News:

Thanks to everyone for the feedback on what errors you encountered at https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=33904.0
Corrected several already and appreciate your patience as we work through the rest.

Main Menu

Increased speed limits on Oklahoma interstates

Started by dchristy, April 20, 2019, 10:30:35 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

dchristy

Governor Stitt signed into law on the 16th the legislation that would increase the speed limit on rural interstates from 70 to 75 and on most of the turnpike system from 75 to 80.  The understanding is that this increase would be a gradual process, but in my opinion some of the worst four lane roads in the state are sections of the Cimarron, Indian Nation, and H. E. Bailey Turnpikes.  Any thoughts?


Ned Weasel

Quote from: dchristy on April 20, 2019, 10:30:35 PM
Governor Stitt signed into law on the 16th the legislation that would increase the speed limit on rural interstates from 70 to 75 and on most of the turnpike system from 75 to 80.  The understanding is that this increase would be a gradual process, but in my opinion some of the worst four lane roads in the state are sections of the Cimarron, Indian Nation, and H. E. Bailey Turnpikes.  Any thoughts?

I have only driven the section of the Indian Nation Turnpike north of US 69, but I have driven it several times, and I never found it to be unsafe.  One caveat, however, is that I only drove it in a company vehicle from my former job, which had a speed governor set to 65 MPH, so I did not get to experience the road at its speed limit.  Is the southern section less safe?  I would imagine it would be technically simple to replace the shoulderless median with a Jersey barrier plus shoulders.  My experience with the other Oklahoma Turnpikes that I have driven is that I have found them to be of generally higher quality than the non-toll freeways in the state (except for the horrendous construction zone on the Turner Turnpike).
"I was raised by a cup of coffee." - Strong Bad imitating Homsar

Disclaimer: Views I express are my own and don't reflect any employer or associated entity.

rte66man

This article gives more details:

https://kfor.com/2019/04/12/measure-to-increase-speed-limits-on-oklahoma-turnpikes-approved-by-senate/

Quote

OKLAHOMA CITY - A push to raise speed limits on Oklahoma turnpikes is headed to the governor's desk.

House Bill 1071 passed the Senate this week after the House of Representatives already approved the measure.

The bill would allow the Oklahoma Turnpike Authority to raise speed limits on certain turnpikes from 75 miles per hour to 80 miles per hour.

If it becomes law, the bill's authors say speed limits wouldn't go up right away.

Instead, they say more studies would have to be done to determine if a speed increase is safe.

If higher speeds are approved, lawmakers say they would be limited to the H.E. Bailey, Cimarron, Indian Nation or Muskogee turnpikes.
When you come to a fork in the road... TAKE IT.

                                                               -Yogi Berra

SoonerCowboy

Governor Stitt signed into law on the 16th the legislation that would increase the speed limit on rural interstates from 70 to 75 and on most of the turnpike system from 75 to 80.  The understanding is that this increase would be a gradual process, but in my opinion some of the worst four lane roads in the state are sections of the Cimarron, Indian Nation, and H. E. Bailey Turnpikes.  Any thoughts?





I do not have very much experience with the Cimarron, or the H.E. Bailey beyond Chickasha. I think the Indian Nation, is a very nice highway, for the most part. I would agree that the part north of US 69 is the best part. I will be traveling it this Friday, from Henryetta to Hugo, and then again on Sunday from Hugo to Henryetta, so I can give a full report.   :bigass:

In_Correct

If it is safe, they would not need to govern commercial vehicles. :crazy:
Drive Safely. :sombrero: Ride Safely. And Build More Roads, Rails, And Bridges. :coffee: ... Boulevards Wear Faster Than Interstates.

Ned Weasel

Quote from: In_Correct on April 21, 2019, 02:44:11 PM
If it is safe, they would not need to govern commercial vehicles. :crazy:

Speed governors in commercial vehicles are not mandated by law.  Rather, they are an industry standard for company drivers, and we can easily speculate as to the reasons for this practice (better insurance rates and better control over the company's own CSA score are two probable reasons).  Independent drivers typically do not have speed governors in their vehicles.
"I was raised by a cup of coffee." - Strong Bad imitating Homsar

Disclaimer: Views I express are my own and don't reflect any employer or associated entity.

Bobby5280

The H.E. Bailey Turnpike isn't all bad. Some portions of it have been improved between Chickasha and Newcastle. The last few miles leading up to Newcastle have an entirely new road deck.

I think the worst part of the H.E. Bailey Turnpike is South of Lawton to Randlett/US-70. The difference is pretty obvious when the first few "free" miles of I-44 from the Red River going North reach the US-70 exit. Those first few miles were completely re-built a few years ago and have all new concrete slab and shoulders. North of US-70 the quality goes down quite a bit. The road basically needs be re-decked. But ODOT and OTA treat that section of the turnpike system as a very last priority. It wasn't until just a few years ago that OTA finally installed cable barriers and removed the dangerous, narrow grassy median strip on that part of I-44. Roughly 20 years prior to that the OTA installed concrete Jersey barriers on I-44 from just North of Lawton all the way to the Missouri border. They didn't bother with the stretch South of Lawton until new Interstate highway regulations forced to the OTA to do so.

The Walters Toll Plaza is pretty bad. It's a very outdated, inefficient design. The road bridge over the top of the toll booths is in pretty dilapidated shape. The whole interchange needs to be re-built just like the toll plaza renovation on the Muskogee Turnpike at the interchange with OK-51 (just SE of Tulsa and East of Coweta).

J N Winkler

I'm not really in favor of this speed limit increase.  I certainly won't be setting my cruise at 80 on the turnpikes--as it is, for fuel efficiency I set it at around 72 unless I have a tailwind.  The bulk of my travel in Oklahoma is on I-35 between the Kansas state line and Oklahoma City (quite good with full paved shoulders and, except for the very congested first 30 miles north of OKC, can easily handle 75) and the Cimarron Turnpike (has long lengths upgraded to a paved median with cable barrier, but IIRC still has a few sections with the raised grass median).

Is there to be any change of speed limit on non-Interstate freeways like the US 64 Sand Springs Expressway?  I worry more about higher speed limits there because speed change facilities are ungenerous (e.g., at Westport Road).
"It is necessary to spend a hundred lire now to save a thousand lire later."--Piero Puricelli, explaining the need for a first-class road system to Benito Mussolini

In_Correct

Quote from: J N Winkler on April 21, 2019, 07:21:02 PM
I'm not really in favor of this speed limit increase.  I certainly won't be setting my cruise at 80 on the turnpikes--as it is, for fuel efficiency I set it at around 72 unless I have a tailwind.  The bulk of my travel in Oklahoma is on I-35 between the Kansas state line and Oklahoma City (quite good with full paved shoulders and, except for the very congested first 30 miles north of OKC, can easily handle 75) and the Cimarron Turnpike (has long lengths upgraded to a paved median with cable barrier, but IIRC still has a few sections with the raised grass median).

Is there to be any change of speed limit on non-Interstate freeways like the US 64 Sand Springs Expressway?  I worry more about higher speed limits there because speed change facilities are ungenerous (e.g., at Westport Road).

Exactly.

Quote from: stridentweasel on April 21, 2019, 03:19:22 PM
Quote from: In_Correct on April 21, 2019, 02:44:11 PM
If it is safe, they would not need to govern commercial vehicles. :crazy:

Speed governors in commercial vehicles are not mandated by law.  Rather, they are an industry standard for company drivers, and we can easily speculate as to the reasons for this practice (better insurance rates and better control over the company's own CSA score are two probable reasons).  Independent drivers typically do not have speed governors in their vehicles.

That is true, but why do Insurance base their rates on speed?
Drive Safely. :sombrero: Ride Safely. And Build More Roads, Rails, And Bridges. :coffee: ... Boulevards Wear Faster Than Interstates.

Plutonic Panda

Hopefully this is a just a start. It would be nice to ultimately see speed limits go to 85 or even 90. Best just to do away with them all together but no way that happens in the foreseeable future.

kphoger

I-35 having a lower speed limit than The Cimarron to Tulsa is ludicrous, given the difference in medians.  I'm in favor of raising the non-turnpike speed limit to 75, but there's no way the Cimarron should bounce up to 80.

(says the guy who once got a warning on the Cimarron for driving 81...)
Keep right except to pass.  Yes.  You.
Visit scenic Orleans County, NY!
Male pronouns, please.

Quote from: Philip K. DickIf you can control the meaning of words, you can control the people who must use them.

US 89

Quote from: kphoger on April 22, 2019, 02:40:37 PM
I-35 having a lower speed limit than The Cimarron to Tulsa is ludicrous, given the difference in medians.  I'm in favor of raising the non-turnpike speed limit to 75, but there's no way the Cimarron should bounce up to 80.

Yeah, I don't like the idea of 80 mph limits on the turnpikes that still have the raised grass median with no inside shoulder, like the Cimarron and Indian Nation. Never driven the HE Bailey myself, but it looks no different from the Turner or Will Rogers from a quick GSV.

But I agree that there's absolutely no reason the rural free interstates shouldn't be 75.

kphoger

Quote from: US 89 on April 22, 2019, 02:44:19 PM
Quote from: kphoger on April 22, 2019, 02:40:37 PM
I-35 having a lower speed limit than The Cimarron to Tulsa is ludicrous, given the difference in medians.  I'm in favor of raising the non-turnpike speed limit to 75, but there's no way the Cimarron should bounce up to 80.

Yeah, I don't like the idea of 80 mph limits on the turnpikes that still have the raised grass median with no inside shoulder, like the Cimarron and Indian Nation. Never driven the HE Bailey myself, but it looks no different from the Turner or Will Rogers from a quick GSV.

But I agree that there's absolutely no reason the rural free interstates shouldn't be 75.

HE Bailey is fine except for the cable barrier in lieu of actual median on part of it.  Well, that and the undulating roadbed, but that's another story.
Keep right except to pass.  Yes.  You.
Visit scenic Orleans County, NY!
Male pronouns, please.

Quote from: Philip K. DickIf you can control the meaning of words, you can control the people who must use them.

In_Correct

Quote from: dchristy on April 20, 2019, 10:30:35 PM
Governor Stitt signed into law on the 16th the legislation that would increase the speed limit on rural interstates from 70 to 75 and on most of the turnpike system from 75 to 80.  The understanding is that this increase would be a gradual process, but in my opinion some of the worst four lane roads in the state are sections of the Cimarron, Indian Nation, and H. E. Bailey Turnpikes.  Any thoughts?

:wave:  Welcome!  :wave:
Drive Safely. :sombrero: Ride Safely. And Build More Roads, Rails, And Bridges. :coffee: ... Boulevards Wear Faster Than Interstates.

Ned Weasel

Quote from: In_Correct on April 22, 2019, 12:28:05 PM
That is true, but why do Insurance base their rates on speed?

I'll assume that's a rhetorical question.  And if it isn't, ask an insurance expert.
"I was raised by a cup of coffee." - Strong Bad imitating Homsar

Disclaimer: Views I express are my own and don't reflect any employer or associated entity.

bugo

Quote from: SoonerCowboy on April 21, 2019, 02:05:40 PM
I do not have very much experience with the Cimarron, or the H.E. Bailey beyond Chickasha. I think the Indian Nation, is a very nice highway, for the most part. I would agree that the part north of US 69 is the best part. I will be traveling it this Friday, from Henryetta to Hugo, and then again on Sunday from Hugo to Henryetta, so I can give a full report.   :bigass:

The Indian Nation Turnpike south of US 270 is in bad shape, or at least it was the last time I drove it. It was rough and you could hear and feel the tires hitting the expansion joints on the highway. The stretch of the turnpike from US 69 south to US 70 has daily traffic counts of less than 2000 cars a day so it is not a priority of the OTA.

In_Correct

Quote from: Plutonic Panda on April 22, 2019, 01:29:21 PM
Hopefully this is a just a start. It would be nice to ultimately see speed limits go to 85 or even 90. Best just to do away with them all together but no way that happens in the foreseeable future.

No.  :-o Not until every rail is double tracked and grade separated and every road has passing lanes. With the Speed Unlimited Interstates there needs to be continuous frontage roads with passing lanes (in this case with speed limits) and the main lanes have three in each direction. The main travel lane is in the middle, with the slower traffic (entering and exiting) is on the far right lanes. (and no entrances nor exits in the far left lanes) As for Interchanges, the ramps between the frontage roads and the main lanes headed toward a Stack Interchange. The Frontage Roads can have the Clover & Diamond lanes.

Speed Limits On And Near Interchanges, Speed Limits for long bridges, also Speed Limits near Cities. No speed limits on Rural Interstates.

"SPEED
LIMIT
ACTIVE"

signs would be needed for bad weather (ice on bridges, bad visibility), and also if there are wrecks or road construction.
Drive Safely. :sombrero: Ride Safely. And Build More Roads, Rails, And Bridges. :coffee: ... Boulevards Wear Faster Than Interstates.

vdeane

Isn't it the driver's responsibility to slow down when conditions require regardless of whether the government tells them to or not?
Please note: All comments here represent my own personal opinion and do not reflect the official position of NYSDOT or its affiliates.

kphoger

Quote from: vdeane on April 23, 2019, 12:56:09 PM
Isn't it the driver's responsibility to slow down when conditions require regardless of whether the government tells them to or not?

Only if you don't live in a nanny state.
Keep right except to pass.  Yes.  You.
Visit scenic Orleans County, NY!
Male pronouns, please.

Quote from: Philip K. DickIf you can control the meaning of words, you can control the people who must use them.

Bobby5280

I don't mind speed limits on some of the turnpikes and "free" Interstates in Oklahoma being raised to 80mph. Lots of people already go 80mph anyway. I don't drive quite that fast since the gas mileage in my truck goes to hell at that point; a little above 70mph is usually good enough.

I do not agree with eliminating speed limits. This notion that "people just need to be responsible" and keep the government out of regulating speed is a stance of denial over the realities of the roadways. It is something that would only work if everyone already drove courteously and responsibly. Sad truth: too many people are not responsible. They do blatantly stupid things behind wheel, like steering the car using one's kneecaps while thumbing text messages into a phone. They drive selfishly, as if there is no one else on the road but themselves. Or they drive aggressively, cutting off other motorists, blocking the flow of traffic or doing anything else to fuel road rage in other motorists. It would be one thing if a driver's own reckless habits cost him his own life in an accident. Far too often an idiot driver kills other motorists with his stupidity. I can just imagine some moron doing 130mph on I-44, losing control and then cartwheeling across the median into my lane.

vdeane

Quote from: Bobby5280 on April 23, 2019, 02:35:10 PM
Sad truth: too many people are not responsible.
These are the people who should have never been given a licence in the first place.  Solution: increase the standards so that they can't, then force everyone to meet the new standards the next time they renew.
Please note: All comments here represent my own personal opinion and do not reflect the official position of NYSDOT or its affiliates.

Ned Weasel

#21
Quote from: vdeane on April 23, 2019, 09:05:44 PM
Quote from: Bobby5280 on April 23, 2019, 02:35:10 PM
Sad truth: too many people are not responsible.
These are the people who should have never been given a licence in the first place.  Solution: increase the standards so that they can't, then force everyone to meet the new standards the next time they renew.

I can't entirely disagree here.  If we had stricter standards for driver's licensing, we would see even more demand for walkable, bikable, transit-friendly cities, because more people would be disqualified from driving, or some people just wouldn't want to put in the effort to meet the higher standards.
"I was raised by a cup of coffee." - Strong Bad imitating Homsar

Disclaimer: Views I express are my own and don't reflect any employer or associated entity.

oscar

Quote from: stridentweasel on April 23, 2019, 09:30:52 PM
Quote from: vdeane on April 23, 2019, 09:05:44 PM
Quote from: Bobby5280 on April 23, 2019, 02:35:10 PM
Sad truth: too many people are not responsible.
These are the people who should have never been given a licence in the first place.  Solution: increase the standards so that they can't, then force everyone to meet the new standards the next time they renew.

I can't entirely disagree here.  If we had stricter standards for driver's licensing, we would see even more demand for walkable, bikable, transit-friendly cities, because more people would be disqualified from driving.

Then you have people in rural (or even many suburban) areas who would be completely out-of-luck, because they wouldn't meet the new standards and there is no remotely practical alternative to driving where they live or work.

Not everybody lives in cities, nor should they. There's a lot of empty space in our country. Somebody has to live and/or work in those areas, such as to mine the gold, or tend the oil/gas wells or wind farms, or herd the cattle, or grow our food.
my Hot Springs and Highways pages, with links to my roads sites:
http://www.alaskaroads.com/home.html

Ned Weasel

Quote from: oscar on April 23, 2019, 09:46:00 PM
Then you have people in rural (or even many suburban) areas who would be completely out-of-luck, because they wouldn't meet the new standards and there is no remotely practical alternative to driving where they live or work.

For suburban areas, look up sprawl retrofit.  It's off-topic for the thread, so I won't elaborate here. 

Quote
Not everybody lives in cities, nor should they. There's a lot of empty space in our country. Somebody has to live and/or work in those areas, such as to mine the gold, or tend the oil/gas wells or wind farms, or herd the cattle, or grow our food.

Are these people capable of driving a motor vehicle competently or not?  If they are, then they should have no problem meeting the increased standards for obtaining a driver's license.  If they are not, do you really want them driving?  Driving has always been a privilege, not a right.
"I was raised by a cup of coffee." - Strong Bad imitating Homsar

Disclaimer: Views I express are my own and don't reflect any employer or associated entity.

oscar

Quote from: stridentweasel on April 23, 2019, 09:54:25 PM
Quote
Not everybody lives in cities, nor should they. There's a lot of empty space in our country. Somebody has to live and/or work in those areas, such as to mine the gold, or tend the oil/gas wells or wind farms, or herd the cattle, or grow our food.

Are these people capable of driving a motor vehicle competently or not?  If they are, then they should have no problem meeting the increased standards for obtaining a driver's license.  If they are not, do you really want them driving?  Driving has always been a privilege, not a right.

In some heavily rural states (the Dakotas, where much of my family comes from, come to mind), it's hard to be too fussy about the required level of "competence".

Even in the less rural states, older drivers raise holy hell when licensing agencies try to make sure they are still competent to drive, whatever their skills used to be. And that goes double when their children have to "take their keys away", as has happened in my extended family. As someone approaching that age range, I'm not real sympathetic to those gripes, but they are a problem. Better transit options would help, if you can get them to live where those options are possible (and avoid travel to places they aren't), and can get public officials to be less accommodating to those who balk. Good luck with that!
my Hot Springs and Highways pages, with links to my roads sites:
http://www.alaskaroads.com/home.html



Opinions expressed here on belong solely to the poster and do not represent or reflect the opinions or beliefs of AARoads, its creators and/or associates.