Current state speed limit increase proposals

[Brandon]

^^ Why?  Allowing 5 mph allows for discrepancies in both the speedometer and the radar gun the cop is using.  Speedometers are only good to +/- 5%, as are radar guns (no matter what cops like to tell you).

[roadfro]

It's mainly for the consistency between what existed previously versus what the bill has now.

In my opinion, the new law is basically saying, "we set this maximum speed, but it's kinda okay if you go a little bit over the maximum speed." The old one didn't do that.

[algorerhythms]

Scott Walker signs law allowing 70 mph speed limits in Wisconsin.

[Brandon]

Scott Walker signs law allowing 70 mph speed limits in Wisconsin.

Wisconsin finally joins the rest of the Midwest as a 70 mph zone, and there was much rejoicing.

[SSOWorld]

Looks like they're following the "1987 rural speed limit rule"

The speed limit seems to be remaining 65 in several stretches around cities.  Obviously Milwaukee is exempt (as a 55 zone) and the metro area will stay 65 outside of that (southern Ozaukee (south of Port Washington), Milwaukee, Waukesha.  Other cities that will stay 65:
- Madison (US-151 to the Beltline Interchange on 39/90; I-94 to start as 70 at the Badger Interchange)
- Green bay (I-43 from WIS-29 northward), I-41 from WIS-172 northward - US-41 may be signed to 70 for a bit north of the city?)
- Appleton (I-41 in between the WIS-441 Jct's)
- Wausau (I-39 north of Business 51 south end - US-51 may be signed as 70 from Business 51 north end to CTH-K or close to Lincoln Dr north of Merrill?)
- Stevens Point (I-39 between WIS-54 and WIS-66)
- Eau Claire (I-94 between WIS-312 (North Crossing) and US-53 - US-53 may be signed as 70 from Chippewa Falls to Rice Lake?)
- La Crosse (I-90 from US-53 to MN line)
- Hudson (I-94 from WIS-35 (southbound?) to MN Line) <-- Suspect this is because of proximity to Twin Cities area - MN signed I-94 as 65 to there from the state line

This all makes sense to me since I feel that doing 70 in urban areas is risky due to close-proximity exits.  Though La Crosse (mainly French Island), Point (particularly between US-10 and CTH B in Plover) and Eau Claire don't have such, but the other cities do and have been slowed down at the appropriate locations IMO.

http://www.dot.wisconsin.gov/news/releases/299-co-exec.htm <-- WisDOT announcement regarding it - they're going to start it next month.

Wisconsin - no longer the Oregon of the Midwest.

[froggie]

La Crosse is probably due to the river floodplain.

Hudson has effectively been part of the Twin Cities metro for a couple decades.

[SSOWorld]

La Crosse is probably due to the river floodplain.

Hudson has effectively been part of the Twin Cities metro for a couple decades.

Not sure why on the flood plain, but - I actually thought it was to the western 53 interchange, but it's more likely the eastern one - which makes more sense.  MN has 70 right up to the bridge.  (Well not now since it's being reconstructed...)
fixed my bad -sso

[Jim920]

La Crosse is probably due to the river floodplain.

Hudson has effectively been part of the Twin Cities metro for a couple decades.

Not sure why on the flood plain, but - I actually thought it was to the western 53 interchange, but it's more likely the eastern one - which makes more sense.  MN has 70 right up to the bridge.  (Well not now since it's being reconstructed...)

Actually MnDOT starts an ends 70 about a mile from the US-14/61 interchange.

fixed my bad -sso

[SSOWorld]

That may be for 2 reasons - 1 - the bridge was unsafe due to it's width... and integrity; 2 - to "slow drivers" before they enter WI and a sharp curve.

[Pink Jazz]

Also, it looks like Maryland's speed limit bill has been quietly signed by Governor Larry Hogan.

[SSOWorld]

http://www.chron.com/news/article/The-Latest-House-votes-to-regulate-chemicals-in-6365320.php

An attempt to raise limits in eastern Oregon is underway - at the Governor's desk right now.

Keep in mind ODOT is vehemently against raising above 65 on the count of "more deaths" and has opposed legislation in the past.   The technical term of the current law writes that ODOT has descretion in raising limits to max 70.

[doorknob60]

http://www.chron.com/news/article/The-Latest-House-votes-to-regulate-chemicals-in-6365320.php

An attempt to raise limits in eastern Oregon is underway - at the Governor's desk right now.

Keep in mind ODOT is vehemently against raising above 65 on the count of "more deaths" and has opposed legislation in the past.   The technical term of the current law writes that ODOT has descretion in raising limits to max 70.

Oh thank God! This better pass, I swear. Too bad it wont take place until March 1, 2016 if it does. Taking a trip from Nampa to Seaside and back (going back through Bend) next week. Higher speed limits would be very nice. Will be great for future similar trips.

[corco]

I take a lot of road trips all over the region and go to Oregon less than any other state nearby. Why? Because I'm at risk for a substantial speeding ticket everytime I go there if a cop is having a bad day and decides to enforce speeds below 70 in 55 zones. I hate the "clumping " culture in Oregon which is different from the rest of the west. In most of the inland west, we try to stay as far away from other cars as possible, but in eastern Oregon you find and stay  with a clump of speeding cars to minimize the likelihood of getting a ticket. With wildlife hazards/farn equipment/etc on the road, this is needlessly dangerous.

I look forward to not being stressed everytime I cross eaten Oregon and to wanting to visit the state more often. I hope it passes.

[hotdogPi]

I look forward to not being stressed everytime I cross eaten Oregon and to wanting to visit the state more often. I hope it passes.

[vdeane]

I look forward to not being stressed everytime I cross eaten Oregon and to wanting to visit the state more often. I hope it passes.

That sounds stressful indeed.

[roadman65]

Is Oklahoma going to ever allow the non turnpike freeways to have 75 mph? 

[Rothman]

Is Oklahoma going to ever allow the non turnpike freeways to have 75 mph? 

Makes me wonder if they bought into the idea that toll roads are to provide a "premium" service to drivers.  That was a big idea around here about five or six years ago.

[iBallasticwolf2]

Is Oklahoma going to ever allow the non turnpike freeways to have 75 mph? 

Makes me wonder if they bought into the idea that toll roads are to provide a "premium" service to drivers.  That was a big idea Everywhere 60 years ago.

FTFY

[Rothman]

Is Oklahoma going to ever allow the non turnpike freeways to have 75 mph? 

Makes me wonder if they bought into the idea that toll roads are to provide a "premium" service to drivers.  That was a big idea Everywhere 60 years ago.

FTFY

Heh.  Well done.

I was recalling conversations with one particular NYSDOT manager years ago who was actually arguing that NYSDOT roads should be expected to have a lower "quality" than the Thruway since the Thruway was providing a "premium service."

Yeah, he retired pretty shortly thereafter and was pretty shunted off to the side previous to that, anyway.

[Tarkus]

Oregon's latest speed limit increase bill (HB 3402) was signed by Gov. Brown on Monday.  I've started a thread for it on the Northwest board.

[cl94]

Is Oklahoma going to ever allow the non turnpike freeways to have 75 mph? 

Makes me wonder if they bought into the idea that toll roads are to provide a "premium" service to drivers.  That was a big idea Everywhere 60 years ago.

FTFY

Heh.  Well done.

I was recalling conversations with one particular NYSDOT manager years ago who was actually arguing that NYSDOT roads should be expected to have a lower "quality" than the Thruway since the Thruway was providing a "premium service."

Yeah, he retired pretty shortly thereafter and was pretty shunted off to the side previous to that, anyway.

Problem now is that, due to the lack of funding (thanks, Cuomo), they often are a significantly lower quality, at least out here.

[gonealookin]

I e-mailed Nevada DOT's information office to ask about implementation of SB2, which becomes law on October 1.  I don't want to copy and paste an e-mail reply, but to paraphrase, they're going to have a meeting in a couple weeks with the various agencies to identify segments of I-80 (initially) which will be candidates for 80 mph limits.  NDOT's Traffic Information staff will accumulate speed study data on the segments and, after consulting with the interested parties such as NHP and local law enforcement, will make speed limit change recommendations to the Director of NDOT.  Traffic Information already has other assignments pending so this job will have to be fit into their existing work schedule; therefore the study process is expected to take "months".  After the Director's approval, the NDOT district maintenance crews would then have to fit sign posting into their schedules.

Bottom line, I don't think you'll see 80 mph limits posted anywhere on I-80 in Nevada until a few months into 2016, and on any other highways (I-15?) it would be later than that.

[jakeroot]

Bottom line, I don't think you'll see 80 mph limits posted anywhere on I-80 in Nevada until a few months into 2016, and on any other highways (I-15?) it would be later than that.

And that makes sense to me. Automatically bumping up all rural freeways straight to 80 seems pretty stupid. I'm sure the studies will support an increase, but a study should always be performed.

[roadfro]

Bottom line, I don't think you'll see 80 mph limits posted anywhere on I-80 in Nevada until a few months into 2016, and on any other highways (I-15?) it would be later than that.

And that makes sense to me. Automatically bumping up all rural freeways straight to 80 seems pretty stupid. I'm sure the studies will support an increase, but a study should always be performed.

I agree with this approach, taking time to do the speed safety studies and not just do a blanket raise.

There will be some great stretches of I-80 that would be great candidates for higher speeds, but there are also some mountain passes that shouldn't be raised. I also don't know that I-15 to California would be wise to blanket raise without further study–while much of that traffic flows at 80+ now, I would be worried about the speed differentials out there (especially on holiday weekends.

[myosh_tino]

I also don't know that I-15 to California would be wise to blanket raise without further study–while much of that traffic flows at 80+ now, I would be worried about the speed differentials out there (especially on holiday weekends.

I think a bigger concern is big rig traffic.  If I'm not mistaken, Nevada does not have a separate speed limit for trucks so if I-15 is raised to 80 MPH, that would create a 25 MPH differential in speed limits upon entering California and its 55 MPH speed limit for all trucks.