Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Since you have a beef with our supposedly "low" speed limits, you should take it up with the feds. The state has nothing to do with setting speed limits.
No. The State has full control over speed limits in Hawaii.
The NMSL was modified in 1987 and 1988 to allow up to 65 mph (105 km/h) limits on certain limited access, rural roads. Congress repealed the NMSL in 1995, fully returning speed limit setting authority to the states.
Regardless - speed limits have been a hot topic in Hawaii for awhile....
"Critics argue that it's time to bring highway speed limits, which basically haven't changed since 1935, up to date. Improvements in auto technology as well as driver education make it possible to let most vehicles travel safely at higher speeds, they say."
Why in hurry eh? Wife going in labor? Trying to escape a fire or tsunami? Will not going an extra 10 mph make one homeless or lose one's job? Why go faster? You live in Paradise! Everyone wants to move here, enjoy it before it's gone.
The NMSL was modified in 1987 and 1988 to allow up to 65 mph (105 km/h) limits on certain limited access, rural roads. Congress repealed the NMSL in 1995, fully returning speed limit setting authority to the states.
Regardless - speed limits have been a hot topic in Hawaii for awhile....
"Critics argue that it's time to bring highway speed limits, which basically haven't changed since 1935, up to date. Improvements in auto technology as well as driver education make it possible to let most vehicles travel safely at higher speeds, they say."
So let me guess. You're another one that thinks increasing the speed limit will reduce congestion?
Why am I not surprised.
And you are incorrect again. Doing your infamous apples and oranges routine comparing WIDE AND OPEN highways to urban freeways with high congestion, limited sight distance, horrible on/off ramp design, no shoulders/medians and extremely narrow lanes.
The feds forced the state to reduce the speed limit because of the specific items I outlined in my post. Reducing the lane width required the speed limit change from 50 mph to 45 mph. The stretch of H-1 along UH has been 45 mph since the freeway opened. And this was established by FEDERAL requirements that require X amount of feet of on ramp to allow for ample acceleration run and speed at the actual lane merge. The on ramps were too short, thus the lower speed limit had to be instituted for that section and that section only. All these requirements are set by the feds - not the state.
And yes, the state can set its own TOP speed limit for its sections of interstate highways. But in order for them to get to a higher speed limit they must meet the federal safety requirements, some of which I outlined in my previous post. The state can't just decide to put whatever speed limit they want - that is patently absurd. They need to meet the minimum requirements of safety first. The freeway section we are specifically talking about does NOT meet the minimum requirements to even get the speed limit to 50 MPH. Those standards are all set by the feds - not the state.
The federal government has not had speed limit jurisdiction since 1995. You have a source that says otherwise- produce it. I've provided 2 sources. The State of Hawaii since 1995 has full jurisdiction over speed limits.
I also never weighed in on increasing speed limits. I simply posted links regarding your false information.
I don't really care what the speed limit is on Oahu - they are largely ignored anyway. When the police set up radar they are always - and I mean always in the same place. To help folks out - off the top of my head, Likelike towards town right when you emerge from tunnel - Pali towards Kailua right when you get on from H1 where it curves by the cliff - Pali towards town just past the initial stoplights - Hawaii Kai bound on Kalanianaole - on H3 town bound where speed limit drops under the viaduct, H1 by Kapiolani exit - couldn't really tell you the West side since I do all I can to avoid it.
Increasing the speed limit does absolutely nothing to ease congestion. Anyone with a 3rd grade education knows that. Congestion is the result of too many cars on the road at the same time. I can't believe someone even has to explain that to you.
Since you have a beef with our supposedly "low" speed limits, you should take it up with the feds. The state has nothing to do with setting speed limits. The feds set the limit based on sight distance (driving over a hill or around a bend), availability of sufficient shoulders and medians, lane width and the design of on and off ramps. The stretch between Kapiolani Medical and the Middle St merge has very limited sight distance in several areas, very little to no shoulders or medians, very narrow lanes and very poorly designed on and off ramps.
Accidents happen all the time along that stretch - I can literally see them from my house. In fact, this just happened an hour ago
Increasing the speed limit in that area is dangerous and just plain dumb.
Why do you always peg the horses ass meter in your posts?
Faster traffic spreads the cars out (physics), and at the same time allows some cars to have already gotten to their destination and get off the road, and some to get on the road later and still make their destination in time. Watch a stream of cars at a race. On the straight, at max speed, their linear separation is greater, although in time interval it is the same. As they slow, the time interval stays the same, but their interval decreases. It is actually one of Bernoulli laws. Cars on freeway are the same, except worse because regular drivers don't like to get too close, so they slow down even more, exacerbating the problem even more. The closer they get, the more they slow, which brings them even closer together, so they slow even more. Eventually, you will find thousands of cars all stopped on the freeway, for absolutely no reason than someone in the front slowed down, and everyone else followed suite, each slowing down a bit more than those in front.
Also, I don't recall saying to increase speed limits, merely the speed cars travel. Once they start to slow, the game is over. Believe me, I drive in some of the heaviest traffic around and I see all the time. Keeping he speed up, keeps the linear interval long, so congestion is reduced.
You can demonstrate this to even yourself. If a road has to carry X number of cars per hour, if they are going slow, many more will still be on the road at the same time (congestion), at higher speeds cars will have to spend less time on the road, and more will have already gotten off the road, and therefore, less congestion.
Dangerous sections of roads should be fixed to speeds can be maintained, and drivers must be educated to abide by the rules, and keep speeds up as much as possible. Slowing down without definite immediate needs is a killer for traffic. Lane discipline is critical, slower traffic must move to the right, no matter what the actual speeds are. But of course, none of this will happen because it beyond the intellectual and emotional capacity of far too many drivers who, immediately upon entering traffic, dive for the fast lane and stay their going substantially slower than the faster cars on the road.
Another error (another in a sea of errors) is about who sets speed limits. The Feds "set" speed limits during the Carter administration, and for some time thereafter, as a fuel-saving step (so goes their pretense). It wasn't a mandate, exactly, but merely a threat to cut-off highway funding. As I said, just another error in your sea, or, rather, ocean, of errors.
And please, try to keep the Horse's Ass levels out of the red zone. I think the Mod should say something to you.
Why do you always peg the horses ass meter in your posts?
Faster traffic spreads the cars out (physics), and at the same time allows some cars to have already gotten to their destination and get off the road, and some to get on the road later and still make their destination in time. Watch a stream of cars at a race. On the straight, at max speed, their linear separation is greater, although in time interval it is the same. As they slow, the time interval stays the same, but their interval decreases. It is actually one of Bernoulli laws. Cars on freeway are the same, except worse because regular drivers don't like to get too close, so they slow down even more, exacerbating the problem even more. The closer they get, the more they slow, which brings them even closer together, so they slow even more. Eventually, you will find thousands of cars all stopped on the freeway, for absolutely no reason than someone in the front slowed down, and everyone else followed suite, each slowing down a bit more than those in front.
Also, I don't recall saying to increase speed limits, merely the speed cars travel. Once they start to slow, the game is over. Believe me, I drive in some of the heaviest traffic around and I see all the time. Keeping he speed up, keeps the linear interval long, so congestion is reduced.
You can demonstrate this to even yourself. If a road has to carry X number of cars per hour, if they are going slow, many more will still be on the road at the same time (congestion), at higher speeds cars will have to spend less time on the road, and more will have already gotten off the road, and therefore, less congestion.
Dangerous sections of roads should be fixed to speeds can be maintained, and drivers must be educated to abide by the rules, and keep speeds up as much as possible. Slowing down without definite immediate needs is a killer for traffic. Lane discipline is critical, slower traffic must move to the right, no matter what the actual speeds are. But of course, none of this will happen because it beyond the intellectual and emotional capacity of far too many drivers who, immediately upon entering traffic, dive for the fast lane and stay their going substantially slower than the faster cars on the road.
Another error (another in a sea of errors) is about who sets speed limits. The Feds "set" speed limits during the Carter administration, and for some time thereafter, as a fuel-saving step (so goes their pretense). It wasn't a mandate, exactly, but merely a threat to cut-off highway funding. As I said, just another error in your sea, or, rather, ocean, of errors.
And please, try to keep the Horse's Ass levels out of the red zone. I think the Mod should say something to you.
:?
You must be malihini? Speed limits will not change the fact that currently everyone coming out of ewa has two options to get to town. The freeway or farrington through waipahu. This is just one example of bad development planning when it comes to building roads. But to the credit of people who lived on Oahu in prior generations how could they see a future Oahu overpopulated like it is today. In my opinion increasing the speed limits will only cause more congestion in bottleneck areas and will cause more accidents. Currently we have to many accidents that close down lanes or parts of our freeways. Imagine if the speed limits increased.
Last edited by Da kine guy; 06-25-2016 at 10:46 AM..
You must be malihini? Speed limits will not change the fact that currently everyone coming out of ewa has two options to get to town. The freeway or farrington through waipahu. This is just one example of bad development planning when it comes to building roads. But to the credit of people who lived on Oahu in prior generations how could they see a future Oahu overpopulated like it is today. In my opinion increasing the speed limits will only cause more congestion in bottleneck areas and will cause more accidents. Currently we have to many accidents that close down lanes or parts of our freeways. Imagine if the speed limits increased.
Perhaps you missed this:
"Dangerous sections of roads should be fixed to speeds can be maintained, and drivers must be educated to abide by the rules, and keep speeds up as much as possible. Slowing down without definite immediate needs is a killer for traffic."
And again, I don't specifically call for increasing speed limits overall, just keep traffic moving faster than it currently is.
Most of what I refer to is a matter of poor driving techniques and habits, but that would never change.
To be honest, he idea of self-driving cars that would keep speeds up and not violate lane protocols might not be such a bad idea after all.
Sometimes, I think I live in a world where people have not gone to Driver's Ed in High School!!!!
Why do you always peg the horses ass meter in your posts?
Faster traffic spreads the cars out (physics), and at the same time allows some cars to have already gotten to their destination and get off the road, and some to get on the road later and still make their destination in time. Watch a stream of cars at a race. On the straight, at max speed, their linear separation is greater, although in time interval it is the same. As they slow, the time interval stays the same, but their interval decreases. It is actually one of Bernoulli laws. Cars on freeway are the same, except worse because regular drivers don't like to get too close, so they slow down even more, exacerbating the problem even more. The closer they get, the more they slow, which brings them even closer together, so they slow even more. Eventually, you will find thousands of cars all stopped on the freeway, for absolutely no reason than someone in the front slowed down, and everyone else followed suite, each slowing down a bit more than those in front.
Also, I don't recall saying to increase speed limits, merely the speed cars travel. Once they start to slow, the game is over. Believe me, I drive in some of the heaviest traffic around and I see all the time. Keeping he speed up, keeps the linear interval long, so congestion is reduced.
You can demonstrate this to even yourself. If a road has to carry X number of cars per hour, if they are going slow, many more will still be on the road at the same time (congestion), at higher speeds cars will have to spend less time on the road, and more will have already gotten off the road, and therefore, less congestion.
Dangerous sections of roads should be fixed to speeds can be maintained, and drivers must be educated to abide by the rules, and keep speeds up as much as possible. Slowing down without definite immediate needs is a killer for traffic. Lane discipline is critical, slower traffic must move to the right, no matter what the actual speeds are. But of course, none of this will happen because it beyond the intellectual and emotional capacity of far too many drivers who, immediately upon entering traffic, dive for the fast lane and stay their going substantially slower than the faster cars on the road.
Another error (another in a sea of errors) is about who sets speed limits. The Feds "set" speed limits during the Carter administration, and for some time thereafter, as a fuel-saving step (so goes their pretense). It wasn't a mandate, exactly, but merely a threat to cut-off highway funding. As I said, just another error in your sea, or, rather, ocean, of errors.
And please, try to keep the Horse's Ass levels out of the red zone. I think the Mod should say something to you.
My meter is calibrated to be accurate and your posts confirm that
My primary frustration with you is that you put convenience (your perception that people will save time commuting) over the safety of drivers. You have a very reckless and selfish way of rationalizing things - "what's a few more accidental deaths from time to time?... the main thing is I can get to work 40 seconds faster."
My argument is that our roads are not built or designed the same way they are in the mainland. People from the mainland move here and drive as if they are in a similar driving environment - long stretches of wide open, properly engineered roads with extra wide lanes (to accommodate a high volume of large interstate transporting semis), long on and off ramps, almost limitless sight distances and, most importantly, a class of drivers that is accustomed to driving fast in these specific environments. When you take that kind of mentality and apply it here on our roads which are engineered completely differently, it can make for a very dangerous driving environment. And you encouraging this kind of mentality on our roads is a detriment to the safety of all drivers on our roads.
I'm going to reiterate again since you seem to generalize all my statements - I am speaking specifically about the H-1 corridor between UH and the Middle St merge. This is a problem area and people break the speed limit by a good margin - consistently. I am arguing that cars need to follow the speed limit (or stay within a reasonable excess of the speed limit). And you are arguing not only are cars driving too slow in this specific corridor (suggesting they are not breaking the speed limit ENOUGH), but that the speed limit should be increased to reduce congestion and get people to their destination faster. I disagree with this because increasing the speed limit on this specific corridor will not reduce travel times.
And for these reasons -
1) Increasing the speed limit does indeed reduce the time people need to stay on the road. However, that also means that more cars are going to be exiting off ramps at a higher volume in a shorter period of time. I'm not sure if you are aware of this but there are surface streets immediately adjacent to the H-1 that are far beyond capacity. The Kinau off ramp constantly backs well onto the H-1... sometimes up to a mile. The Punahou exit is basically a parking lot that flows ONTO the H-1 16 hours a day. The same can be said for the Lunalilo off ramp and quite often the UH exit (going Kokohead) when an event takes place. Punchbowl at rush hour backs up far beyond the Liliha overpass and the Pali is no different. Increasing the speed limit would mean more cars (trying to get off the freeway) would flow onto these already fully congested surface streets in a shorter time span. And therefore even MORE cars would back up onto the freeway itself increasing traffic jams and slowing your commute even more than it was BEFORE the speed limit was increased. Further, off ramps that may have not backed up onto the freeway before the higher flow of cars was evident on the freeway may back up now with the increased volume. That further exacerbates congestion. So your idea of increasing the speed limit to get more people to move to their final destination is half baked because you are not factoring in surface streets directly adjacent to the freeway already being at full capacity and already backing up onto the freeway.
2) There is a direct and well-proven correlation to the speed of which cars travel and the severity of injuries in accidents. A difference of just 3 mph in forward motion can be the difference between a stable condition accident vs one that puts someone in critical condition. That means that accidents that previously may have resulted in non-critical injuries may end up being critical or fatal. This results in more traffic investigations that can close lanes (or the entire freeway) for hours on end. These investigations can increase the impact on traffic 10-fold+ over just the standard clearing of debris and vehicles in a non-critical or fatal accident. These delays eat into your perceived time savings.
3) When people drive in lanes that are narrower than what they are accustomed to (like they are along the stretch of H-1 I am talking about) they tend to get anxiety. They are passing drivers or drivers are passing them at a very close proximity that can make many drivers nervous and anxious. Elderly people (of which we have many here on our roads) are particularly sensitive to this. Anxiousness on the roads often leads to slowing of forward speed as drivers will try to reduce the level of anxiousness to a level they are comfortable with. A "minimum" speed limit that you assume everyone will adhere to will be broken all the time by these overly anxious drivers; particularly when the lanes are so narrow. Remember, not everyone responds to faster drivers with faster forward speed themselves. Elderly people who have much slower reaction times than younger people tend to respond to higher speed with yet an even lower speed so that if they were in an accident the severity of the injury would be reduced. It is a normal human reaction in anxious drivers. These anxious drivers will further slow cars down and only increase frustration (i.e. road rage) from those trying to move "efficiently" and adhere to the higher speed limit.
4) And this takes us to the negative psychological impacts of the higher speed limits and how this can lead to an increase in road rage incidents and accidents. If you're stuck behind someone going 45 in a 45 mph zone you may get frustrated but that frustration is generalized (e.g. directed at the people who set the actual speed limit, law enforcement, etc). If the speed limit was set at 55 and a driver is going 45, the frustration of the faster driver behind is entirely directed at the slower driver. The anger and frustration builds as the driver takes things more "personally" as the slower driver isn't just driving to follow the law - but quite possibly to just annoy and aggravate other faster drivers. A more stressful driving dynamic on the roads will always lead to a higher frequency of accidents. More accidents increases commute times.
Regarding the feds setting the speed limit, it is very much true that the state was forced to reduce the speed limit to 45 mph because of minimum federal guidelines for lane widths (and the other less than ideal conditions that particular section of freeway presents). We are arguing two very different things. Again, states can set whatever speed limit they want, BUT THE ROADS MUST MEET MINIMUM FEDERAL DESIGN GUIDELINES FIRST. I don't know why you and Viper can't understand that.
My meter is calibrated to be accurate and your posts confirm that
My primary frustration with you is that you put convenience (your perception that people will save time commuting) over the safety of drivers. You have a very reckless and selfish way of rationalizing things - "what's a few more accidental deaths from time to time?... the main thing is I can get to work 40 seconds faster."
My argument is that our roads are not built or designed the same way they are in the mainland. People from the mainland move here and drive as if they are in a similar driving environment - long stretches of wide open, properly engineered roads with extra wide lanes (to accommodate a high volume of large interstate transporting semis), long on and off ramps, almost limitless sight distances and, most importantly, a class of drivers that is accustomed to driving fast in these specific environments. When you take that kind of mentality and apply it here on our roads which are engineered completely differently, it can make for a very dangerous driving environment. And you encouraging this kind of mentality on our roads is a detriment to the safety of all drivers on our roads.
I'm going to reiterate again since you seem to generalize all my statements - I am speaking specifically about the H-1 corridor between UH and the Middle St merge. This is a problem area and people break the speed limit by a good margin - consistently. I am arguing that cars need to follow the speed limit (or stay within a reasonable excess of the speed limit). And you are arguing not only are cars driving too slow in this specific corridor (suggesting they are not breaking the speed limit ENOUGH), but that the speed limit should be increased to reduce congestion and get people to their destination faster. I disagree with this because increasing the speed limit on this specific corridor will not reduce travel times.
And for these reasons -
1) Increasing the speed limit does indeed reduce the time people need to stay on the road. However, that also means that more cars are going to be exiting off ramps at a higher volume in a shorter period of time. I'm not sure if you are aware of this but there are surface streets immediately adjacent to the H-1 that are far beyond capacity. The Kinau off ramp constantly backs well onto the H-1... sometimes up to a mile. The Punahou exit is basically a parking lot that flows ONTO the H-1 16 hours a day. The same can be said for the Lunalilo off ramp and quite often the UH exit (going Kokohead) when an event takes place. Punchbowl at rush hour backs up far beyond the Liliha overpass and the Pali is no different. Increasing the speed limit would mean more cars (trying to get off the freeway) would flow onto these already fully congested surface streets in a shorter time span. And therefore even MORE cars would back up onto the freeway itself increasing traffic jams and slowing your commute even more than it was BEFORE the speed limit was increased. Further, off ramps that may have not backed up onto the freeway before the higher flow of cars was evident on the freeway may back up now with the increased volume. That further exacerbates congestion. So your idea of increasing the speed limit to get more people to move to their final destination is half baked because you are not factoring in surface streets directly adjacent to the freeway already being at full capacity and already backing up onto the freeway.
2) There is a direct and well-proven correlation to the speed of which cars travel and the severity of injuries in accidents. A difference of just 3 mph in forward motion can be the difference between a stable condition accident vs one that puts someone in critical condition. That means that accidents that previously may have resulted in non-critical injuries may end up being critical or fatal. This results in more traffic investigations that can close lanes (or the entire freeway) for hours on end. These investigations can increase the impact on traffic 10-fold+ over just the standard clearing of debris and vehicles in a non-critical or fatal accident. These delays eat into your perceived time savings.
3) When people drive in lanes that are narrower than what they are accustomed to (like they are along the stretch of H-1 I am talking about) they tend to get anxiety. They are passing drivers or drivers are passing them at a very close proximity that can make many drivers nervous and anxious. Elderly people (of which we have many here on our roads) are particularly sensitive to this. Anxiousness on the roads often leads to slowing of forward speed as drivers will try to reduce the level of anxiousness to a level they are comfortable with. A "minimum" speed limit that you assume everyone will adhere to will be broken all the time by these overly anxious drivers; particularly when the lanes are so narrow. Remember, not everyone responds to faster drivers with faster forward speed themselves. Elderly people who have much slower reaction times than younger people tend to respond to higher speed with yet an even lower speed so that if they were in an accident the severity of the injury would be reduced. It is a normal human reaction in anxious drivers. These anxious drivers will further slow cars down and only increase frustration (i.e. road rage) from those trying to move "efficiently" and adhere to the higher speed limit.
4) And this takes us to the negative psychological impacts of the higher speed limits and how this can lead to an increase in road rage incidents and accidents. If you're stuck behind someone going 45 in a 45 mph zone you may get frustrated but that frustration is generalized (e.g. directed at the people who set the actual speed limit, law enforcement, etc). If the speed limit was set at 55 and a driver is going 45, the frustration of the faster driver behind is entirely directed at the slower driver. The anger and frustration builds as the driver takes things more "personally" as the slower driver isn't just driving to follow the law - but quite possibly to just annoy and aggravate other faster drivers. A more stressful driving dynamic on the roads will always lead to a higher frequency of accidents. More accidents increases commute times.
Regarding the feds setting the speed limit, it is very much true that the state was forced to reduce the speed limit to 45 mph because of minimum federal guidelines for lane widths (and the other less than ideal conditions that particular section of freeway presents). We are arguing two very different things. Again, states can set whatever speed limit they want, BUT THE ROADS MUST MEET MINIMUM FEDERAL DESIGN GUIDELINES FIRST. I don't know why you and Viper can't understand that.
You confuse not believing 90% of what you say (for good reason), with not understanding.
I don't think I asked for higher speed limits, just to increase the overall speed of traffic to reduce the number of cars on the roads at any one point in time - mostly due to poor driving techniques and disregard for protocols like slower traffic to the right.
I've also advocated that trouble spots be fixed.
I have to say, you are way too aggressive and over-the-top for me, so I'm going to have to let you go - you're simply not worth the aggravation.
You confuse not believing 90% of what you say (for good reason), with not understanding.
I don't think I asked for higher speed limits, just to increase the overall speed of traffic to reduce the number of cars on the roads at any one point in time - mostly due to poor driving techniques and disregard for protocols like slower traffic to the right.
I've also advocated that trouble spots be fixed.
I have to say, you are way too aggressive and over-the-top for me, so I'm going to have to let you go - you're simply not worth the aggravation.
Yet you continued the conversation?
You specifically said speed limits are too low. You said people need to drive faster so you can get to where you want to go in less time. Does that not insinuate the desire to increase speed limits?
Trouble spots can't be fixed without exercising eminent domain and taking people's properties to widen roads on the freeway AND surface streets. There is no real fix. You just think people here on this island drive too slow. Period.
Nothing too aggressive or over the top with my post. I called you out on your desire to make our roads more dangerous so you can shave a few dozen seconds off your commute. You took personal offense when I reiterated your own comments.
I'm glad you now realize that increasing the speed limit (or people breaking the speed limit by a larger margin) won't make a difference on that H-1 corridor regarding commute times. Something good was accomplished.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
