What's the deal here? With one exception that I know of (US 13/Salisbury Bypass), Maryland does not sign any non-Interstate routes above 55 MPH. Years ago, there was talk of a trial involving signing MD 32 in Howard County at 65 MPH, but I don't think anything ever came of that. The ICC at 55 is an even bigger joke.
The 55 MPH maximum on non-Interstates is completely arbitrary and can't be based on sound planning or engineering. What's at play here?
Some states never left NMSL. NY is much the same way, but at least we have some exceptions on rural freeways depending on region.
Quote from: mcmc on July 29, 2012, 04:09:29 AM
The 55 MPH maximum on non-Interstates is completely arbitrary and can't be based on sound planning or engineering. What's at play here?
Politics most likely. Sounds similar to Iowa where only freeways signed as interstates can be posted at 70, while a nearly identical US rout freeway has to remain 65.
§ 21-801.1 of the Transportation Article of Maryland reads (in part):
(e) Limits may not exceed 55 or 65 miles an hour. --
(1) Notwithstanding any other provision of this subtitle, a maximum speed limit of more than 55 miles an hour may not be established or continued on any highway in this State that:
(i) Is not an interstate highway or an expressway;
U.S. 50 in Prince George's and Anne Arundel Counties is 65 because it is "secret" I-595.
The "or an expressway" language seems to leave the door open to non-Interstates. US 13 Near Sailsbury is posted at 65, so what gives? Is anyone privy to the SHA's thinking?
Quote from: mcmc on July 29, 2012, 03:22:23 PM
The "or an expressway" language seems to leave the door open to non-Interstates. US 13 Near Sailsbury is posted at 65, so what gives? Is anyone privy to the SHA's thinking?
The US-340 freeway south of Frederick is 65 mph.
Quote from: cpzilliacus on July 29, 2012, 01:59:09 PM
§ 21-801.1 of the Transportation Article of Maryland reads (in part):
(e) Limits may not exceed 55 or 65 miles an hour. --
(1) Notwithstanding any other provision of this subtitle, a maximum speed limit of more than 55 miles an hour may not be established or continued on any highway in this State that:
(i) Is not an interstate highway or an expressway;
U.S. 50 in Prince George's and Anne Arundel Counties is 65 because it is "secret" I-595.
It was funded and designed as an Interstate highway, when that segment of the US-50 freeway was rebuilt. So it really is an Interstate highway, just not signed as such on the highway.
Quote from: mcmc on July 29, 2012, 03:22:23 PM
The "or an expressway" language seems to leave the door open to non-Interstates. US 13 Near Salisbury is posted at 65, so what gives? Is anyone privy to the SHA's thinking?
It might have something to do with the population of the area that a highway traverses? Both MD-100 & MD-32, for example, cut right thru the DC/Baltimore area, and each have quite a few exits with pretty great frequency, creating a lot of traffic doing various things.
Not saying that
is the reason... but it's the best guess I can come up with at the moment.
Maryland was one of the later states in allowing any 65-mph speed limits at all during the period after the NMSL was modified to allow 65 on rural Interstates. Former Governor William Donald Schaefer was absolutely dead-set against allowing 65 anywhere, and I recall quite clearly that during his administration Maryland signage evidenced almost a smugness about it–when you crossed into Maryland on I-495 from Virginia over the American Legion Bridge, for example, the "SPEED LIMIT 55" signs were topped with yellow banners that said "STILL!" Schaefer left office in 1995 due to being term-limited and his successor, Parris Glendening, was fairly quick to allow 65-mph limits where the NMSL permitted (as the repeal of that law was not effective until December 8, 1995).
I don't remember when Maryland started posting 65-mph limits on other segments like "I-95 Between the Beltways" or US-50/secret I-595, much less the US-340 segment mentioned above.
It does continue to amuse me that Maryland does the same thing as some other states in that they can be overly picky about "urban" versus "rural" considerations. I-270 has a 65-mph limit on the portion where it's two lanes per side (Clarksburg north to the Frederick area) but a 55-mph limit south of there where the road is wider and generally has better sight lines.
Arkansas' maximum speed on 2 lane highways is 55. This includes some perfectly straight and flat highways. There's no reason some of these roads shouldn't be signed at 65 MPH. Or they could take a cue from Texas and sign them at 70. Even if they did, some of the locals would still drive 55, as they do in Oklahoma where the speed limit on most 2 lane roads is 65.
Quote from: Mr_Northside on July 30, 2012, 03:04:53 PM
Quote from: mcmc on July 29, 2012, 03:22:23 PM
The "or an expressway" language seems to leave the door open to non-Interstates. US 13 Near Salisbury is posted at 65, so what gives? Is anyone privy to the SHA's thinking?
It might have something to do with the population of the area that a highway traverses? Both MD-100 & MD-32, for example, cut right thru the DC/Baltimore area, and each have quite a few exits with pretty great frequency, creating a lot of traffic doing various things.
Not saying that is the reason... but it's the best guess I can come up with at the moment.
I think you have some very good ideas here. MD 32 and 100 are commuter-oriented (or at least inter-suburban), while US 13 and 340 are well away from the I-95 corridor and with less frequent exits. I would imagine if US 15 were upgraded to full freeway, it could be signed at 65 as well.
Quote from: 1995hoo on July 30, 2012, 03:36:45 PM
It does continue to amuse me that Maryland does the same thing as some other states in that they can be overly picky about "urban" versus "rural" considerations. I-270 has a 65-mph limit on the portion where it's two lanes per side (Clarksburg north to the Frederick area) but a 55-mph limit south of there where the road is wider and generally has better sight lines.
When traffic conditions allow, that posted 55 MPH on I-270 south of Md. 121 is
universally ignored. I would estimate that the 85th percentile speed is above 70 MPH.
Reason it remains at 55 MPH? I think it remains because the "anti-auto vanguard" has a fair amount of influence over the Montgomery County Council (I know, I-270 is not a county road), and at least a few of its members would raise the air quality boogeyman if the state were to raise the posted limit to 65 MPH.
Quote from: Steve on July 30, 2012, 09:21:00 PMI think you have some very good ideas here. MD 32 and 100 are commuter-oriented (or at least inter-suburban), while US 13 and 340 are well away from the I-95 corridor and with less frequent exits. I would imagine if US 15 were upgraded to full freeway, it could be signed at 65 as well.
This is true and even logical, but with the exception of a few miles of US 13 and US 340 (am I missing any others?), why are there no non-Interstates posted above 55 in the entire state?
Quote from: mcmc on July 31, 2012, 07:14:41 PM
Quote from: Steve on July 30, 2012, 09:21:00 PMI think you have some very good ideas here. MD 32 and 100 are commuter-oriented (or at least inter-suburban), while US 13 and 340 are well away from the I-95 corridor and with less frequent exits. I would imagine if US 15 were upgraded to full freeway, it could be signed at 65 as well.
This is true and even logical, but with the exception of a few miles of US 13 and US 340 (am I missing any others?), why are there no non-Interstates posted above 55 in the entire state?
How many relatively rural non-Interstate freeways does Maryland have?
Quote from: Steve on July 31, 2012, 08:25:03 PM
How many relatively rural non-Interstate freeways does Maryland have?
Not necessarily 'rural', but at or very close to 70 mph Interstate standard design --
US-50/US-301 between MD-70 and Bay Bridge
US-50/US-301 between Bay Bridge and US-301 split
MD-32 Patuxent Freeway
MD-10
MD-100
Freeway segments of US-29 and MD-4
Maryland's 4-lane rural highways, non-limited access as well as limited access with at-grade intersections, generally should be candidates for 60 or 65 mph, yet all of them are capped at 55 mph as well.
Very few of their generally excellent rural 2-lane highways are even 55 mph like most eastern states, the vast majority are 50 mph.
Vermont, NH, and Maine do the same thing: 50 on most roads that would be at least 55 anywhere else.
Just my opinion.....
Quote from: Beltway on July 31, 2012, 09:41:20 PM
Not necessarily 'rural', but at or very close to 70 mph Interstate standard design --
US-50/US-301 between MD-70 and Bay Bridge
US-50/US-301 between Bay Bridge and US-301 split
I don't know... there are very frequent exits (many of which are glorified RIRO's), the Kent Narrows bridge has a pretty narrow median/left shoulders, and at times a LOT of traffic. Also, there is an at-grade intersection in the Westbound direction right before the exit for MD-2 North. (Not to say I'd personally gripe about an increase to 65-70mph for this....)
QuoteMD-32 Patuxent Freeway
MD-10
MD-100
Can't vouch for MD-10... MD-100 might be able to meet that criteria, with the exception of a lot of traffic. There are stretches of MD-32 that have some pretty big curves east of Ft. Meade, and some heavy exits (with some left exits & entrances) between (and including) Ft. Meade & I-95.
QuoteFreeway segments of US-29 and MD-4
Can't vouch for MD-4. Though even the freeway segments of US-29 have some at-grade access and left turns and such....
QuoteMaryland's 4-lane rural highways, non-limited access as well as limited access with at-grade intersections, generally should be candidates for 60 or 65 mph, yet all of them are capped at 55 mph as well.
PA is pretty much the same. Unless it's a freeway (that meets the right criteria) signed as 65, it's not gonna be higher than 55.
Baltimore Sun: Harbor Tunnel bridge project enters toughest phase for drivers (http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/breaking/bs-md-bridge-repairs-20120801,0,2867591.story)
Quote from: Mr_Northside on August 01, 2012, 01:10:15 PM
Just my opinion.....
Quote from: Beltway on July 31, 2012, 09:41:20 PM
Not necessarily 'rural', but at or very close to 70 mph Interstate standard design --
US-50/US-301 between MD-70 and Bay Bridge
US-50/US-301 between Bay Bridge and US-301 split
I don't know... there are very frequent exits (many of which are glorified RIRO's), the Kent Narrows bridge has a pretty narrow median/left shoulders, and at times a LOT of traffic. Also, there is an at-grade intersection in the Westbound direction right before the exit for MD-2 North. (Not to say I'd personally gripe about an increase to 65-70mph for this....)
There are no at-grade intersections on US-50 between D.C. and Queenstown.
Quote from: Beltway on August 01, 2012, 05:45:50 PM
Quote from: Mr_Northside on August 01, 2012, 01:10:15 PM
Just my opinion.....
Quote from: Beltway on July 31, 2012, 09:41:20 PM
Not necessarily 'rural', but at or very close to 70 mph Interstate standard design --
US-50/US-301 between MD-70 and Bay Bridge
US-50/US-301 between Bay Bridge and US-301 split
I don't know... there are very frequent exits (many of which are glorified RIRO's), the Kent Narrows bridge has a pretty narrow median/left shoulders, and at times a LOT of traffic. Also, there is an at-grade intersection in the Westbound direction right before the exit for MD-2 North. (Not to say I'd personally gripe about an increase to 65-70mph for this....)
There are no at-grade intersections on US-50 between D.C. and Queenstown.
He's correct about the exits on Kent Island, though. Some of those are not at all suitable for high-speed traffic. The Merritt Parkway interchanges with the stop signs are better than some of the Kent Island exits.
There's a very fine (non-existent?) line between a RIRO and an at-grade. Presumably he's talking about this one: http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&ll=39.016462,-76.485502&spn=0.003718,0.008256&gl=us&t=m&z=18&layer=c&cbll=39.016414,-76.486632&panoid=uER7aS3pCkUujfkAgHj3bg&cbp=12,43.23,,0,10.13
Quote from: 1995hoo on August 01, 2012, 05:55:28 PM
Quote from: Beltway on August 01, 2012, 05:45:50 PM
There are no at-grade intersections on US-50 between D.C. and Queenstown.
He's correct about the exits on Kent Island, though. Some of those are not at all suitable for high-speed traffic. The Merritt Parkway interchanges with the stop signs are better than some of the Kent Island exits.
Actually given the -extremely- long accell and decel lanes on US-50, there is no reason why it couldn't be 65 mph on the mainline.
Quote from: NE2 on August 01, 2012, 05:58:10 PM
There's a very fine (non-existent?) line between a RIRO and an at-grade.
indeed - to me, one of the definitions of "at-grade" is the ability to turn across traffic (left in the US), but this would make a lot of Jersey expressways full freeways...
Quote from: NE2 on August 01, 2012, 05:58:10 PM
There's a very fine (non-existent?) line between a RIRO and an at-grade. Presumably he's talking about this one: http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&ll=39.016462,-76.485502&spn=0.003718,0.008256&gl=us&t=m&z=18&layer=c&cbll=39.016414,-76.486632&panoid=uER7aS3pCkUujfkAgHj3bg&cbp=12,43.23,,0,10.13
I would never consider that to be an at-grade intersection.
Quote from: Beltway on August 01, 2012, 05:59:48 PM
Quote from: 1995hoo on August 01, 2012, 05:55:28 PM
Quote from: Beltway on August 01, 2012, 05:45:50 PM
There are no at-grade intersections on US-50 between D.C. and Queenstown.
He's correct about the exits on Kent Island, though. Some of those are not at all suitable for high-speed traffic. The Merritt Parkway interchanges with the stop signs are better than some of the Kent Island exits.
Actually given the -extremely- long accell and decel lanes on US-50, there is no reason why it couldn't be 65 mph on the mainline.
I didn't say it couldn't be. I said they're unsuitable for high-speed traffic.
But knowing the Maryland government and having seen its nanny-state tendencies for many years, it doesn't surprise me at all that they refuse to post it there.
Quote from: Beltway on August 01, 2012, 06:01:11 PM
Quote from: NE2 on August 01, 2012, 05:58:10 PM
There's a very fine (non-existent?) line between a RIRO and an at-grade. Presumably he's talking about this one: http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&ll=39.016462,-76.485502&spn=0.003718,0.008256&gl=us&t=m&z=18&layer=c&cbll=39.016414,-76.486632&panoid=uER7aS3pCkUujfkAgHj3bg&cbp=12,43.23,,0,10.13
I would never consider that to be an at-grade intersection.
It's an intersection between a local road (actually a segment of MD 648) and westbound US 50, and it's at-grade. Therefore it's an at-grade intersection.
Quote from: deanej on August 01, 2012, 09:44:33 AM
Vermont, NH, and Maine do the same thing: 50 on most roads that would be at least 55 anywhere else.
False. I think you meant to say Connecticut, RI, and Mass.
Vermont and New Hampshire both post 2-lane high-quality roads at 55 (generally mostly expressways), but don't have very many roads that could handle speeds that high to begin with. If you want to drive 55 in NH, drive NH 9 or NH 125, both have numerous 55 mph stretches. Maine posts almost every rural state highway at 55. I travel to Maine every weekend and have noticed very few 50 mph zones - the vast majority being 55, which is a welcome change from southern New England.
On the other hand, I cannot think of a single 2-lane road off the top of my head in either CT or RI that's posted above 50, not even in the far corners of the state, and I can name some in Massachusetts, but only two that aren't super-2 freeways (US 1 from Rowley to Newburyport and a brief stretch near Attleboro)
Regarding RIROs v. at-grades, I consider it to be a RIRO if there is some semblance of a median separating entering and exiting traffic (even just a painted taper), if it has some semblance of acceleration/deceleration lanes, and if it is treated as an exit rather than an intersection (i.e. exit sign instead of street blade).
Quote from: 1995hoo on August 01, 2012, 06:11:02 PM
Quote from: Beltway on August 01, 2012, 05:59:48 PM
Quote from: 1995hoo on August 01, 2012, 05:55:28 PM
He's correct about the exits on Kent Island, though. Some of those are not at all suitable for high-speed traffic. The Merritt Parkway interchanges with the stop signs are better than some of the Kent Island exits.
Actually given the -extremely- long accell and decel lanes on US-50, there is no reason why it couldn't be 65 mph on the mainline.
I didn't say it couldn't be. I said they're unsuitable for high-speed traffic.
So what are you saying, that the ramps should be able to handle 65 mph traffic?
What I am saying is that the accell and decel lanes are plenty long enough to transition gradually to and from 65 mph on the mainline, and pass through the 25 mph curves of the ramp.
Quote from: NE2 on August 01, 2012, 06:16:43 PM
Quote from: Beltway on August 01, 2012, 06:01:11 PM
Quote from: NE2 on August 01, 2012, 05:58:10 PM
There's a very fine (non-existent?) line between a RIRO and an at-grade. Presumably he's talking about this one: http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&ll=39.016462,-76.485502&spn=0.003718,0.008256&gl=us&t=m&z=18&layer=c&cbll=39.016414,-76.486632&panoid=uER7aS3pCkUujfkAgHj3bg&cbp=12,43.23,,0,10.13
I would never consider that to be an at-grade intersection.
It's an intersection between a local road (actually a segment of MD 648) and westbound US 50, and it's at-grade. Therefore it's an at-grade intersection.
It is not an intersection, because the local traffic does not cross active mainline lanes.
Quote from: deathtopumpkins on August 01, 2012, 07:40:53 PM
Quote from: deanej on August 01, 2012, 09:44:33 AM
Vermont, NH, and Maine do the same thing: 50 on most roads that would be at least 55 anywhere else.
False. I think you meant to say Connecticut, RI, and Mass.
Vermont and New Hampshire both post 2-lane high-quality roads at 55 (generally mostly expressways), but don't have very many roads that could handle speeds that high to begin with. If you want to drive 55 in NH, drive NH 9 or NH 125, both have numerous 55 mph stretches. Maine posts almost every rural state highway at 55. I travel to Maine every weekend and have noticed very few 50 mph zones - the vast majority being 55, which is a welcome change from southern New England.
On the other hand, I cannot think of a single 2-lane road off the top of my head in either CT or RI that's posted above 50, not even in the far corners of the state, and I can name some in Massachusetts, but only two that aren't super-2 freeways (US 1 from Rowley to Newburyport and a brief stretch near Attleboro)
Regarding RIROs v. at-grades, I consider it to be a RIRO if there is some semblance of a median separating entering and exiting traffic (even just a painted taper), if it has some semblance of acceleration/deceleration lanes, and if it is treated as an exit rather than an intersection (i.e. exit sign instead of street blade).
The rural roads in VT and NH that are posted 50 would be posted 55 in NY (indeed, 50 is almost never posted in NY).
I believe a good chunk of US 2 in Maine west of I-95 is posted 50 as well.
Quote from: deanej on August 01, 2012, 09:45:45 PM
Quote from: deathtopumpkins on August 01, 2012, 07:40:53 PM
Quote from: deanej on August 01, 2012, 09:44:33 AM
Vermont, NH, and Maine do the same thing: 50 on most roads that would be at least 55 anywhere else.
False. I think you meant to say Connecticut, RI, and Mass.
Vermont and New Hampshire both post 2-lane high-quality roads at 55 (generally mostly expressways), but don't have very many roads that could handle speeds that high to begin with. If you want to drive 55 in NH, drive NH 9 or NH 125, both have numerous 55 mph stretches. Maine posts almost every rural state highway at 55. I travel to Maine every weekend and have noticed very few 50 mph zones - the vast majority being 55, which is a welcome change from southern New England.
On the other hand, I cannot think of a single 2-lane road off the top of my head in either CT or RI that's posted above 50, not even in the far corners of the state, and I can name some in Massachusetts, but only two that aren't super-2 freeways (US 1 from Rowley to Newburyport and a brief stretch near Attleboro)
Regarding RIROs v. at-grades, I consider it to be a RIRO if there is some semblance of a median separating entering and exiting traffic (even just a painted taper), if it has some semblance of acceleration/deceleration lanes, and if it is treated as an exit rather than an intersection (i.e. exit sign instead of street blade).
The rural roads in VT and NH that are posted 50 would be posted 55 in NY (indeed, 50 is almost never posted in NY).
I believe a good chunk of US 2 in Maine west of I-95 is posted 50 as well.
That may well be, but I can only vouch for southern and coastal Maine. Off the top of my head, US 1, US 202, ME 9, ME 236, ME 4, and ME 11 are all posted at least partially at 55. And that's just from my trip up there last weekend, which didn't even go farther up than Kennebunk. The only state highways that were not at least partially posted up to 55 were ME 91 (narrow and twisty), ME 103 (old alignment of ME 236 and narrow, twisty road though Kittery), ME 9A (mostly settled area), and US 1A (mostly settled area).
I still insist that you mix up northern and southern New England when it comes to speed limits.
Like I said in my previous post, nowhere do CT or RI post 2-lane undivided roads above 50, Mass. does it occasionally, VT does it sometimes, NH does it fairly often, and Maine does it more often than not.
Quote from: Beltway on August 01, 2012, 09:16:42 PM
It is not an intersection, because the local traffic does not cross active mainline lanes.
It's not a four-way intersection. But it's certainly a T intersection.
Quote from: NE2 on August 02, 2012, 03:15:44 AM
Quote from: Beltway on August 01, 2012, 09:16:42 PM
It is not an intersection, because the local traffic does not cross active mainline lanes.
It's not a four-way intersection. But it's certainly a T intersection.
It is -not- an intersection.
A "T intersection" allows left turns to and from the main road. US-50 does not.
Quote from: Beltway on August 02, 2012, 06:23:33 AM
Quote from: NE2 on August 02, 2012, 03:15:44 AM
Quote from: Beltway on August 01, 2012, 09:16:42 PM
It is not an intersection, because the local traffic does not cross active mainline lanes.
It's not a four-way intersection. But it's certainly a T intersection.
It is -not- an intersection.
A "T intersection" allows left turns to and from the main road. US-50 does not.
Nope. An intersection is a place where two roads intersect - here the MD 648 segment and
westbound US 50. http://itd.idaho.gov/projects/d3/ID55Corridor/Caldwell_2009/spacingUrbanSuburban.pdf "RIRO = Intersection that limits vehicle access
to right-in/right-out movements"
Quote from: Beltway on August 02, 2012, 06:23:33 AM
Quote from: NE2 on August 02, 2012, 03:15:44 AM
Quote from: Beltway on August 01, 2012, 09:16:42 PM
It is not an intersection, because the local traffic does not cross active mainline lanes.
It's not a four-way intersection. But it's certainly a T intersection.
It is -not- an intersection.
A "T intersection" allows left turns to and from the main road. US-50 does not.
I am not going to argue the semantics of this. But the point where Md. 648 meets the westbound side of U.S. 50/U.S. 301 is left over from the days when the U.S. 50/U.S. 301 was an arterial highway, not the (mostly) limited-access road that exists today. Md. 648 used to be connected to U.S. 50/U.S. 301 on the south side as well, but access there has been blocked-off for quite a few years.
I believe that access to Md. 648 remains
only because the other access point to this segment of Md. 648 is from an
intersection with Md. 2 (Ritchie Highway), north of the Md. 2/U.S. 50/U.S. 301/Md. 450 interchange (Google Maps here (http://maps.google.com/maps?q=arnold,+maryland&hl=en&ll=39.018475,-76.495185&spn=0.00476,0.006781&hnear=Arnold,+Anne+Arundel,+Maryland&gl=us&t=h&z=17) (Md. 648 is Baltimore-Annapolis Boulevard)). That intersection has difficult geometrics (especially for trucks trying to reach the lumberyard located on Md. 648 between Md. 2 and U.S. 50/U.S. 301).
Long accell and decell lanes could be built within existing right-of-way, that would make that exit similar to the situation on Kent Island.
Even currently I would not consider that segment of US-50/US-301 to be not a freeway.
To return to the original topic:
If it weren't for the statute imposing a maximum 55-mph limit, one road in Maryland that could easily accommodate a 60- or 65-mph speed limit is most of US-15 from north of Frederick to the Pennsylvania line. Not necessarily the portion through Frederick, which has a lot of traffic, but the portion north of there is generally wide-open and traffic entering from the at-grade intersections can see the road well enough that there wouldn't be many problems with someone cresting a hill at high speed to find someone turning out into the road. I seem to recall the road having a slightly twistier and narrower feel to it around Thurmont, so perhaps maintaining the 55-mph limit through there might be appropriate as well.
I usually set my cruise control at around 65 mph on that part of US-15 and I've never had any problems. I'm a lot more wary on the 65-mph portion in Pennsylvania if I'm coming back late at night (and I've come back from Hershey Bears games quite late on occasion) because that road seems like it ought to have a higher likelihood of deer crossing the road.
Quote from: deathtopumpkins on August 01, 2012, 10:29:44 PM
I still insist that you mix up northern and southern New England when it comes to speed limits.
Like I said in my previous post, nowhere do CT or RI post 2-lane undivided roads above 50, Mass. does it occasionally, VT does it sometimes, NH does it fairly often, and Maine does it more often than not.
Most of my New England driving has been in Vermont; very little in southern New England. Almost all roads VT posts at 50 (which is almost everything in rural areas that isn't an interstate) would be 55 in NY. Plus VT drivers typically go 45 on these roads. Not fun.
Quote from: Beltway on August 02, 2012, 06:23:33 AM
Quote from: NE2 on August 02, 2012, 03:15:44 AM
Quote from: Beltway on August 01, 2012, 09:16:42 PM
It is not an intersection, because the local traffic does not cross active mainline lanes.
It's not a four-way intersection. But it's certainly a T intersection.
It is -not- an intersection.
A "T intersection" allows left turns to and from the main road. US-50 does not.
One way streets are now freeways in between traffic lights?
<<< One way streets are now freeways in between traffic lights? >>>
Oh please. We are not talking about a street, we are talking about the US-50 freeway, which is over 50 miles long, and you are questioning the design of -one- exit.
Quote from: 1995hoo on August 02, 2012, 10:46:33 AM
To return to the original topic:
If it weren't for the statute imposing a maximum 55-mph limit, one road in Maryland that could easily accommodate a 60- or 65-mph speed limit is most of US-15 from north of Frederick to the Pennsylvania line. Not necessarily the portion through Frederick, which has a lot of traffic, but the portion north of there is generally wide-open and traffic entering from the at-grade intersections can see the road well enough that there wouldn't be many problems with someone cresting a hill at high speed to find someone turning out into the road. I seem to recall the road having a slightly twistier and narrower feel to it around Thurmont, so perhaps maintaining the 55-mph limit through there might be appropriate as well.
Hoo, I strongly agree. U.S. 15 from Md. 26 north to the Pennsylvania border could be posted 65 MPH - even passing Thurmont.
Quote from: 1995hoo on August 02, 2012, 10:46:33 AM
I usually set my cruise control at around 65 mph on that part of US-15 and I've never had any problems. I'm a lot more wary on the 65-mph portion in Pennsylvania if I'm coming back late at night (and I've come back from Hershey Bears games quite late on occasion) because that road seems like it ought to have a higher likelihood of deer crossing the road.
Another Maryland rural arterial that could have a 65 limit is U.S. 301 from Queenstown to the Delaware border. The land is very nearly flat, and the sight distances are long.
My list of suggested speed limit increases in Maryland (not supported by any engineering study):
Arterials and expressways:
U.S. 301 from (but not including) the Nice Bridge to Bowie - 60 MPH
U.S. 301 from Queenstown to the Delaware border - 65 MPH
U.S. 50/U.S. 301 from Md. 450 (West Street) to Queenstown (not including the WPL Bridge) - 60 MPH
U.S. 50 from Queenstown to the Salisbury Bypass - 60 MPH (except passing built-up areas of Easton and Cambridge)
U.S. 15 from Md. 26 to the Pennsylvania line - 65 MPH
U.S. 29 from Md. 650 (New Hampshire Avenue) to I-70 - 60 MPH
Md. 4 (Pennsylvania Avenue) from I-95 to Md. 258 (Bay Front Road) - 60 MPH (maybe higher if the signals at Westphalia Road, Suitland Parkway and Dower House Road ever get replaced by grade-separated interchanges)
Md. 5 (Branch Avenue) from I-95 to south of Md. 223 (Woodyard Road) - 60 MPH
Interstates and freeways:
Md. 200 - 65 MPH (great candidate for N.J. Turnpike-style variable speed limits)
Md. 100 between U.S. 29 and I-97 - 65 MPH
Md. 10 between I-695 and Md. 100 - 65 MPH
Md. 32 between Md. 108 and I-97 (except between B-W Parkway and Md. 198) - 65 MPH
I-95 "Between the Beltways" - 70 MPH
I-795 - 70 MPH
I-95 (JFK Highway) - 75 MPH
I-70 between Md. 144 east of Frederick and U.S. 29 - 75 MPH
I-270 - 65 MPH
I-70 between Md. 144 east of Hancock and Md. 66 (Mapleville Road) - 75 MPH
I-68 between the West Virginia border and Md. 546 (Finzel Road) - 75 MPH
U.S. 50 between Md. 410 (East West Highway) and Md. 450 (West Street) - 75 MPH
I-695 (except at the approaches to and crossing the F. S. Key Bridge) - 65 MPH
I-95/I-495 from the Wilson Bridge to the I-95 interchange in College Park - 65 MPH
I-97 - 70 MPH
I might add MD-210 to that list–at least the part between MD-228 in Accokeek and the Beltway. (I am not familiar enough with the part beyond MD-228 to comment. I've only been down to the end of the road one time, as there is very little reason to go that way unless you live there or have business at the Navy base.) As it is the speed limits on that road are pretty much universally ignored. It would probably be a fine candidate for variable speed limits if drivers could be convinced to take such limits seriously, as I recognize that the road does become very congested at certain times of day and that at those times it is desirable to try to keep the traffic going slower. But I can think of any number of weekday afternoons when I've been on that road and I've been one of the slowest people on the road at 65 mph.
I wouldn't argue with the idea of NOT raising the speed limit on US-301 through Waldorf, though. That area feels busy and visually cluttered to me every time I pass through.
Regarding I-270, you mentioned earlier in this thread how the 55-mph speed limit is universally ignored. You're not kidding there. If I try to set the cruise control between 65 and 70 I find I'm still one of the slowest people on the road. For a revised speed limit, though, I kind of like the idea of a split speed limit for the local and express lanes whereby the express lanes would have a higher limit than the local lanes would. The local carriageways are two lanes and have a lot of traffic merging from both directions (people entering I-270 on the right; people moving from express to local lanes on the left). I find it hard to quibble with the idea of a lower speed limit for those lanes under that particular set of circumstances.
Quote from: 1995hoo on August 02, 2012, 04:36:58 PM
I might add MD-210 to that list–at least the part between MD-228 in Accokeek and the Beltway. (I am not familiar enough with the part beyond MD-228 to comment. I've only been down to the end of the road one time, as there is very little reason to go that way unless you live there or have business at the Navy base.) As it is the speed limits on that road are pretty much universally ignored. It would probably be a fine candidate for variable speed limits if drivers could be convinced to take such limits seriously, as I recognize that the road does become very congested at certain times of day and that at those times it is desirable to try to keep the traffic going slower. But I can think of any number of weekday afternoons when I've been on that road and I've been one of the slowest people on the road at 65 mph.
Md. 210 (Indian Head Highway) is functionally classified as an expressway from the I-95/I-495 interchange on the south edge of Forest Heights south to the Prince George's County/Charles County border, on the way to Indian Head (it is defined as an arterial in Charles County, presumably because it has driveways connecting directly to the highway, and as one approaches the Town of Indian Head (yes, it is a municipality), it resembles a wide urban street).
But except for the interchange in Forest Heights, all of its intersections are at-grade, and I frequently hear of "serious" and sometimes fatal wrecks.
A colleague has told me that many of those fatal wrecks involve "sport" motorcycles (a/k/a "crotch rockets"), but there are also plenty of "T-bone" crashes involving vehicles with four or more wheels.
So I am not so enthused about raising the speed limit on 210 above the current 55 MPH - unless and until the state finds a large pot of money to replace the signalized intersections with grade-separated interchanges (and that will be expensive because there are so many intersections).
Quote from: 1995hoo on August 02, 2012, 04:36:58 PM
I wouldn't argue with the idea of NOT raising the speed limit on US-301 through Waldorf, though. That area feels busy and visually cluttered to me every time I pass through.
And the numerous signalized intersections in Waldorf almost assure that nobody is going to get through there quickly anyway. So leave that segment at 55 MPH.
Quote from: 1995hoo on August 02, 2012, 04:36:58 PM
Regarding I-270, you mentioned earlier in this thread how the 55-mph speed limit is universally ignored. You're not kidding there. If I try to set the cruise control between 65 and 70 I find I'm still one of the slowest people on the road. For a revised speed limit, though, I kind of like the idea of a split speed limit for the local and express lanes whereby the express lanes would have a higher limit than the local lanes would. The local carriageways are two lanes and have a lot of traffic merging from both directions (people entering I-270 on the right; people moving from express to local lanes on the left). I find it hard to quibble with the idea of a lower speed limit for those lanes under that particular set of circumstances.
That's a good idea. 55 in the "local" lanes, 65 or maybe 70 in the "through" or "main" or "express" lanes.
Quote from: cpzilliacus on August 02, 2012, 04:10:20 PM
I-795 - 70 MPH
I-95 (JFK Highway) - 75 MPH
I-70 between Md. 144 east of Frederick and U.S. 29 - 75 MPH
70 MPH! 75 MPH! Sounds great! But is there a single person associated with the government of Maryland that supports raising the maximum statewide limit above 65 MPH?
Sounds like Maryland's government are a bunch of pussies. Oklahoma's government is beyond fucked up, but at least they let us drive 75 on the turnpikes.
Quote from: mcmc on August 02, 2012, 08:01:40 PM
Quote from: cpzilliacus on August 02, 2012, 04:10:20 PM
I-795 - 70 MPH
I-95 (JFK Highway) - 75 MPH
I-70 between Md. 144 east of Frederick and U.S. 29 - 75 MPH
70 MPH! 75 MPH! Sounds great! But is there a single person associated with the government of Maryland that supports raising the maximum statewide limit above 65 MPH?
Plenty of drivers with Maryland license plates seem to like it fine, though I don't know if they vote.
Quote from: Beltway on August 02, 2012, 01:05:35 PM
<<< One way streets are now freeways in between traffic lights? >>>
Oh please. We are not talking about a street, we are talking about the US-50 freeway, which is over 50 miles long, and you are questioning the design of -one- exit.
Freeways sometimes have at-grade intersections. Just look at NY 17. Or NY 198 (which has a traffic light!). US 15 had at-grades north of Williamsport just like this that were recently removed. Also, take a look at exit 111 on NY 17. At first glance it looks just like this, but unlike this, it uses guide signs instead of a street blade (!), and is striped as an interchanged; this is striped as an intersection with a right turn lane (otherwise, there would be an "island" painted with white lines).
Quote from: deanej on August 03, 2012, 12:11:49 PM
Freeways sometimes have at-grade intersections. Just look at NY 17. Or NY 198 (which has a traffic light!).
These aren't freeways. RIRO intersections are often tolerated on freeways, but cross traffic is completely prohibited.
NY 198 is a freeway both west and east so I'm not sure how you'd want to classify it, but in any case, both are considered freeways by upstate NY locals (especially since NY 17 now has no traffic lights west of Harriman).
Of course, I'm sure Florida, with it's newer roads, doesn't have to deal with any of these issues.
The definition of a freeway does not vary place-to-place. Whether the locals consider something a freeway does not make it a freeway. If it has intersections with cross traffic, it is an expressway or an arterial, not a freeway.
Quote from: deathtopumpkins on August 04, 2012, 09:44:25 AM
The definition of a freeway does not vary place-to-place. Whether the locals consider something a freeway does not make it a freeway. If it has intersections with cross traffic, it is an expressway or an arterial, not a freeway.
I though New Jesersy used to have the definitions of freeway and expressway reveresed?
The definition does vary or have a second meaning in Illinois, where there are signs that say "Notice of Freeway" plus a bunch of smaller text along roads that have very stringent access control, but may still have stoplights.
I think to some degree you guys are arguing apples and oranges. The argument "deathtopumpkins" seems to be making is that from an MUTCD or highway engineer's standpoint the word "freeway" has a certain meaning regardless of what any state or local government says; in addition, there's no doubting that on this forum the word "freeway" is almost always used to refer to a particular class of road.
But it's also indisputable that states do indeed use these terms in other ways and that as a practical matter it would be futile to say, "You're using that word incorrectly." New York's use of "expressway" and "parkway" as terms for particular types of "freeways" has legal significance, for example, because commercial vehicles are banned from "parkways" and must use "expressways" instead, even if both the "parkway" and the "expressway" constitute a type of road generically called a "freeway." (Put differently: The Belt Parkway is a freeway. So is the Brooklyn-Queens Expressway. Trucks cannot legally use the Belt Parkway but may use the BQE.) Likewise, there's an arterial route named "Rockaway Freeway" that runs under the elevated A train on the Rockaway Peninsula. You'd look like a fool if you insisted on calling it "Rockaway Expressway" due to an insistence on the word "freeway" having a particular meaning. I can think of other places where I've been on a road that falls within the "generic" definition of "freeway" and as I've approached the end of that portion I've seen a sign saying "Expressway Ends 1/4 Mile" or the like. The sign is perfectly clear and I think it's rather semantic to quibble with "freeway" versus "expressway" in that situation, especially if local practice is to use the term "expressway" in that context. (edited to add: One example is on I-70 approaching Breezewood from the south, where warning signs advise "Expressway Ends.")
As I mentioned in another thread, the term "freeway" isn't generally used much where I live in Virginia except in the form "the Freeway" in reference to one particular segment of highway in the District of Columbia (the Southwest—Southeast Freeway). Nobody ever says things like "take the I-95 freeway to Exit 170 and then take the 495 freeway to Exit 52." They'd say "take I-95 to Exit 170 and then take the Beltway to Exit 52." (Actually they'd put a suffix on "170" but I forget which letter it is...and I don't care!) Those California "Freeway Entrance" signs are something I've never seen other than in pictures because they aren't used here and I've never been to California.
In general I've grown up hearing people say "the highway" to refer to what "deathtopumpkins" is referring to as a "freeway"–for example, "I was going to take the highway to Tysons until I heard a truck had overturned, so I took the streets instead."
Long way of saying, there is nothing wrong with regional variance in popular usage, as long as in the legal and engineering context people can understand their own agreed-upon terms.
(It's sort of like "stoop" versus "porch." A lot of people where I live refer to the front stoop as a "porch," whereas I've always understood a "porch" to be something fancier and more elaborate. But I'm not going to "correct" someone and say, "That's a stoop, not a porch." I'd look like an asshole. Doesn't stop me from referring to it as the stoop, though, and nobody's ever asked me what I meant by that. I think "freeway" and "expressway" are similar in that the average man on the street would typically understand exactly what you meant if you were giving directions and doesn't know nor care nor need to know that from a legal or engineering standpoint there's a difference–in other words, if I told you "there are a bunch of long red lights, so take the freeway," or "there are a bunch of long red lights, so take the highway," or "there are a bunch of long red lights, so take the expressway," do you really think you'd be confused or that you'd think I meant something different by each of those? I don't. If I said any of those it would be the "highway" version, BTW, although more likely I'd just give the road number.)
Does the word "freeway" ever get used around Boston? Growing up there, I think the only time I heard the word "freeway" was visiting other places. The Southeast Expressway is a freeway but is called an expressway. Seems to be that way in many places in the northeast. Indiana uses the word "expressway" for some freeways...I-469 is named Ronald Reagan Expressway, not Freeway, which led to an exercise in pedantry on the I-469 Wikipedia page last year as someone inserted commentary about Indiana using the wrong word, and we know of the Borman Expressway in Indiana. Chicago lingo also uses Expressway for Interstate highways (Edens, Eisenhower, etc. etc. etc.). So indeed it is a regional thing.
Quote from: PurdueBill on August 04, 2012, 05:19:49 PM
.... led to an exercise in pedantry ....
That's kind of my point. It's not pedantic for regulatory authorities or highway engineers to be precise in their usage of these words, but it's pedantic to insist that public usage, or state law usage, is "wrong."
(BTW, precision in wording is something that's often very important in what I do for a living–I'm an attorney. But one of the things you learn in the legal profession is the importance of the concept of "reasonableness." Arguing that a sign on I-70 that says "Expressway Ends" is "wrong" because it "should" say "Freeway Ends" is not reasonable.)
Quote from: PurdueBill on August 04, 2012, 05:19:49 PM
Does the word "freeway" ever get used around Boston? Growing up there, I think the only time I heard the word "freeway" was visiting other places. The Southeast Expressway is a freeway but is called an expressway. Seems to be that way in many places in the northeast. Indiana uses the word "expressway" for some freeways...I-469 is named Ronald Reagan Expressway, not Freeway, which led to an exercise in pedantry on the I-469 Wikipedia page last year as someone inserted commentary about Indiana using the wrong word, and we know of the Borman Expressway in Indiana. Chicago lingo also uses Expressway for Interstate highways (Edens, Eisenhower, etc. etc. etc.). So indeed it is a regional thing.
When I write "freeway," I mean functional class, not what the road is named. Freeways don't have to be free from tolls, but they do need to have full access control with no roads or streets intersecting at-grade (I suppose exceptions for "official use only" entrances and exits, and, in some areas, "farm" roads are acceptable).
In Maryland and Virginia and D.C., we have freeways that are freeways (S.E./S.W. in D.C., Anacostia in D.C. and Md.); "highways" that are freeways (I-395 and I-95, Henry G. Shirley Memorial Highway in Va. and U.S. 50 John Hanson Highway in Md.); "beltways" that are freeways (I-495 Capital and I-695 Baltimore); "expressways" that are freeways (I-83, Jones Falls and Harrisburg); a "connector" that's a freeway (Md. 200); "parkways" (in name) that are expressways (Va. 286, Fairfax County and Va. 289, Franconia Springfield); parkways that are managed by the National Park Service as "true" parkways but have a functional class of expressway.
In nearby Jefferson County, W.Va., part of U.S. 340 is called the William L. Wilson Freeway, but it is almost certainly classified as an expressway, or maybe a principal arterial highway.
And that's just a few.
Quote from: PurdueBill on August 04, 2012, 05:19:49 PM
Does the word "freeway" ever get used around Boston? Growing up there, I think the only time I heard the word "freeway" was visiting other places. The Southeast Expressway is a freeway but is called an expressway.
Yes, when referring to a class of road, but never referring to a road's name. There is no "such-and-such Freeway" in Massachusetts (that I know of), just Expressways (Southeast, Southwest, Northeast, East Boston) and Highways (Yankee Division) mostly.
Local usage can change for a class of road too. In upstate NY, freeways are called expressways. Expressways don't even have a term in local parlance because there are so few of them in NY, and almost all of the ones we have were built in the last 20 or so years. Note that the roads I mentioned before are considered "expressways" (which, again, is what we call freeways in upstate NY) by the locals; they don't get downgraded in the minds of anyone except people here to "highways" just because of the at-grades.
This topic has veered a bit off-topic. Can we confirm that the only non-Interstate freeways in Maryland to be signed above 55 are:
- US 13 (Salisbury Bypass)
- US 340 (south of Frederick)
Quote from: mcmc on August 08, 2012, 02:46:06 AM
This topic has veered a bit off-topic. Can we confirm that the only non-Interstate freeways in Maryland to be signed above 55 are:
- US 13 (Salisbury Bypass)
- US 340 (south of Frederick)
Yeah, forum topics tend to drift. I was once on a forum where topics tended to drift so far that the end of the thread wasn't even related to the forum's subject matter at all.
Quote from: mcmc on August 08, 2012, 02:46:06 AM
This topic has veered a bit off-topic. Can we confirm that the only non-Interstate freeways in Maryland to be signed above 55 are:
- US 13 (Salisbury Bypass)
- US 340 (south of Frederick)
True to the best of my knowledge.
As has been posted, the unsigned I-595 segment on US-50 is 65 mph, but still was built to Interstate standards as an Interstate highway.
Quote from: deathtopumpkins on August 01, 2012, 07:40:53 PMOn the other hand, I cannot think of a single 2-lane road off the top of my head in either CT or RI that's posted above 50, not even in the far corners of the state, and I can name some in Massachusetts, but only two that aren't super-2 freeways (US 1 from Rowley to Newburyport and a brief stretch near Attleboro)
Back in my Driver's Ed days (Fall of 1981); the MA speed limits were the following:
School Zones: 20 (unless otherwise posted)
Thickly-Settled Districts/Areas, non-divided roads: 30 (unless otherwise posted)
Non-thickly-settled, non-divided roads/highways: 40 (unless otherwise posted)
Divided highways: 50 (unless otherwise posted)
Needless to say even back then, most divided highways in the Bay State fell in the
unless otherwise posted (at 55 then, 55-65 now) category.
Similar can be said for non-divided roads; except that the maximum posted speed is no higher than 55 mph.