Legislation aimed at reducing the maximum speed limit by 10 miles per hour on roads that are unposted and unpaved is currently being debated in the state House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee.
Introduced earlier this year by state Rep. Brad Jacobsen (R-Oxford), who serves on the committee, House Bill 4423 would make 45 mph the top speed limit on county roads with a gravel or unimproved surface in counties with populations of 1 million or more.
‘Right now, it only affects Oakland and Wayne counties,? Jacobsen said. ‘Macomb County has a population in the neighborhood of 800,000, give or take. They will be affected by that in a few years.?
Currently, the maximum speed limit is 55 miles per hour on unpaved, unposted roads throughout the state.
Jacobsen believes that’s just too fast ‘for most of them.?
Given all the twists and turns on so many of these roads in rural areas, he said, ‘There’s no way you should be driving 30 miles an hour down some of those curves, let alone 55.?
Some local officials agree.
‘You show me a (gravel) road here in Oxford where you feel safe going 55 miles an hour,? said Oxford Twp. Supervisor Bill Dunn, who believes 45 mph is a ‘reasonable? maximum.
‘I would be happy with 45 (mph),? said Addison Twp. Supervisor Bruce Pearson. ‘That would be safe and prudent.?
Pearson noted he already has drivers traveling at excessive speeds on Lake George Rd., which is supposed to be 55 mph. That’s because since the township had it re-graveled, the surface is smooth like asphalt and the road commission is doing a ‘super job? maintaining it.
‘I created a monster,? the supervisor said. ‘Now, I’ve got people doing 80 miles an hour down there.?
Even drivers who travel at 65 or 70 mph are still going ‘way too fast? for a gravel road, ‘no matter how you look at it,? in Pearson’s opinion. That’s why traffic enforcement has been stepped up on Lake George Rd.
‘They’ve already written a few tickets,? he said.
Not only does Pearson see 45 mph as a safer speed limit, he also believes ‘it would save our gravel roads.?
‘We’re putting a lot of money in these gravel roads and (drivers are) going so fast they’re tearing them up within weeks of grading them and chloriding them,? he noted.
Although his bill would make 45 mph the maximum speed limit, that doesn’t mean it’s Jacobsen’s ideal number.
‘Forty-five (mph) is the best compromise I’ve been able to come up with thus far,? he said. ‘I would like to see (the speed limit) below 45 miles an hour on most of our gravel roads. We really need a method to petition the state police to lower it more. I’m still working on that.?
Jacobsen’s bill is designed to offset the impact of a 2006 state law which eliminated the 25 mph posted speed limit on 283 unpaved road segments in Oakland County.
Of those, 248 road segments became unposted, meaning motorists are required to drive at a safe speed given the conditions, with the maximum allowable speed being 55 mph.
In Oxford Township, 20 sections of unpaved road went to an unposted 55 mph. Addison Township saw 19 of its road segments go from 25 to 55 mph.
When the 2006 law was approved, there was quite an uproar from the public. Many citizens and local officials expressed opposition.
Jacobsen said his office still receives complaints these days, but ‘it’s not as heavy as it used to be.?
Craig Bryson, spokesman for the Road Commission for Oakland County, agreed.
‘Really, this whole issue’s been pretty quiet, at least as far as we can tell in recent years,? he said.
When the speed limit went to 55 mph, Bryson said ‘some people asserted . . . there would be blood on all the streets? from increased traffic crashes.
But that’s not been the case.
‘We have not seen any problems (since) it was raised to 55,? Bryson said. ‘We have carefully monitored the crashes on gravel roads and they have, in fact, gone down.?
Based on figures provided by the road commission, the number of gravel road accidents countywide began to decline after all of the 25 mph speed limit signs were removed in 2009. They went from 447 crashes in 2008 to 371 in 2010. The number of crashes continued to decrease in 2011 and 2012 with 345 and 321, respectively. Crashes increased to 402 in 2013, but then dipped again with 328 occurring in 2014.
Jacobsen noted the state police ‘are not real happy with the idea of reducing (the speed limit) to 45 on gravel roads? in certain counties.
‘They look at it as the old camel’s nose under the tent ? other areas of the state are now going to want to slow down to 45 miles an hour (on their roads),? he said. ‘Their concern is we’re going to go through and reduce roads that can handle 55 (mph) and nobody is going to enforce a 45-mile-an-hour speed limit, so they feel it’s a waste (of time).?
Another of the state police’s concerns, according to the state representative, is how drivers are going to know the unposted speed limit on a gravel road has dropped from 55 to 45 mph when, for example, they’ve left Lapeer County and entered Oakland County.
A solution suggested by the state police is to post all of the applicable Oakland County roads at 45 mph, but Jacobsen said, ‘Then the question is who’s going to pay for the signs??
The other issue is enforceability, which again requires posting the speed limit and spending money.
‘It’s a double-edged sword,? Jacobsen said. ‘In order to write a ticket for over 45 (mph), you have to have a sign up, otherwise, you, as the person who got the ticket, would have a really good argument in court to get out of it.?
‘Somebody’s got to pay for the signs,? he continued. ‘It would most likely be the townships. The road commission, I’m sure, is not going to be willing to spend thousands of dollars for signs all over Oakland County.?
Although he believes a 45 mph speed limit is better than the current 55, Jacobsen doesn’t think it will satisfy everyone in the public.
‘We’ve got folks that want it to be 25 (mph) because they’re out there riding their horses, riding their bikes, walking their dogs (on gravel roads),? he explained.
But Jacobsen said those people have to keep in mind a remark he once heard from a state trooper ? ‘People have to remember the roads are for cars. Roads are not built for people to walk on.?
‘All gravel roads shouldn’t be 25 (mph),? the state representative noted. ‘Lake George Road is a good example. Forty (or) 45 miles an hour might be a reasonable speed on parts of Lake George Road. We really need to have more flexibility based on the conditions of the particular road.?
Jacobsen’s bill would also modify speed limits that are based on the number of vehicular access points such as driveways and intersecting roads.
Based on the 2006 law, in order to have a 25 mph speed limit, a road segment must have 60 or more vehicular access points within a half-mile. To be 35 mph, there must be 45 to 59 access points. For 45 mph, there must be 30 to 44 access points within a half-mile.
Jacobsen’s bill would change it to the following ? 25 mph (60 or more access points); 30 mph (50 to 59 points); 35 mph (45 to 49 points); 40 mph (40 to 44 points); and 45 mph ( 30 to 39 points).
Although it’s not contained in the bill’s current language, the state representative explained how they’re also considering creating some type of formula by which subdivision entrances/exits would count as more than a single access point.
For example, if a subdivision has 100 homes, each one could count as 0.25 of an access point, making the entrance/exit equal to 25 access points. Because multiple vehicles enter and leave a subdivision all day long, Jacobsen said, ‘You really need to count it as more than one.?
‘It won’t help all of our gravel roads in Oakland County, but it may help some areas within our district,? he said. ?(Vehicular access points are) used for reference now, but they don’t have ultimate control. Even under my proposal, there’s still the ability to deviate from speed limits based on safety (factors), crash data, the topography of the road. They look at a whole variety of things.?
But when it comes to unpaved roads, Bryson said the reality is vehicular access points are the only factor that’s considered when formulating speed limits.
‘The state police won’t sign off on a speed study on a gravel road, so by default the (number of access points) is the only other legal alternative allowed, so that becomes the determining factor,? he explained.
Bryson noted the state police are ‘not wrong? about this practice.
‘If you do a speed study today on a gravel road and the road’s wet and compacted, and maybe the grader just went down yesterday and it’s in good shape, you’ll get one result,? he explained. ‘You do it a week later when it’s dry and the road’s been beat up for a while and it’s much rougher, you’ll get a completely different (result). It really is difficult to get a consistent, reliable response to a speed study on a gravel road.?
Jacobsen’s bill is part of a package of legislation concerning speed limits and driving laws.
One of the other bills, H.B. 4425, would eliminate townships from having a vote in the decision-making process when it comes to setting speed limits.
Currently, state law says townships, county road commissions and state police must ‘unanimously? agree when it comes to raising or lowering a speed limit on a county road.
Jacobsen supports eliminating townships from the equation.
‘I think it’s a good idea,? he said. ‘I’ve used myself during (committee hearing) testimony as an example of part of the problem.?
Speaking from experience as an Oxford Township trustee who served from 1984 to 2000, Jacobsen said, ‘Too often we let emotions and people screaming at us cloud the issue of what really makes sense, either scientifically or financially.?
‘This (bill) is trying to take emotions out of the issue and allow the professionals ? state police, MDOT and the road commission ? to do their job,? he continued. ‘They are the engineers. They are the law enforcement (officers). They are the professionals.
‘As much as township trustees try to do what’s best for our community, sometimes we need to let the professionals take over. Let somebody who studies it and deals with it on a daily basis make the decision.?
Jacobsen noted eliminating the townships? vote doesn’t mean they wouldn’t be allowed to continue providing input.
‘They’re still welcome to chime in on whether they think (speed limits) should be higher or lower,? he said.
Bryson said the reality is eliminating the townships? vote won’t have much of an impact on things.
‘This process is pretty much driven by the state police,? he explained. ‘They won’t sign off on anything they don’t agree with. If they don’t sign off on it, nothing happens. In practical terms, that’s sort of what it comes down to.?
Bryson noted townships have only been included in the process since the 2006 law was enacted. ‘They had never traditionally been a part of it,? he said. ‘It was always the road commission and the state police (making the decisions). In practical terms, (it) really doesn’t change much.?