Routing across NE and NE SR 70

[tmthyvs]

I'm looking to do a trip from Denver to the Sioux Falls area this summer and am curious about route options. Google maps routes me off I-80 at North Platte to US 83 to NE 92 to NE 70 and then NE 14 to US 20. What I'm curious about is whether these are good roads with decent speed limits. This routing is about 25 miles shorter than the routing through Grand Island and Columbus on US 281, US 30, and US 81, but I'm not sure whether it will actually be faster. Anyone familiar with that routing (and as far as time goes, I don't speed, so the posted speed limit is very relevant). Any other recommendations?

[corco]

This way likely will be faster. I haven't been on these specific roads but have been on roads in the area (and more than my fair share of random rural Nebraska highways) and the speed limit is generally a blanket 60 MPH on off-interstate roads in Nebraska, regardless of whether they are state or US. It will not be more, and given what you will be driving through I highly, highly doubt it will be less (these are good roads, I am positive of that). Added time bonus in that you're not passing through anything of significant size, so you won't have to slow way down for towns.

On 281-30-81 you're going to be slowing down through Grand Island, and it can take a quite a while to get from I-80 to out of Grand Island on 281/30 just due to the number of lights (what is that- 10 miles? I'd plan 20-25 minutes there alone). I'd definitely go the other way- the speed limit should be the same and you won't be slowing down nearly as often (or for as long) if you take the backroads. Even if for some reason the speed limit is 55 instead of 60 you'll still be saving time just by not having to tredge through Grand Island, Central City, Columbus, and Norfolk. Broken Bow, Ord, and Neligh are the only real towns you'll have to pass through on the other routing, and there might be a light in Broken Bow, but that's about it.

The other upshot by the google routing is that you're going through a decent chunk of the interesting part of Nebraska, so I'd enjoy that drive! 30 is kind of an annoying route to drive down too- it won't be rare that you have to slow down for trucks and/or pass, even if you're going exactly the speed limit. I haven't been on 81 from Columbus north, but I'd expect you'd be looking at a similar situation

Like I said- I haven't been on these specific roads but have been on a ton of random rural Nebraska highways, and have yet to bump into one that was paved and wasn't well constructed (I checked a Nebraska map for you, all those roads are paved)-absolute worst case scenario is a 55 MPH speed limit, but I'd bet large amounts it'll be 60 for most of the trek.

[huskeroadgeek]

That's an interesting routing-I'm not sure I would have picked that one out if I was just looking at the map. The only problem I find with that routing along NE 70 is that it requires quite a few turns on to different highways and the road isn't very straight in many parts. But traffic would be light and I doubt there would be much truck traffic to slow things down. You would find more traffic on US 20 though, but there are few towns to slow you down. Another option I would see would be to stay on I-80 all the way to US 77 and then take that up to I-29. It is about 40 miles longer than your proposed route, but has more interstate and US 77 moves pretty well-it is 4 lane from I-80 to Wahoo and along the multiplex with US 275 N. of Fremont. The only real slowdowns would be in Wahoo & Fremont. I would choose that over US 281-30-81. But if you want a more interesting drive in an area that's a little off the beaten path, I would choose your proposed route.

[J N Winkler]

I have driven parts of SR 70 and it does have multiple TOTSOs.  I don't think that is necessarily a disadvantage.  I would expect most of it to have a speed limit of 60 MPH (I haven't really seen 65 MPH on east-west conventional-road Nebraska state highways apart from US 20 west of Bassett and SR 2 west of a point about halfway through the Sand Hills).

[usends]

Curious: what are the exact parameters you entered in Google?  I entered Denver to Sioux Falls, and it has me getting off I-80 at North Platte, but staying on US 83 up to Mission SD, and then due east all the way across to I-29.  When I use Mapquest, I get essentially the same answer, except it has me staying on US 83 all the way up to I-90 (...which in turn causes me to recall that there are signs around North Platte promoting US 83 as the shortest connecting route between I-80 and I-90 in this part of the country).

I agree that the route you described would be scenic, and perhaps more enjoyable than interstates, depending how you like to travel.  But if getting there fast is your primary goal, I'm a little skeptical that Google result you got is the way to go.  I certainly don't mean to discourage travel along scenic routes - just passing along what I've heard: I live in Denver, and I know several families who make the drive to the Sioux Falls/NW Iowa region.  Knowing that staying on the interstates would add mileage to their drive, I'm always curious how they go, so I've spent some time talking to them about this.  Everyone tells me I-80 / I-680 / I-29 is the fastest route.  Despite the added mileage, and the fact that traffic can get congested in Lincoln and Omaha, apparently it's still faster.  These people are not roadgeeks, but they have tried other options (such as US 83), and they've all come to the same conclusion: staying on the interstates is the quickest way.

[agentsteel53]

interstates in general are faster - not just the higher speed limit (75 vs 60, implying a tolerance of 82 vs 66 or so), but also because you don't have to slow down every 10 miles for a town.  You'd be surprised how much time you lose on that - even more if the small town has a traffic light.

I can average 76mph on the interstate, even with having to stop for gas once every 4 hours, while on the two-lanes I am lucky to hit 58mph - and that's without stopping by the side of the road to take photos, checking out the old alignment, and doing other fun things.

and that's just for rural two-lanes.  Through suburban areas, freeways are the only plausible through route.  Shopping mall arterials with a speed limit of 50 give you an average speed of maybe 20.  It's hideous and depraved (and largely devoid of roadgeek fun, especially since that old US-275/NE-92 shield pair is gone in suburban Omaha).

[Mapmikey]

No need to guess about Nebraska speed limits:

http://www.nebraskatransportation.org/docs/speed-limit.pdf

Mapmikey

[J N Winkler]

Hmm.  Looks like the speed limit on SR 2 has been revised upward since I last drove it (summer 2001).  65 MPH starts at Grand Island, rather than well west of Broken Bow as I remember.  But US 183 between Taylor and Bassett is still 60 MPH, hmmm.  (Rose, which is the only wide spot in the road between Taylor and Bassett, is unincorporated.)

On the general issue of "making progress," my personal philosophy is that stoplights are evil.  This is why I asked (in a parallel thread) how many stoplights there are between Key West and the Miami-area freeway that is closest to Key West.  I don't go on trips with an eye toward making a set average speed, and will accept large drops in average speed if I think the scenery justifies it, but in areas with little urban development I want to be able to keep moving forward at a steady speed, whether that is 60 or 65 MPH on the open road or 30 MPH for a short distance through a small town.  I don't mind a fairly large number of stoplights within a relatively short distance when passing through a town, but stoplights every five miles or so on a rural arterial (quite common in the South--coastal Virginia is actually quite bad for this, as are the parts of US 70 in North Carolina which haven't been upgraded to freeway yet) are anathema.

[huskeroadgeek]

Curious: what are the exact parameters you entered in Google?  I entered Denver to Sioux Falls, and it has me getting off I-80 at North Platte, but staying on US 83 up to Mission SD, and then due east all the way across to I-29.  When I use Mapquest, I get essentially the same answer, except it has me staying on US 83 all the way up to I-90 (...which in turn causes me to recall that there are signs around North Platte promoting US 83 as the shortest connecting route between I-80 and I-90 in this part of the country).

I agree that the route you described would be scenic, and perhaps more enjoyable than interstates, depending how you like to travel.  But if getting there fast is your primary goal, I'm a little skeptical that Google result you got is the way to go.  I certainly don't mean to discourage travel along scenic routes - just passing along what I've heard: I live in Denver, and I know several families who make the drive to the Sioux Falls/NW Iowa region.  Knowing that staying on the interstates would add mileage to their drive, I'm always curious how they go, so I've spent some time talking to them about this.  Everyone tells me I-80 / I-680 / I-29 is the fastest route.  Despite the added mileage, and the fact that traffic can get congested in Lincoln and Omaha, apparently it's still faster.  These people are not roadgeeks, but they have tried other options (such as US 83), and they've all come to the same conclusion: staying on the interstates is the quickest way.

It does all depend on whether you are looking for a quick route from point A to point B or looking for a more leisurely scenic route. When I was looking at this and other possible routes, I thought that I-80-I-680-I-29 seemed like the best possible route overall, but I assumed that seemed pretty obvious just by looking at a map and the idea was probably to do something a little different by taking 2-lane roads. I offered US 77 from I-80 to I-29 as an alternative-it's 30 miles shorter than continuing on I-80 and I-680 to I-29. I don't make many trips up to Sioux City/Sioux Falls, but I've done both US 77 and I-80-I-680 to I-29, and the time is about the same.
Then again, if you are looking for a more leisurely scenic drive going I-80-US 77-I-29 doesn't offer much more than I-80-I-680-I-29 does.

[tmthyvs]

Curious: what are the exact parameters you entered in Google? 

Denver to Canton, SD (a little SE of Sioux Falls).

[Revive 755]

No need to guess about Nebraska speed limits:

http://www.nebraskatransportation.org/docs/speed-limit.pdf

I see NDOR hasn't bothered to fix any of the underposted routes in the eastern half of the state.  No reason lots of US 34 between Grand Island and Lincoln couldn't be 65.  Parts of US 75 and US 73 are even more in need of an increase to 65.

[agentsteel53]

I don't mind a fairly large number of stoplights within a relatively short distance when passing through a town

I mind those just as much as the spread-out kind.  Going 0-for-13 on US-66 in Flagstaff really gets on one's nerves.

[J N Winkler]

I think 13 stoplights over 65 miles are worse than 13 stoplights in a single town within 65 miles, even if the net loss in time at signals is identical.  The effect is largely psychological.  With signals in towns, there is some expectation that a freeway bypass will be available which will allow through traffic to avoid most if not all of them.  Once you pass a few widely spaced signals on an essentially rural arterial, you are forced to accept that planning failure has occurred and the level of specialization for through traffic implied by, say, a single-sheet state highway map is not borne out in reality.  The resulting feeling of cognitive dissonance rapidly changes into a sense of claustrophobia.  It's a bit like having your leg stuck in a steel trap, except that instead of sawing your leg off to escape, you need to sit through multiple additional signals to escape--either by retracing your steps through the signals you passed previously, or by sitting through an unknown but large number of other signals before you can reconnect with a network whose arterial function is guaranteed (which is, in practice, the freeway network).

There are also considerations of consistency and safety.  Drivers routinely expect to encounter stoplights in areas where the access function is important, along with relatively low speed limits (generally between 25 and 40 MPH) which translate into safe approach speeds for signals.  Drivers, on the other hand, don't expect to see a signal after a long uninterrupted run in a rural area--this is part of the reason flashing lights and "SIGNAL AHEAD" warning signs have to be provided for isolated rural signals.  Moreover, coming to a dead stop from 55 MPH (the usual approach speed for these rural signals in Virginia and North Carolina) means losing almost four times as much kinetic energy as at 30 MPH, with correspondingly higher wear and tear on brakes and powertrain, more effort on the driver's part, larger deviation from smooth operation/"vehicle sympathy," etc.  Signals with approach speeds well above 55 MPH are actively unsafe--Kansas DOT, for example, won't even consider a signal for an intersection where the through road has a speed limit of 70 MPH but the cross traffic is too great for effective control using stop signs.

The general rule of thumb is that a high proportion of the trips made in a town will be relatively short and will be dominated by the function of access to properties, so it is generally neither necessary nor practical to supply a high degree of specialization for through-traffic function to serve these movements.  Commuter freeways are an exception that proves the rule:  they are generally provided both to accommodate "just passing through town" movements (which generally cannot be excluded from commuter freeways unless some sort of closed corridor is created, e.g. by routing them along a turnpike which has very wide interchange spacing) and "going from one part of town to another" movements.  Unlike rural freeways, which are generally designed to accommodate the design hour volume at LOS B or better, they tend to be designed to handle the DHV at LOS D or E.

In rural areas, journeys tend to be longer, and specialization for through-traffic function is much cheaper.  It should be easier for a whorehouse madam to be elected Pope than it is for a commercial business to get a driveway permit on a through rural highway, and in well-run states where the DOT and localities are able to institute effective planning control, this is indeed the case.  It is not uncommon for freeways to be built for sub-10,000 design year AADT just to avoid having flat intersections, let alone signals.

[agentsteel53]

Signals with approach speeds well above 55 MPH are actively unsafe

Indeed.  State highway 71 in Austin, TX, heading west from the airport into town, is nearly a full freeway - grade-separated interchange after grade-separated interchange, speed limit of 70, everyone doing 75-80 ... then, at one junction for no discernible reason, with no warning, there is ... a traffic light??!  With a 3-second yellow, no less.  I've come to a screeching halt about two car lengths into the intersection before.