Oregon

[formulanone]

Ashland: Weed

Is this a marijuana joke?

Abner Weed must be rolling in his grave right about now.

Ashland should come after Weed.

[kernals12]

Ashland: Weed

Is this a marijuana joke?

Is Wikipedia broken?

I Googled "Weed, Oregon" and got a bunch of cannabis stuff. How was I supposed to know Bickendan was talking about a place in California?

Back in the 90s, environmentalists claimed that building the West Side bypass would fuel unwanted urban sprawl in the Tualatin Valley. Well, the road was never built and yet the population of the area has exploded. Go figure.

To be fair, almost all of that growth has been in the existing urban growth boundaries. A lot of the land around where the WSB would have gone, it's locked from urban development for the next 30 years now. And, I think it's also illegal to build a freeway in those areas.

It's illegal to build any road anywhere unless it's a designated ROW.

[Max Rockatansky]

Yreka and Redding were also mentioned right before Weed.  Not really much of a stretch to infer that Weed as located somewhere nearby.  Weed makes sense as a control city given it is the origin point for US 97.

[PNWRoadgeek]

Yreka and Redding were also mentioned right before Weed.  Not really much of a stretch to infer that Weed as located somewhere nearby.  Weed makes sense as a control city given it is the origin point for US 97.

I would always laugh at the name Weed when it came up on guide signs on the 97 in Klamath Falls. Man, Klamath Falls has some banger control cities(I.e, San Francisco, Reno)

I've got a hot take, I think Eugene should be signed south out of Portland instead of Salem, especially at the I-84 junction. The issue is that while Salem is a major city in Oregon and the capital, it's only around 40-50 miles away from Portland. Plus, it kinda feels like part of the Portland metro considering how close it is. I would sign Eugene and have Salem as the secondary. Also, I-5 bypasses Salem almost entirely(besides the 22 interchange, the most logical reason to sign it IMO because it is the fastest way to Central Oregon from the Portland metro), so I would sign Eugene instead.

I also feel like Oregon can get really petty on I-5 and especially I-84 with in-state control cities, like others have said. Like, why is Roseburg here? Why is Baker here? Why is Ontario here?(I understand Grants Pass because it's the access point for the Redwoods and the 199 is best cutoff to the 101 in the state, I would still go Medford out of Eugene though)

Anyways, those are my thoughts on the current discussion.

[Bickendan]

When the control cities were first established, Salem most definitely wasn't part of the Portland metro. There are two different discussions here -- whether a control city was valid at the time I-5 was built or when US 99 was converted, and whether a control city makes sense now.

I'd argue the control cities as they are now were good when they were designated, and my updated list (aside from my tongue-in-cheek Weed) would be a good update, but I'm not bothered by the current set.

[Rothman]

Back in the 90s, environmentalists claimed that building the West Side bypass would fuel unwanted urban sprawl in the Tualatin Valley. Well, the road was never built and yet the population of the area has exploded. Go figure.

To be fair, almost all of that growth has been in the existing urban growth boundaries. A lot of the land around where the WSB would have gone, it's locked from urban development for the next 30 years now. And, I think it's also illegal to build a freeway in those areas.

Who'dathunk other factors besides highway construction contribute to growth?

[Plutonic Panda]

A bill to increase transportation funding in Oregon via increased taxes has passed the house.

https://oregoncapitalchronicle.com/2025/09/01/after-false-starts-oregon-house-passes-transportation-tax-package/

[Thunderbyrd316]

   This morning I came up McLoughlin (Oregon 99E) in Gladstone and noticed that ODOT has lowered the speed limit from 40 to 35. (I did not go all the way up to Milwaukie but I presume the entire 40 zone was reduced to 35.) I was just on that segment about a week ago and it was still 40 so this is VERY recent. ODOT is COMPLETELY out of control with this ****!NO ONE was going close to that slow either. All this is accomplishing is further eroding respect for the rule of law. This is a very wide multi-lane suburban commercial arterial that was lowered from 45 to 40, I believe, in the late '80's or early '90's. (I grew up on Vineyard Road so I was on this stretch all the time for a big part of my life.) I did not check but I presume River Road and Oatfield Road, which are under the jurisdiction of Clackamas County, (2 lane residential arterials) are still 35 as they were just a few weeks ago, the last time I was on them. Something SERIOUSLY NEEDS to be done to put a stop to this MADNESS!

[Amaury]

I'm sorry, but a speed limit being lowered is not the end of the world. Be disappointed or even a little annoyed, sure, I guess, but no need to get worked up over it. There are worse things to be upset over.

[Plutonic Panda]

Sure just keep lowering them until people don't give a fuck anymore. Oh wait that already happens so maybe having low speed limit limits is an issue actually worth visiting

[doorknob60]

This morning I came up McLoughlin (Oregon 99E) in Gladstone and noticed that ODOT has lowered the speed limit from 40 to 35. (I did not go all the way up to Milwaukie but I presume the entire 40 zone was reduced to 35.) I was just on that segment about a week ago and it was still 40 so this is VERY recent. ODOT is COMPLETELY out of control with this ****!NO ONE was going close to that slow either. All this is accomplishing is further eroding respect for the rule of law. This is a very wide multi-lane suburban commercial arterial that was lowered from 45 to 40, I believe, in the late '80's or early '90's. (I grew up on Vineyard Road so I was on this stretch all the time for a big part of my life.) I did not check but I presume River Road and Oatfield Road, which are under the jurisdiction of Clackamas County, (2 lane residential arterials) are still 35 as they were just a few weeks ago, the last time I was on them. Something SERIOUSLY NEEDS to be done to put a stop to this MADNESS!

Eh, roads like McLoughlin in cities all over the place often have a speed limit of 35. An example where I live in Boise is Chinden (US-20/26) through Garden City. Or Fairview in Boise. Tons of driveways and intersections, lots of conflict points and people turning on and off. 35 seems fine, for most of it at least.

I agree with the idea that if you lower the speed limit too much, people will stop caring about it/following it. I think Oregon has already reached that point (lack of enforcement is also a factor). But I think the 55 MPH urban freeway speed limits, 65 MPH rural I-5 limit, and the blanket 55 MPH on 2 laners west of the Cascades are all more egregious problems than a 35 MPH limit in a busy suburban area.

[xonhulu]

But I think the 55 MPH urban freeway speed limits, 65 MPH rural I-5 limit, and the blanket 55 MPH on 2 laners west of the Cascades are all more egregious problems than a 35 MPH limit in a busy suburban area.

Well said.  100% agree, especially on the last two.

[CovalenceSTU]

.

Ridge Rd over in Warrenton is our recent example - a collector road built to an unusually high standard, with sweeping curves and few driveways. Originally the default 55mph (south of KOA), then lowered to 45 with less passing zones due to close by soccer fields.

A few weeks ago, ODOT did a speed study with the hopes of lowering it even further (!), with the same concern. (45 is already an absolute crawl, and lots of traffic goes ten or even twenty over.) I've heard that preliminary results support the original speed limit though.

[Thunderbyrd316]

Eh, roads like McLoughlin in cities all over the place often have a speed limit of 35. An example where I live in Boise is Chinden (US-20/26) through Garden City. Or Fairview in Boise. Tons of driveways and intersections, lots of conflict points and people turning on and off. 35 seems fine, for most of it at least.

   40 mph is actually the correct speed limit for Chinden through Garden City. (Oregon is NOT the only state where speed limits are posted lower than they should be.) 40 mph is the correct speed limit for most multi-lane suburban commercial arterials. But at least in Idaho most open highways have very reasonable speed limits. Oregon is COMPLETELY OUT OF CONTROL and is NOT going to stop! The Oregon 22 freeway west of downtown Salem is posted at an absolutely ABSURD 35 mph! (Not just eastbound approaching the signal at the end of the freeway in downtown Salem where that limit would actually make sense but even EASTBOUND well beyond downtown with NO justification whatsoever except to harass automobile drivers.) I could literally write an entire book just documenting locations of absurdly ridiculous unreasonably low Oregon speed limits.   

[Thunderbyrd316]

I'm sorry, but a speed limit being lowered is not the end of the world. Be disappointed or even a little annoyed, sure, I guess, but no need to get worked up over it. There are worse things to be upset over.

   According to your AA Roads "Profile" it lists your age as 33. That would mean that you are not old enough to remember the tyranny of a blanket 55 mph National Maximum Speed Limit. I am. What was supposed to be a "temporary" measure lasted in its original form for 13 years and then in 1987 speed limits of up to 65 mph were authorized, initially on designated "rural" Interstate highways ONLY, with gradual exceptions granted over time until 1995 when, as part of Newt Gingrich's "Contract with America", the wholly unconstitutional federal limits were finally scrapped.

   The very first time I saw any speed limit sign with a number higher than 55 mph was on Interstate 82 just north of Yakima. (Even though I was alive when Oregon had SPEED 70 MILES signs and Washington had SPEED LIMIT 70 signs and California had MAXIMUM SPEED 65 and 70 signs, I was only 4 years old when they went away so I was not really old enough to remember seeing them. I and my father were driving back to Portland from Spokane on the day Washington began changing over their speed limit signs from 55 to 65 / T60. The 65 / T60 signs we saw just past the SR 821 interchange at Selah were the first we saw that day. I later saw MAXIMUM SPEED 65 signs in California well before Oregon, which as usual, was late to the party doing anything positive, finally installed their SPEED 65 / T55 signs.

   And I still recall the joy I felt when, the following year, in the Summer of 1988, I for the very first time saw a speed limit higher than 55 mph on a non-Interstate highway, Kansas 10 headed out to Lawrence, which was posted at 65.

   I also recall the sense of wonder in March of 1996 when I finally saw my very first SPEED LIMIT 60 and SPEED LIMIT 70  signs in Washington. (I did not have a car at that time so I rode the C-tran bus up to Salmon Creek, then WALKED all the way out to 179th just to get a look at those beautiful signs!)

   For me, correct speed limits are a serious moral issue. When laws are unreasonable and/or unjust, respect for authority and the rule of law erodes. Anarchy and chaos are already growing and will continue to escalate until things get FAR worse than most are able to presently imagine.

[kkt]

I'm sorry, but a speed limit being lowered is not the end of the world. Be disappointed or even a little annoyed, sure, I guess, but no need to get worked up over it. There are worse things to be upset over.

   According to your AA Roads "Profile" it lists your age as 33. That would mean that you are not old enough to remember the tyranny of a blanket 55 mph National Maximum Speed Limit. I am. What was supposed to be a "temporary" measure lasted in its original form for 13 years and then in 1987 speed limits of up to 65 mph were authorized, initially on designated "rural" Interstate highways ONLY, with gradual exceptions granted over time until 1995 when, as part of Newt Gingrich's "Contract with America", the wholly unconstitutional federal limits were finally scrapped.

   The very first time I saw any speed limit sign with a number higher than 55 mph was on Interstate 82 just north of Yakima. (Even though I was alive when Oregon had SPEED 70 MILES signs and Washington had SPEED LIMIT 70 signs and California had MAXIMUM SPEED 65 and 70 signs, I was only 4 years old when they went away so I was not really old enough to remember seeing them. I and my father were driving back to Portland from Spokane on the day Washington began changing over their speed limit signs from 55 to 65 / T60. The 65 / T60 signs we saw just past the SR 821 interchange at Selah were the first we saw that day. I later saw MAXIMUM SPEED 65 signs in California well before Oregon, which as usual, was late to the party doing anything positive, finally installed their SPEED 65 / T55 signs.

   And I still recall the joy I felt when, the following year, in the Summer of 1988, I for the very first time saw a speed limit higher than 55 mph on a non-Interstate highway, Kansas 10 headed out to Lawrence, which was posted at 65.

   I also recall the sense of wonder in March of 1996 when I finally saw my very first SPEED LIMIT 60 and SPEED LIMIT 70  signs in Washington. (I did not have a car at that time so I rode the C-tran bus up to Salmon Creek, then WALKED all the way out to 179th just to get a look at those beautiful signs!)

   For me, correct speed limits are a serious moral issue. When laws are unreasonable and/or unjust, respect for authority and the rule of law erodes. Anarchy and chaos are already growing and will continue to escalate until things get FAR worse than most are able to presently imagine.

Wholly unconstitutional?  Nevada challenged the 55 mph law, and lost in the 9th Circuit.

[Bruce]

Rebuild the roads to suit these speed limits. That's the goal, and it makes things much safer for everyone (yes, including us drivers).

Trivia question: how much time is saved by going 40 versus 30 on a suburban road with traffic lights every few blocks? The answer is probably going to be 0 minutes. But the likelihood of killing another human being goes down dramatically.

Please, consider looking beyond the windshield. The road belongs to all users.

[vdeane]

Trivia question: how much time is saved by going 40 versus 30 on a suburban road with traffic lights every few blocks? The answer is probably going to be 0 minutes. But the likelihood of killing another human being goes down dramatically.

Depends on whether it affects how many lights you hit and how long you're on it.  It feels like you're crawling though, and I for one would rather not be in a situation where I have to stare at the speedometer to prevent myself from subconsciously speeding.