Virginia

Started by Alex, February 04, 2009, 12:22:16 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

Takumi

I was on VA 76 today, going to check out the recently completed segment of Woolridge Road, and noticed it now has mileposts every .2 miles. However, they run in reverse. The last milepost, just before Charter Colony Parkway, is 12.2, and the mileage decreases as the route goes north/east.
Quote from: Rothman on July 15, 2021, 07:52:59 AM
Olive Garden must be stopped.  I must stop them.

Don't @ me. Seriously.


LM117

Quote from: 1995hoo on January 26, 2018, 05:50:45 PM
Regarding my posts above about HB27, this week the House Transportation Subcommittee to which it was assigned voted unanimously to recommend "passing it by indefinitely,"  which I understand is basically equivalent to recommending rejection. That's good news.

Good. It was a stupid idea. I wish VA would go full electronic and do away with stickers altogether.
“I don’t know whether to wind my ass or scratch my watch!” - Jim Cornette

MASTERNC

Quote from: LM117 on January 27, 2018, 09:45:15 AM
Good. It was a stupid idea. I wish VA would go full electronic and do away with stickers altogether.

All states should, though it's a hard sell in states that charge for stickers (like PA, which charges inspection stations $7 for a sticker - akin to a "stamp tax").

LM117

There's another attempt to raise the Reckless Driving threshold to 85mph.

http://www.richmond.com/news/virginia/government-politics/general-assembly/senate-backs-bill-to-raise-reckless-driving-threshold-to-mph/article_a5bca637-2a03-5129-b698-897058919707.html

QuoteThe Senate on Tuesday voted 23-16 to pass a bill that would raise the threshold for reckless driving in Virginia from 80 to 85 mph.

Sen. David Suetterlein, R-Roanoke County, said his Senate Bill 104 was necessary because someone shouldn't potentially be convicted of a Class 1 misdemeanor, punishable by up to 12 months in jail and a $2,500 fine, for going 11 miles over the standard 70 mph speed limit on interstates.

Sen. Scott Surovell, D-Fairfax, who handles traffic cases as part of his law practice, agreed. He said imposing a reckless driving statute at 80 mph doesn't deter anyone from speeding because most of those who are ticketed don't realize that going over 80 would mean reckless driving.

Sen. Mark Obenshain, R-Rockingham, said he wanted to keep the law as it is, and said the reckless driving charge over 80 mph stops people from excessive speeds on Interstate 81 and saves lives.
“I don’t know whether to wind my ass or scratch my watch!” - Jim Cornette

1995hoo

Quote from: LM117 on January 30, 2018, 11:15:23 AM
There's another attempt to raise the Reckless Driving threshold to 85mph.

....

Long-overdue, although the whole idea of establishing that a particular speed is automatically reckless is a bit absurd anyway.
"You know, you never have a guaranteed spot until you have a spot guaranteed."
—Olaf Kolzig, as quoted in the Washington Times on March 28, 2003,
commenting on the Capitals clinching a playoff spot.

"That sounded stupid, didn't it?"
—Kolzig, to the same reporter a few seconds later.

jakeroot

Quote from: 1995hoo on January 30, 2018, 11:30:41 AM
Quote from: LM117 on January 30, 2018, 11:15:23 AM
There's another attempt to raise the Reckless Driving threshold to 85mph.

....

Long-overdue, although the whole idea of establishing that a particular speed is automatically reckless is a bit absurd anyway.

Yeah, I don't get that idea either. Washington allows any speed above the limit to be classified as "reckless", but I rarely hear of it being applied at all (officer's discretion). Having a definite, set number to define "reckless" works against the idea that roads can be built for any speed (which they can be).

LM117

#2856
Officers in VA also have discretion, but it's rarely used. It's also worth mentioning that the Senate has passed similar bills before, but the House of Delegates have killed every previous attempt in committee. I don't think it's ever gotten to the floor.

Maybe they'll be a better chance now since last November's shakeup.
“I don’t know whether to wind my ass or scratch my watch!” - Jim Cornette

froggie

Quote from: LM117Officers in VA also have discretion, but it's rarely used.

I wouldn't say "rarely"....may depend on the jurisdiction.  I certainly know that Charles City County uses such discretion...there was one guy in court the day I was who was caught going 24 over.  Per the law, that's an automatic reckless, but the ticketing officer didn't write it as such and the judge made it a point to note this to the accused.

VTGoose

Quote from: LM117 on January 30, 2018, 11:15:23 AM

http://www.richmond.com/news/virginia/government-politics/general-assembly/senate-backs-bill-to-raise-reckless-driving-threshold-to-mph/article_a5bca637-2a03-5129-b698-897058919707.html

QuoteSen. Mark Obenshain, R-Rockingham, said he wanted to keep the law as it is, and said the reckless driving charge over 80 mph stops people from excessive speeds on Interstate 81 and saves lives.

I didn't realize that I-81 went through an alternative universe when it got up near Harrisonburg.

Even when conditions allow (mainly when there isn't a lot of congestion) and I'm pushing 75, I still have people blow past doing well over 80. I'll bet there is any number of State Troopers who will attest that they regularly clock people exceeding 80 -- despite the reckless driving charge.

I would suggest that the biggest problem with safety on I-81 is people who don't know how to drive, especially flatlanders who encounter the various grades south of Roanoke (both four-wheelers and truckers). There really isn't a cure for stupid.

Bruce in Blacksburg
"Get in the fast lane, grandma!  The bingo game is ready to roll!"

Beltway

Quote from: VTGoose on January 31, 2018, 11:22:50 AM
I didn't realize that I-81 went through an alternative universe when it got up near Harrisonburg.
Even when conditions allow (mainly when there isn't a lot of congestion) and I'm pushing 75, I still have people blow past doing well over 80. I'll bet there is any number of State Troopers who will attest that they regularly clock people exceeding 80 -- despite the reckless driving charge.
I would suggest that the biggest problem with safety on I-81 is people who don't know how to drive, especially flatlanders who encounter the various grades south of Roanoke (both four-wheelers and truckers). There really isn't a cure for stupid.
Bruce in Blacksburg

I agree.  I am regularly amazed at the number of drivers who don't even know how to use a turn signal, probably 40 or 50% of all drivers.  It doesn't matter if there are no other vehicles nearby, but many times a driver makes a sudden unexpected move that would have been easily explained beforehand if he had bothered to use his turn signal.
http://www.roadstothefuture.com
http://www.capital-beltway.com

Baloney is a reserved word on the Internet
    (Robert Coté, 2002)

1995hoo

Quote from: jakeroot on January 30, 2018, 09:42:31 PM
Quote from: 1995hoo on January 30, 2018, 11:30:41 AM
Quote from: LM117 on January 30, 2018, 11:15:23 AM
There's another attempt to raise the Reckless Driving threshold to 85mph.

....

Long-overdue, although the whole idea of establishing that a particular speed is automatically reckless is a bit absurd anyway.

Yeah, I don't get that idea either. Washington allows any speed above the limit to be classified as "reckless", but I rarely hear of it being applied at all (officer's discretion). Having a definite, set number to define "reckless" works against the idea that roads can be built for any speed (which they can be).

It also takes away from the idea of "recklessness" as a legal concept. That is, the legal concept of recklessness means that you either act intentionally without paying any attention to the likely injurious consequences that may occur from your conduct or you knowingly disregard the risk of those consequences. I'd argue that the mere fact of driving faster than a specific speed does not, in and of itself, automatically create a likelihood of injurious consequences merely because of the speed (assuming the speed is the sole factor at issue–that is, setting aside issues like bad weather or visibility or heavy traffic or whatever).

I'm sure I've mentioned this before, but I once saw a judge ask a cop in Fairfax General District Court why he hadn't written a guy a reckless driving ticket. The guy had been going 98 mph on I-66 west of Fair Oaks. The cop said it was late at night, the weather was clear with a full moon, there was no traffic, and the guy was driving a new Corvette, so the cop concluded the guy was trying out his new car and he was not posing a danger to himself or anyone else. The judge accepted the explanation. I still say good for both the cop and the judge for getting it right.
"You know, you never have a guaranteed spot until you have a spot guaranteed."
—Olaf Kolzig, as quoted in the Washington Times on March 28, 2003,
commenting on the Capitals clinching a playoff spot.

"That sounded stupid, didn't it?"
—Kolzig, to the same reporter a few seconds later.

LM117

#2861
Quote from: 1995hoo on January 31, 2018, 03:53:46 PMI'm sure I've mentioned this before, but I once saw a judge ask a cop in Fairfax General District Court why he hadn't written a guy a reckless driving ticket. The guy had been going 98 mph on I-66 west of Fair Oaks. The cop said it was late at night, the weather was clear with a full moon, there was no traffic, and the guy was driving a new Corvette, so the cop concluded the guy was trying out his new car and he was not posing a danger to himself or anyone else. The judge accepted the explanation. I still say good for both the cop and the judge for getting it right.

Wow! :wow: Fairfax is one of the last places I'd expect to do that. I've always heard that they're very tough. Hell, there's a retired cop from NOVA who is a member of City-Data forum (posts in VA subforum) and he always mentions how tough Fairfax courts are whenever someone asks for advice on speeding and RD charges in that area.
“I don’t know whether to wind my ass or scratch my watch!” - Jim Cornette

Beltway

Quote from: LM117 on February 01, 2018, 05:57:14 AM
Quote from: 1995hoo on January 31, 2018, 03:53:46 PMI'm sure I've mentioned this before, but I once saw a judge ask a cop in Fairfax General District Court why he hadn't written a guy a reckless driving ticket. The guy had been going 98 mph on I-66 west of Fair Oaks. The cop said it was late at night, the weather was clear with a full moon, there was no traffic, and the guy was driving a new Corvette, so the cop concluded the guy was trying out his new car and he was not posing a danger to himself or anyone else. The judge accepted the explanation. I still say good for both the cop and the judge for getting it right.
Wow! :wow: Fairfax is one of the last places I'd expect to do that. I've always heard that they're very tough. Hell, there's a retired cop from NOVA who is a member of City-Data forum (posts in VA subforum) and he always mentions how tough Fairfax courts are whenever someone asks for advice on speeding and RD charges in that area.

So what was he charged with?  Obviously something if he was in front of the General District Court.  If the police and magistrate don't press a particular charge then the judge won't do it himself, so that point is moot.
http://www.roadstothefuture.com
http://www.capital-beltway.com

Baloney is a reserved word on the Internet
    (Robert Coté, 2002)

1995hoo

Quote from: Beltway on February 01, 2018, 07:25:52 AM
Quote from: LM117 on February 01, 2018, 05:57:14 AM
Quote from: 1995hoo on January 31, 2018, 03:53:46 PMI'm sure I've mentioned this before, but I once saw a judge ask a cop in Fairfax General District Court why he hadn't written a guy a reckless driving ticket. The guy had been going 98 mph on I-66 west of Fair Oaks. The cop said it was late at night, the weather was clear with a full moon, there was no traffic, and the guy was driving a new Corvette, so the cop concluded the guy was trying out his new car and he was not posing a danger to himself or anyone else. The judge accepted the explanation. I still say good for both the cop and the judge for getting it right.
Wow! :wow: Fairfax is one of the last places I'd expect to do that. I've always heard that they're very tough. Hell, there's a retired cop from NOVA who is a member of City-Data forum (posts in VA subforum) and he always mentions how tough Fairfax courts are whenever someone asks for advice on speeding and RD charges in that area.

So what was he charged with?  Obviously something if he was in front of the General District Court.  If the police and magistrate don't press a particular charge then the judge won't do it himself.

Plain old speeding.
"You know, you never have a guaranteed spot until you have a spot guaranteed."
—Olaf Kolzig, as quoted in the Washington Times on March 28, 2003,
commenting on the Capitals clinching a playoff spot.

"That sounded stupid, didn't it?"
—Kolzig, to the same reporter a few seconds later.

Beltway

Quote from: 1995hoo on February 01, 2018, 07:26:36 AM
Quote from: Beltway on February 01, 2018, 07:25:52 AM
Quote from: LM117 on February 01, 2018, 05:57:14 AM
Quote from: 1995hoo on January 31, 2018, 03:53:46 PMI'm sure I've mentioned this before, but I once saw a judge ask a cop in Fairfax General District Court why he hadn't written a guy a reckless driving ticket. The guy had been going 98 mph on I-66 west of Fair Oaks. The cop said it was late at night, the weather was clear with a full moon, there was no traffic, and the guy was driving a new Corvette, so the cop concluded the guy was trying out his new car and he was not posing a danger to himself or anyone else. The judge accepted the explanation. I still say good for both the cop and the judge for getting it right.
Wow! :wow: Fairfax is one of the last places I'd expect to do that. I've always heard that they're very tough. Hell, there's a retired cop from NOVA who is a member of City-Data forum (posts in VA subforum) and he always mentions how tough Fairfax courts are whenever someone asks for advice on speeding and RD charges in that area.
So what was he charged with?  Obviously something if he was in front of the General District Court.  If the police and magistrate don't press a particular charge then the judge won't do it himself.
Plain old speeding.

And a fine based on the number of mph over?
http://www.roadstothefuture.com
http://www.capital-beltway.com

Baloney is a reserved word on the Internet
    (Robert Coté, 2002)

1995hoo

Quote from: Beltway on February 01, 2018, 07:27:55 AM
Quote from: 1995hoo on February 01, 2018, 07:26:36 AM
Quote from: Beltway on February 01, 2018, 07:25:52 AM
Quote from: LM117 on February 01, 2018, 05:57:14 AM
Quote from: 1995hoo on January 31, 2018, 03:53:46 PMI'm sure I've mentioned this before, but I once saw a judge ask a cop in Fairfax General District Court why he hadn't written a guy a reckless driving ticket. The guy had been going 98 mph on I-66 west of Fair Oaks. The cop said it was late at night, the weather was clear with a full moon, there was no traffic, and the guy was driving a new Corvette, so the cop concluded the guy was trying out his new car and he was not posing a danger to himself or anyone else. The judge accepted the explanation. I still say good for both the cop and the judge for getting it right.
Wow! :wow: Fairfax is one of the last places I'd expect to do that. I've always heard that they're very tough. Hell, there's a retired cop from NOVA who is a member of City-Data forum (posts in VA subforum) and he always mentions how tough Fairfax courts are whenever someone asks for advice on speeding and RD charges in that area.
So what was he charged with?  Obviously something if he was in front of the General District Court.  If the police and magistrate don't press a particular charge then the judge won't do it himself.
Plain old speeding.

And a fine based on the number of mph over?

From what I recall, yes. As you correctly note, the judge won't increase the charge. I'm not sure he legally can.
"You know, you never have a guaranteed spot until you have a spot guaranteed."
—Olaf Kolzig, as quoted in the Washington Times on March 28, 2003,
commenting on the Capitals clinching a playoff spot.

"That sounded stupid, didn't it?"
—Kolzig, to the same reporter a few seconds later.

cpzilliacus

Washington Post: Monster trucks for Virginia's roads? Some lawmakers want to study them; opponents see them as menace.

QuoteMonster trucks could come to Virginia's highways if some lawmakers get their way.

QuoteThese are not the fun kind of monster trucks that intentionally crush cars, motor homes and other vehicles for the entertainment of fans who crowd into arenas to see them. These would be 18-wheeler trucks rolling down ordinary highways with loads of 91,000 pounds and perhaps more.

QuoteSupporters say the super trucks are important to keep commerce flowing, particularly for enterprises such as the Port of Virginia. They also argue that the heavier trucks would pose no additional threat to highway safety or infrastructure than existing 18-wheelers. Those advocates say they would just like to give Virginia flexibility to test the use and effect of super trucks, regardless of the federal government's stance.
Opinions expressed here on AAROADS are strictly personal and mine alone, and do not reflect policies or positions of MWCOG, NCRTPB or their member federal, state, county and municipal governments or any other agency.

Rothman

Egads.  NYSDOT called them "super loads" about 10 years ago.  Didn't know they had actual proponents.  The permitting alone and procedures to prevent bridge failures is a huge headache for all involved.
Please note: All comments here represent my own personal opinion and do not reflect the official position(s) of NYSDOT.

Beltway

Quote from: cpzilliacus on February 01, 2018, 10:21:27 PM
Washington comPost: Monster trucks for Virginia's roads? Some lawmakers want to study them; opponents see them as menace.
QuoteMonster trucks could come to Virginia's highways if some lawmakers get their way.
QuoteThese are not the fun kind of monster trucks that intentionally crush cars, motor homes and other vehicles for the entertainment of fans who crowd into arenas to see them. These would be 18-wheeler trucks rolling down ordinary highways with loads of 91,000 pounds and perhaps more.
QuoteSupporters say the super trucks are important to keep commerce flowing, particularly for enterprises such as the Port of Virginia. They also argue that the heavier trucks would pose no additional threat to highway safety or infrastructure than existing 18-wheelers. Those advocates say they would just like to give Virginia flexibility to test the use and effect of super trucks, regardless of the federal government's stance.

The poorly written article did not say if the trucks would be longer or wider, just that the weight limit would be increased from 80,000 to 91,000 pounds.  If they are not longer or wider, then it would be a misnomer to call them "monster trucks".  As far as the effects on pavements and bridges, that needs to be studied, IMHO.
http://www.roadstothefuture.com
http://www.capital-beltway.com

Baloney is a reserved word on the Internet
    (Robert Coté, 2002)

Rothman

Quote from: Beltway on February 01, 2018, 11:30:34 PM
Quote from: cpzilliacus on February 01, 2018, 10:21:27 PM
Washington comPost: Monster trucks for Virginia's roads? Some lawmakers want to study them; opponents see them as menace.
QuoteMonster trucks could come to Virginia's highways if some lawmakers get their way.
QuoteThese are not the fun kind of monster trucks that intentionally crush cars, motor homes and other vehicles for the entertainment of fans who crowd into arenas to see them. These would be 18-wheeler trucks rolling down ordinary highways with loads of 91,000 pounds and perhaps more.
QuoteSupporters say the super trucks are important to keep commerce flowing, particularly for enterprises such as the Port of Virginia. They also argue that the heavier trucks would pose no additional threat to highway safety or infrastructure than existing 18-wheelers. Those advocates say they would just like to give Virginia flexibility to test the use and effect of super trucks, regardless of the federal government's stance.

The poorly written article did not say if the trucks would be longer or wider, just that the weight limit would be increased from 80,000 to 91,000 pounds.  If they are not longer or wider, then it would be a misnomer to call them "monster trucks".  As far as the effects on pavements and bridges, that needs to be studied, IMHO.
It isn't like loads like this haven't existed already.  NY had about half-a-dozen a year back in 2006 or so; don't know if that number has gone up or down.  In some cases, the escorted load would have to slow down to a crawl when it came to certain bridges.  NYSDOT would give them a specific route, but the permits were nuts.  All sorts of permits are needed for these things at various levels of government.  Very cumbersome and expensive to undertake.
Please note: All comments here represent my own personal opinion and do not reflect the official position(s) of NYSDOT.

cpzilliacus

Quote from: Rothman on February 01, 2018, 11:09:28 PM
Egads.  NYSDOT called them "super loads" about 10 years ago.  Didn't know they had actual proponents.  The permitting alone and procedures to prevent bridge failures is a huge headache for all involved.

I have no particular reason  to think this is a bad idea (the Pennsylvania Turnpike has long allowed 100,000 pounds gross on its roads without a permit), save one.   

There should be no discussion about heavier truck gross weights, or longer combinations (especially as it applies to I-81 in Virginia) until funding is identified by VDOT and is in place to design, engineer and construct a widening of all of I-81 in the Commonwealth to 6 or ideally 8 lanes.
Opinions expressed here on AAROADS are strictly personal and mine alone, and do not reflect policies or positions of MWCOG, NCRTPB or their member federal, state, county and municipal governments or any other agency.

Beltway

Quote from: Rothman on February 02, 2018, 12:23:59 AM
Quote from: Beltway on February 01, 2018, 11:30:34 PM
The poorly written article did not say if the trucks would be longer or wider, just that the weight limit would be increased from 80,000 to 91,000 pounds.  If they are not longer or wider, then it would be a misnomer to call them "monster trucks".  As far as the effects on pavements and bridges, that needs to be studied, IMHO.
It isn't like loads like this haven't existed already.  NY had about half-a-dozen a year back in 2006 or so; don't know if that number has gone up or down.  In some cases, the escorted load would have to slow down to a crawl when it came to certain bridges.  NYSDOT would give them a specific route, but the permits were nuts.  All sorts of permits are needed for these things at various levels of government.  Very cumbersome and expensive to undertake.

Occasional super-heavy loads can be permitted above 120,000 pounds in some cases in most states, I believe.  But then they would also have many more that 18 wheels.

Example --
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=THaXA-knmWs
weighs over 327,000lbs.
http://www.roadstothefuture.com
http://www.capital-beltway.com

Baloney is a reserved word on the Internet
    (Robert Coté, 2002)

cpzilliacus

Quote from: Beltway on February 02, 2018, 12:45:19 AM
Occasional super-heavy loads can be permitted above 120,000 pounds in some cases in most states, I believe.  But then they would also have many more that 18 wheels.

VDOT permitted an extremely heavy high-voltage transformer, which had to go by  highway from  a railroad siding on NS in Marshall at VA-55 to a location in Loudoun County.  That load was a monster, I think it scaled out between 300,000 and 400,000 pounds.  Predictably, the PEC was all worried about the load damaging "their" scenic secondary roads (might have gone east on VA-55, then north on VA-626 to Middleburg, then east on U.S. 50 and then a few more secondary routes to reach its destination, which might have been the big substation in Arcola (this has been a few years ago)) and the PEC wanted it sent "some other way" (because some tree branches had to be cut and utility lines temporarily moved, as this  thing was tall in addition to being heavy).   Regardless of the PEC's complaining, the load made it from the railroad siding to its intended destination safely.
Opinions expressed here on AAROADS are strictly personal and mine alone, and do not reflect policies or positions of MWCOG, NCRTPB or their member federal, state, county and municipal governments or any other agency.

BrianP

MDOT SHA even had a press release for one heavy load like that.
http://www.marylandroads.com/pages/release.aspx?newsId=2627

I seem to recall that wasn't the first heavy load like that in Harford county.

Jmiles32

As expected, it looks like Northern Virginia would very much like to get a significant piece of that $232 million from the FredEX deal to put towards easing the infamous Woodbridge bottleneck.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/will-virginia-finally-address-the-mess-on-i-95-at-the-occoquan-river/2018/02/02/2daa90a4-0540-11e8-8777-2a059f168dd2_story.html?utm_term=.34861e3e6549
QuoteOn Jan. 8, now-former governor Terry McAuliffe (D) announced an agreement with the I-95 Express Lane concessionaire to extend the express toll lanes to Fredericksburg. As part of the agreement, the northbound Rappahannock River Crossing will be built and $232 million will be allocated to I-95 corridor improvements.

This $232 million provides an opportunity for Virginia to work with the I-95 Express Lane concessionaire to study, design and implement a solution for I-95 between Prince William Parkway and U.S. 1 in both directions that benefits both parties. As a start, VDOT and Prince William County have submitted a project for inclusion into the Council of Governments' long-range plan to add an auxiliary lane to southbound I-95 between Route 123 and Prince William Parkway.

A solution to this bottleneck may not reduce traffic volume during peak periods in the long run, but it could improve safety, reduce accidents, provide better access to and from Prince William County and reduce congestion during off-peak hours. Adding additional general-purpose lanes is not a cost-effective solution, but a mixture of auxiliary lanes, interchange reconfigurations and ramp metering could make this painful bottleneck that affects the lives of so many Prince William County residents and other users of I-95 more tolerable.
Aspiring Transportation Planner at Virginia Tech. Go Hokies!



Opinions expressed here on belong solely to the poster and do not represent or reflect the opinions or beliefs of AARoads, its creators and/or associates.