VA: Bill allowing 70 MPH passes GA, goes to Gov for signature

[J N Winkler]

I think the "very good reason" in this law is the fact that they do need a bit of time to change the signs from 65 to 70 (with temporary covers to be all taken down on a single early morning).

I don't buy this.  In Kansas all Interstates received new speed limits in 1995 and the speed limit signs were stickered over with the new speed limits between midnight and 6 AM on the day the law went into effect (a Friday, if memory serves).  Kansas had then, and still has, nine Interstate routes with a cumulative mileage of 874.34.  There was no faffing around with black bags and so on.

BTW, if this was actually done by contract, it must have bypassed VDOT's construction contract lettings because I never saw it advertised and I check regularly for signing-related work.

Looks like the contractors did it more efficiently than the legislature thought they would.

To me it looks more like VDOT "efficiency":  two bites at the apple when one will do.  Virginia has about three times the population of Kansas, only 250 more miles of Interstate (1117 miles), of which only a small fraction is affected by this speed limit change.  Moreover, VDOT has far more maintenance staff than KDOT.  What's the matter with Virginia?

[froggie]

What's the matter?  Start with the fact that VDOT has about 56,000 miles of road under its responsibility.

The delay in the law, besides being Virginia standard to begin laws on July 1, also takes into account the time needed to do traffic engineering and speed studies on the Interstate segments in question, since such studies are required by state law before VDOT can implement any speed limit changes.

[J N Winkler]

The delay in the law, besides being Virginia standard to begin laws on July 1, also takes into account the time needed to do traffic engineering and speed studies on the Interstate segments in question, since such studies are required by state law before VDOT can implement any speed limit changes.

My "What's the matter with Virginia?" comment (admittedly a bit over-the-top) arose from other posters' observations, upthread, that some 70 MPH speed limit signs are already up with temporary "65" plates over the "70" speed limit values.  Arguably this is inefficient compared to leaving the existing signs in place and sending trucks out with "70" stickers in the small hours of the morning on July 1, which is essentially how Kansas handled the speed limit change on Interstates in 1995.  The temporary plates require at least two steps (installation of the plates on the signs, either in the shop or the field, and then removal of the plates) while stickering the new limits requires just one step, which can be done very quickly.  There might be ulterior considerations, such as the limit change coinciding with wholesale replacement of speed limit signs, which would alter the efficiency comparison.

In general I don't have an issue with choosing a specific calendar date for the entry into force of new laws.

[vdeane]

What's the matter?  Start with the fact that VDOT has about 56,000 miles of road under its responsibility.

The delay in the law, besides being Virginia standard to begin laws on July 1, also takes into account the time needed to do traffic engineering and speed studies on the Interstate segments in question, since such studies are required by state law before VDOT can implement any speed limit changes.

I don't recall reading anywhere that any section of road had to be raised immedietly, just that it was an option now to have a 70 mph speed limit.

[agentsteel53]

The delay in the law, besides being Virginia standard to begin laws on July 1, also takes into account the time needed to do traffic engineering and speed studies on the Interstate segments in question, since such studies are required by state law before VDOT can implement any speed limit changes.

if the signs are posted (albeit, still covered up), that implies that VA has done the necessary traffic study.

as for laws being enacted July 1 - is there any other date during the calendar year or is that it?  If a law gets passed July 2, does the commonwealth have to wait 364 days?

[Scott5114]

I assume the date of enaction is defined by the law itself. Oklahoma generally has such time-release laws go to effect on January 1, but other dates (generally the first of some arbitrary month) have been used.

[J N Winkler]

In Virginia I suspect the July 1 effective date is chosen to correspond with the start of the state fiscal year, as this would make it easy to study the fiscal impact of new laws without having to disaggregate for part-year validity.  Having a consistent start date for all legislation also aids enforceability, in contradistinction to other approaches such as having a law take effect from the moment of the governor's signature or from the moment of publication in the official gazette.  In general ignorantia non excusat, but if you are charged under new provisions, you can usually mount a successful defense if you can show you had no reasonable opportunity to know that the new provisions were effective.  Avoidance of such challenges is one reason law enforcement agencies publicize a grace period before they start enforcing new laws.

If Virginia's state legislature concludes its business well before the start of summer, as is (I think) the case for most state legislatures, there shouldn't be any problems with long (up to one full year) waits for new laws to take effect.  Of course this general observation wouldn't hold for extraordinary sessions in the autumn, for example.

[hbelkins]

I would guess the effective date of legislation depends on when the legislature meets, and how often. Kentucky has biennial 60-day sessions that must be over by a date certain, and only recently has begun having 30-day sessions between the 60-day biennial sessions. Here, by either statute or constitution, the effective date of legislation is established and is overridden only if the legislature declares an emergency and for the law to go into effect immediately upon the governor's signature. Most recently, our anti-texting law went into effect immediately, but officers only will be writing warnings until the first of the year, after which they can write citations.

[deathtopumpkins]

Finally clinched the southern end of I-295 today, and snagged a few photos of speed limit 70 signs.

[rickmastfan67]

Nice to see more 70MPH signs in VA.  Now if they can only migrate over to I-77.

[Mr. Matté]

What the heck are the things on the side of the Speed Limit 65 Ahead sign? They're probably for grabbing your attention but what do they specifically do?

[D-Dey65]

I didn't see a single Speed Limit 70 sign on I-95 in Virginia on my drive in June.

[Bryant5493]

^^

I think the speed limit became effective as of July 1, 2010, is probably why you didn't see any in June.


Be well,

Bryant

[deathtopumpkins]

The new limits went into effect July 1, as stated previously in this thread, and only on I-295. VDOT has to finish doing the studies for the other roads before they can be raised as well.

Mr. Matté: They're exactly what you thought. I can't recall seeing any at night, as they aren't used where I live, but I think they're reflective as well just to grab your attention and reinforce that this limit is new.

[NJRoadfan]

Mr. Matté: They're exactly what you thought. I can't recall seeing any at night, as they aren't used where I live, but I think they're reflective as well just to grab your attention and reinforce that this limit is new.

They are on the "Reduced speed ahead" and actual speed limit signs on I-85 and on I-95 north entering Richmond (the 55mph zone).

[hbelkins]

I would guess the effective date of legislation depends on when the legislature meets, and how often. Kentucky has biennial 60-day sessions that must be over by a date certain, and only recently has begun having 30-day sessions between the 60-day biennial sessions. Here, by either statute or constitution, the effective date of legislation is established and is overridden only if the legislature declares an emergency and for the law to go into effect immediately upon the governor's signature. Most recently, our anti-texting law went into effect immediately, but officers only will be writing warnings until the first of the year, after which they can write citations.

I need to correct myself. The Kentucky State Police put out a press release erroneously saying that the anti-texting law went into effect immediately. Turns out that's not the case. There was no emergency notation made in the legislation and no other effective date specified. Therefore it goes into effect on July 15 like all the rest of the legislation passed this year.

So for another week, it's still legal to text and drive in Kentucky.

[agentsteel53]

attacking the causes, not the effects, as legislatures tend to do.  

I think Germany's recommended speed law is an ideal model for driving restrictions.  The autobahn has no speed limit, but if you are driving over 140 km/h and cause an accident, then the circumstances will be taken into account.

it should be the same way with texting, applying makeup, paying too much attention to the radio, and a thousand other activities that are just not possible to legislate by specific action, but easy enough to legislate by effect.  Basically, the principle that some drivers are just fine while a little inattentive, while others are morons no matter how well we train them.

"Go ahead and do something dangerous - but heaven help you if you cause an accident!"

then again, this is the country that thinks that lack of seatbelt use should be fined.  If you're fixing to kill yourself stupidly, why again are we stopping you?

[J N Winkler]

then again, this is the country that thinks that lack of seatbelt use should be fined.  If you're fixing to kill yourself stupidly, why again are we stopping you?

I don't think the Autobahnpolizei let you get away with not wearing a seatbelt either.

[froggie]

If you're fixing to kill yourself stupidly, why again are we stopping you?

Probably because if they do go kill themselves in such a way, they're incurring a fair chunk of cost on society which they don't pay, but taxpayers do.

[agentsteel53]

Probably because if they do go kill themselves in such a way, they're incurring a fair chunk of cost on society which they don't pay, but taxpayers do.

how much does the spatula treatment cost?  how many days of imprisonment of a felon does that buy you?  I'm guessing hosing down highways to clean off the brains is a drop in the bucket compared to everything else.

[froggie]

There's still the cost of the response (usually several entities including police and fire), traffic control, autopsy (if performed), road repair (if needed), etc etc.  It's more than just taking a spatula and a hose to the road...


Back on topic, the CTB will be getting briefed on the recommendations today.  Page 4 of the PDF has a map showing the general locations where a 70 MPH speed is being recommended.  The goal is to have the speed limits changed by end of the year.

[rickmastfan67]

Nice to see that all of I-81 between TN and I-77 South should become 70.  Little miffed that they don't think more of I-77 should become 70 as well.  I honestly think I-77 between Exits #32 (I-81/US-11 North) and Exit #24 (VA-69) could be posted as 70 as well.  Especially since they rebuilt the bridge over the New River and there are no massive hills unlike South of Exit #24.

[WillWeaverRVA]

There's still the cost of the response (usually several entities including police and fire), traffic control, autopsy (if performed), road repair (if needed), etc etc.  It's more than just taking a spatula and a hose to the road...


Back on topic, the CTB will be getting briefed on the recommendations today.  Page 4 of the PDF has a map showing the general locations where a 70 MPH speed is being recommended.  The goal is to have the speed limits changed by end of the year.

That link is dead but the contents have moved:

http://www.ctb.virginia.gov/resources/2010/oct/pres/Agenda_Item_4_CTB_BriefingIII.pdf

The proposed areas make a lot of sense, and it seems common sense in general played a major role in choosing where to increase speed limits. The only areas not being considered for speed limit increases are those areas with heavier traffic and more accidents, mostly urban areas (as well as I-64 near Afton Mountain - as decent as the road is 70mph there is asking for trouble).

Now if only there could be some exception put in place to raise the speed limits on VA 288 and VA 895 (east of the toll plaza) to 70...

[deathtopumpkins]

Every article I've read has said that the legislation includes non-interstate freeways as well... Though that link does not.

Still, I really don't see what the problem is. If those roads can be posted at 65, why not 70.

[rickmastfan67]

Looks like I-77 WILL become 70 MPH South of I-81 after all.
http://www.virginiadot.org/info/resources/70_mph_Phase_List.pdf

I-77 will be posted as 70 MPH in two phases.

Phase 1 will be the following:

• The first 21 Miles of I-77 starting @ the NC State Line.
• From I-81 Wytheville to 0.27 Miles South of the Big Walker Mountain Tunnel.
• From 0.48 Miles North of the Big Walker Mountain Tunnel to 0.42 Miles South of Exit #66 (US-52/VA-598).

Phase 2 will be the following:

• From Mile 21 to I-81 Fort Chiswell.

So, all of I-77 will become 70 MPH in VA.   It will just take some time.