MSP & MDOT Choose to Make Metro Freeways More Deadly

[Meddle]

Drivers cruising along at 70 m.p.h. on freeways in the metro area, only to see the speed limit abruptly drop to 55 m.p.h. -- particularly in Detroit -- may get a break.

Lt. Gary Megge, a Michigan State Police speed law expert, said the State Police, along with the Michigan Department of Transportation, are to resume speed-limit modernization efforts this fall in metro Detroit.

The move likely will raise speed limits on freeway stretches in Detroit up to 70 m.p.h., and perhaps save some drivers a speeding ticket or two. The initiative would leave some stretches at 55 m.p.h. because they aren't configured to safely handle higher speeds, officials said.

http://freep.com/article/20090831/NE...ed-to-70-m.p.h.

[EastSider]

How will they make them more deadly?

[digitalvision]

Way to edit the quote to contradict what the facts in the article... did you scroll down? Obviously you didn't, or else you would of seen this:

Police: Slow-goers are the most dangerous drivers

....

Lt. Gary Megge, a Michigan State Police traffic expert who has overseen hundreds of speed limit changes around the state, said a freeway driver going slower than the flow of traffic can be "the most dangerous driver on the road" because he or she spurs aggressiveness from faster drivers that is more likely to lead to crashes.

Drivers who go 55 m.p.h. can be almost mowed over by the majority of drivers who travel closer to 70 m.p.h., officials said. Given that reality, the State Police and MDOT have for several years worked to set more realistic limits on freeway speeds. The federal government, in the mid-1990s, ended the national 55 m.p.h. speed limit established to conserve fuel amid the 1970s oil crises.

[Meddle]

Freeway speeds within the city have always been 55MPH. Higher speeds in congested areas lead to more serious collisions and greater chances of fatalities.

Drivers who go 55 m.p.h. can be almost mowed over by the majority of drivers who travel closer to 70 m.p.h.

That's true in open areas where the roads are built to handle higher speeds. Slower vehicles within higher speed traffic can be a problem.

Raising the city speed limits to 70 will mean traffic will be traveling 80MPH or more, instead of the current 65-70.

[Gsgeorge]

Not so sure about that one, Meddle. Thinking about the Lodge, everyone goes 70MPH anyway, but I am not sure you'd be able to go much faster than that considering the configuration of the freeway with its narrow lanes and broad curves. That is to say, the shape of the road prevents drivers from traveling faster than 70MPH comfortably.

In any case I welcome the change. Faster speed limits on freeways are proven to save lives, just look at the studies done in Denver & Los Angeles in this regard. I recall they were from around 2004. Sorry hopefully someone is a better googler than I am...

[rb336]

Freeway speeds within the city have always been 55MPH. Higher speeds in congested areas lead to more serious collisions and greater chances of fatalities.


That's true in open areas where the roads are built to handle higher speeds. Slower vehicles within higher speed traffic can be a problem.

Raising the city speed limits to 70 will mean traffic will be traveling 80MPH or more, instead of the current 65-70.

long-disproven falacy

[Meddle]

You'll see.

[313WX]

Freeway speeds within the city have always been 55MPH.

On I-75 [[Chrysler), the speed limit has been 70 MPH for a while [[but everyone goes 80-85 MPH), but that's because it's 4-5 lanes wide.

Part of the reason Metro Detroiters may drive so fast is because our roads lack any significant congestion [[because the region has sprawled out so far). We have no reason to slow down [[or driver slower) with relatively empty streets.

[DetroitPlanner]

The freeways I am on most are I-94 or M-39. I would seriously doubt that any change in speed limits would impact me. The roads are too congested to drive the speed limits as they are. It might impact the Allen Park/Dearborn/Dearborn Heights/MSP coffers on the speed trap S of Michigan to I-94 though!

[EastSider]

Drivers who go 55 m.p.h. can be almost mowed over by the majority of drivers who travel closer to 70 m.p.h.

That's true in open areas where the roads are built to handle higher speeds. Slower vehicles within higher speed traffic can be a problem.

The freeways in Detroit were built to handle higher speeds. Even the Reuther's engineering predates the 55 mph artifical limit.

[Roq]

You'll see.

So you're the guy who is sitting in the fast lane doing 65?

[JBMcB]

The freeways in Detroit were built to handle higher speeds. Even the Reuther's engineering predates the 55 mph artifical limit.

That's what I've heard as well. Much of the freeway system was designed with 50's-era vehicles in mind, large passenger cars that didn't corner very well. If a 50's land yacht could take a curve at 50-60MPH, a modern car with a smaller wheelbase and stiffer suspension should be able to safely take it at 70.

[Detroitnerd]

That's what I've heard as well. Much of the freeway system was designed with 50's-era vehicles in mind, large passenger cars that didn't corner very well. If a 50's land yacht could take a curve at 50-60MPH, a modern car with a smaller wheelbase and stiffer suspension should be able to safely take it at 70.

Actually, it's not about the tolerances of the vehicles, it's about the road design challenges. After Wyoming, I-94 was cut through an urban area, with lots of curves, twists and turns. Same thing with Lodge, the S-curve at Hamilton. If we've noticed anything from that tanker accident at the S-curve at 9 Mile, it's that people doing 80 MPH on interstates don't slow down for the more extreme curves. Besides, people didn't drive that fast in the 1950s, when those freeways were opened. It wasn't the law, it was the reality of it.

[MCP-001]

http://freep.com/article/20090831/NE...ed-to-70-m.p.h.

This title is a big steaming, heaping pile of horsesqueeze.

Keeping everyone at the same speed will make traffic more safe, not less.

Travel on I-80 in Ohio & Indiana to get an idea of how traffic should move.

[Detroitnerd]

MCP: Yeah, you're talking about inter-city roads, not the ones that were hacked through urban areas in the 1950s. There is a difference.

[MCP-001]

MCP: Yeah, you're talking about inter-city roads, not the ones that were hacked through urban areas in the 1950s. There is a difference.

True, where the roads go are different.

But if they're designed correctly, there is no reason why higher speeds [[which everyone travels anyway) are not possible.

[Jman]

Besides, people didn't drive that fast in the 1950s, when those freeways were opened. It wasn't the law, it was the reality of it.

I can tell you weren't around in the 50's.

[MikeM]

Are they going to raise the minimum speed limit?

[milesdriven]

We should take a lesson from Mexico in setting speed limits. In many urban areas, such as Mexico City, Queretaro, and Acapulco they set different speed limits for different lanes.

Also, Michigan should sell "speedpasses" where drivers must take a road test showing they have better than average reaction times, then get a sticker for their rear windshields allowing them to travel 85-90 mph in designated areas where it is safe to do so. I drive close to 90K miles/year for work, and I'd love the idea of a prepaid speeding ticket. It would be a major revenue generator for the state.

[Detroitnerd]

I can tell you weren't around in the 50's.

My dad was a traffic cop in the 1950s.

[Todd_Scott]

Studies do show that raising the speed limit to 70 does increase fatality rates on interstates. Some studies also show that it decreases road capacity as well.

It's frustrating to see our State Police blame those following the speed limits THAT THE STATE POLICE SET rather than fault their own inability to effectively enforce traffic laws.

[Detroitnerd]

Higher speed limits encourage sprawl.

[ziggyselbin]

Here is a story of an A2 man that happens to be an expert on traffic dynamics and how he dealt with a speeding ticket.

It has been documented by many sources that if traffic is routinely travelling at 5-15 mph over the posted limit that in many cases it is far safer to raise the limit_ there is no evidence that this will cause traffic to go even faster.




http://blog.mlive.com/annarbornews/2...enge_uphe.html

[pffft]

Now, I have a heavy foot and am frustrated by plodders in the fast lane, but think about this...do you really want grandma and grandpa, who might have issues seeing, or reacting quickly, to be going 70 plus mph around some of these curves?
There should be an acknowledged plodder lane where they can safely go under the speed limit.
There are also out of towners not as familiar with the curves and such, who might not be comfortable zooming by at 70 through the city freeways.
As more of the baby boomer population ages, I think this may cause issues...

[Detroitnerd]

True that. The next 20 years, we're supposed to have a significantly older population behind the wheel. But, hey, that's just the statistics. Whatever gets you home to Bingham Farms faster, dude. Bennigan's beckons.