/exit points
• Point of entry in the taper zone
• Work area is only separated by small beacons, difficult to see at night
• No lane markings in the area of the exit taper

Note:

• This road work zone is to a large extent located in the tunnel

To Top

Italy: A 28 near Pordenone

Rating: Acceptable

Location:	Conegliano - Portugruaro
	between Cimpello and Porcia
Work:	Cleaning of the concrete barrier
Length:	1.7 kilometres
Traffic routing:	2n+1
Duration:	No information available
Time of testing:	14 April 2005

Strengths and weaknesses:

• Speed is reduced gradually, speed limit is not too early
• All the required signs are provided, clearly visible and understandable
• Good visual guidance thanks to original lane markings
• Road surface in a good and clean condition
• Points of entry/exit can be recognised on time, acceleration/deceleration lanes provided
• Lay-bys provided

• No signs with information on the type, length and duration of the work
• No flashing lights to warn motorists in advance
• Reduction in the number of lanes
• Signs showing the speed limit are not provided at least every 1,000 metres
• Speed limit of 60 kilometres an hour slows down the flow of traffic
• No guiding humps on the traffic lanes at entry/exit points
• The work area is only separated by traffic cones
• Road work zone entries/exits

Note:

• It was not possible to evaluate the layout of the road work zone at night because it was removed on the evening of the test.

To Top

The Netherlands: A15 near Sliedrecht

Rating: Acceptable

Location:	Rotterdam - Gorinchem
	between Papendrecht and Gorinchem
Work:	Road refurbishment
Length:	4.1 kilometres
Traffic routing:	4+0
Duration:	1998 to 2007
Time of testing:	6 May 2005

Strengths and weaknesses:

• Signs provide information on the type and duration of the work
• No reduction in the number of lanes
• Speed is gradually reduced in advance of the road work zone, the speed limit is not enforced too early
• All the required traffic signs are in place and are understandable, signs showing the speed limit are provided every 500 to 1,000 metres
• Road work zone has a clear layout at night and is illuminated, traffic guiding and protection equipment fitted with reflectors
• Lanes can be clearly recognised thanks to good road markings
• Opposite-way traffic separated by guiding/protective barriers
• Road surface in a good and clean condition
• Points of entry/exit can be recognised on time, acceleration/deceleration lanes provided
• Adequate safety zone in front of the work area

• No signs with information on the total and remaining length within the road work zone
• No flashing lights to warn motorists in advance
• Not enough room for HGVs in the taper zone in the direction of Gorinchem
• Speed limit of 70 kilometres an hour slows down the flow of traffic
• Lanes are too narrow
• No guiding humps on the traffic lanes at entry/exit points
• No lay-bys
• Distance to the next road work zone is less than five kilometres in both directions

To Top

The Netherlands: A 16 near Breda

Rating: Acceptable

Location:	Rotterdam - Antwerp
	between Prinsenbeek and Hazeldonk
Work:	Expansion to six lanes
Length:	3.2 kilometres
Traffic routing:	4+0
Duration:	2000 to 2006
Time of testing:	5 and 6 May 2005

Strengths and weaknesses:

• Signs provide information on the type and duration of the work in the direction of Antwerp
• Flashing lights to warn motorists in advance
• Sufficient room for HGVs in the taper area
• Signs are understandable, the speed limit is indicated at least every 1,000 metres
• Road work zone has a clear layout at night and is illuminated, traffic guiding and protection equipment fitted with reflectors
• Constant speed limit of 90 kilometres per hour permits traffic to flow
• Lanes can be clearly recognised thanks to good road markings
• Opposite-way traffic separated by guiding/protective barriers
• Road surface in a good and clean condition
• Points of entry/exit can be recognised on time, acceleration/deceleration lanes provided
• Adequate safety zone in front of the work area

• No signs providing information on the type, length and duration of the work in the direction of Rotterdam
• Reduction in the number of lanes
• Speed is not reduced gradually
• Lanes are too narrow
• No guiding humps on the traffic lanes at entry/exit points
• No lay-bys
• No indication of exit taper in the direction of Antwerp

To Top

The Netherlands: A 59 near Waalwijk

Rating: Acceptable

Location:	Drunen/ Hertogenbosch - Waalwijk
	between Drunen-West and Waalwijk-Oost
Work:	Erection of a bridge
Length:	1.4 kilometres
Traffic routing:	4+0
Duration:	January to August 2005
Time of testing:	24 March 2005

Strengths and weaknesses:

• Signs provide information on the type and duration of the work
• No reduction in the number of lanes
• All the required signs are provided and are understandable
• Road work zone has a clear layout at night and is illuminated, traffic guiding and protection equipment fitted with reflectors
• Lanes can be clearly recognised thanks to good road markings
• Opposite-way traffic separated by guiding/protective barriers
• Road surface in a good and clean condition
• Points of exit can be recognised on time, deceleration lanes provided

• No information provided about the length of the road work zone
• Information about the road work zone is provided too late
• No flashing lights to warn motorists in advance
• Speed is not reduced gradually
• Speed limit of 70 kilometres an hour slows down the flow of traffic
• Lanes are too narrow
• No guiding humps on the traffic lanes at entry/exit points
• No lay-bys

To Top

The Netherlands: A 50/ A 59 near Oss

Rating: Acceptable

Location:	Nijmegen - Hertogenbosch
	between Oss-Oost and Rosmalen
Work:	Redevelopment of a carriageway leading to the motorway
Length:	8.3 kilometres
Traffic routing:	4+4
Duration:	October 2004 to January 2006
Time of testing:	23 and 24 March 2005

Strengths and weaknesses:

• Signs provide information on the type and duration of the work
• Speed is reduced gradually in the direction of Nijmegen
• No reduction in the number of lanes
• All the required traffic signs are in place and are understandable, signs showing the speed limit are provided at least every 1,000 metres
• Road work zone has a clear layout at night and is illuminated, traffic guiding and protection equipment fitted with reflectors
• Lanes can be clearly recognised thanks to good road markings
• Opposite-way traffic separated by guiding/protective barriers
• Road surface in a good and clean condition
• Points of entry/exit can be recognised on time, acceleration/deceleration lanes provided

• No information about the road work zone
• No information provided about the length of the road work zone
• No flashing lights to warn motorists in advance
• Speed is abruptly reduced in the direction of Hertogenbosch
• No-overtaking signs are not provided at least every 1,000 metres
• Smooth flow of traffic is hindered by traffic lights in the road work zone
• No guiding humps on the traffic lanes at entry/exit points
• No lay-bys

To Top

Slovenia: A 2 near Brežice

Rating: Acceptable

Location:	Ljubljana - Zagreb
	between Dmovo and Gmajna
Work:	Expansion to four lanes
Length:	5.2 kilometres
Traffic routing:	2+0
Duration:	Until December 2005
Time of testing:	13 April 2005

Strengths and weaknesses:

• Signs provide information on the type, length and duration of the work
• Flashing lights to warn motorists in advance
• Speed is gradually reduced in advance of the road work zone, the speed limit is not enforced too early
• All the required signs are provided and are understandable
• Road work zone has a clear layout at night, traffic guiding and protection equipment fitted with reflectors
• Signs showing the speed limit provided at least every 1,000 metres
• Lanes can be clearly recognised thanks to good road markings
• Adequate safety zone in front of the work area

• No information about the road work zone
• Reduction in the number of lanes
• Sudden change in road surface slope (edge) in the taper zone
• Overtaking is not possible
• Opposite-way traffic is not separated by guiding/protective barriers
• No lay-bys
• The points of entry/exit in the direction of Zagreb have no acceleration/deceleration lanes
• Dirt from construction vehicles on traffic lane
• No signs with information on the remaining length of the road work zone
• Distance to the next road work zone in the direction of Zagreb is less than five kilometres

To Top

Great Britain: M 60 near Manchester

Rating: Acceptable

Location:	Stockport - Liverpool
	between Manchester-Sale (8) and Manchester-Didsbury (5)
Work:	Widening of the traffic lane
Length:	8 kilometres
Traffic routing:	Changing
Duration:	Until March 2006
Time of testing:	9 May 2005

Strengths and weaknesses:

• Signs provide information on the type, length and duration of the work
• No reduction in the number of lanes
• All the required traffic signs are in place, signs showing the speed limit are provided at least every 1,000 metres
• Road work zone has a clear layout at night, traffic guiding and protection equipment as well as road markings fitted with reflectors
• Lanes can be clearly recognised during the day thanks to good road markings
  Road surface in a good and clean condition
• Points of entry/exit can be recognised on time, acceleration/deceleration lanes provided

• No signs with information on the remaining length of the road work zone
• No flashing lights to warn motorists in advance
• Gradual reduction in speed in advance of the road work zone is too abrupt
• Sudden change in road surface slope (edge) in the taper zone in the direction of Stockport
• Remains of the original road markings in the direction of Liverpool are confusing at night
• Speed limit of 40 miles per hour (64 kilometres per hour) slows down the flow of traffic
• Lanes too narrow in the direction of Liverpool
• Opposite-way traffic is separated only be plastic pillars
• No guiding humps on the traffic lanes at entry/exit points
• No lay-bys
• No safety zone in front of the work area

Note:

• The road work zones in Great Britain were changed considerably at night so that work could be carried out during times of low traffic. The test evaluated the clear layout of the road work zone at night and not the change.

To Top

Great Britain: M 5 near Weston-super-Mare

Rating: Good

Location:	Bristol - Exeter
	between Burnham-on-Sea (22) and Weston-super-Mare (21)
Work:	Road renewal
Length:	3.4 kilometres
Traffic routing:	4+0
Duration:	April to May 2005
Time of testing:	11 May 2005

Strengths and weaknesses:

• Signs provide information on the type and duration of the work, information about the remaining length provided within the road work zone
• Sufficient room for HGVs in the taper area
• Traffic signs and road markings are clear, intact and easy to spot
• All the required traffic signs are in place, signs showing the speed limit are provided at least every 1,000 metres
• Road work zone has a clear layout at night, taper zones are floodlit, traffic guiding and protection equipment as well as road markings fitted with reflectors
• Constant speed limit of 50 miles per hour (80 kilometres per hour) permits traffic to flow smoothly
• Traffic lanes are wide enough
• Lanes can be clearly recognised thanks to good road markings
• Road surface in a good and clean condition
• Adequate safety zone in front of the work area

• No signs providing information about the overall length of the road work zone
• Reduction in the number of lanes
• No flashing lights to warn motorists in advance
• Gradual reduction in speed in advance of the road work zone is too abrupt
• Sudden change in road surface slope (edge) in the taper zone
• Opposite-way traffic is separated only be plastic pillars
• No lay-bys
• Sign indicating the exit taper in the direction of Exeter is too late

Note:

• The road work zones in Great Britain were changed considerably at night so that work could be carried out during times of low traffic. The test evaluated the clear layout of the road work zone at night and not the change.

To Top

Great Britain: M 5 near Cheltenham

Rating: Good

Location:	Gloucester - Birmingham
	between Cheltenham (11) and Gloucester (11a)
Work:	Road renewal
Length:	4.5 kilometres
Traffic routing:	4+0
Duration:	April to June 2005
Time of testing:	10 May 2005

Strengths and weaknesses:

• Signs provide information on the type of work, information about the remaining length provided within the road work zone
• Sufficient room for HGVs in the taper area
• All the required traffic signs are in place, signs showing the speed limit are provided at least every 1,000 metres
• Road work zone has a clear layout at night, taper zones are floodlit, traffic guiding and protection equipment as well as road markings fitted with reflectors
• Constant speed limit of 50 miles per hour (80 kilometres per hour) permits traffic to flow smoothly
• Lanes can be clearly recognised thanks to good road markings
• Road surface in a good and clean condition
• Points of entry/exit can be recognised on time, acceleration/deceleration lanes provided
• Adequate safety zone in front of the work area

• No signs providing information on the overall length and duration of the roadworks
• Gradual reduction in speed in advance of the road work zone is too abrupt
• Reduction in the number of lanes
• No flashing lights to warn motorists in advance
• No guiding humps on the traffic lanes at entry/exit points
• Opposite-way traffic is separated only be plastic pillars
• No lay-bys

Note:

• The road work zones in Great Britain were changed considerably at night so that work could be carried out during times of low traffic. The test evaluated the clear layout of the road work zone at night and not the change.

To Top

Great Britain: M 5 near Bristol (West)

Rating: Good

Location:	Birmingham - Exeter
	between Avonmouth (18 a) and Easter Compton (17)
Work:	Construction of an additional slow lane
Length:	5 kilometres
Traffic routing:	3+3
Duration:	May to November 2005
Time of testing:	12 May 2005

Strengths and weaknesses:

• Signs provide information on the type and duration of the work
• No reduction in the number of lanes
• Sufficient room for HGVs in the taper area
• All the required traffic signs are in place, signs showing the speed limit are provided at least every 1,000 metres
• Road work zone has a clear layout at night and is floodlit, traffic guiding and protection equipment as well as road markings fitted with reflectors
• Lanes can be clearly recognised thanks to good road markings
• Road surface in a good and clean condition
• Points of entry/exit can be recognised on time, acceleration/deceleration lanes provided
• Adequate safety zone in front of the work area

• No signs with information on the total and remaining length of the road work zone
• No flashing lights to warn motorists in advance
• Gradual reduction in speed in advance of the road work zone is too abrupt
• No guiding humps on the traffic lanes at entry/exit points
• Speed limit of 40 miles per hour (64 kilometres per hour) slows down the flow of traffic
• No lay-bys
• Longitudinal separation of the work area using traffic cones only

Note:

• The road work zones in Great Britain were changed considerably at night so that work could be carried out during times of low traffic. The test evaluated the clear layout of the road work zone at night and not the change.

To Top

Great Britain: M 4 near Bristol (East)

Rating: Good

Location:	Bristol - London
	between Yate (18) and Bristol (19)
Work:	Widening of the traffic lane, construction of an emergency lane
Length:	5.1 kilometres
Traffic routing:	4+2
Duration:	April to November 2005
Time of testing:	13 May 2005

Strengths and weaknesses:

• Signs provide information on the type and duration of the work, information about the remaining length provided within the road work zone
• No reduction in the number of lanes
• Sufficient room for HGVs in the taper area
• All the required traffic signs are in place, signs showing the speed limit are provided at least every 1,000 metres
• Road work zone has a clear layout at night, traffic guiding and protection equipment as well as road markings fitted with reflectors
• Lanes can be clearly recognised thanks to good road markings
• Road surface is clean
• Points of entry/exit can be recognised on time, acceleration/deceleration lanes provided
• Adequate safety zone in front of the work area
• Free breakdown tow-away service

• No signs providing information about the overall length of the road work zone
• No flashing lights to warn motorists in advance
• Gradual reduction in speed in advance of the road work zone is too abrupt
• Sudden change in road surface slope (edge) in the taper zone in the direction of London
• Speed limit of 40 miles per hour (64 kilometres per hour) slows down the flow of traffic
• Lanes are too narrow in the direction of Bristol
• Opposite-way traffic is separated only be plastic pillars
• No guiding humps on the traffic lanes at entry/exit points

Note:

• The road work zones in Great Britain were changed considerably at night so that work could be carried out during times of low traffic. The test evaluated the clear layout of the road work zone at night and not the change.

To Top

Great Britain: M 25 near London

Rating: Acceptable

Location:	London orbital
	between London-Chertsey (12) and Beaconsfield (16)
Work:	Expansion
Length:	11.5 metres
Traffic routing:	Changing
Duration:	Until December 2005
Time of testing:	14 May 2005

Strengths and weaknesses:

• Signs provide information on the type and duration of the work, information about the remaining length provided within the road work zone
• No reduction in the number of lanes
• Speed is reduced gradually
• All the required traffic signs are in place, signs showing the speed limit are provided at least every 1,000 metres
• Road work zone (northbound) has a clear layout at night, taper zones are floodlit, traffic guiding and protection equipment as well as road markings fitted with reflectors
• Road surface is clean
• Points of entry/exit can be recognised on time, acceleration/deceleration lanes provided
• Adequate safety zone in front of the work area
• Free breakdown tow-away service on site

• No signs providing information about the overall length of the road work zone
• No flashing lights to warn motorists in advance
• Gradual reduction in speed in advance of the road work zone is too abrupt
• Not enough room for HGVs in the taper area
• The layout of the (southbound) road work zone is confusing at night, with lanes ending suddenly
• Speed limit of 40 miles per hour (64 kilometres per hour) slows down the flow of traffic
• Some of the lane markings have been torn off, original road markings are still visible
• No guiding humps on the traffic lanes at entry/exit points

Note:

• The road work zones in Great Britain were changed considerably at night so that work could be carried out during times of low traffic. The test evaluated the clear layout of the road work zone at night and not the change.

To Top

Great Britain: M 62 near Pontefract

Rating: Acceptable

Location:	Leeds - Hull
	between Pontefract (33) and Castleford (32)
Work:	Widening of the traffic lane, erection of a bridge
Length:	9.3 kilometres
Traffic routing:	Changing
Duration:	May 2003 to December 2005
Time of testing:	8 May 2005

Strengths and weaknesses:

• Signs provide information on the type, length and duration of the work
• No reduction in the number of lanes in the direction of Leeds
• All the required traffic signs are in place, signs showing the speed limit are provided at least every 1,000 metres
• Constant speed limit of 50 miles per hour (80 kilometres per hour) permits traffic to flow smoothly
• Traffic guiding and protection equipment as well as road markings fitted with reflectors
• Road surface is clean
• Points of entry/exit can be recognised on time, acceleration/deceleration lanes provided
• Adequate safety zone in front of the work area
• Free breakdown tow-away service

• No signs with information on the total and remaining length of the road work zone
• No flashing lights to warn motorists in advance
• Gradual reduction in speed in advance of the road work zone is too abrupt
• Lane routing in the direction of Hull is confusing because some of the lane markings cross over
• At night, the lane markings are in contradiction to the traffic cones in the direction of Hull
• No guiding humps on the traffic lanes at entry/exit points
• Distance to the next road work zone is less than five kilometres in the direction of Hull

Note:

• The road work zones in Great Britain were changed considerably at night so that work could be carried out during times of low traffic. The test evaluated the clear layout of the road work zone at night and not the change.

To Top