2.

4 ROAD TRAFFIC SIGNAGE AND EQUIPMENT

Regarding subjected issue, we would like to point on issues as following:

1. The Milentija Popovica approach (creating a Y junction) at km 58+650-is used as a BUS

stop without the details of how the approach will be closed, as at the moment it is a junc-
tion which is used for traffic, the design as it is puts the BUS stop directly in the path of
the oncoming traffic, and the only thing indicating that the approach is closed is the solid
line in the main road, while at the same time the BUS stop is marked on the main road;
2. Solid line at the centre of the road from km 58+380 to km 58+838 requires the residents
to merge onto the main road with only right turns, and the way the residents would be al-
lowed to make a left turn from their houses and driveways is not defined in the traffic
design, therefore this kind of design would actually create a situation where most of the
drivers will be non-compliant, whenever they make a left turn from their driveways,
3. Pedestrian footpath from km 58+414 is interrupted until km 58+481, and six parking
spaces are designed, this interruption in pedestrian footpath should be rectified as there
is a space to create a footpath next to the parking spaces,
4. STOP lines are not designed on any of the northbound approaches (side roads and
streets) from km 56+958 to 58+838
5. Pedestrian footpath from km 58+380 is interrupted until km 58+414, for the creation of
the BUS stop, this interruption in pedestrian footpath should be rectified as there is a
space to create a footpath next to the BUS stop,
6. Hazard warning sign on km 58+030 indicates only the approach road from the right,
while there is also an approach road on 57+897 to the left (prior to the approach road
from the right – at km 57+853
7. Traffic signs II-28 and II-30(50km/h) lose their validity 2 meters after they are placed (as
per the Article 32 of the Rulebook on Traffic Signalization (Official Gazette of RS, No
85/2017) as they should be repeated after every junction if they are valid after the junc-
tion, and the junction starts 2 meters after the traffic signs are placed,
8. Traffic sign II-30(50km/h) at km 57+800 should be repeated after the junctions on km
57+674 and km 57+625 if its validity extends after these junctions,
9. Solid line at the centre of the road from km 56+906 to km 57+688 requires the residents
to merge onto the main road with only right turns, and the way the residents would be al-
lowed to make a left turn from their houses and driveways is not defined in the traffic
design, therefore this kind of design would actually create a situation where most of the
drivers will be non-compliant, whenever they make a left turn from their driveways,
10. Village Manastiriste is merged with Vlasotince, and there is no traffic sign indicating the
name of Manastiriste, only traffic signs indicating Vlasotince,
11. There are no hazard warning signs indicating the approach to pedestrian crossing on km
57+417
12. Hazard warning sign I-28.1 at km 56+760 indicates only the hazard of merging road from
the right while there is also a merging road from the left,
13. The approach road on km 56+577 is not marked with a STOP sign although it is an as-
phalt road,
14. Solid line at the centre of the road from km 54+787 to km 55+367 requires the residents
to merge onto the main road with only right turns, and the way the residents would be al-
 lowed to make a left turn from their houses and driveways is not defined in the traffic
design, therefore this kind of design would actually create a situation where most of the
drivers will be non-compliant, whenever they make a left turn from their driveways,
15. Traffic signs II-30 (60km/h) at 54+850 and II-30 (40km/h) at km 54+675 are too close to
have any significant impact (especially as II-30 (60km/h) at 54+850 is placed after the
50km/h speed limit zone allowing the drivers to drive 60km/h for only 175 meters),
16. Traffic signs II-30 (60km/h) at 54+265, II-30 (50km/h) at 54+190 and II-30 (40km/h) at
km 54+525 are too close to have any significant impact (especially as II-30 (60km/h) at
54+265 is placed after the 50km/h speed limit zone, limiting the speed to 50km/h for only
75m),
17. BUS stops at km 54+151 and km 54+078 are too close to the junction and the danger-
ous bend, and they are marked on the road itself,
18. Bend on km 53+833 is not marked with informational signs III-63 and III-64, although the
radii is R=75m, while at other locations bends with R=80m and R=100m are marked with
these traffic signs,
19. Solid line at the centre of the road from km 52+123 to km 52+849 requires the residents
to merge onto the main road with only right turns, and the way the residents would be al-
lowed to make a left turn from their houses and driveways is not defined in the traffic
design, therefore this kind of design would actually create a situation where most of the
drivers will be non-compliant, whenever they make a left turn from their driveways,
20. Solid line at the centre of the road from km 49+579 to km 50+961 requires the residents
to merge onto the main road with only right turns, and the way the residents would be al-
lowed to make a left turn from their houses and driveways is not defined in the traffic
design, therefore this kind of design would actually create a situation where most of the
drivers will be non-compliant, whenever they make a left turn from their driveways,
21. Bend on km 49+691 is not marked with informational signs III-63 and III-64, although the
radii is R=80m, while at other locations bends with R=80m and R=100m are marked with
these traffic signs,
22. BUS stop at km 48+300 is not marked with markings, only with a traffic sign,
23. Parking space at km 48+308 is placed at the sharp bend, this area could have been
used to widen the road, as BUS stop and parking space are designed on a consecutive
bends,
24. BUS stop at km 47+625 is not marked with markings, only with a traffic sign,
25. Sight distance on junctions to the private lots is not satisfactory due to inadequate main-
tenance of the zone around them (it is necessary to regularly maintain and cut the veget-
ation). However, within BoQ there is no item referring to prescribed works.
26. Tourist signalisation is not the subject of technical documentation.
27. The design of transition curves:
a. The transition (curve-spiral-straight-spiral-curve) at km 46+588 has a short
straight of 0.18m, between two consecutive spiral transition curves,
b. The transition (curve-spiral-straight-spiral-curve) at km 46+682 has a short
straight of 4.40m, between two consecutive spiral transition curves,
c. 48+310-short straight of 2.74m
d. km 50+072-short straight of 4.19m
28. Pedestrian footpaths are not connected, and even, as mentioned before where the ped-
estrian footpath is created the design itself introduces a disruption (parking, BUS stop),
29. The speed limits are too restrictive on certain sections, the speed management should
be reviewed,
30. The focus on long solid lines creates a problem for driver compliance.