prohibiting 18-wheelers on US routes
anon
just curious because i always see signs warning truckers
of switchbacks & tight curves but don't recall ever seeing
an outright prohibition of large trucks except on state
routes.
i know they can be prohibited on interstates (e.g.,
Atlanta's downtown connector except for deliveries).
this weekend i was on US129 ("Deal's Gap") on the TN side
and there was an 18-wheeler on the road! i've never seen
one on this road, though i've seen a fair number of pics
of crashes involving them on on this road... it was
unreal. A motorcyclist was warning everyone ahead of the
truck to get as far to the side as they could, because the
trucker couldn't make any of the curves without taking up
the bulk of the other lane. I thought the trucker had to
be insane to think he could do this, and it likely
would've been quicker & definitely much less risky to take
another route.... there's nowhere he could've been going
that didn't have another way to get there.
anon
this for one
on most of the curves... so why can't they just prohibit
them?
http://tailofthedragon.com/dragon_trucks.html
elaich
news:Ayozg.12553$%7.4...@bignews2.bellsouth.net:
> are states not allowed to prohibit them on US routes? i'm
> just curious because i always see signs warning truckers
> of switchbacks & tight curves but don't recall ever seeing
> an outright prohibition of large trucks except on state
> routes.
I've often wondered why they are not outright prohibited on certain roads.
I've never seen any sign prohibiting them anywhere.
Locally, there is a winding dirt road that goes behind the weigh station.
I've often suspected that it is kept in that condition to keep trucks from
jumping the station. There's no way anyone could get an 18 wheeler through
there, but the warning sign only states that the road is "not recommended"
for trucks and campers.
Jon Enslin
anon wrote:
> i found some pics of 18-wheelers on this road... it's like
> this for one
> on most of the curves... so why can't they just prohibit
> them?
The Supreme Court has basically given the states not a great deal of
latitude in placing restrictions on highways for interstate commerce
reasons.
Jon
Michael G. Koerner
That rig could also have been on its way to or from a local stop.
BTW, big-rig trucks are prohibited from most of Lake Shore Shrive (US 41) in
Chicago.
--
___________________________________________ ____ _______________
Regards, | |\ ____
| | | | |\
Michael G. Koerner May they | | | | | | rise again!
Appleton, Wisconsin USA | | | | | |
___________________________________________ | | | | | | _______________
Michael G. Koerner
In that general area, I very much wonder how big-rigs were able to do it on
the Tennessee side of the pre-freeway reouting of US 19 at Fancy Gap. I drove
that 'old' road while exploring the area around the then just opened I-26
freeway in mid-2003. WHATTA DRIVE!
morticide
It does remind me of going through the Boston Mountains in northwest
Arkansas prior to the opening of I-540. US 71 has a 17-mile stretch
with lots of 20-mph curves. Imagine a convoy of military vehicles
using that road: 5T dump trucks struggle there.
H.B. Elkins
>The Supreme Court has basically given the states not a great deal of
>latitude in placing restrictions on highways for interstate commerce
>reasons.
There are truck restrictions on US 19W in North Carolina.
--
To reply by e-mail, remove the "restrictor plate"
Sherman L. Cahal
There were restrictions on the US 119 Pine Mountain crossing in
Kentucky.
Mike Tantillo
anon wrote:
> are states not allowed to prohibit them on US routes? i'm
> just curious because i always see signs warning truckers
> of switchbacks & tight curves but don't recall ever seeing
> an outright prohibition of large trucks except on state
> routes.
>
> i know they can be prohibited on interstates (e.g.,
> Atlanta's downtown connector except for deliveries).
>
Actually the prohibition has little to do with the "brand" of facility
(state/US/interstate) and a lot more about the availability and quality
of alternate routes.
I suspect that it is impossible to just prohibit certain types of
vehicles from a road used for interstate commerce purposes. It can
reasonably be assumed that all interstates are used in interstate
commerce. It can also be assumed that US routes (being the major
routes of yesteryear) are also considered to be part of interstate
commerce, as a remenant of older times. Besides, like interstates,
AASHTO has to get involved in selecting the routes of US routes, so
since all states have an interest in US routes, it would seem that it
would be against the spirit of the rule for a state to declare that
part of a multi-state US route is off limits.
Now that being said.....with good reason, and a good alternate route,
prohibitions spring up. When a US route splits into a bypass and
business route, many times through trucks are banned from the business
route. This would make sense since the bypass was designed as a bypass
and usually is a higher quality of road than the business route, and
the towns have a good reason for not wanting through trucks in their
downtown areas if the trucks dont need to be there and there is a
decent way for them to get around. If there were no bypass route, then
by having a truck prohibition, they would actually be impeding travel
by trucks with a downtown restriction, unless they sign a truck route
(which should be of equal or greater quality). But why waste time with
a seperate truck route when you can just move the entire US route out
of downtown?
The case of Atlanta on I-75, I-85, and I-20 is very similar. There is
a vested interest in keeping trucks out of downtown Atlanta, being that
the connector has narrow lanes, very heavy traffic, and some tricky
weaves. But they provide a bypass which is equal quality (interstate
freeway), so they can get away with it. additionally, there is a very
well defined area that the ban applies to (inside I-285), so it is easy
to enforce. But if someone tried to ban trucks from I-15 in Las Vegas,
that would be a no-go, since there is no other interstate freeway that
trucks can use. It would be unacceptable to ban trucks from a segment
of interstate and force them onto a lesser quality US route or state
route.
Now of course routes with a pre-existing absolute restriction have to
have bans. Such as a low clearance structure, or no wide loads due to
a toll booth or construction zone, but these are generally the
exception rather than the norm.
> this weekend i was on US129 ("Deal's Gap") on the TN side
> and there was an 18-wheeler on the road! i've never seen
> one on this road, though i've seen a fair number of pics
> of crashes involving them on on this road... it was
> unreal. A motorcyclist was warning everyone ahead of the
> truck to get as far to the side as they could, because the
> trucker couldn't make any of the curves without taking up
> the bulk of the other lane. I thought the trucker had to
> be insane to think he could do this, and it likely
> would've been quicker & definitely much less risky to take
> another route.... there's nowhere he could've been going
> that didn't have another way to get there.
This is one, that IMO, should qualify for an absolute physical
restriction. US 64 has a truck route signed between Franklin and
Hendersonville NC because of a stretch like this (follows US 74, I-40,
and I-26) and so it can be done but just isnt. Maybe because the
suitable alternates are very far out of the way, or maybe because
coordination between two states is too difficult. As for why the truck
was there...probably just looked at a map without getting advice.
Anyone who knows that road would never take a truck on it....
Jon Enslin
Michael G. Koerner wrote:
> Jon Enslin wrote:
> > anon wrote:
> >
> >>i found some pics of 18-wheelers on this road... it's like
> >>this for one
> >>on most of the curves... so why can't they just prohibit
> >>them?
> >
> >
> >
> > The Supreme Court has basically given the states not a great deal of
> > latitude in placing restrictions on highways for interstate commerce
> > reasons.
>
> That rig could also have been on its way to or from a local stop.
It doesn't matter - the highways are all connected. (That is the
court's logic.)
>
> BTW, big-rig trucks are prohibited from most of Lake Shore Shrive (US 41) in
> Chicago.
I guess it just matters if someone brings suit.
Jon
richard
"anon" <lkj331...@lkj22.24444kj33.dccc.3lkj23.net> wrote in message
news:Ayozg.12553$%7.4...@bignews2.bellsouth.net...
As I am a trucker, yes, we are prohibited from using various roadways
including interstates.
Georgia, has many roads that are posted with signs stating "NO STAA ACCESS".
Which means trucks that meet the requirements of the STAA are not allowed.
Get caught on it, you get fined.
Ever seen those white signs with a silhouette of a truck and the big red
"NO" over it? When I see one of those, I try not using that road. However,
in certain cases, you have to.
As you found the "Tail of the dragon" website, I helped those guys get that
route banned for truck use as way to many idiots thought they could handle
the curves. The problem with that is, trucking companies still pay their
drivers the shortest route, and unfortunately, the dragon is included in
some routing.
After having seen the photos myself, I sure as hell wouldn't want to chance
going that route and risking losing the truck on a curve.
Some
Wild
Idiot
Found
Truck
John Lansford
>elaich wrote:
>> "anon" <lkj331...@lkj22.24444kj33.dccc.3lkj23.net> wrote in
>> news:Ayozg.12553$%7.4...@bignews2.bellsouth.net:
>>
>>
>>>are states not allowed to prohibit them on US routes? i'm
>>>just curious because i always see signs warning truckers
>>>of switchbacks & tight curves but don't recall ever seeing
>>>an outright prohibition of large trucks except on state
>>>routes.
>>
>>
>> I've often wondered why they are not outright prohibited on certain roads.
>> I've never seen any sign prohibiting them anywhere.
>>
>> Locally, there is a winding dirt road that goes behind the weigh station.
>> I've often suspected that it is kept in that condition to keep trucks from
>> jumping the station. There's no way anyone could get an 18 wheeler through
>> there, but the warning sign only states that the road is "not recommended"
>> for trucks and campers.
>
>In that general area, I very much wonder how big-rigs were able to do it on
>the Tennessee side of the pre-freeway reouting of US 19 at Fancy Gap. I drove
>that 'old' road while exploring the area around the then just opened I-26
>freeway in mid-2003. WHATTA DRIVE!
They take their time going up that steep grade anyway, so the hairpin
curves aren't that big a deal. TN had wide gravel shoulders on all
the sharp curves, so the trucks could use those to keep from taking up
all the pavement. I saw as many as 30 big trucks sitting at the TN/NC
route waiting on NCDOT to scrape/salt US 23 before travelling down
that steep grade (before I-26 opened, of course).
Trucks cannot be banned from any US route unless there's a comparable
and parallel route nearby, and there are no businesses that need to be
serviced on the US route itself. US 129 at Deals Gap has several
service stations along it, which require tanker trucks to keep the gas
tanks filled.
John Lansford, PE
--
John's Shop of Wood
http://wood.jlansford.net/
John Lansford
>
>As I am a trucker, yes, we are prohibited from using various roadways
>including interstates.
>Georgia, has many roads that are posted with signs stating "NO STAA ACCESS".
>Which means trucks that meet the requirements of the STAA are not allowed.
>Get caught on it, you get fined.
>Ever seen those white signs with a silhouette of a truck and the big red
>"NO" over it? When I see one of those, I try not using that road. However,
>in certain cases, you have to.
There were signs prohibiting STAA vehicles on US 19/23 north of Mars
Hill before I-26 opened. I saw them at all the weigh stations on I-40
throughout NC back then. They were put up after TNDOT completed their
half of the interstate route, and truckers began using it more
frequently. After two were killed coming down the steep grades in NC,
the signs went up.
>As you found the "Tail of the dragon" website, I helped those guys get that
>route banned for truck use as way to many idiots thought they could handle
>the curves. The problem with that is, trucking companies still pay their
>drivers the shortest route, and unfortunately, the dragon is included in
>some routing.
>
And there are businesses along US 129 in NC that require fuel trucks
to reach them. I doubt there are a lot of through trucks on that road
though.
anomalous
national network (mostly interstates). State and US roads deemed unsafe for
wider 102" trucks and double trailer units are closed to them, though the
only US route restricted seems to be a section of US 9 in southwest NJ.
I always believed a State could restrict truck access to any route if they
could show a safety hazard or that the route could not handle the weight. Is
this not so?
"anon" <lkj331...@lkj22.24444kj33.dccc.3lkj23.net> wrote in message
news:Ayozg.12553$%7.4...@bignews2.bellsouth.net...
DanTheMan
Mike Tantillo wrote:
> anon wrote:
> > are states not allowed to prohibit them on US routes? i'm
> > just curious because i always see signs warning truckers
> > of switchbacks & tight curves but don't recall ever seeing
> > an outright prohibition of large trucks except on state
> > routes.
> >
> > i know they can be prohibited on interstates (e.g.,
> > Atlanta's downtown connector except for deliveries).
> >
>
>
> Actually the prohibition has little to do with the "brand" of facility
> (state/US/interstate) and a lot more about the availability and quality
> of alternate routes.
>
> I suspect that it is impossible to just prohibit certain types of
> vehicles from a road used for interstate commerce purposes. It can
> reasonably be assumed that all interstates are used in interstate
> commerce. It can also be assumed that US routes (being the major
> routes of yesteryear) are also considered to be part of interstate
> commerce, as a remenant of older times. Besides, like interstates,
> AASHTO has to get involved in selecting the routes of US routes, so
> since all states have an interest in US routes, it would seem that it
> would be against the spirit of the rule for a state to declare that
> part of a multi-state US route is off limits.
>
> Now that being said.....with good reason, and a good alternate route,
> prohibitions spring up.
The only example I can think of in NY is a section of US 6, which is
signed as the "Long Mountain State Parkway" and also part of the
Palisades Interstate Parkway. Here, there is a great bypass - I don't
think it's signed, but taking NY 293 to US 9W is the bypass.
(Alternatively, just use I-84 in the first place.) I believe it is a
physical restriction due to some low bridges on the Palisades Parkway
part of the route, although having never traveled it I can't be
positive.
Another that surprises me that trucks are allowed is US 44/NY 55 over
the Minnewaska/Shawangunk Range between Kerhonkson and New Paltz, NY.
There's a wicked 5-mph hairpin coming down the east side of that ridge,
which would probably be a really tough one in an 18-wheeler. Yet I see
the occasional tractor trailer, and TONS of semi-trucks, using that
road on a regular basis. The problem here might be the bypass route -
it's either US 209/NY 52/NY 208, which is a bit on the long side and
still quite hilly, or I-87 north to US 209 south, which is just a bit
lengthy.
-Dan
Mike Tantillo
And they can probably do a through trucks prohibited (meaning if you
don't have a delivery, you can't use the road).
anon
> a comparable
> and parallel route nearby, and there are no businesses
> that need to be
> serviced on the US route itself. US 129 at Deals Gap
> has several
> service stations along it, which require tanker trucks
> to keep the gas
> tanks filled.
no, there is nothing on the dangerous section. The only
commercial development at all between the Tapoco Lodge,
one end of where the section of road we're discussing
(just before the Cheoah River and where it starts to
parallel the Little Tennessee River), is the Deals Gap
Motorcycle Resort at the intersection of 129 and NC28. It
could be reached via NC 28, and i don't think they even
sell gas... or even the US129 section between there and
the Cheoah is short enough & not that bad. It's the other
stuff -- there isn't development, absolutely nothing to
service.
c...@os2bbs.com
> are states not allowed to prohibit them on US routes? i'm
> just curious because i always see signs warning truckers
> of switchbacks & tight curves but don't recall ever seeing
> an outright prohibition of large trucks except on state
> routes.
Virginia bans trucks "over 8 tons gross" on U.S. 50 between the City
of Fairfax and the Virginia end of the T. Roosevelt Bridge (crossing
the Potomac River).
D.C. bans all trucks on U.S. 50 crossing the T. Roosevelt Bridge (also
signed as I-66), and on U.S. 50 west of 15th Street, N.W.
Virginia also bans trucks "over 65 foot length" on U.S. 15 between the
Virginia end of the bridge over the Potomac River and U.S. 29
in Prince William County. This section of U.S. 15 is also posted as a
"Virginia Byway."
And trucks are also banned on U.S. 17 between U.S. 50 at Paris, Va. and
I-66.
Michael G. Koerner
Non-local (through) big-rigs are also prohibited from US 209 through the
Delaware Water Gap N.R.A. in Pennsylvania and from US 441 through Great Smoky
Mountains N.P.
Scott M. Kozel
>
> Virginia bans trucks "over 8 tons gross" on U.S. 50 between the City
> of Fairfax and the Virginia end of the T. Roosevelt Bridge (crossing
> the Potomac River).
Urban arterial.
> D.C. bans all trucks on U.S. 50 crossing the T. Roosevelt Bridge (also
> signed as I-66), and on U.S. 50 west of 15th Street, N.W.
Urban arterial. I-66 ends 1/2 mile east of there.
> Virginia also bans trucks "over 65 foot length" on U.S. 15 between the
> Virginia end of the bridge over the Potomac River and U.S. 29
> in Prince William County.
Because it would be used as an outer bypass of the D.C. area, and nearly
all of that section has only 2 lanes.
> And trucks are also banned on U.S. 17 between U.S. 50 at Paris, Va. and
> I-66.
Thanks to the RE/T groups (radical environmentalist/transit groups).
--
Scott M. Kozel Highway and Transportation History Websites
Virginia/Maryland/Washington, D.C. http://www.roadstothefuture.com
Philadelphia and Delaware Valley http://www.pennways.com
Ottorino Yamamoto
> Non-local (through) big-rigs are also prohibited from US 209 through the
> Delaware Water Gap N.R.A. in Pennsylvania
ALL commercial traffic is banned. The only vehicles allowed are passenger
cars, and light trucks. RV's prolly are allowed, but I've never seen one on
that road.
--
Comrade Ottorino Yamamoto
http://mryamamoto.50megs.com
Mike Tantillo
Scott M. Kozel wrote:
> c...@os2bbs.com wrote:
> >
> > Virginia bans trucks "over 8 tons gross" on U.S. 50 between the City
> > of Fairfax and the Virginia end of the T. Roosevelt Bridge (crossing
> > the Potomac River).
>
> Urban arterial.
>
> > D.C. bans all trucks on U.S. 50 crossing the T. Roosevelt Bridge (also
> > signed as I-66), and on U.S. 50 west of 15th Street, N.W.
>
> Urban arterial. I-66 ends 1/2 mile east of there.
>
> > Virginia also bans trucks "over 65 foot length" on U.S. 15 between the
> > Virginia end of the bridge over the Potomac River and U.S. 29
> > in Prince William County.
>
> Because it would be used as an outer bypass of the D.C. area, and nearly
> all of that section has only 2 lanes.
And hopelessly overloaded as it is.
>
> > And trucks are also banned on U.S. 17 between U.S. 50 at Paris, Va. and
> > I-66.
>
> Thanks to the RE/T groups (radical environmentalist/transit groups).
But there is an interstate quality alternate.....I-66 west to I-81
north.
Mike Tantillo
Michael G. Koerner wrote:
> c...@os2bbs.com wrote:
> > anon wrote:
> >
> >
> >>are states not allowed to prohibit them on US routes? i'm
> >>just curious because i always see signs warning truckers
> >>of switchbacks & tight curves but don't recall ever seeing
> >>an outright prohibition of large trucks except on state
> >>routes.
> >
> >
> > Virginia bans trucks "over 8 tons gross" on U.S. 50 between the City
> > of Fairfax and the Virginia end of the T. Roosevelt Bridge (crossing
> > the Potomac River).
> >
> > D.C. bans all trucks on U.S. 50 crossing the T. Roosevelt Bridge (also
> > signed as I-66), and on U.S. 50 west of 15th Street, N.W.
> >
> > Virginia also bans trucks "over 65 foot length" on U.S. 15 between the
> > Virginia end of the bridge over the Potomac River and U.S. 29
> > in Prince William County. This section of U.S. 15 is also posted as a
> > "Virginia Byway."
> >
> > And trucks are also banned on U.S. 17 between U.S. 50 at Paris, Va. and
> > I-66.
>
> Non-local (through) big-rigs are also prohibited from US 209 through the
> Delaware Water Gap N.R.A. in Pennsylvania and from US 441 through Great Smoky
> Mountains N.P.
minor nitpick, i'm not sure if either is actually a US route (try
lookin g for a US 441 shield in GSMNP....you might be looking for a
long time!). US routes are generally state maintained highways whose
primary purpose is for transportation, whereas Newfound Gap Road in
GSMNP is maintained by EFLHD (Eastern Federal Lands Highway Division, a
part of FHWA), and its primary purpose is a recreational road to bring
tourists into and out of the national park. You'll find very little
through traffic that is not utilizing at least one park facility along
the way....I'd imagine the vast majority of that traffic is late night
gamblers driving between the Cherokee casino and the resort town of
Gatlinburg.
richard
"anomalous" <som...@microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:22uzg.31332$pu3.4...@ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca...
> NJ has restrictions in place restricting trucks over 96" in width to the
> national network (mostly interstates). State and US roads deemed unsafe
> for wider 102" trucks and double trailer units are closed to them, though
> the only US route restricted seems to be a section of US 9 in southwest
> NJ.
>
> I always believed a State could restrict truck access to any route if they
> could show a safety hazard or that the route could not handle the weight.
> Is this not so?
>
True. But a federal law dictates that states can not restrict the use of
102" trailers on any designated truck route.
It has nothing to do with the weight factor, as a 102" trailer is still
limited to the same weight as a 96" trailer.
It has more to do with the physical make up of the road itself than
anything.
I have spent quite a bit of time in NJ and have seen all those signs showing
where 102" and twins are allowed.
However, I can't say for a fact that the law is actually enforced.
I think they put them up for the truckers who come in out of state and don't
know they're way around.
Mike Tantillo
c...@os2bbs.com wrote:
> anon wrote:
>
> > are states not allowed to prohibit them on US routes? i'm
> > just curious because i always see signs warning truckers
> > of switchbacks & tight curves but don't recall ever seeing
> > an outright prohibition of large trucks except on state
> > routes.
>
> Virginia bans trucks "over 8 tons gross" on U.S. 50 between the City
> of Fairfax and the Virginia end of the T. Roosevelt Bridge (crossing
> the Potomac River).
>
Between Fairfax and the Beltway, there is an interstate quality
alternate just to the north.
Between the Beltway and Arlington, I'm assuming the road is open to
local deliveries, and local deliveries can also get in via I-395 and VA
110 (now reopened to trucks and busses since the Pentagon Secure Bypass
is complete). Between Arlington and DC, the bridge is restricted.
> D.C. bans all trucks on U.S. 50 crossing the T. Roosevelt Bridge (also
> signed as I-66), and on U.S. 50 west of 15th Street, N.W.
Probably has something to do with the "park-like" status of the route
and its proximity to the National Mall, the White House, etc. Besides,
many other routes are better. ANy truck that made it over the bridge
would have to head west on local streets, since I-66 is restricted due
to court order (Coleman Decision). It is much easier/better for trucks
to just take 9th/12th Streets, 14th Street, 15th Street, or the I-395
Mall Tunnel to I-395 into Virginia, which has express access to the
Beltway, and by nature of the Beltway, all other roads feeding into DC.
>
> Virginia also bans trucks "over 65 foot length" on U.S. 15 between the
> Virginia end of the bridge over the Potomac River and U.S. 29
> in Prince William County. This section of U.S. 15 is also posted as a
> "Virginia Byway."
Much of it does pass through very scenic parts of Loudon County, which,
despite suburbanization, is still a fairly pleasant drive outside of
Leesburg (leesburg is horrible, and I usually find going through town
to be better/faster then fighting a ton of traffic on the bypass), as
housing density is still fairly low.
>
> And trucks are also banned on U.S. 17 between U.S. 50 at Paris, Va. and
> I-66.
Why would through trucks need to utilize this stretch of roadway?
Looks like they would be going from Warrenton to Winchester, where US
17 to I-66 to I-81 would be better and faster.
Scott M. Kozel
"Mike Tantillo" <mjtan...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> c...@os2bbs.com wrote:
>
> > Virginia bans trucks "over 8 tons gross" on U.S. 50 between the City
> > of Fairfax and the Virginia end of the T. Roosevelt Bridge (crossing
> > the Potomac River).
>
> Between Fairfax and the Beltway, there is an interstate quality
> alternate just to the north.
>
> Between the Beltway and Arlington, I'm assuming the road is open to
> local deliveries, and local deliveries can also get in via I-395 and VA
> 110 (now reopened to trucks and busses since the Pentagon Secure Bypass
> is complete). Between Arlington and DC, the bridge is restricted.
I-66 between I-495 and Rosslyn, does not allow commercial trucks, as
part of the 1977 Coleman Decision that authorized that I-66 segment's
construction.
Large trucks between I-66 west of I-495 and downtown D.C., have an
all-Interstate route utilizing I-66, I-495 and I-395.
John Lansford
I thought there was a gas station down near the Cheoah Lake dam on US
129 in NC. In order to get to it and not use that part of US 129
trucks would have to come up from Robbinsville; NC 28 isn't really
that much better than US 129 as far as curves and grades, especially
approaching the Fontana Lake intersection.
anon
> Lake dam on US
> 129 in NC.
that's the Tapoco Lodge.
Clark F Morris
<koz...@comcast.net> wrote:
>c...@os2bbs.com wrote:
>>
>> Virginia bans trucks "over 8 tons gross" on U.S. 50 between the City
>> of Fairfax and the Virginia end of the T. Roosevelt Bridge (crossing
>> the Potomac River).
>
>Urban arterial.
>
>> D.C. bans all trucks on U.S. 50 crossing the T. Roosevelt Bridge (also
>> signed as I-66), and on U.S. 50 west of 15th Street, N.W.
>
>Urban arterial. I-66 ends 1/2 mile east of there.
>
>> Virginia also bans trucks "over 65 foot length" on U.S. 15 between the
>> Virginia end of the bridge over the Potomac River and U.S. 29
>> in Prince William County.
>
>Because it would be used as an outer bypass of the D.C. area, and nearly
>all of that section has only 2 lanes.
>
>> And trucks are also banned on U.S. 17 between U.S. 50 at Paris, Va. and
>> I-66.
>
>Thanks to the RE/T groups (radical environmentalist/transit groups).
I doubt transit supporters have that much interest in truck bans and
would consider rich (or at least well-off) NIMBYs with good political
connections far more likely suspects. Ideological and ecological
politics may be the explanation and knowledge of the area would be
needed to make an actual judgment. NIMBYs are of all ideological and
political persuasions.
Scott M. Kozel
> >> I-66.
> >
> >Thanks to the RE/T groups (radical environmentalist/transit groups).
>
> I doubt transit supporters have that much interest in truck bans and
> would consider rich (or at least well-off) NIMBYs with good political
> connections far more likely suspects. Ideological and ecological
> politics may be the explanation and knowledge of the area would be
> needed to make an actual judgment. NIMBYs are of all ideological and
> political persuasions.
In this case, it was exurban NIMBYs from the Sierra Club and the
Piedmont Environmental Council.
H.B. Elkins
>minor nitpick, i'm not sure if either is actually a US route (try
>lookin g for a US 441 shield in GSMNP....you might be looking for a
>long time!).
http://www.millenniumhwy.net/interestingsigns/tn/441-73parksign.jpg
Clark F Morris
wrote:
>Clark F Morris wrote:
>>
>> "Scott M. Kozel" wrote:
>> > c...@os2bbs.com wrote:
>> >
>> >> And trucks are also banned on U.S. 17 between U.S. 50 at Paris, Va. and
>> >> I-66.
>> >
>> >Thanks to the RE/T groups (radical environmentalist/transit groups).
>>
>> I doubt transit supporters have that much interest in truck bans and
>> would consider rich (or at least well-off) NIMBYs with good political
>> connections far more likely suspects. Ideological and ecological
>> politics may be the explanation and knowledge of the area would be
>> needed to make an actual judgment. NIMBYs are of all ideological and
>> political persuasions.
>
>In this case, it was exurban NIMBYs from the Sierra Club and the
>Piedmont Environmental Council.
This probably makes your point in so far as the Sierra Club is
concerned (although they overall aren't that much into transit other
than lip service). The Piedmont Environmental Council has a view of
growth that probably mirrors that of many transit advocates but they
don't seem to be much into transit.
Scott M. Kozel
Both of them are "into transit" for "other people", namely
promoting new high-density transit-oriented developments to
be built in urban areas, to handle the population growth, so
that the Sierra Clubbers and the PECers can have unfettered
permanent enjoyment of their exurban horse farms for the rich.
Marc Fannin
> minor nitpick, i'm not sure if either is actually a US route (try
> lookin g for a US 441 shield in GSMNP....you might be looking for a
> long time!). US routes are generally state maintained highways whose
> primary purpose is for transportation, whereas Newfound Gap Road in
> GSMNP is maintained by EFLHD (Eastern Federal Lands Highway Division, a
> part of FHWA), and its primary purpose is a recreational road to bring
> tourists into and out of the national park.
Interestingly, there are many references on the GSMNP official site
( http://www.nps.gov/grsm/ ) identifying Newfound Gap Road as US-441.
So is it or isn't it...? [Rhetorical]
________________________________________________________________________
Marc Fannin|musx...@kent.edu or @hotmail.com| http://www.roadfan.com/