Carpool Lane Violation, CVC 21655 - No Signs Posted

[bruinPE]

I wouldn't count on Google Maps images to save the day for you. Highway construction/signage... etc, can change on a daily basis and there is the possibility that some Google Maps images can be up to 2 or 3 years old.

This statement is very true. While some areas will have images from 2010/2011, a lot of the images from Google Maps are from 2008 or earlier. You can generally tell that you are looking at an older photo set when the image is not high definition.

This is the exact reason why my agency requires our engineers to always field check complaints/inquiries and not rely on canned photos. You never know when a big rig has knocked out a sign or someone has stolen/defaced a sign. New signs, striping, and pavement markings are installed almost every day as well.

[That Guy]

This statement is very true. While some areas will have images from 2010/2011, a lot of the images from Google Maps are from 2008 or earlier. You can generally tell that you are looking at an older photo set when the image is not high definition.

This is the exact reason why my agency requires our engineers to always field check complaints/inquiries and not rely on canned photos. You never know when a big rig has knocked out a sign or someone has stolen/defaced a sign. New signs, striping, and pavement markings are installed almost every day as well.

I have a question for you, bruinPE... Would your agency issue a letter, say at the request of a defendant/driver, attesting to some circumstances/conditions/facts regarding signage (this case as an example), or construction zone information i.e.: hours/dates when construction was performed on a certain highways (example: for a speeding in a construction zone citation), OR would they normally refuse such a request?

My apologies to jaiselus for the threadjack.

[bruinPE]

Well, my agency is required to provide any documents considered public record due to the California Public Records Act. That could theoretically include detour plans which would show the time and date of proposed construction zones. However, you may need to do a formal written request to get official hard copies of signed plans, signal timing sheets, etc.

There are a few things that we do provide without formal written public records act requests... like E&T Surveys, volume data, or other general information.

My agency also won't provide an written opinion on a given situation. Some of my fellow engineers have testified and/or given depositions, but those are usually reserved for bigger cases litigation/claims against our agency or for cases that occurred on roadways within our jurisdiction.

[adam_]

Two questions:

Does 21655 require signs be "erected" and not just 'lanes designated' (as in pavement marking)

Bruin- will you agency respond to subpoenas? (as opposed to public records act requests)

Thx

[bruinPE]

Two questions:

Does 21655 require signs be "erected" and not just 'lanes designated' (as in pavement marking)

Bruin- will you agency respond to subpoenas? (as opposed to public records act requests)

Thx

1. Pretty much. Signs are a minimum and pavement markings are supplementary.

21655.5 (b) The Department of Transportation and local authorities, with respect to highways under their respective jurisdictions, shall place and maintain, or cause to be placed and maintained, signs and other official traffic control devices to designate the exclusive or preferential lanes, to advise motorists of the applicable vehicle occupancy levels, and, except where ramp metering and bypass lanes are regulated with the activation of traffic signals, to advise motorists of the hours of high-occupancy vehicle usage...

2. I imagine you could find out who the engineer who was in responsible charge of the project (signal timing, design of the intersection, etc) and subpoena them? I haven't personally done so, but I have had co-workers who have given depositions for court cases (usually major accidents).

[adam_]

1. Pretty much. Signs are a minimum and pavement markings are supplementary.

21655.5 (b) The Department of Transportation and local authorities, with respect to highways under their respective jurisdictions, shall place and maintain, or cause to be placed and maintained, signs and other official traffic control devices to designate the exclusive or preferential lanes, to advise motorists of the applicable vehicle occupancy levels, and, except where ramp metering and bypass lanes are regulated with the activation of traffic signals, to advise motorists of the hours of high-occupancy vehicle usage...
.

Thanks, so if the OP can provide evidence that there was no SIGN, then the state has not met the requirements of 21655b.

OP should document the current conditions with photographs... not sure if the transportation official on that project would provide you with a letter stating 'the signs were down due to construction' or something to that effect.

You can also cross the officer, but he will probably say 'to the best of my recollection' or something else that will not perjure himself but leave it color-able...

The trick will be how can you prove to the corrupt LA area traffic court judges that the signs really were not up on that day... and make sure you spell out, in your testimony, all of the elements you are asserting for dismissal- don't assume the judge will figure it out because 'they know the law'...they may, but they tend not to remember it until you make it clear that their failure to do so gives you an appeal.

[That Guy]

The trick will be how can you prove to the corrupt LA area traffic court judges that the signs really were not up on that day...

What do "the corrupt LA area traffic court judges" have to do with a citation issued in San Diego County?

[adam_]

What do "the corrupt LA area traffic court judges" have to do with a citation issued in San Diego County?

Correction. Strike LA Area, replace with California