Virginia Legislation Action Thread

[Mark Blacknell]

Hi, all. I thought it would be helpful to start a new thread that summarizes the state of play for the various bits of legislation working its way through the General Assembly in Richmond. I’ll lead off with WABA’s Action Alert for today’s items, and then follow up with a post about other pending items.

Today:

Please Act Now to Support SB 1060 and Oppose SB 731 in the Virginia Senate

The Virginia Senate Transportation Committee will consider two bicycle-related bills on Wednesday afternoon (1/23/13). We need you to respectfully ask the Senate Transportation Committee members to:

1) Support SB 1060, Reeves, which would prohibit motorists from rear-ending or side-swiping bicyclists (i.e., following bicyclists too closely or passing bicyclists with less than a 3-foot gap).

2) Oppose SB 731, Carrico, which would prohibit riding mopeds on highways with speed limits above 35 MPH. If moped riding is banned, bicycling may be next!
You can identify and contact your state legislators from the Who’s My Legislator page.
If your Senator is listed below, call or email them directly – constituent calls really matter. Otherwise, you may call or email all three committee members from NoVA or bulk email the entire 14-member committee by simply copying the email addresses on this page and pasting them into your email’s To: field.

Senate Transportation Committee Members from NoVA

* Sen. Barbara Favola (D-31st District), [URL=”tel:804-698-7531″]804-698-7531[/URL], <district31@senate.virginia.gov>
* Sen. Dave Marsden (D-37th District), [URL=”tel:804-698-7537″]804-698-7537[/URL], <district37@senate.virginia.gov>
* Sen. Chuck Colgan (D-29th District), [URL=”tel:804-698-7529″]804-698-7529[/URL], <district29@senate.virginia.gov>

Thank you for acting on very short notice to improve bicycling in Virginia. Unfortunately, bills move swiftly at the Virginia General Assembly, and we only learned yesterday afternoon that these bill would be heard today. If the Senate Transportation Committee reports these bill today, they will be considered by the full Senate in just a few days. Please check our blog for regular updates – we’ll try not too email you too frequently.

Due to the response to our recent action alerts, the Virginia Senate has already passed SB 736 (prohibits dooring), whereas the House Transportation Committee has passed HB 1950 (prohibits rear-ending bicyclists) with a 20-1 vote.

I cannot emphasize enough now much of a difference actual constituent contact makes on these matters. We turned some votes last year with them, and have again this year. We need that to keep happening. Please feel free to cut, paste, and forward to your friends and relatives who don’t read the forum.

Finally, the General Assembly makes it difficult to get notice of what’s on the docket in a timely manner, unfortunately, so if communications/action alerts seem a bit rushed and disjointed, well . . . there are many things I’d like to fix about Richmond. But let’s start with getting better bike legislation out of them.

Topic

[Mark Blacknell]

@sjclaeys 44307 wrote:

Asking for feedback the same week that the bill was introduced does not constitute meaningful outreach. I doubt that her interaction with Loudoun County officials was limited to that week.

Loudoun County had a lobbyist on the case, sent a Sheriff’s Deputy down to (ultimately not) testify, and her Legislative Assistant was presenting crash figures from a (erroneous, as best as I could tell) Loudoun-prepared fact sheet.

[GuyContinental]

So, I don’t know if it was related but there was a Loudoun trooper well hidden at the Van Buren crossing bright and early this morning. Which is awesome since Van Buren is completely deserted (as in tumbleweeds blowing through) at 7am. Sure am glad that I hung out shivering at that light for 6 minutes while one car passed. I feel safer already.

[mstone]

We need a “pedestrian level of service” where intersections fail if pedestrians have to wait several minutes at empty intersections. W&OD at gallows is the same way–really short walk signal, then it will refuse to give pedestrians a signal again for several minutes. The funny thing is, you usually have to stand at an empty street for a while, then cars come just before they finally get a red.

[FFX_Hinterlands]

@GuyContinental 44600 wrote:

So, I don’t know if it was related but there was a Loudoun trooper well hidden at the Van Buren crossing bright and early this morning. Which is awesome since Van Buren is completely deserted (as in tumbleweeds blowing through) at 7am. Sure am glad that I hung out shivering at that light for 6 minutes while one car passed. I feel safer already.

You sure it wasn’t a Herndon Police Car? They sit there and nail people coming down the hill toward the Herndon Post office. I don’t think Herndon has a stop sign ordinance yet, but I’ve heard them say they like to “write warnings” to “keep tabs” on repeat offenders.

[bobco85]

@GuyContinental 44600 wrote:

So, I don’t know if it was related but there was a Loudoun trooper well hidden at the Van Buren crossing bright and early this morning. Which is awesome since Van Buren is completely deserted (as in tumbleweeds blowing through) at 7am. Sure am glad that I hung out shivering at that light for 6 minutes while one car passed. I feel safer already.

@mstone 44601 wrote:

We need a “pedestrian level of service” where intersections fail if pedestrians have to wait several minutes at empty intersections. W&OD at gallows is the same way–really short walk signal, then it will refuse to give pedestrians a signal again for several minutes. The funny thing is, you usually have to stand at an empty street for a while, then cars come just before they finally get a red.

I don’t want to derail the conversation, but in both the situations that I have quoted, it seems that the 2 minute law (VA Code § 46.2-833) would apply, allowing each of you to cross on a red.

[GuyContinental]

Honestly not sure- coloration looked like Loudoun but I could only see the front half of the car. She was sitting in the office park cut out about 100 yards south of the crossing (on the E side) giving me the evil eye (if she was camped out for speeders the pickings were slim).

[GuyContinental]

@bobco85 44606 wrote:

I don’t want to derail the conversation, but in both the situations that I have quoted, it seems that the 2 minute law (VA Code § 46.2-833) would apply, allowing each of you to cross on a red.

Not sure I’d want to test that with a LEO sitting right there. Maybe dismount and jaywalk?

Regardless, I agree with Mr. Stone, Gallows is the other signaled WO&D intersection where there are large gaps of traffic and very long light intervals, at least in the AM (pm notsomuch)

[baiskeli]

@GuyContinental 44609 wrote:

Not sure I’d want to test that with a LEO sitting right there. Maybe dismount and jaywalk?

It specifically mentions bicycles, along with motorcycles (which aren’t expected to dismount), so I’d say it’s legal to ride through without dismounting.

But I don’t want to test it in front of a cop either, let alone the cop’s knowledge of the law in the first place.

[dasgeh]

@mstone 44601 wrote:

We need a “pedestrian level of service” where intersections fail if pedestrians have to wait several minutes at empty intersections. W&OD at gallows is the same way–really short walk signal, then it will refuse to give pedestrians a signal again for several minutes. The funny thing is, you usually have to stand at an empty street for a while, then cars come just before they finally get a red.

There are a bunch of intersections near the Lincoln that would fail this too — the lights aren’t timed together, so pedestrians have red when there are no cars, or no way cars could go far, but then pedestrians get green when cars could be continuing. Backs up traffic and frustrates pedestrians.

[mstone]

@bobco85 44606 wrote:

I don’t want to derail the conversation, but in both the situations that I have quoted, it seems that the 2 minute law (VA Code § 46.2-833) would apply, allowing each of you to cross on a red.

I think that only applies to road signals, not pedestrian signals. (Because who cares how long pedestrians wait if the alternative might make a car slow down.)

[ShawnoftheDread]

@mstone 44623 wrote:

I think that only applies to road signals, not pedestrian signals. (Because who cares how long pedestrians wait if the alternative might make a car slow down.)

I’d read it that way too, especially considering it’s meant to address the inability of motorcycles and bikes to trip the light. That’s not the case with a pedestrian signal.

[DaveK]

Nope.

Quote:

…if a driver of a motorcycle or moped or a bicycle rider approaches an intersection that is controlled by a traffic light…

That includes any signal in my mind. They should have written traffic signal instead of traffic light, but I’m having a hard time figuring out where that would be a problem. In any case, if I roll up to a pedestrian signal to cross, say, Gallows Road, and I have to wait 2 minutes, I’ll run it right in front of a cop and take it to court. This is another law I need to laminate and keep in my seat bag…

[GuyContinental]

@DaveK 44636 wrote:

Nope.

That includes any signal in my mind. They should have written traffic signal instead of traffic light, but I’m having a hard time figuring out where that would be a problem. In any case, if I roll up to a pedestrian signal to cross, say, Gallows Road, and I have to wait 2 minutes, I’ll run it right in front of a cop and take it to court. This is another law I need to laminate and keep in my seat bag…

I was going to ask if anyone had a laminated list of laws and what they might be… of course there is a time place and attitude to pull that off… maybe helmet camera to boot.

[mstone]

@DaveK 44636 wrote:

Nope.

That includes any signal in my mind. They should have written traffic signal instead of traffic light, but I’m having a hard time figuring out where that would be a problem. In any case, if I roll up to a pedestrian signal to cross, say, Gallows Road, and I have to wait 2 minutes, I’ll run it right in front of a cop and take it to court. This is another law I need to laminate and keep in my seat bag…

So in your mind it is intended to cover pedestrian walk signals, but they just forgot to mention pedestrians? In context, it is intended to apply to sensor-actuated lights which often never change for anything other than a car. You might have a valid argument for a broken push-to-walk signal, but this provision was never meant to just be a “I don’t want to wait for the signal” exemption.

[ShawnoftheDread]

@DaveK 44636 wrote:

Nope.

That includes any signal in my mind. They should have written traffic signal instead of traffic light, but I’m having a hard time figuring out where that would be a problem….

…the driver or rider may proceed through the intersection on a steady red light…

The statute doesn’t mention a pedestrian signal at all. If you’re using a crosswalk without waiting for a walk signal, you’re not crossing “on a steady red light.”

In any case, if I roll up to a pedestrian signal to cross, say, Gallows Road, and I have to wait 2 minutes, I’ll run it right in front of a cop and take it to court. This is another law I need to laminate and keep in my seat bag…

I wish you luck. Let us know how it goes.

[Author]

Replies