Speechless

Fri, Jan 7, 2011 : 12:21 p.m.

The posted limit on Plymouth used to be set at 40 mph. Back then, given the Michigan tradition of driving 5-10 mph over whatever speed limit is posted, it was not uncommon to see 45-50 mph on the road. The city dropped the limit to 35 mph following the accidental but brutal deaths of two U-M students who tried to cross in front of the Islamic Center. The speed reduction, along with pedestrian islands and crosswalk lighting, comprised aspects of a reform plan for that roadway which was led by former city councilpersons Bob Johnson and Kim Groome. Plymouth is comparatively slower and safer now, and it's quite sad to see this positive legacy now become endangered.

grye

Fri, Jan 7, 2011 : 10:51 a.m.

There are many areas in Ann Arbor where the speed limit is set ridiculously low. Others are just fine. Conditions, time of day, and the amount of traffic can all be factors to be considered to determine what is safe. Although the speed limit on Plymmouth Road is only 35 mph, at 11:30pm when there is no snow, rain, or traffic, 45 mph is completely safe. 2 lanes each way with a center turn lane is better than other Ann Arbor roads with a 45 mph speed limit. Remember all you whiners about raising the speed limits. You can always drive slower or take the bus. No one is stopping you (unless you consider anything over 5 mph unsafe). The police may ticket you for creating an unsafe condition for other drivers.

Speechless

Thu, Jan 6, 2011 : 8:37 p.m.

"... The city needs to work on making roads that discourage, not encourage speeding and once the speed studies have been conducted and the speed limits adjusted, throwing the book at... others who continue to drive in excess of those speed limits...." The bottom line, I suppose, is that the rage from a few speed advocates over posted speeds in parts of town has succeeded in raising the political ante. Complete Streets advocates and their elected allies have been delivered a clear challenge to reimagine Ann Arbor roads and streets more thoroughly than before. This victory for the National Motorists/Speeders Association constricts the more limited, piecemeal strategies employed until now. While asserting, however absurdly, that we live in a "border-to-border speed trap," the speeders have nonetheless been effective in throwing down a gauntlet. I would hope that advocates for bicyclists, pedestrians, commuters and other non-drivers will work with supportive members of city council and the administration to develop systemic, long-term plans for reducing vehicle speeds and promoting shared roadway usage. This might include developing a set of defensible road criteria that effectively counters the dangerous standard of "85th percentile" driving, along with reconfiguring streets to have fewer lanes and greater accomodation for bike lanes, HAWK signal crossings, pedestrian islands, walking paths, etc. And, although the results of the statewide election most decidedly favor the interests of Walker and Wieder and decrease existing support for Complete Streets, ideas for (eventual) progressive change in state law should also be strategized. What would be very sweet is if this current defeat for safer, shared roadways leads to Ann Arbor becoming — in five or ten years — a national leader in forward-looking municipal programs which both reduce and slow down personal vehicle traffic.

AAFish

Thu, Jan 6, 2011 : 7:57 p.m.

Well, good ol' AnnArbor.com seems to have deleted my post from yesterday. Not the first time -- they're really quite wussy about some things. So -- let me try to summarize what I said -- If the "85th percentile" rule is truly a tenet of so-called "traffic engineering," then, as far as I'm concerned, that relegates "traffic engineering" to the realm of alchemy or voodoo. Not truly related to real science. Or engineering. Going by the "85th percentile" rule in connection with speed limits is akin to letting drunks determine what DUI laws should be. The vast majority of drivers seem to have no concept whatsoever of Newtonian physics, which is very germane to the discussion of traffic laws. Now -- I would not expect most people to be able to recite physics equations from memory. Indeed, I'd have to look up some of them myself. But -- I WOULD hope, ideally anyway, that anyone possessing a driver's license might have -- just an inkling -- of the fact that stopping distance increases with speed (actually, as the SQUARE of the speed), and -- that there is a distance in front of the car in which you CAN NOT stop. Which -- as I said - increases as the square of the speed. My example of the absurdity of the 85th percentile rule is Huron Parkway at the intersection of Platt. There is a traffic signal there, which I have -- repeatedly -- seen run on the red, just because the drivers were going too damn fast. So much for relying on the wisdom of the public as to the setting of speed limits. Murrow's Ghost -- you are spot on, as usual.

John Q

Wed, Jan 5, 2011 : 7:53 p.m.

"You may certainly challenge the data that say that posted speeds have little effect on actual speeds, but don't assume and claim, without refuting that data, that the posted speeds bear a relationship to pedestrian outcomes." I've seen no evidence, despite what's implied in some comments, that adjusting speed limits to match the 85th percentile increases pedestrian safety. Is that was the case, there would be no reason for signing speed reductions in school zones. Whether drivers obey a lower speed limit or not, it sends a signal about the need for more caution versus a higher speed limit. That said, I don't think speed limits are going to stop those who are intent on driving at whatever speed they want. foobar417's approach of engineering roads to reduce unsafe conditions for bicyclist and pedestrians is the only way to provide a safer environment for those who have to share roads with cars. The city needs to work on making roads that discourage, not encourage speeding and once the speed studies have been conducted and the speed limits adjusted, throwing the book at the likes of Mr. Weikle and others who continue to drive in excess of those speed limits.

Heardoc

Wed, Jan 5, 2011 : 7:22 p.m.

@ghost Look up the word 'Freedom" It will assist you when you have a need to discuss oppression --Let' have some critical thinking on this matter -- not just hyperbole from you -- Also look up oppression -- this may assist you as well. Know =ing the meaning and intent is very important -- please refrain from using terms and words out of context in the future.

Heardoc

Wed, Jan 5, 2011 : 6:13 p.m.

@ ghost You seem to think that safety and slow speeds are not in conflict. Silly boy. That is why the percentile is in the law --- if no one follows the law -- then the law is not functioning. Let us see if we can bring an analogy you can understand. There were/are laws on the books that state unmarried people cannot live together -- since you believe that all laws are just you would have no problem with this -- even though the vast majority of people wold not think well if government started to impose this law upon us -- as is the pattern with you 1) Pontificate 2) Purposefully miss points so as to argue for argument sake 3) Attempt to find arcane ways of defending a silly position 4) Ignore the facts -- believe in t he position -- make up facts along the way. I realize that you want to defend a city government that is far left and you see no problem in oppression by the government as long as you agree with the government. Where were you taught -- Berkley? Silly boy.

JudithS

Wed, Jan 5, 2011 : 6:40 a.m.

"E. and W. Huron St, W. Stadium Blvd and Washtenaw Ave are so wide streets - problems; walk jays, handicapped has slow walking, handy wheelchair but electric-mobile wheelchair power has a pretty well fast too." Am I the only one who has no idea what this comment meant???

Boo Radley

Wed, Jan 5, 2011 : 5:43 a.m.

@Barb Ann Arbor city ordinance, like state law, gives the right of way to pedestrians LAWFULLY within a cross walk. But the law goes back to what children used to be taught about looking both ways before crossing the street. If there is not sufficient time for a pedestrian to cross before oncoming traffic, they must not enter the crosswalk. If a vehicle has to brake sharply, or slam on the brakes, the pedestrian is in the wrong.

Tom Wieder

Wed, Jan 5, 2011 : 12:34 a.m.

Ghost - You keep making this argument about making "speed limits safe for pedestrians," but you keep ignoring the argument that the posted speed limits and the actual speeds hardly correlate at all. The argument here isn't about how fast cars should travel; it's about what the legal speed limits should be. If you want to alter actual vehicle speeds, we talk should about where this might be done in the city, and how. But putting numbers on signs that almost nobody pays attention to doesn't protect pedestrians, or anyone else.

Heardoc

Tue, Jan 4, 2011 : 9:56 p.m.

@ghost Again a purposeful miss by you -- Just because a government makes a law does not make it correct. The consent of the governed challenges and does not support the law. You cannot expect to be 'SAFE' at your every move. This is the mentality of the left that believes in cradle to grave involvement by the government. The same group that put through ObamaCare with the statement by FORMER SPEAKER PELOSI that 'We Need To Pass it To See What is In It'... Read the Declaration of Independence and then the Constitution -- even one such as yourself would easily understand that the will of the governed supercede the government and that we have a duty to challenge government when it is oppressive. You may not think this is oppressive but the rest of us do feel it is oppressive -- you also have some very different thoughts on many subjects. Please do not purposefully miss the point in the future.

Tom Wieder

Tue, Jan 4, 2011 : 9:12 p.m.

foobar417 - I'm not assuming anything about the future use of Newport Rd., and it is possible that some people forego using that street, and others, because they are not user-friendly to them at present. And I'm supportive of efforts to make our streets more usable by bicyclists. At the same time, it is important to be realistic about American life. Very few people use bicycles as a significant mode of transportation in their daily lives - to go to and from work, during work, for shopping and entertainment, etc. - and they never will. A major reason for this is the geography of our communities. Yes, you can call it sprawl, but unless we scrap trillions in the investment in our scattered homes, offices, stores, etc., bicycles, walking and mass transit do not serve well the needs of most citizens. Bicycles are used by somewhat more people for recreation, but it is still a very distinct minority, even where good biking infrastructure is available. Given these realities of American life - and the likelihood that only marginal changes are very likely, it is appropriate to ask how many resources should be devoted to these alternative modes, and at what cost in time and inconvenience to non-users?

Thor143

Tue, Jan 4, 2011 : 7:07 p.m.

As much as I don't like cops, the speed limit on Washtenaw through the hilly sections is too high. Add to that, that they are losing revenue from the speed traps that they set up on that stretch.

foobar417

Tue, Jan 4, 2011 : 7:02 p.m.

@Tom Wieder: I believe there have been traffic studies that prove that if you reduce lane widths, auto speeds go down. I'd have to google a bit to find the ones I remember reading about, so I'm not asserting that as fact. You state: "So, if the various transport modes have safely co-existed at those speeds for years, why would we try to lower the current speeds? If there's an actual safety problem that lower actual speeds would address, then, sure, lower the speeds by engineering methods." I think there's a significant flaw in this statement. It assumes that past use of the roadway is the only indicator of potential future uses, given greater accomodation for alternate uses of the road. Or to put it another way, since possible future users of the road are potentially too scared to use the road given the high speeds, you're statement would argue against modifying the road to appeal to a broader class of users who are currently not registering as users of the road. For example, Newport Road leads to many significant area attractions, including city-owned nature areas and the Huron River. If there were sidewalks and the 85th percentile speed was 25 MPH, I would happily take my young children on bikes on the sidewalk down Newport to the Huron River. Likewise, if there were bike lanes and the 85th percentile speed was 25 MPH, my wife would feel comfortable riding down that road. As it is now, whether the posted speed limit is 25 mph or 40 mph, with all the drivers speeding along at at 40 mph, I'm the only member of my family who feels comfortable using that facility. To put it another way, Complete Streets is now the guiding policy of the state of Michigan. (I realize it only covers certain streets and municipalities can opt out, but it is an expression of the general intent for how streets should cater to ALL users as endorsed by the state government.) It's one thing to debate whether speed limits or stop signs or road diets or lane narrowings are the most effective means of reducing speeds. It's another thing to debate whether the goal is to to design streets to primarily accomadate the quick passage of cars or to design streets to facilitate the safe passage of all users who MIGHT use the street if it was safe for everyone. In my opinion, we, as a society, should certainly evaluate what are the most effective means of reducing speeds and some approaches may seem logical (e.g. lower speed limits, additional stop signs) and yet have unintended consequences. However, again in my opinion, it's very important to design streets so that all classes of users feel safe whatever their chosen means of transport. In my opinion, it's not very important to facilitate fast speeds by cars, because that creates a hostile climate for other users of roadways and because it doesn't accomplish anything in the long run other than encouraging sprawl and congestion. To each his own, of course.

Tom Wieder

Tue, Jan 4, 2011 : 6:08 p.m.

@foobar417 - I don't object (Jim Walker can speak for himself) to traffic control measures that reduce average speeds - IF they make sense for some reason. In your hypothetical, you talk about adding sidewalks, which would probably encourage higher, not lower, speeds, because drivers would expect pedestrians to use them, instead of walking in the road and would be less concerned about hitting them. As far as reducing lanes to 10 ft, I don't know if: (A) that raises any other safety concerns or (B) that would reduce speeds. My basic reaction is that there isn't a safety need to reduce current actual speeds on Newport. With the longstanding 85th percentile speed on that road of nearly 40, I'm unaware of any vehicle/pedestrian or vehicle/bicycle accidents. So, if the various transport modes have safely co-existed at those speeds for years, why would we try to lower the current speeds? If there's an actual safety problem that lower actual speeds would address, then, sure, lower the speeds by engineering methods.

racerx

Tue, Jan 4, 2011 : 5:17 p.m.

@5c0++4d13y-yeah, and we get to drive at any speed we want so all of those Priuses, Volts, Volvo's, Subies, bicyclist, peds can stay off the streets and let us "drive it like we stole it!" LOL!

racerx

Tue, Jan 4, 2011 : 5:13 p.m.

@atnaap-thanks for the reference. However, what some failed to realize is that the city decided to trump State law which is the 85th percentile. To me, this is the defining factor. Studies from abroad are fine, still we live in a society of laws and it seems, at least to me, that the city decided that it didn't want to follow a State law that governs our society. Oh, and the speed trap on South bound Main St. across from the auto repair store before Happy's Pizza catching traffic in the morning. Easy pickings, like fish in a barrel. Again, how many accidents are caused by excessive spending in relation to the tickets that motorist receive?

5c0++ H4d13y

Tue, Jan 4, 2011 : 4:11 p.m.

January 3rd should be named Jim Walker Day in honor of a real Ann Arbor hero.

Heardoc

Tue, Jan 4, 2011 : 3:45 p.m.

@ghost Absurdity begins when one does not pay attention to the facts. You seem to be purpsoeful in your missing the point. I have seen this many times from you. Seem to argue for no other reqason than to argue. Let see if we can create an analogy here... You seem to favor status quo -- At one point most people thought the earth was flat (akin to thinking the speed limits are properly set by the city) and others thought the world was round. In your view -- the staus quo would remain (ala, flat worlder) and spped limits should not be changed even though only 15% of the people follow that rule. 85% of us think the rulke is bogus and is meant to generate money for the city in a arbitrary and cariciuos way (round worlders). You want to believe in a flat world that is your choice -- I choose to believe in a round world.

foobar417

Tue, Jan 4, 2011 : 3:45 p.m.

@Jim Walker and @Tom Wiedner: So, assuming I'm following your arguments correctly, 1) You object to setting speed limits to anything other than "what drivers actually" drive (i.e. 85th percentile). 2) You don't object to making the streets safe for everyone, including pedestrians and cyclists. Therefore, if there are alternative traffic control measures that effectively reduce 85th percentile speeds and that's what the community wants to do and spend its money on, you wouldn't object. (I think you've said that you feel speed limit signs and extra stop signs are not effective, so I'm talking about things other than that.) For example, if the city of Ann Arbor chose to reduce lane widths to 10 feet, added bike lanes, and added sidewalks to Newport Road and it had the practical effect of reducing the 85th percentile of speeds on that road to 25 MPH, you'd have no object to the city taking that tact and then setting the speed limit to 25 MPH.

breadman

Tue, Jan 4, 2011 : 2:40 p.m.

Ghost! You are right, There is an older gentle men that lives one bus stop sign down from Hillside Terrace that gets on at Jackson by Rite Aide with his few Kroger bags from shopping and must cross Jackson Ave. Now he must choose too either walk all the way down Jackson or walk back from Jackson, Huron and Dexter split so he does not become a speed bump.. That Guy has been there a looong time...

Heardoc

Tue, Jan 4, 2011 : 2:25 p.m.

@Ghost Why not just not drive -- that would be the safest. Not practical and not very thoughtful on your part. Did you look at bicycles? What about people running too fast? At what point will you feel safe? Hey, what about we keep everyone off the road and in their homes and not come out-- that would be safer....;..... Just silly Ghost.

Heardoc

Tue, Jan 4, 2011 : 2:22 p.m.

It6 is odd that we have a government body, Ann Arbor City CVouncil and Mayor Heftge, that have attempted to not follow the law. Several rulings later this government body is still attempting to see if there is a way they can avoid tyhe law. These are the same people who thought that hiring two police officers whose role would be to write tickets to the residents and visitors of the city of Ann Arbor. These nleftisis we have in office believe that your money belongs to them. That they have every right to find a way to take your money fromn you and your family. We need to put these people back into the private sector and get them out of our government. I think the last election was one that said to stop the leftist agenda, live within your means and stop blaming everybody else for your own situation.

Greggy_D

Tue, Jan 4, 2011 : 2:18 p.m.

@Ghost "Rather than permit lawbreakers set the speed limit, which is what the 85% rule does," AGAIN you fail to understand there aren't any lawbreakers when the set speed limit is against State law.

Jim Walker

Tue, Jan 4, 2011 : 2:10 p.m.

For Phillip Farber Michigan's had 871 fatalities in 2009, with 100.9 billion vehicle miles traveled, for a fatality rate of 0.86 fatalities per 100 million vehicle miles traveled. Michigan had 1,386 fatalities in 1999, with 93.1 billion vehicle miles traveled, for a fatality rate of 1.49 fatalities per 100 million vehicle miles traveled. A part of this 42% reduction in the fatality rate per mile traveled is due to the efforts of the Michigan State Police to support the posting of 85th percentile speed limits - see www.michigan.gov/speedlimits and download the booklet "Establishing Realistic Speed Limits" to understand the methodology. The two command officers in the department responsible for safety in the state police won a Governor's Traffic Safety Advisory Commission award for their work on 85th percentile limits to advance safety. By comparison, the national fatality rate is 1.16 fatalities per 100 million vehicle miles traveled, so our results in Michigan are about 25% better than the national average. Please also note that the raw fatality count in 2009 of 33,804 is the lowest number since 1954 when the total vehicle miles traveled was less than 20% of todays total miles traveled. The fatality rate in the mid 1950s was more than 5 times greater per mile traveled than todays results. Driving today is dramatically safer than in years past and posting correct 85th percentile speed limits on our main roads will advance those gains even further. Regards, James C. Walker, NMA

Jim Walker

Tue, Jan 4, 2011 : 1:52 p.m.

Text of the comment I made at the city council hearing last night. Ann Arbor City Council Meeting & Hearing on MVC/UTC Adoption 1/3/11 I support the citys adoption of the entire Michigan Vehicle Code and the Uniform Traffic Code. It has been my wish for many years to see posted limits in Ann Arbor set in compliance with state laws for the purpose of maximizing safety for all users. I am concerned by some comments from city officials, and sincere members of the public who spoke at the last hearing, that indicate some people believe the state laws and rules in the Michigan Vehicle Code and the Uniform Traffic Code on speed limits are NOT designed to produce the safest possible environment for all users bikes, pedestrians and vehicles. Nothing could be further from the truth. The State Police Department in charge of improving safety for all citizens and users of our streets and roads supports all of the state laws and rules in these codes because they DO tend to produce the greatest safety, the smoothest traffic flow, and the fewest conflicts between all users bikes, pedestrians and vehicles. The artificially low speed limits that are common on the main roads in Ann Arbor tend to create more speed variance, more conflicts between users, and a less smooth and less predictable traffic flow. This decreases safety for all users. And, of course, it promotes unfair enforcement versus some of our safest drivers. Three things indicate the city may not be intending to actually set the safest posted limits. First, Mr. West was quoted in the AnnArbor.Com article on December 16th that the posted limit on Newport might go up to 30 mph from the current 25. That would change the posted limit from the 0th percentile speed where essentially no one is in compliance, to about the 18th percentile speed so that only 82% of the drivers would be arbitrarily defined as violators, rather than virtually 100% of them. This would only be a token gesture, not a change to promote safety, and not in keeping with the intent of the state laws. Second, Mr. West was quoted that the city may use other criteria for their engineering studies, not necessarily similar to the state laws and administrative rules in the UTC. Third, the amendment introduced on December 20 leaves a gaping loophole the city could use to do the wrong things in the future and make the code changes meaningless. I support the new ordinance. I hope the city will use it to actually set the safest possible speed limits on our main roads. James C. Walker, Board Member, National Motorists Association

Jim Walker

Tue, Jan 4, 2011 : 1:50 p.m.

For Neal Elaykin: Tom Weider noted correctly that the posted limits have almost nothing to do with actual travel speeds. I would add that the portion of Newport where I have measured the 85th percentile speeds at 40 mph (same as the county measured it when the road was posted at 40 about 12-15 years ago) is the portion north of M-14, well beyond Forsythe and Wines schools. The correct engineering solution when a school is present is to post a lower limit that applies only when children are likely to be present, as was done recently on Washtenaw near Tappan school. State law provides for this under MCL 257.627a. Also, the use of stop signs as speed control devices is not correct engineering and has many negative consequences. When used in this way on the obviously main road that should have the right of way, the compliance with full stops is poor and the average speeds between the stop signs has a strong likelihood to go UP, as people accelerate hard to "make up for the lost time" with the improper stops. In addition, residents will experience a rise in noise for the braking and accelerating vehicles. It further raises pollution, gas consumption, and wear and tear on cars. The City of Livonia had a big project to remove unnecessary stop signs and stop lights that did not meet their engineering "warrants" (the technical criteria that permit or do not permit a stop sign or stop light). The average speeds on those streets DROPPED when the unneeded signs were removed and the police official responsible for the program received a Governor's Traffic Safety Advisory Commission award for heading the program. Regards, James C. Walker, NMA

Phillip Farber

Tue, Jan 4, 2011 : 1:35 p.m.

@Tom Weider "People tend to drive at a speed at which they feel comfortable and safe, regardless of the posted limits." I think that may explain why there were 33,804 traffic deaths in 2010. Could it be that people are poor judges of safe speeds? If so what does that say about the 85% rule? I say: lower the speed limits, enforce them to the max and put streets and road on a serious diet.

Heardoc

Tue, Jan 4, 2011 : 11:30 a.m.

This is nothing more than a bunch of government thugs attemtping to circumvent the will of the people by using loopholes to in order to impose their will upon the citizens of Ann Arbor. This is the same group of people who attempted to hire two policie officers whose soul duty was to write tickets to those people who choose to visit, or happen to live, Ann Arbor. this ius nothing more than Chicago Land politics by the leftists that are runnning our city. Mayor Heftge and the city council are so hungry for our money that they have not followed the law -- and are now attempting to see if there is a way they can get around the law. The most sickening part of this whole mess -- it points out that the government of our city feels that they are entitled to our money as they see fit. Will attemtp to get that money in any way they can and if you resist they will attempt to maker you pay a price for your ressistance.

Barb

Tue, Jan 4, 2011 : 11:22 a.m.

@Boo, I thought an Ann Arbor City ordinance did indeed give pedestrians the right of way... is that now how it works?

Tom Wieder

Tue, Jan 4, 2011 : 11:22 a.m.

@atnaap - I don't doubt that the higher the speed at which a pedestrian is struck by a vehicle, the greater the likelihood of serious injury or death, but that really doesn't address the issue of proper posted speed limits. If the average actual speed on a street with a posted limit of 25 is 37, and the average speed is 37 when posted at 35, the difference in posted speed is unlikely to make any difference in the injury/death experience of pedestrians, because only the actual speed makes the difference. You may certainly challenge the data that say that posted speeds have little effect on actual speeds, but don't assume and claim, without refuting that data, that the posted speeds bear a relationship to pedestrian outcomes. On what do you base the sweeping statement that the 85th percentile principle is "bogus/poorly interpreted?"

Boo Radley

Tue, Jan 4, 2011 : 11:20 a.m.

If the goal of any group is increased pedestrian safety, then the proper (but politically incorrect) enforcement efforts should be directed at ticketing jaywalkers and those pedestrians who mistakenly believe that they have the right of way as long as they can rush out in the crosswalk before a car reaches it. State law does not automatically give a pedestrian the right of way simply because they are in a crosswalk.

Tom Wieder

Tue, Jan 4, 2011 : 11:08 a.m.

Some of the comments here represent the common, if understandable, misperception that there is a significant relationship between posted speed limits and actual speeds. There isn't. People tend to drive at a speed at which they feel comfortable and safe, regardless of the posted limits. Numerous objective tests have shown that lowering or raising posted limits as much as 15 mph on a road change the average speed on the road less than 3 mph. Vigorous enforcement changes speeds for a brief period, but the effect almost disappears as soon as there isn't a cop posted there all the time. Virtually no one, NO ONE, not city buses, moms in mini-vans or police on routine patrol drives at the speed limit on streets like Newport. The posted limit is 25, but the average speed is about 35. This is not a guess; it comes from repeated measurements. So, Linda Peck, whatever "charm" Ann Arbor has for walkers, it has little to do with posted limits, because they don't reflect reality. @Andy Jacobs - "How can you possibly determine this speed [85th percentile] if the limit is set to something else?" Simple. You measure it. On Newport Rd., for example, despite its 25 mph posting, the 85th percentile is about 40. Because this result isn't tied to posted limits (see above), you'd get about the same result measuring the 85th if the limit were posted at 35 or 45. "This areas "new drivers" (young, new to the country, etc) will most certainly be getting in more dangerous accidents." You base this on what data or traffic science that says that these drivers would get into more accidents if posted limits - notwithstanding their non-effect on actual speeds - were higher? @Neal Elyakin - Let's assume, just for argument's sake, that higher POSTED limits on Newport would endanger kids walking to and from school. At most, this condition exists for 370 hours (185 school days X 2 hours a day). Does it really make sense to put stops on the road for the other 8390 hours of the year. Special school zone limits with flashing numerals operating during key hours would be much more effective in slowing speeds near the schools without inhibiting reasonable driving the other 96% of the time.

theodynus

Tue, Jan 4, 2011 : 9:50 a.m.

@Racerx: Sources for the stats cited by the WBWC are: Killing Speed and Saving Lives, UK Dept. of Transportation, London, England. See also Limpert, Rudolph. Motor Vehicle Accident Reconstruction and Cause Analysis. Fourth Edition. Charlottesville, VA. The Michie Company, 1994, p. 663. Vehicle Speeds and the Incidence of Fatal Pedestrian Collisions prepared by the Austrailian Federal Office of Road Safety, Report CR 146, October 1994, by McLean AJ,Anderson RW, Farmer MJB, Lee BH, Brooks CG. Both studies are from very reputable transportation research agencies and the science behind them is pretty irrefutable. It's certainly better science than the bogus/poorly interpreted 85th percentile speed limit studies.

Steven and Kathy

Tue, Jan 4, 2011 : 9:10 a.m.

E. and W. Huron St, W. Stadium Blvd and Washtenaw Ave are so wide streets - problems; walk jays, handicapped has slow walking, handy wheelchair but electric-mobile wheelchair power has a pretty well fast too.

Robert Honeyman

Tue, Jan 4, 2011 : 8:55 a.m.

re chip reed: @20mph, you'd *have* to live forever to get wherever you're going! :7)

JGS

Tue, Jan 4, 2011 : 8:42 a.m.

@Ignatz - Funny how that works huh? :)

Chip Reed

Tue, Jan 4, 2011 : 8:31 a.m.

Newport was a big road before the automobile had been invented. It was the road to Foster Station (AKA Newport). I went to Forsythe and students have been able to stay out of the street, so far. Anyway, let's all drive 20 mph and we'll all live forever!

Kevin S. Devine

Tue, Jan 4, 2011 : 8:31 a.m.

I'd like to suggest that speed limits are not the only reason we have a "less smooth and less predictable traffic flow" as Jim Walker stated. How about if the city's Transportation Planning Department reviews the timing of traffic lights across the city. It seems to me they are permanently set for football Saturdays. I've idled at red lights on Eisenhower, Pauline, Seventh, William, Liberty and any number of other streets at off-peak hours, like 9 p.m. on a weeknight or 8 a.m. on a Sunday, with nary a car in sight in any direction. Such a waste of time and gas.

Ignatz

Tue, Jan 4, 2011 : 8:30 a.m.

Just speaking for myself, but I always make sure that traffic is clear before I cross a street. I learned that a long time ago.

Linda Peck

Tue, Jan 4, 2011 : 7:52 a.m.

This proposed increase is such a mistake! Part of the charm of our town is slow speeds. We can take a look around and people are not afraid to walk. Think about it! Part of why Ypsilanti's downtown is such an unpleasant walk-through is the high speed people drive down Michigan Avenue.

Soothslayer

Tue, Jan 4, 2011 : 7:35 a.m.

"Walker subscribes to the Michigan State Police's belief that limits should be set near the speed at which 85 percent of drivers travel in normal conditions." How can you possibly determine this speed if the limit is set to something else? This areas "new drivers" (young, new to the country, etc) will most certainly be getting in more dangerous accidents. Why is it that driving lawas that we've been dealing with for decades cannot simply be standardized so they are not up for "debate"?

Tex Treeder

Tue, Jan 4, 2011 : 7:14 a.m.

Huron Parkway north of Washtenaw is obviously set too low now. It was lowered to 35 mph just a few years ago when it had been 40 or 45. That section of road is obviously faster than currently posted.

shadow wilson

Tue, Jan 4, 2011 : 7:03 a.m.

racerx you picked the wrong stretch of packard the speed limit is fine there.There are several residential street access points onto packard as well as several business access points as well.........30mph is the correct speed on that part of packard........otherwise I agree with the need for change in other locations.

Neal Elyakin

Tue, Jan 4, 2011 : 6:59 a.m.

I would normally not complain about speed limits; and although I do fall into that category of the 82 percent of drivers who would be arbitrarily defined as violators when driving on some AA roads with very low speed limits, I must comment about Newport Road. South of the M14 overpass, there are two schools - Forsythe Middle and Wines Elementary - right on the road. North of Newport - closer to the turn to Huron River Drive - is another school (Steiner). Increasing the speed limit on this road may be fine, but add stop signs - I would recommend one at Red Oak, and another one at White Oak - or reduce the limit after White Oak until Newport ends at North Maple. I'm sure if the city asks for citizen input, more like me would be happy to add their comments.

sbbuilder

Tue, Jan 4, 2011 : 6:58 a.m.

Will the City refund all the tickets written in violation of State law over the past number of years? If this were purely a safety issue, could anyone point to the number of vehicle/pedestrian/bicycle accidents? Or, the number of vehicle/bicycle deaths in the City? I may be remiss, but I can't think of any examples of these in recent times.

breadman

Tue, Jan 4, 2011 : 6:29 a.m.

Walkees, Watch out crossing the streets where there are no crosswalks at. So that means too all seniors, best get off the bus at the next bus stop and take your time getting back, becuase you could be come the next speed bump. Even in the YELLOW PAINTED lines with the new crossing law in AA your life is still in danger. There flying low. Been there and done it!!!!

racerx

Tue, Jan 4, 2011 : 6:16 a.m.

WB&WC sites their stat, based on what? Heresay? What supports this stat? Congrats to Jim Walker for taking the city to court to have them do the right thing. There are so many speed traps in town, and traffic crawls at a slow pace. Lets count where these traps are; Packard Rd police cars will park at either the former Dom Bakery lot, or now, at the cleaners next to Morgan & York; Main St. a car will park in a drive out next to UM Golf Course; Stadium Blvd at Crisler Arena next to the Big House; Washtenaw Ave near Kings Keyboard....Where is data that supports the correlation between speed and traffic acidents along these roads? Shame on the city for having the threats of lawsuit to comform to State law.