If you didn't think we had enough rules/fines, well they have just added a few more...New California Driving Rules Effective January or July 1, 2007

1. Carpool lane - 1st time $1068.50 starting 1/1/07 (The $271 posted on the highway is old). Don't do it again because 2nd time is going to be double. 3rd time triple and 4th time license suspended.

2. Incorrect lane change $380. Don't cross the lane on solid lines or intersections

3. Block intersection - $485

4. Driving on the shoulder - $450

5. Cell phone use in the construction zone. - Double fine

6. Passengers over 18 not in their seat belts - both passengers and drivers get tickets

7. Speeders can only drive 3 miles above the limit. (WTF?)

8. DUI = JAIL (Stays on your driving record for 10 years!)

9. As of 07/01/07 cell phone use must be "hands free" while driving. (Link to specific vehicle code: http://www.dmv.ca.gov/pubs/vctop/d11/vc23123.htm)

10. If a vehicle is being driven at a speed less than the normal speed of traffic moving in the same direction at such time, and is not being driven in the right-hand lane for traffic or as close as practicable to the right-hand edge or curb, it shall constitute prima facie evidence that the driver is operating the vehicle in violation. (Link to specific vehicle code: http://www.dmv.ca.gov/pubs/vctop/d11/vc21654.htm)

 

one word......


MOVE

 

No offense intended.. but a lot of it just doesn't seem that ridiculous at all.

1. Carpool lane fine seems a mite bit high

2. People changing lanes in intersections = retarded.

3. Is something that needs to be stepped up anyway. There's nothing more annoying than being in traffic and having to continue to sit when your light turns green because of all the f^#@sticks that shouldn't have tried to cram in blocking the intersection.

4. Again, violators = retarded.

5. Poll the site and 70% of people on here are going to say that the worst/most annoying drivers are people on their cell phones. Most of them don't pay attention and they're dangerous. Speeding fines are doubled in construction zones in most states... why not cell phones?
It's not like it's for no reason, people die all the time. Last year or the year before here in STL we had a MODOT worker killed in a construction zone, a buddy/coworker of his did a promo commercial asking people to drive safely in construction zones and HE was killed the next week in a construction zone accident.

6. I don't know about the other states... but IL has had front seat passenger seat belt laws for quite a while. Not necessarily something I agree with, but definitely nothing new.

7. Why don't they just raise all the speed limits 3mph then?

8. GOOD.

9. See 5.

10. Tell me you've never been in the passing lane screaming bloody murder at that SOB who's cruising along at 62 in a 65.

Not suggesting CA laws these days aren't getting ridiculous... just throwing some points out there.

 

Those aren't real. It's a hoax email that's been going around.

 

I thought the cell phone one wasn't for like another year or 2.

 

They should abolish all carpool lanes. Waste of money, waste of gas. One lane empty and two lanes full of cars at idle. It makes the point that we're over populated.

I'd move, but this is my home state which was invaded by leftists seeking a refuge. Can we put up a 'no vacany' sign already? I've been crowded out of every city I've lived in, and watched orchards replaced by high density housing around downtown LA, then in San Fernando Valley (and the Anaheim area), and now Silicon Valley.

 

Same email (though with higher fines) is floating around Northern VA...

 

if you aint speeding your impeeding right 3mph over is a joke. on the highway here you can get out of 10 over the limit in the croud and the officer won't give you a second look. 30 over gets you a free ride in the oicers car though. there is a time and place to speed though. through a school zone @ 7:30am isn't it. but give me an open strip of highway and ill run out 4th gear.

I approve the seatbelt law. both driver and offending passenger should both be punished.

were not real big on cell phone use and don't have carpool lanes. though EVERYTHING stays on our driving abstract for 10 years... doesn't help in court if your a habitual speeder like me but insurance only looks back 3-5 years depending on who's your provider. even then they only look at accidents and tickets 10mph+. everyone gets speeding tickets sooner or later.

 

Appreciate the "heads-up" but shouldn`t this post be in General or Regional section???

 

I hate the ones that block the intersection, they should get higher fines.

 

HOAX
http://www.snopes.com/politics/traffic/california.asp

 

That isn't what the majority of L.A City said. I participated in seeking funds under Proposition 1B (initiated by the Bay Area) for transportation projects voted at the March 15th CTC meeting. During the first run L.A. was furious because the CTC didn't allocate any $$ to L,A. The comments from L.A. Mayor was 30% of the population in Cal...but ZERO funds allocated for your HOV on the 405. However I believe (well I know because I have a copy of the letter) the Governor urged the CTC to relook at a number of projects for programming.

HOVs, Aux Lanes, and inside widening are the improvements most needed on our facilities. HOVs are supposed to encourage car pooling, as well as reduce emissions.

 

 

The real changes for 2007: http://www.dmv.ca.gov/about/leg/leginfo_dl.htm

 

Public funds end up in the pockets of investors.

That's hard to believe HOV lanes are of any benefit in an area where there are three lane freeways. We voted for a third lane to ease congestion and the thieves turned it into a HOV lane! Then they build individual overpasses for HOV lanes? How much more does doubling the number of overpasses cost? Someone is pocketing this money.

Somehow I think this is backed by the same wealthy people who leverage 'environmental' reasons to buy up open space around congested areas to boost the price of their real estate holdings. I'm sure they push these measures to make themselves richer to the detriment of the regular folk trying to make a living.

 

People this is an internet hoax...!!!

http://www.snopes.com/politics/traffic/california.asp

 

I am not trying to argue with you but being that this is my buisness I can tell you that the only thing that applies out of what you said is when somebody wants to build a new Interchange. DOT doesn't seek to add interchanges. However if widening is triggerred by congestion due to growth...then all Interchanges are required to be brought to current design standards...exceptions can be sought if need be but require the justification. Most of these exceptions are for 20 year design life and non standard inside and outside shoulders.

If you want to know more and would like me to respond to this please review.

FHWA and CTC Guidelines

applicable laws for Project Development regarding Environmental

CEQA (State)
NEPA (Federal)

CEQA if State Funds used
NEPA if Federal Funds used

Developer funded projects that do not include Federal $$ are not subject to NEPA or the FHWA unless on an Interstate. Also NEPA can be trigerred by other requirements such as a permit from the Army Corps of Engineers...in this case Army Corp has jursidication and not FHWA...unless of course it's on an Interstate and cost of a million $$.

I am currently managing over $500 million worth of state transportation projects....including the project currently in construction through your city...I also am working on 5 other projects to be built in 2012 which will provide Auxilliary Lanes between every Interchange....these projects have nothing to do with developers...they are operational improvements.

However there is at least a couple of projects that have and are going through you town. These projects were/are developer related...so I can understand why you might think what you wrote. DOT is required to provide quality assurance in an Oversight role once the projects are approved through a study report and are part of the General and Regional Transportation Plan...they are also subject to regional air quality conformity...and are constrained to however many lanes that conformity requires.

 

I guess they just want to cover the "what if's."

 

I wonder if the democrats came up with that?

 

You can not correct stupidity through legislation!

Keith