New "Safety Corridor" Zones coming to Phoenix area

[howlincoyote2k1]

http://www.bizjournals.com/phoenix/news/2016/12/13/why-going-10-over-the-speed-limit-is-now-going-to.html?ana=e_ae_set1&s=article_du&ed=2016-12-13&u=kHeEi%2FqzDYSLrNI6mpZ80CLP1BD&t=1481667586&j=76751471

Kind of silly if you ask me.

Honestly, if Salt Lake City can handle 70 on their urban freeways, Phoenix can--and should--too.

[jeffandnicole]

NJ has them on their roads also.  Honestly, after you've seen the sign a few times, you don't even think about it.  I would seriously doubt anyone's driving style was modified by the signage or designation.

[coatimundi]

Surrounding states have been doing safety corridors for a while now. New Mexico has a very similar set up. I'm not sure how effective it actually is though, because I've never seen a cop on the one on I-10.

These seem like logical places to put them. I-10 through GRIT is just a death trap, and it's mostly from lack of capacity and the dangerous driving that ends up causing.

Honestly, if Salt Lake City can handle 70 on their urban freeways, Phoenix can--and should--too.

California keeps a steady 65 in most urban areas too, with exceptions usually being due to a particularly dangerous (and old) stretch of road. But I don't know that lowering the limit on urban freeways helps anywhere. People are just going to go as fast as they want to go. In Houston, the speed limits were consistently 60 on the freeways, but traffic generally moved at 70. Putting a cop out just makes it worse because, when they pull someone over, that causes rubbernecking, even when they're on the shoulder.

[howlincoyote2k1]

The main difference is that Phoenix's freeways are top-notch quality; much better than freeways in Utah, in my opinion. Sure, some areas need to be resurfaced, but they are wide, lanes are very clearly marked with reflectors, excellent sightlines and well-lit, well-designed interchanges to minimize confusion, and not a lot of twists and curves compared to, say, California. But then again, few states rival California in that department...

[pumpkineater2]

I hope that the speed limits in these Safety Revenue Corridors will at least stay the same. I haven't seen anything in any articles that I've read that say otherwise, so that's good.

The main difference is that Phoenix's freeways are top-notch quality; much better than freeways in Utah, in my opinion. Sure, some areas need to be resurfaced, but they are wide, lanes are very clearly marked with reflectors, excellent sightlines and well-lit, well-designed interchanges to minimize confusion, and not a lot of twists and curves

  Which is why the limit of 65 on most of our freeways is a big fat joke. For example on I-17 going south into town in the Carefree hwy. area, the freeway is such high quality, about as good as freeways come, yet the limit drops to 65? When I pass through there, I laugh and continue to zoom by at 70+, along with literally every other driver. Paying 100% attention, of course.

[Max Rockatansky]

That section of I-40 between Kingman and the US 93 turn-off is relatively easy to pick off speeders in.  Good luck pulling anyone over in the Gila Res, downtown on I-10, or even US 60 during rush hour.  Really about the only corridor that is a "problem" is the Gila Reservation on I-10 and that is largely ADOT's own fault for not following through with an expansion.  New Mexico does this crap too, hopefully there isn't BS about "lights on for safety."

[Brandon]

http://www.bizjournals.com/phoenix/news/2016/12/13/why-going-10-over-the-speed-limit-is-now-going-to.html?ana=e_ae_set1&s=article_du&ed=2016-12-13&u=kHeEi%2FqzDYSLrNI6mpZ80CLP1BD&t=1481667586&j=76751471

Kind of silly if you ask me.

Honestly, if Salt Lake City can handle 70 on their urban freeways, Phoenix can--and should--too.

Hell, Detroit handles 70 mph on their urban freeways with a few exceptions.

[howlincoyote2k1]

If Detroit can handle 70, that should put us at 80 

What I find kind of weird is how long it took us to get up to 65 in the city. For a long while, it was stuck at 55, and I think we got the bump up around....2001 or so?

[Max Rockatansky]

If Detroit can handle 70, that should put us at 80 

What I find kind of weird is how long it took us to get up to 65 in the city. For a long while, it was stuck at 55, and I think we got the bump up around....2001 or so?

Detroit wasn't like that until recently.  The roads didn't improve the people just left and the jobs migrated to the suburbs.  Don't forget Detroit went from 1.8 million people in the 1950s to under 700,000 on the last census.  I've heard similar talk in other rust belt cities like Buffalo, I just remember first hand when it was different in Detroit. 

Really 65 MPH is probably pretty adequate for a suburban freeway.  The 51 and I-17 really need to get off the 55 MPH kick they are still on.  Even 143 probably could be 65 MPH with the exception of the last southbound mile. 

[AlexandriaVA]

Pretty surreal to hear some of the posted speeds you guys are throwing around...

[Max Rockatansky]

Pretty surreal to hear some of the posted speeds you guys are throwing around...

Different ball game out west.  Almost all those cities are spread out and were built with transportation in mind.  Phoenix is 518 square miles in area itself.

[Pink Jazz]

Really 65 MPH is probably pretty adequate for a suburban freeway.  The 51 and I-17 really need to get off the 55 MPH kick they are still on.  Even 143 probably could be 65 MPH with the exception of the last southbound mile.

I know the reason for the 55 mph speed limits on 51 and I-17 are due to substandard design of those portions, since they have 11 foot wide lanes instead of the current Interstate standard of 12 feet.  Maybe 60 mph would be better.  However, I agree that some freeways can handle 70 mph limits, such as the US 60 Superstition Freeway, all of Loop 202, most of Loop 101 except for the Price Freeway and a portion of the Pima Freeway in Scottsdale, I-10 west of 43rd Avenue and east of Baseline, and I-17 north of Loop 101.

[Max Rockatansky]

Really 65 MPH is probably pretty adequate for a suburban freeway.  The 51 and I-17 really need to get off the 55 MPH kick they are still on.  Even 143 probably could be 65 MPH with the exception of the last southbound mile.

I know the reason for the 55 mph speed limits on 51 and I-17 are due to substandard design of those portions, since they have 11 foot wide lanes instead of the current Interstate standard of 12 feet.  Maybe 60 mph would be better.  However, I agree that some freeways can handle 70 mph limits, such as the US 60 Superstition Freeway, all of Loop 202, most of Loop 101 except for the Price Freeway and a portion of the Pima Freeway in Scottsdale, I-10 west of 43rd Avenue and east of Baseline, and I-17 north of Loop 101.

I used to drive the 51 pretty much every day.  Design may be one thing but one thing for certain always rung true.  You needed to go 70 MPH or you were going to get run over by the surrounding traffic.  I-17 and 143 I can see the older design being an issue due to the sudden needs to stop, but the 51 was always designed far better IMO. 

I wonder though, isn't the "Safety Corridor" concept really just another go at something like the photo-radar devices that used to be on I-17 and the 101?  Those didn't work because everyone knew they had a 11 MPH tolerance, how is this Safety Corridor any different?  The chances of an officer picking you out of a crowd of people is still going to be pretty unlikely unless you are doing something really stupid that stands out. 

[US71]

I've seen "Safety Corridors" in Oklahoma

[coatimundi]

Really 65 MPH is probably pretty adequate for a suburban freeway.  The 51 and I-17 really need to get off the 55 MPH kick they are still on.  Even 143 probably could be 65 MPH with the exception of the last southbound mile.

I know the reason for the 55 mph speed limits on 51 and I-17 are due to substandard design of those portions, since they have 11 foot wide lanes instead of the current Interstate standard of 12 feet.  Maybe 60 mph would be better.  However, I agree that some freeways can handle 70 mph limits, such as the US 60 Superstition Freeway, all of Loop 202, most of Loop 101 except for the Price Freeway and a portion of the Pima Freeway in Scottsdale, I-10 west of 43rd Avenue and east of Baseline, and I-17 north of Loop 101.

I used to drive the 51 pretty much every day.  Design may be one thing but one thing for certain always rung true.  You needed to go 70 MPH or you were going to get run over by the surrounding traffic.  I-17 and 143 I can see the older design being an issue due to the sudden needs to stop, but the 51 was always designed far better IMO. 

I wonder though, isn't the "Safety Corridor" concept really just another go at something like the photo-radar devices that used to be on I-17 and the 101?  Those didn't work because everyone knew they had a 11 MPH tolerance, how is this Safety Corridor any different?  The chances of an officer picking you out of a crowd of people is still going to be pretty unlikely unless you are doing something really stupid that stands out.

The point is not necessarily increased enforcement but rather encouraging more careful driving with the threat of extra fines, just like with school and construction zones. So it's not the same as the speed cameras at all because you knew exactly where they were and the fines were the same as if you were given a real ticket by a cop. If you got one (and it seemed like mostly tourists who did), then you were just stupid because, like you said, there was a pretty significant range you could be in and still be safe.

New Mexico's safety zones require that you have your lights on, which gives a cop an easy reason to pull you over.

[Max Rockatansky]

Really 65 MPH is probably pretty adequate for a suburban freeway.  The 51 and I-17 really need to get off the 55 MPH kick they are still on.  Even 143 probably could be 65 MPH with the exception of the last southbound mile.

I know the reason for the 55 mph speed limits on 51 and I-17 are due to substandard design of those portions, since they have 11 foot wide lanes instead of the current Interstate standard of 12 feet.  Maybe 60 mph would be better.  However, I agree that some freeways can handle 70 mph limits, such as the US 60 Superstition Freeway, all of Loop 202, most of Loop 101 except for the Price Freeway and a portion of the Pima Freeway in Scottsdale, I-10 west of 43rd Avenue and east of Baseline, and I-17 north of Loop 101.

I used to drive the 51 pretty much every day.  Design may be one thing but one thing for certain always rung true.  You needed to go 70 MPH or you were going to get run over by the surrounding traffic.  I-17 and 143 I can see the older design being an issue due to the sudden needs to stop, but the 51 was always designed far better IMO. 

I wonder though, isn't the "Safety Corridor" concept really just another go at something like the photo-radar devices that used to be on I-17 and the 101?  Those didn't work because everyone knew they had a 11 MPH tolerance, how is this Safety Corridor any different?  The chances of an officer picking you out of a crowd of people is still going to be pretty unlikely unless you are doing something really stupid that stands out.

The point is not necessarily increased enforcement but rather encouraging more careful driving with the threat of extra fines, just like with school and construction zones. So it's not the same as the speed cameras at all because you knew exactly where they were and the fines were the same as if you were given a real ticket by a cop. If you got one (and it seemed like mostly tourists who did), then you were just stupid because, like you said, there was a pretty significant range you could be in and still be safe.

New Mexico's safety zones require that you have your lights on, which gives a cop an easy reason to pull you over.

I guess we'll see, it sure didn't work the Photo Radar cameras.  Basically the 10 MPH cushion is almost exactly the same as the previous 11 MPH from the photo radars.  At least with the photo radars people had to figure out they were set to 11 MPH over, here they are just making public knowledge from the get-go.  So basically you're going to have be speeding off hour or doing something really stupid on top of speeding to get pulled over for anything less than 10 over.  At minimum the language is vague that enforcement can include other violations than just speeding, that ought be an interesting read in ARS.  Either way this still has the tinges of "revenue generator" written all over it.  At least the prospect of dealing with an actual officer instead of RedFlex has a better taste in regards to feeling legitimate.

In regards to I-40 east of Kingman and I-10 in the Gila Lands the issue is more about freeway design needing an update.  The issues with I-10 in the Gila Reservation are well known and well discussed already on this board in other threads.  I-40 might not exactly be to the same level as inadequate east from Kingman to US 93 but it ought to get an update.  There is a ton of truck and commuter traffic weaving and trying to get in position on that stretch of I-40.  It probably wouldn't hurt to install a third lane, especially east bound for the climb to the US 93 turn off.  With all this talk about I-11 and everything regarding it would only be natural to expand the corridor.

Anyways, I guess time will tell if the measure is effective.  At least this is a full year trial this time, I seem to recall the first attempt by Scottsdale at photo radars on the 101 was 6 or 9 months?

In regards to New Mexico, some of those Safety Zones are really in questionable location.  The one on I-10 near the ghost town of Gage is on an extremely straight and isolated roadway.  It is way too easy to pick off people for whatever citation you wanted.   Speaking of I-10 in New Mexico, it was fascinating to see the new Border Patrol checkpoint finally finished earlier this year west of Las Cruces.  I wouldn't even want to guess how many Border Patrol trucks are floating around NM 9 these days.

[Otto Yamamoto]

Really 65 MPH is probably pretty adequate for a suburban freeway.  The 51 and I-17 really need to get off the 55 MPH kick they are still on.  Even 143 probably could be 65 MPH with the exception of the last southbound mile.

I know the reason for the 55 mph speed limits on 51 and I-17 are due to substandard design of those portions, since they have 11 foot wide lanes instead of the current Interstate standard of 12 feet.  Maybe 60 mph would be better.  However, I agree that some freeways can handle 70 mph limits, such as the US 60 Superstition Freeway, all of Loop 202, most of Loop 101 except for the Price Freeway and a portion of the Pima Freeway in Scottsdale, I-10 west of 43rd Avenue and east of Baseline, and I-17 north of Loop 101.

I used to drive the 51 pretty much every day.  Design may be one thing but one thing for certain always rung true.  You needed to go 70 MPH or you were going to get run over by the surrounding traffic.  I-17 and 143 I can see the older design being an issue due to the sudden needs to stop, but the 51 was always designed far better IMO. 

I wonder though, isn't the "Safety Corridor" concept really just another go at something like the photo-radar devices that used to be on I-17 and the 101?  Those didn't work because everyone knew they had a 11 MPH tolerance, how is this Safety Corridor any different?  The chances of an officer picking you out of a crowd of people is still going to be pretty unlikely unless you are doing something really stupid that stands out.

The point is not necessarily increased enforcement but rather encouraging more careful driving with the threat of extra fines, just like with school and construction zones. So it's not the same as the speed cameras at all because you knew exactly where they were and the fines were the same as if you were given a real ticket by a cop. If you got one (and it seemed like mostly tourists who did), then you were just stupid because, like you said, there was a pretty significant range you could be in and still be safe.

New Mexico's safety zones require that you have your lights on, which gives a cop an easy reason to pull you over.

I guess we'll see, it sure didn't work the Photo Radar cameras.  Basically the 10 MPH cushion is almost exactly the same as the previous 11 MPH from the photo radars.  At least with the photo radars people had to figure out they were set to 11 MPH over, here they are just making public knowledge from the get-go.  So basically you're going to have be speeding off hour or doing something really stupid on top of speeding to get pulled over for anything less than 10 over.  At minimum the language is vague that enforcement can include other violations than just speeding, that ought be an interesting read in ARS.  Either way this still has the tinges of "revenue generator" written all over it.  At least the prospect of dealing with an actual officer instead of RedFlex has a better taste in regards to feeling legitimate.

In regards to I-40 east of Kingman and I-10 in the Gila Lands the issue is more about freeway design needing an update.  The issues with I-10 in the Gila Reservation are well known and well discussed already on this board in other threads.  I-40 might not exactly be to the same level as inadequate east from Kingman to US 93 but it ought to get an update.  There is a ton of truck and commuter traffic weaving and trying to get in position on that stretch of I-40.  It probably wouldn't hurt to install a third lane, especially east bound for the climb to the US 93 turn off.  With all this talk about I-11 and everything regarding it would only be natural to expand the corridor.

Anyways, I guess time will tell if the measure is effective.  At least this is a full year trial this time, I seem to recall the first attempt by Scottsdale at photo radars on the 101 was 6 or 9 months?

In regards to New Mexico, some of those Safety Zones are really in questionable location.  The one on I-10 near the ghost town of Gage is on an extremely straight and isolated roadway.  It is way too easy to pick off people for whatever citation you wanted.   Speaking of I-10 in New Mexico, it was fascinating to see the new Border Patrol checkpoint finally finished earlier this year west of Las Cruces.  I wouldn't even want to guess how many Border Patrol trucks are floating around NM 9 these days.

Pre Nixon Memorial Speed Limit, Interstate 17 was posted for 60 through Phoenix.

XT1254

[J N Winkler]

In regards to New Mexico, some of those Safety Zones are really in questionable location.  The one on I-10 near the ghost town of Gage is on an extremely straight and isolated roadway.  It is way too easy to pick off people for whatever citation you wanted.   Speaking of I-10 in New Mexico, it was fascinating to see the new Border Patrol checkpoint finally finished earlier this year west of Las Cruces.  I wouldn't even want to guess how many Border Patrol trucks are floating around NM 9 these days.

The I-40 Gallup bypass has a safety corridor designation as well, although its geometric design is not spectacularly inferior to that of rural I-40, unlike the case with Santa Rosa, which has a sharp curve in the vicinity of Exit 275 but (as of the last time I passed through, in 2014) no safety corridor.

My big objections to NMDOT's safety corridors:  (1) regulatory sign colors are used inconsistently (e.g., "Use headlights" signs are occasionally white on green), (2) "Check headlights" signing is not provided on corridor exit, and (3) a few corridors peter out with no signed end.  The mandatory daytime headlamp use requirement is a pain just in general, and is arguably tantamount to criminalization of poverty since there are older vehicles still on the road that do not have DRL at all, as well as newer vehicles with turn-signal DRL only and no automatic headlamp shutoff.

I haven't been on NM 9 in over a decade, but the last time I travelled it from the bootheel to El Paso, it felt like half of the other traffic consisted of Border Patrol vehicles.

[Max Rockatansky]

In regards to New Mexico, some of those Safety Zones are really in questionable location.  The one on I-10 near the ghost town of Gage is on an extremely straight and isolated roadway.  It is way too easy to pick off people for whatever citation you wanted.   Speaking of I-10 in New Mexico, it was fascinating to see the new Border Patrol checkpoint finally finished earlier this year west of Las Cruces.  I wouldn't even want to guess how many Border Patrol trucks are floating around NM 9 these days.

The I-40 Gallup bypass has a safety corridor designation as well, although its geometric design is not spectacularly inferior to that of rural I-40, unlike the case with Santa Rosa, which has a sharp curve in the vicinity of Exit 275 but (as of the last time I passed through, in 2014) no safety corridor.

My big objections to NMDOT's safety corridors:  (1) regulatory sign colors are used inconsistently (e.g., "Use headlights" signs are occasionally white on green), (2) "Check headlights" signing is not provided on corridor exit, and (3) a few corridors peter out with no signed end.  The mandatory daytime headlamp use requirement is a pain just in general, and is arguably tantamount to criminalization of poverty since there are older vehicles still on the road that do not have DRL at all, as well as newer vehicles with turn-signal DRL only and no automatic headlamp shutoff.

I haven't been on NM 9 in over a decade, but the last time I travelled it from the bootheel to El Paso, it felt like half of the other traffic consisted of Border Patrol vehicles.

And I honestly don't recall anything on I-25 from Las Lunas to Las Cruces...seemed like that ought to be a thing with the wind and the terrain.  The only one I recall making sense was the Safety Corridor on I-10 and the Texas State Line since it got a ton of traffic heading between Las Cruces to El Paso.

The last time I was on NM 9 was back in 2011.  The BP traffic was huge by then but I guess it was a problem road given the proximity to the border and remoteness of the terrain.  AZ 86 west of Tucson had the same issue, especially after the new BP station got built in Why.

[Max Rockatansky]

Week old ADOT video on the Safety Corridors:

[hm insulators]

Pretty surreal to hear some of the posted speeds you guys are throwing around...

Different ball game out west.  Almost all those cities are spread out and were built with transportation in mind.  Phoenix is 518 square miles in area itself.

Which is almost as big as the Hawaiian island of Kauai.

[jeffandnicole]

Pretty surreal to hear some of the posted speeds you guys are throwing around...

Different ball game out west.  Almost all those cities are spread out and were built with transportation in mind.  Phoenix is 518 square miles in area itself.

Which is almost as big as the Hawaiian island of Kauai.

What's kinda funny is that actual travel speeds in the Phoenix area really aren't that much different than in the Northeast.  Anywhere traffic is moving freely between NYC and Richmond, 85th percentile speeds are generally in the 75-80 mph area.

[Max Rockatansky]

Pretty surreal to hear some of the posted speeds you guys are throwing around...

Different ball game out west.  Almost all those cities are spread out and were built with transportation in mind.  Phoenix is 518 square miles in area itself.

Which is almost as big as the Hawaiian island of Kauai.

What's kinda funny is that actual travel speeds in the Phoenix area really aren't that much different than in the Northeast.  Anywhere traffic is moving freely between NYC and Richmond, 85th percentile speeds are generally in the 75-80 mph area.

Kind of makes me surprised that variable speed limit signs weren't at least discussed over the Safety Corridor.  Its probably just easier to throw up some "Safety Zone" signs rather than a bunch of changeable signs just to make normal into more severe ones.

[dfwmapper]

Having driven the I-10 corridor through the GRIC several times over the last 10 days, all this bullshit has done is exacerbate the differences between the trucks governed at 70, the cars with cruise set at 75, and the drivers who don't care and are still driving at 80+. The speed differential is even more dangerous than what it was before. If Arizona truly wanted to improve safety they'd find the money to widen I-10 to 6 lanes at least as far as Casa Grande (perhaps with additional climbing lanes on the hill near the rest area) and write tickets to left lane hogs.

As for the one on I-10 between the stack and ministack, it'll push more people onto the substandard I-17 which has a 55mph speed limit but nowhere for cops to hide to enforce that limit.

[Max Rockatansky]

Having driven the I-10 corridor through the GRIC several times over the last 10 days, all this bullshit has done is exacerbate the differences between the trucks governed at 70, the cars with cruise set at 75, and the drivers who don't care and are still driving at 80+. The speed differential is even more dangerous than what it was before. If Arizona truly wanted to improve safety they'd find the money to widen I-10 to 6 lanes at least as far as Casa Grande (perhaps with additional climbing lanes on the hill near the rest area) and write tickets to left lane hogs.

As for the one on I-10 between the stack and ministack, it'll push more people onto the substandard I-17 which has a 55mph speed limit but nowhere for cops to hide to enforce that limit.

I think it is more about ADOT, the state, and the Gila Tribe not being able to agree on things that led to the debacle on the Gila Reservation with I-10 still only being four lanes.  I find it amusing that ADOT throws out so much talk about getting I-11 to Casa Grande through the Estrella Range, they would never say it but it so they can get a bypass of the Gila Reservation. 

But you hit on a good point, a lot of the original "Safety Corridors" don't even hit some of the truly dangerous parts of the highway system.  If they were so interested in safety where is something like the AZ 87 between Fountain Hills and Payson or US 60 between Globe and Superior?  I-10 on Texas Canyon is probably by function of design the most dangerous part of the Interstate in Arizona after the Gila Reservation. 

Funny you mention I-17, that actually is a great way to get around the convergence of I-10/AZ202/AZ51 in a pinch since it is mainly there for trucks.