Northern Virginia HOT Lanes

[cpzilliacus]

I'm curious what the signage experts on this forum think about the situation shown in the video below (click to play). The question is–should the truck driver receive a ticket? A fellow who posts in Dr. Gridlock's blog at the Washington Post contends that signs restricting lane usage based on number of axles are unenforceable as a matter of law. I rather suspect his argument would get nowhere in Fairfax Circuit Court, but I'm wondering what anyone else has to say.

I have seen tractor trailers stopped by the VSP - more than once - on the I-495 HOV/toll lanes.

The signs are plenty  clear enough. 

IMO, guilty of violating § 46.2-830 of the Code of Virginia. 

Relevant part of § 46.2-830:

All drivers of vehicles shall obey lawfully erected traffic control devices.

[1995hoo]

I've seen them stopped as well, and from that driver's behavior I think he realized he was in the wrong place. My question is more in a general sense–is a restriction based on number of axles valid and enforceable? I don't know why it wouldn't be, especially when toll rates are often set on that basis, but the other guy was pretty adamant when he posted about it in the past (username "Russtinator," FWIW; he hasn't commented recently, but in general he was one of the more reasonable and knowledgeable people who commented there).

[Alps]

I've seen them stopped as well, and from that driver's behavior I think he realized he was in the wrong place. My question is more in a general sense–is a restriction based on number of axles valid and enforceable? I don't know why it wouldn't be, especially when toll rates are often set on that basis, but the other guy was pretty adamant when he posted about it in the past (username "Russtinator," FWIW; he hasn't commented recently, but in general he was one of the more reasonable and knowledgeable people who commented there).

It's entirely enforceable. Obviously, it's a state or even municipal-level code, but if you can restrict roads by vehicle weight and height, why not other characteristics like number of axles?

[cpzilliacus]

I've seen them stopped as well, and from that driver's behavior I think he realized he was in the wrong place. My question is more in a general sense–is a restriction based on number of axles valid and enforceable?

Yes, Steve is absolutely correct.  States can (and do) enforce the number of axles allowed (or not allowed, as the case might be).

I don't know why it wouldn't be, especially when toll rates are often set on that basis, but the other guy was pretty adamant when he posted about it in the past (username "Russtinator," FWIW; he hasn't commented recently, but in general he was one of the more reasonable and knowledgeable people who commented there).

Governments that run the transportation infrastructure must be able to restrict the number of axles in order to protect that infrastructure.  D.C.-area case in point - MacArthur Boulevard in Montgomery County, Md. between Great Falls and the D.C. line at Dalecarlia Reservoir.  It is posted to only allow motor vehicles with four wheels (or less) to use the road. 

Why is this?  Because the Washington Aqueduct, built in the mid-1800's by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (and still owned and operated by the Army) to supply drinking water to the District of Columbia, runs underneath. In addition to the aqueduct under MacArthur Boulevard, the low limit is in place to protect the massive (and magnificent) Union Arch Bridge which carries the aqueduct (and MacArthur Boulevard) over Cabin John Creek (and since the 1960's, the Cabin John Parkway, "secret" Md. 495X).

Water that flows through the Aqueduct is delivered to customers in D.C. and Northern Virginia (but not Maryland, even though very nearly all of the Aqueduct is in Maryland).  The only "customer" of the Aqueduct in Maryland is the Carderock Division of the Naval Surface Warfare Center, which uses raw water to fill the several large model basins (details here) on its reservation.

[mtantillo]

I've seen them stopped as well, and from that driver's behavior I think he realized he was in the wrong place. My question is more in a general sense—is a restriction based on number of axles valid and enforceable? I don't know why it wouldn't be, especially when toll rates are often set on that basis, but the other guy was pretty adamant when he posted about it in the past (username "Russtinator," FWIW; he hasn't commented recently, but in general he was one of the more reasonable and knowledgeable people who commented there).

It's entirely enforceable. Obviously, it's a state or even municipal-level code, but if you can restrict roads by vehicle weight and height, why not other characteristics like number of axles?

In Virginia, there has to be a law backing up a regulatory sign (that whole "lawfully posted" thing).  So no, you cannot just go posting regulatory signs that conflict with state laws.  Somewhere there's a law to back that up. 

I think axles are a better way to restrict traffic than by vehicle weight, just in that there is no way a driver should not know how many axles on his vehicle, whereas he might not know how much his loaded vehicle weighs at any given time.  Georgia and South Carolina sign the "left lane restrictions" based on the number of wheels..."no trucks over 6 wheels in left lane".  Guess each "dualy" axle counts as 4 wheels. 

[froggie]

In Virginia, there has to be a law backing up a regulatory sign (that whole "lawfully posted" thing).  So no, you cannot just go posting regulatory signs that conflict with state laws.  Somewhere there's a law to back that up.

Given that the I-64 Reversible HOV lanes in Norfolk have been signed "No Trucks" for years, I presume there's some sort of law on the books that would allow VDOT to restrict truck traffic.

[cpzilliacus]

In Virginia, there has to be a law backing up a regulatory sign (that whole "lawfully posted" thing).  So no, you cannot just go posting regulatory signs that conflict with state laws.  Somewhere there's a law to back that up.

Given that the I-64 Reversible HOV lanes in Norfolk have been signed "No Trucks" for years, I presume there's some sort of law on the books that would allow VDOT to restrict truck traffic.

And strangely, the HOV lanes on I-95/I-395 have not restricted trucks since HOV-4 traffic was first allowed in the 1970's - though trucks must comply with the HOV restriction during the time that those are in effect.

[cpzilliacus]

I've seen them stopped as well, and from that driver's behavior I think he realized he was in the wrong place. My question is more in a general sense–is a restriction based on number of axles valid and enforceable? I don't know why it wouldn't be, especially when toll rates are often set on that basis, but the other guy was pretty adamant when he posted about it in the past (username "Russtinator," FWIW; he hasn't commented recently, but in general he was one of the more reasonable and knowledgeable people who commented there).

It's entirely enforceable. Obviously, it's a state or even municipal-level code, but if you can restrict roads by vehicle weight and height, why not other characteristics like number of axles?

In Virginia, there has to be a law backing up a regulatory sign (that whole "lawfully posted" thing).  So no, you cannot just go posting regulatory signs that conflict with state laws.  Somewhere there's a law to back that up.

That makes sense.  I don't think a judge would be too enthused about convicting someone for a traffic violation for disregarding a sign that was effectively illegal.

I think axles are a better way to restrict traffic than by vehicle weight, just in that there is no way a driver should not know how many axles on his vehicle, whereas he might not know how much his loaded vehicle weighs at any given time.  Georgia and South Carolina sign the "left lane restrictions" based on the number of wheels..."no trucks over 6 wheels in left lane".  Guess each "dualy" axle counts as 4 wheels.

Agreed that axles are a better way to restrict trucks.  Clear and not usually ambiguous (though it could be in the case of trucks (usually dump trucks and trash trucks) with "drop" axles).

I have seen the truck restrictions on I-26 in Charleston and also on I-95 in Florence.

I have driven in Georgia, but I don't recall that sort of signage there.

A dually is going to be 6 wheels, but such trucks don't usually have any problem keeping up with fast-moving traffic.   But if they are pulling  a big trailer, then they don't always run quite as fast.

[1995hoo]

In Virginia, there has to be a law backing up a regulatory sign (that whole "lawfully posted" thing).  So no, you cannot just go posting regulatory signs that conflict with state laws.  Somewhere there's a law to back that up.

Given that the I-64 Reversible HOV lanes in Norfolk have been signed "No Trucks" for years, I presume there's some sort of law on the books that would allow VDOT to restrict truck traffic.

And strangely, the HOV lanes on I-95/I-395 have not restricted trucks since HOV-4 traffic was first allowed in the 1970's - though trucks must comply with the HOV restriction during the time that those are in effect.

Except, of course, at their current southern end, where trucks are not permitted because they have to pass through the weigh station accessible solely from the general-purpose lanes.

[cpzilliacus]

In Virginia, there has to be a law backing up a regulatory sign (that whole "lawfully posted" thing).  So no, you cannot just go posting regulatory signs that conflict with state laws.  Somewhere there's a law to back that up.

Given that the I-64 Reversible HOV lanes in Norfolk have been signed "No Trucks" for years, I presume there's some sort of law on the books that would allow VDOT to restrict truck traffic.

And strangely, the HOV lanes on I-95/I-395 have not restricted trucks since HOV-4 traffic was first allowed in the 1970's - though trucks must comply with the HOV restriction during the time that those are in effect.

Except, of course, at their current southern end, where trucks are not permitted because they have to pass through the weigh station accessible solely from the general-purpose lanes.

Yeah, though (at least for now) it is essentially impossible for the Virginia State Police to catch up to and stop scale evaders on the southbound side of I-95, since it is darned near impossible for a police car to reach that side from the scalehouse on the northbound side.

[cpzilliacus]

[Mostly about the I-95 HOV/Toll lanes project]

Dr. Gridlock in the Washington Post: Don't spend your summer in I-95 traffic

A stretch of heavily traveled highway in Northern Virginia has become one of the longest work zones in the nation this summer.

About 1,500 workers are turning a 29-mile section of Interstate 95 into the state's latest high-occupancy toll lane project. The long-term impact on commuting in the D.C. region is likely to be enormous, but the short-term effects of summer travel also will be significant.

[NJRoadfan]

If the NJ Turnpike can keep traffic moving without a problem in a major construction zone, I'd think Flour can.

[cpzilliacus]

If the NJ Turnpike can keep traffic moving without a problem in a major construction zone, I'd think Flour can.

Conditions are different on I-95 in Northern Virginia.

The HOV/Toll lanes have been there for many years, and they have almost always provided additional (non-restricted) lane capacity in the peak-flow direction on weekends and holidays.  Usually southbound on Saturdays and northbound on Sundays. With this  project going on, those lanes are frequently closed all weekend, effectively removing a fair amount of "extra" capacity that motorists have gotten used to having, regardless of how many people in the car (since HOV restrictions in this corridor never apply on weekends and holidays - and even on weekdays, they expire at 6 P.M.).

Only the segment between Va. 610 (Garrisonville Road, Exit 143) and Va. 234 (Dumfries Road, Exit 152) is remotely like the New Jersey Turnpike widening project between 6 and 8A.  Unlike the Turnpike's project, where much of the work is taking place adjacent to but mostly beyond the existing 6 lanes of Turnpike, nearly all of the Fluor/Transurban work is in the (former) median of I-95 (which was designed with a generously wide median from the start).

[cpzilliacus]

WAMU Radio: Alexandria And Fairfax County Residents Give Up Fight Against I-95 Ramp

[mc78andrew]

So what's the verdict on the HOT lanes in northern VA?  Not from the tollers perspective...I'm more interested in the quality of life enhancements.

Sounds like it has helped if you are willing to pay a toll, but is off peak traffic any better with the complete rebuild of the general purpose lanes? 

[mtantillo]

I say yes, it is a little better in the general purpose lanes. 

[1995hoo]

I've noticed the past few times I've headed towards Falls Church or Fair Oaks that the toll rates seem to have risen a bit again, with the run from Springfield to I-66 now apparently having a base rate of $1.50. Last week I paid $1.15 each way from Springfield to Route 29 (this per checking my online statement, since that particular trip's rate is never posted on the signs). It used to be 90¢ for that trip. I wonder if the higher rates are a function of increased use or whether something else is in play. It does seem to me that more people are using the Express Lanes but that traffic in them is still what I'd consider quite light.

I haven't had to drive on that part of the Beltway in rush hour in a while and so have no opinion about general-purpose lane traffic. (My trips in the general-purpose lanes lately have only been from Springfield to Route 236 anyway, which is a pretty short distance.)

[Mapmikey]

Pretty sure the rates have gone up again...the price at 5:30 a.m. never drops below $2.35 for the full trip anymore.

As for whether the HOT lanes have improved the mainline's quality of life, the answer is yes.  However, some of this is attributable to no longer having lanes closed throughout the workday that cause clogs that wouldn't clear by rush hour.

In the afternoon (4:45) the Outer Loop is generally moving well from VA 193 to I-66 followed by a slow stretch to Gallows Rd then open again to I-95/395.

The inner loop in the afternoon is still pretty terrible from VA 123 to the American Legion Bridge on a daily basis, which is to be expected until lanes are added to the I-270 split someday.

I travel too early in the morning to comment on how morning rush is doing...

Mapmikey

[1995hoo]

One other thought....while I normally use the Express Lanes to go to Tysons, my observation as I go through the area from I-66 to Route 7 (which I haven't done at rush hour in several months) is that the general-purpose lanes look a lot saner through there than they used to because of the reconstructed I-66 interchange. Probably the single biggest improvement on the Beltway as a result of this entire project was the redesign of the ramps from I-66 to the Beltway so that traffic now merges on the right instead of on the left. This is true for both sides of the Beltway, but it's more noticeable on the Inner Loop because so many people go from I-66 to Route 7. They no longer have to cut all the way across the Beltway in order to exit.

The removal of the left-lane exit from the Inner Loop to westbound I-66 is also a huge improvement because it eliminates the problem of drivers coming from US-50 who persisted in forcing their way across all four lanes to the left-side ramp instead of using the right-side exit as they were supposed to do. There are still some people who rely blindly on their sat-navs who get confused by the left-side exit being closed (they're easy to spot as they slow abruptly in the leftmost general-purpose lane looking for a nonexistent exit), but that's an issue of driver error and not a problem with the road's design.

The road is certainly in much better condition than it used to be. The general-purpose lanes now have reflectors augmenting the lane striping, which is a big improvement at night.

I definitely find myself sniggering at the idiots who wanted to declare the entire project a failure due to the crashes on the first three days the lanes were open last November. So many idiots seem to think a single day's experience is conclusive proof that something is a failure (though had the lanes been a smashing success on those days they'd have instead looked for ways to denigrate them). I haven't heard any reports of accidents at the lanes' beginning point in a good long time now.

[mtantillo]

The base toll rate must now have some kind of time of day function in it now.  Late at night (11PM) you can still pay $2.05 for the whole length.
But during normal hours, I have seen $2.50 as the price "floor".

[cpzilliacus]

The base toll rate must now have some kind of time of day function in it now.  Late at night (11PM) you can still pay $2.05 for the whole length.
But during normal hours, I have seen $2.50 as the price "floor".

Last spring, I saw the full trip rate (in the overnight hours) as low as $1.05 or maybe $1.35. 

At the WDCITE meeting, one of the Transurban managers said the prime goal in setting the toll (aside from collecting revenue) is to meet their contractual obligation that the speeds in those lanes never fall below 45 MPH (so far, they have not come close to that).

[froggie]

Hoo:  the addition of auxiliary lanes between 66 and Route 7 hasn't hurt either...

[1995hoo]

Hoo:  the addition of auxiliary lanes between 66 and Route 7 hasn't hurt either...

Very true. I didn't mention that only because it's harder to observe that new lane's effect from the Express Lanes than it is to see the reduced amount of lane-weaving.

[Mapmikey]

Hoo:  the addition of auxiliary lanes between 66 and Route 7 hasn't hurt either...

This is only true on the inner loop.  For some reason they did not do this on the outer loop.

When I-66 WB backs up to the point that it backs up onto the outer loop, the lack of an auxiliary lane causes the beltway experience to be worse as there are plenty of people getting on the inner loop from VA 7 EB.

I also agree the inner loop reconfiguration at I-66 is a tremendous success.  Even at 5:45 in the morning there was a tremendous amount of zig-zagging across all lanes between US 50 and VA 7 under the old configuration.

Mapmikey

[mtantillo]

Hoo:  the addition of auxiliary lanes between 66 and Route 7 hasn't hurt either...

This is only true on the inner loop.  For some reason they did not do this on the outer loop.

When I-66 WB backs up to the point that it backs up onto the outer loop, the lack of an auxiliary lane causes the beltway experience to be worse as there are plenty of people getting on the inner loop from VA 7 EB.

I also agree the inner loop reconfiguration at I-66 is a tremendous success.  Even at 5:45 in the morning there was a tremendous amount of zig-zagging across all lanes between US 50 and VA 7 under the old configuration.

Mapmikey

The last thing you would ever want to do is push more traffic onto I-66 via an extra Beltway lane.  66 is bad enough.  The ramp is long enough where 66 backups onto 495 are less common than they used to be.