Our City Online

Messageboard - Transportation

NOTE: You are viewing an archived version of the Columbus Underground forums/messageboard. As of 05/22/16 they have been closed to new comments and replies, but will remain accessible for archived searches and reference. For more information CLICK HERE

Neil Avenue Speed Limit Might Get Raised to 35 MPH

Home Forums General Columbus Discussion Transportation Neil Avenue Speed Limit Might Get Raised to 35 MPH

Viewing 15 posts - 46 through 60 (of 73 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #552042

    Eugene_C
    Participant

    brianleroy said:
    I just see more accidents and injuries. On Neil, cars will be flying past bikes at 40-45mph to beat them to median areas and make the next light.

    I don’t see how 35mph is more enforceable than 25mph – but the slower speed is less dangerous for everyone.

    I personally can’t seem myself driving 45 mph up Neil, at least north of the underpass. I drive probably around 33-38 now if traffic is light and I can’t visualize a scenario where I’d be comfortable going any faster than that even if they raised the limit. In many cases the traffic doesn’t really allow you to go much faster.

    As for “enforceable” how often does CPD enforce speed limits? I rarely ever think of speed limits when I’m inside the city limits. As soon as I hit one of the suburbs though, like up around Linworth Rd., I immediately start paying attention.

    #552043
    Josh_W
    Josh_W
    Participant

    howatzer said:
    The speed limit is meaningless. It’s not enforced. I’d bet most drivers have no idea what the speed limit is.

    You must not drive Neil during rush-hour much, while the CHiPs wannabes camp at the Wilber intersection with their lasers.

    #552044

    InnerCore
    Participant

    #552045

    Pablo
    Participant

    High St. through the SN is 30, through campus it’s 25. High St. is considered a thoroughfare by the City and yet the speed limits are lower than the state law. Why can’t Neil Ave. have the same designation?

    http://development.columbus.gov/UploadedFiles/Development/Planning_Division/Document_Library/Plans_and_Overlays_Imported_Content/TPlanChartOct2405.pdf

    #552046

    NerosNeptune
    Participant

    Why have a nice neighborhood when we have people needing to get through Vic Village 30 seconds faster? Who cares if way more pedestrians get killed in those conditions? We should be widening all these roads to at least 4 lanes and converted to one ways as well, because it’s really annoying to see another car directly in front of you.

    If Vic Village residents are lucky they will get to enjoy Neil, 3rd, 5th, just like beautiful 3rd and 4th streets are enjoyed here in WP.

    #552047

    groundrules
    Participant

    i’m pro-35 as long as they put in some nice round-a-bouts.

    #552048
    Caleb
    Caleb
    Participant

    groundrules said:
    i’m pro-35 as long as they put in some nice round-a-bouts.

    That’s a Dublin, Hilliard thing. Duhhh xD

    #552049
    Caleb
    Caleb
    Participant

    groundrules said:
    i’m pro-35 as long as they put in some nice round-a-bouts.

    That’s a Dublin, Hilliard thing. Duhhh xD

    #552050

    columbusmike
    Participant

    I agree with the earlier posts that speed limits are fairly meaningless. Going more than 25mph feels pretty fast on Neil Avenue due to the trees and traffic medians, giving you the perception that you are traveling much faster than you really are.

    Having said that, I’d still hate to see the speed limit increased, but I don’t think it necessarily means Neil will turn into a freeway.

    #552051
    Snarf
    Snarf
    Participant

    We’re all gonna die!!!

    #552052

    StinkPalm
    Participant

    Not going to comment on whether the speed limit should be raised or not, but without a doubt the lights need to be synchronized. Years ago I drove from King to 670 on Neil everyday and the ONLY way to make any light was to speed. Otherwise you missed EVERY light EVERY time you drove down Neil. That is just stupid planning plain and simple. Lower the speed limit for safety and then make sure everyone speeds b/c you didn’t change the light cycles.

    #552053

    titleistcm
    Participant

    Walker said:
    There’s quite a few of them actually, and the number seems to be growing steadily.

    Certainly not trying to change the thread topic, but I’d like to see more bike “lanes” rather than the bike symbols in car lanes. I think there’s many areas where the driving lane could be narrowed to a safe width and then there is room to paint a narrow bike lane between the parallel parking and car lane…like in Phoenix, California, Chicago, and many other places I travel. Only if there is legitimately no room should the symbol be in the middle of the car lane.

    #552054
    Walker Evans
    Walker Evans
    Keymaster

    titleistcm said:
    Certainly not trying to change the thread topic, but I’d like to see more bike “lanes” rather than the bike symbols in car lanes.

    They’re not “car lanes” though. Cyclists have a right to use them.

    #552055

    groundrules
    Participant

    Walker said:
    They’re not “car lanes” though. Cyclists have a right to use them.

    well then by that definition, they’re not bike lanes either, right?

    #552056

    GCrites80s
    Participant

    They’re actually called carriageways, but they’re not just for carriages either.

Viewing 15 posts - 46 through 60 (of 73 total)

The forum ‘Transportation’ is closed to new topics and replies.