attorney1776

Follow

Comment history

U.S. Highway 59 between Lawrence and Baldwin City on schedule

No, I said "Pleasant Grove pass". Please refer to Webster's. A "pass" describes an area of transverse between two higher elevations on either side. No where does "pass" mean between mountains as you suggest in a smart-ass manner.

Now you just look stupid, with all due respect.

March 16, 2012 at 6:02 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

U.S. Highway 59 between Lawrence and Baldwin City on schedule

And I agree, there needs to be more enforcement of traffic violators in this area. Not only are the vehicles speeding consistently, but every morning before 6am I personally see northbound vehicles passing in 'no passing" zones when there are oncoming vehicles. It's like the wildwest.

Traveling southbound at 5pm, there are always vehicles who intentionally attempt to cut-off and interfere with the flow of traffic where Highway 59 narrows to one southbound lane south of Lawrence. I see the same vehicles doing this. They speed up to cut-off other drivers. I have also seen these drivers attempt to "intentionally" cut-off merging cars and force the left lane car to veer into the opposing, northbound lane to avoid being hit on the right side.

Obviously, this will change with the new highway, but these same drivers will be out there.

March 16, 2012 at 10:54 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

U.S. Highway 59 between Lawrence and Baldwin City on schedule

Keep in mind the added time for the legal issues. I am told that the KDOE preformed alleged substandard engineering and core sampling through the Pleasant Grove hills that showed a solid rock bed to build on.

The construction company bid on and planned their work techniques on this kind of bedrock foundation.

During actual construction it was discovered that the soil under the Pleasant Grove pass was not solid rock, but loose soil. You cannot put a concrete roadway on this kind of "floating" foundation. It would crack and shift too much.

Therefore, as has been stated in the newspapers, this area of the new highway will now be completed in asphalt which is pliable and adjusts to the underlying soil foundation better.

KDOE tried to force the contractor to incur the costs and expenses of this change. The construction company said they were misled by KDOE on their engineering work and core sampling. Legal actions ensured.

Obviously, these issues were eventually worked out. But alleged faulty engineering and sampling before construction caused a lot of the perceived delay.

It does seem that overall they are on schedule for completion.

March 16, 2012 at 10:42 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Towing can chain drivers to huge fees

I will call your attention to the fact that the state of California has had an extremely strict vehicle towing law on the books for 5 years. I'll be happy to forward the complete law to anyone that is interested.

After 25 years of tow company abuses, especially in the city/county of Los Angeles, this new state law zapped all the abuses out of the thiefing tow truck companies. In fact it criminalizes many of the common tow truck driver abuses. A tow truck operator not following the law can be sentenced to actual jail time.

I take serious issue with the comments or opinions of the gentleman from the Kansas Motor Carrier Association. There is NO, (I repeat NO), federal law superceding state tow laws. Towing is a "state" issue, not a federal issue. In fact, it can even fall to counties and cities to write their own ordinances/city codes over the licensing and operations of towing companies within their jurisdiction. It can even be codified into the tow company business license at the city level.

If there was federal law regulating tow companies, then California wouldn't have their own laws at the state, county and city levels. And they clearly do.

Perhaps some interested parties would like to take the California statute to the Kansas legislature, county or city officials and push for changes in the local regulations here.

The way tow truck operators conduct business in Lawrence amounts to nothing more than codified theft of personal property, and if government officials are turning a blind eye, ignoring or conspiring to allow such abuses then it's a much larger problem.

I'll be more than happy to provide the California statute upon request.

July 17, 2011 at 6:57 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Towing can chain drivers to huge fees

I will call your attention to the fact that the state of California has had an extremely strict vehicle towing law on the books for 5 years. I'll be happy to forward the complete law to anyone that is interested.

After 25 years of tow company abuses, especially in the city/county of Los Angeles, this new state law zapped all the abuses out of the thiefing tow truck companies. In fact it criminalizes many of the common tow truck driver abuses. A tow truck operator not following the law can be sentenced to actual jail time.

I take serious issue with the comments or opinions of the gentleman from the Kansas Motor Carrier Association. The is NO (I repeat NO) federal law superceding state tow laws. Towing is a "state" issue, not a federal issue. In fact, it can even fall to counties and cities to write their own ordinances/city codes over the licensing and operations of towing companies within their jurisdiction. It can even be codified into the tow company business license at the city level.

If there was federal law regulating tow companies, then California wouldn't have their own laws at the state, county and city levels. And they clearly do.

Perhaps some interested parties would like to take the California statute to the Kansas legislature, county or city officials and push for changes in the local regulations here.

The way tow truck operators conduct business in Lawrence amounts to nothing more than codified theft of personal property, and if government officials are turning a blind eye or conspiring to allow such abuses then it's a much larger problem.

I'll be more than happy to provide the California statute upon request.

July 17, 2011 at 6:52 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Next