No Turn on Red Ticket, Signage is Incorrect

[anniebee]

My question involves a traffic ticket from the state of: Iowa
First car at stop at an intersection (2 lane N/S - 4 lane divided SE/NW) pulled up to the white stop line in the channelized right turn lane, Complete stop yelied to on comming traffic and when clear made right turn. An officer in patrol vehicle right behind me in turn lane, (he had been behind me for 3/4 of a mile prior, I knew he was there) followed me through the turn and turned on his lights. I pulled over and gathered appropriate paperwork.
Officers “know why I stopped you?"
Me "I have no idea sir."
Officer "that intersection is No Turn on Red"
Me "I'm sorry, I had no clue, can you tell me where the sign in posed,"
Officer “on the beam over the road, I'll be right back"

After a long wait aside the road, approx. 100 feet from the intersection, I sat as more than 15 or 20 cars made the same turn I just was pulled over for, Stop, Yield, proceed with right on red. (Apparently illegally)

The officer came back to the window with (please a warning, please a warning) NO a Ticket for $195.00. (Yah that's what I thought)

I went back a few days later to see where I had missed the No Turn Sign. To my surprise there was actually a sign on the large girder over the road of this large skewed "X" shaped intersection except to was in such a spot that is not even visible from the Channelized right turn lane. I took some pictures of the view from the drivers seat of my car ... Nope no sign visible..
I contacted the My states Department of Transportation State Traffic Engineer, to ask what the specs are on this type of signage and if this particular sign is posted in the correct spot, since you can't actually see it from the Right turn lane.
He called me and emailed me that the photo I had taken 7/2012 and the photo in the DOT database 7/2011 of that intersection do not match.... Apparently the electronic traffic signal had been moved approx. 10' to the right on the over the road gurder but the No Turn on Red sign remained in the original spot and now located 2 electronic signals from my signal.
QUESTIONS
1) What's your opinion?
2) Should I take the Email from the State Traffic Engineer to the city streets department and see if they will suggest to the police to drop the Ticket because the sign I was ticketed for is not in the correct position.
3) Do I just go to court and hope the judge will even look at or listen to anything I have to show him or say?

[That Guy]

My question involves a traffic ticket from the state of: Iowa
First car at stop at an intersection (2 lane N/S - 4 lane divided SE/NW) pulled up to the white stop line in the channelized right turn lane, Complete stop yelied to on comming traffic and when clear made right turn. An officer in patrol vehicle right behind me in turn lane, (he had been behind me for 3/4 of a mile prior, I knew he was there) followed me through the turn and turned on his lights. I pulled over and gathered appropriate paperwork.
Officers “know why I stopped you?"
Me "I have no idea sir."
Officer "that intersection is No Turn on Red"
Me "I'm sorry, I had no clue, can you tell me where the sign in posed,"
Officer “on the beam over the road, I'll be right back"

After a long wait aside the road, approx. 100 feet from the intersection, I sat as more than 15 or 20 cars made the same turn I just was pulled over for, Stop, Yield, proceed with right on red. (Apparently illegally)

The officer came back to the window with (please a warning, please a warning) NO a Ticket for $195.00. (Yah that's what I thought)

I went back a few days later to see where I had missed the No Turn Sign. To my surprise there was actually a sign on the large girder over the road of this large skewed "X" shaped intersection except to was in such a spot that is not even visible from the Channelized right turn lane. I took some pictures of the view from the drivers seat of my car ... Nope no sign visible..
I contacted the My states Department of Transportation State Traffic Engineer, to ask what the specs are on this type of signage and if this particular sign is posted in the correct spot, since you can't actually see it from the Right turn lane.
He called me and emailed me that the photo I had taken 7/2012 and the photo in the DOT database 7/2011 of that intersection do not match.... Apparently the electronic traffic signal had been moved approx. 10' to the right on the over the road gurder but the No Turn on Red sign remained in the original spot and now located 2 electronic signals from my signal.
QUESTIONS
1) What's your opinion?
2) Should I take the Email from the State Traffic Engineer to the city streets department and see if they will suggest to the police to drop the Ticket because the sign I was ticketed for is not in the correct position.
3) Do I just go to court and hope the judge will even look at or listen to anything I have to show him or say?

Lets see the pictures. (You'll have to upload them to an image hosting site (photobucket.com or imageshack.com), and the post the links here for us to see).

There is a big difference between "Signage is Incorrect" and "the photos of that intersection do not match"

So maybe you can redact all personal information from that email and post the contents (wording) of the engineer's response.

Also, is this intersection under the jurisdiction of the local authority (city's public works department or similar agency) or is it under the jurisdiction of the state D.O.T.?

[anniebee]

Link to photos. http://s1167.photobucket.com/albums/q624/anniebee15/

1) DOT photo July 2010 ( misstated the date in earler post)
2) Photo of my view from white stop line in right turn lane
3) Photo of girder from farther back showing "No Turn on Red" sign

This is shared jurisdiction because this road crosses a Highway. From what I am told.


Corrispondance from DOT:

Anne,

In comparing the DOT’s picture below, which was taken in July 2010, it appears the traffic signal head for the right turn lane was moved to the right on the support structure. However, it looks like the “NO TURN ON red ball” sign was not moved with it. So now there is another signal head for Hubbell Ave that is located between the right turn signal and the sign.



If you have any questions, give me a call.

XXXXXXX X. XXXX, PE, PTOE
State Traffic Engineer
Department of Transportation

- - - Updated - - -

Additional information.

He is filing a request for engineering review ( not sure if that is the exact correct wording for the report but something like that) … which he will forward to me when complete

[That Guy]

Link to photos. http://s1167.photobucket.com/albums/q624/anniebee15/

1) DOT photo July 2010 ( misstated the date in earler post)
2) Photo of my view from white stop line in right turn lane
3) Photo of girder from farther back showing "No Turn on Red" sign

This is shared jurisdiction because this road crosses a Highway. From what I am told.


Corrispondance from DOT:

Anne,

In comparing the DOT’s picture below, which was taken in July 2010, it appears the traffic signal head for the right turn lane was moved to the right on the support structure. However, it looks like the “NO TURN ON red ball” sign was not moved with it. So now there is another signal head for Hubbell Ave that is located between the right turn signal and the sign.



If you have any questions, give me a call.

XXXXXXX X. XXXX, PE, PTOE
State Traffic Engineer
Department of Transportation

- - - Updated - - -

Additional information.

He is filing a request for engineering review ( not sure if that is the exact correct wording for the report but something like that) … which he will forward to me when complete

Sorry for the delay in my reply and I'm not sure I'm going to be much help here.

I disagree with your interpretation of the message you received from the D.O.T.. It by no means states that the sign is incorrect, the engineer simply comments on the fact that a signal head was moved but the sign was not moved with it. PERIOD. No indication of any sort that it is in any way incorrect or even questionable. In fact, if it were incorrect, there would be no need to conduct and engineering evaluation to determine its validity or lack thereof. Quite frankly, and when it comes to the specific area where the right turn signal head is located, I find myself looking at two current pictures (picture 2 of 3 and picture 3 of 3) yet the signal heads look out of order.

For starters, most states have a manual which in part or in whole is based upon the Federal MUTCD (Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices) issued by the U.S. FHWA and while there is in fact a manual that is used in Iowa, the section that is dedicated to signs and signals if fairly limited. So basically, you're starting out at a deficit in that you do not have any specific direction on where such a sign should be placed.

However, I think a case could be made that if there is any reference that should be followed, it should be the federal standard and for that, and since the reference date for this installation is June of 2010, then the MUTCD version published just prior to that would be the December 2009 version of the federal MUTCD which you could find HERE. (Careful as it is a HUGE PDF document). If you are able to download it, then I refer you to section 2B.54 starting on page 95 and ending with page 97 and it shows the following:







As you can see there are several possible scenarios and I highlighted the one that is relevant to your situation on page 95 in red rectangles. I do believe that they are in fact using the correct "R10-11" sign, (see page 96 second row, first sign on the left) and the guidance for its use, simply states:

[QUOTEDec 2009 Federal MUTCD - Section 2B.54]"If used, the 'No Turn On Red' sign should be installed near the appropriate signal head."[/QUOTE]

And according to two of the three pictures you posted (the third one does not show the location of the sign), it is clear that the "No Turn On Red" sign is in fact installed near the appropriate signal head indicating the signal phase for the right turn which is clearly visible and is the brightest signal as can be seen in the D.O.T. picture (picture 1 of 3) which was taken from the right turn lane. Alternatively and while you can still see the sign from the straightaway lane shown in your picture (picture 3 of 3) showing the entire line up of signals and signs on the girder, the signal head for the right turn lane appears as it is off and the only lights that are visible are those for the straightaway lanes.

That said, I am not sure where you would suggest that the sign be placed. This is clearly an unusual intersection, however there is nothing unusual about the location or use of such a sign. It seems to conform to the standard of placement for any sign providing a regulatory (mandatory) action by the driver and by placing it at or near the location of the traffic signal you would look at to determine your next movement, a reasonably attentive driver would see it and presumably abide by its instruction.

In conclusion, I am not seeing how the email will help you present a case to anyone really, that the ticket should be dropped.
Even if the engineering evaluation were to return a decision that there is a "better" location for the sign, it does not necessarily mean that its current location is "bad".
But let me ask you this... Where is it, in your opinion, that this sign should be placed?

[anniebee]

Sorry for the delay in my reply and I'm not sure I'm going to be much help here.

I disagree with your interpretation of the message you received from the D.O.T.. It by no means states that the sign is incorrect, the engineer simply comments on the fact that a signal head was moved but the sign was not moved with it. PERIOD. No indication of any sort that it is in any way incorrect or even questionable. In fact, if it were incorrect, there would be no need to conduct and engineering evaluation to determine its validity or lack thereof. Quite frankly, and when it comes to the specific area where the right turn signal head is located, I find myself looking at two current pictures (picture 2 of 3 and picture 3 of 3) yet the signal heads look out of order.

For starters, most states have a manual which in part or in whole is based upon the Federal MUTCD (Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices) issued by the U.S. FHWA and while there is in fact a manual that is used in Iowa, the section that is dedicated to signs and signals if fairly limited. So basically, you're starting out at a deficit in that you do not have any specific direction on where such a sign should be placed.

However, I think a case could be made that if there is any reference that should be followed, it should be the federal standard and for that, and since the reference date for this installation is June of 2010, then the MUTCD version published just prior to that would be the December 2009 version of the federal MUTCD which you could find HERE. (Careful as it is a HUGE PDF document). If you are able to download it, then I refer you to section 2B.54 starting on page 95 and ending with page 97 and it shows the following:







As you can see there are several possible scenarios and I highlighted the one that is relevant to your situation on page 95 in red rectangles. I do believe that they are in fact using the correct "R10-11" sign, (see page 96 second row, first sign on the left) and the guidance for its use, simply states:

[QUOTEDec 2009 Federal MUTCD - Section 2B.54]"If used, the 'No Turn On Red' sign should be installed near the appropriate signal head."

And according to two of the three pictures you posted (the third one does not show the location of the sign), it is clear that the "No Turn On Red" sign is in fact installed near the appropriate signal head indicating the signal phase for the right turn which is clearly visible and is the brightest signal as can be seen in the D.O.T. picture (picture 1 of 3) which was taken from the right turn lane. Alternatively and while you can still see the sign from the straightaway lane shown in your picture (picture 3 of 3) showing the entire line up of signals and signs on the girder, the signal head for the right turn lane appears as it is off and the only lights that are visible are those for the straightaway lanes.

That said, I am not sure where you would suggest that the sign be placed. This is clearly an unusual intersection, however there is nothing unusual about the location or use of such a sign. It seems to conform to the standard of placement for any sign providing a regulatory (mandatory) action by the driver and by placing it at or near the location of the traffic signal you would look at to determine your next movement, a reasonably attentive driver would see it and presumably abide by its instruction.

In conclusion, I am not seeing how the email will help you present a case to anyone really, that the ticket should be dropped.
Even if the engineering evaluation were to return a decision that there is a "better" location for the sign, it does not necessarily mean that its current location is "bad".
But let me ask you this... Where is it, in your opinion, that this sign should be placed?[/QUOTE]

First I would like to thank you for your time and opinion, as I have court in the morning.


Please see the photo I added to the photo link: http://s1167.photobucket.com/albums/q624/anniebee15/
I would suggest it should be placed closest to the appropriate signal head and the signal head designated for the right turn lane (as this light also has a turning arrow for the right turn lane) in the same proximity was to the appropriate signal head in the DOT picture on 7/2010

Not nearest the straightaway signal head for traffic running in the cross direction(not sure that is the correct wording. Maybe traffic approaching form the Left).

Your thoughts would be appreciated
A

- - - Updated - - -

First I would like to thank you for your time and opinion, as I have court in the morning.


Please see the photo I added to the photo link: http://s1167.photobucket.com/albums/q624/anniebee15/
I would suggest it should be placed closest to the appropriate signal head and the signal head designated for the right turn lane (as this light also has a turning arrow for the right turn lane) in the same proximity was to the appropriate signal head in the DOT picture on 7/2010

Not nearest the straightaway signal head for traffic running in the cross direction(not sure that is the correct wording. Maybe traffic approaching form the Left).

Your thoughts would be appreciated
A

[That Guy]

First I would like to thank you for your time and opinion, as I have court in the morning.


Please see the photo I added to the photo link: http://s1167.photobucket.com/albums/q624/anniebee15/
I would suggest it should be placed closest to the appropriate signal head and the signal head designated for the right turn lane (as this light also has a turning arrow for the right turn lane) in the same proximity was to the appropriate signal head in the DOT picture on 7/2010

Not nearest the straightaway signal head for traffic running in the cross direction(not sure that is the correct wording. Maybe traffic approaching form the Left).

Your thoughts would be appreciated
A

I can only assume that you have been to court and the matter was decided already. While I do not know what the outcome was, I can tell you that while you may be correct in assuming that it might be best to post the sign closer to the right turn signal, that does not suggest that it is inappropriate to post it in its existing position. That was the purpose of my previous post and the understanding I have of the federal guidance which I posted for your review.

To support this, a careful review of the engineer's response to you would show that he did not have any intention of moving the sign; and while he did in fact suggest that he will conduct a study, I am not sure what the scope, intent or the result of such a study were. If it my guess I would assume that it had no results at all or at least none that are bound to help you with your case. Then again, he might have used your complaint (or inquiry) as a means to justifying a change in location, but that is likely to come with a disclaimer of non-liability to any issues that might have resulted due to the sign being in its previous location.

Regardless of what happens, that remains to be an extremely odd intersection, and no matter how its changed, it will continue to have issues that some will complain about!

[anniebee]

my court case was postponed to septembe 4th.... and here is a strange turn of events....
I just had a friend call me and say they went through the intersection just now and the sign has been changed to my suggested position some time between Tuesday august 7th 7PM (the last time i took pictures) and today... I will take pictures on my way home this evening and post them to my link ... in your opinion will this help my case at all.

[That Guy]

in your opinion will this help my case at all.

It may... I did sort of address that aspect in my last response... To summarize, a change in the location of the sign does not necessarily mean it is in a better location or that the previous location is incorrect. For all we know, the engineer might get several calls tomorrow of people complaining about citation they received. Then again, he might not hear about it for years.

The final outcome will depend on how the judge will answer this question:

Could a reasonably attentive driver look at the signal head (the way it was displayed before any recent changes) and not see the sign or heed to its direction?

I think the answer is "no" but again, I'm not the judge!

[anniebee]

well here another update for you.... I emailed the DOT gentleman that helped me a few weeks ago and inquired about the sign being moved. I asked him if this sign being moved was a result of his engineering review of the intersection I finish it with my phone call to him or something else entirely. he responded by sending me a series of emails that went back and forth between 3 or 4 different state and city departments. turn on red ball sign was determined to be incorrect and should have been moved initially with the traffic signal head. I've put a call into the city prosecuting attorney explaining what I have done since receiving the ticket, and that through my contact with the DOT the sign was subsequently moved to a more logical and visible position. she asked that I forward her all my communications that I had with the DOT as well as my photographs , she would review the information and call me with her opinion next week. well I am happy to report that I got a call from the city attorney handling my ticket this morning. She told me I do not have to show up to court they will drop the ticket and the city will pay the court costs..... this was truly a blessing because I ended up getting laid off from my job last week... and for sure do not have the 195 dollars for the ticket. I thank you for your input.

[That Guy]

I appreciate the update and congratulations on getting it dismissed, sorry to hear about the job...

You keep insisting on using the word "incorrect" I am sorry, and in spite of the dismissal, I will have to disagree again....

I might agree that the original work order requesting the signal head be moved should have included instructions to move the sign as well. However, the sign placement was not "incorrect", if you were to look at the federal guidance as stated in the MUTCD page I posted, you will see that there is no specific "correct" location for the sign; it simply says: "If used, the 'No Turn On Red' sign should be installed near the appropriate signal head". Does "near" mean to the left or the right? Does it mean above or below? Is 2 feet near enough or should it be 1 foot away?

As I stated when I posted that portion, that is from California's MUTCD. But if Iowa has one (and it seems that it does) then the likelihood that is is VERY similar is GREAT.

And at the end of the day, it is all up to the engineer, his judgment, experience and if he later were to receive some negative feedback about a sign, then he can reevaluate and make a decision... And fact is, if in this case it was "incorrect" the engineer would have stated so in his first email. Instead, he simply explained to you where the sign was, where the signal head was, and how there is another signal head in the middle. Actually, if I were him, I would never use the term "incorrect" simply because that may suggest some sort of error on his part which might also subject his department to some liability if someone was in an accident and got injured.

The law is even less specific in that sense, in fact, here is what Iowa law says about sign placement:

321.237 Signs — requirement — notice.

A traffic ordinance or regulation enacted under subsection 4, 5, 6, 8, 12 or 13 of section 321.236 shall not be effective until signs, giving notice of such local traffic regulations as specified in the department manual on uniform traffic-control devices, are posted upon or at the entrances to the highway or part thereof affected as may be most appropriate and shall be erected at the expense of the local authority.

When a city has adopted an ordinance as authorized in section 321.236, subsection 12, or an ordinance which prohibits standing or parking of vehicles upon a street or streets during any time when snow-removal operations are in progress and before such operations have resulted in the removal or clearance of snow from such street or streets, signs as specified in the above manual, posted as hereinabove provided shall be deemed sufficient notice of the existence of such restrictions.

[C39, §5018.02; C46, 50, 54, 58, 62, 66, 71, 73, 75, 77, 79, 81, §321.237]
86 Acts, ch 1056, §3

... "... posted upon or at the entrances to the highway or part thereof affected as may be appropriate..."... It says nothing about left/right/over/above/1 foot or 4 feet, and "most appropriate is fairly subjective.

I am not saying this for you, obviously you happened to have a prosecuting attorney who is understanding and sympathetic, or maybe she has a stack of files ceiling high and one less case wold allow her more time on the others... in fact she told you and I quote "she will call you with her opinion next week".... So in her opinion, she felt a dismissal is warranted. but that does not mean that every prosecuting attorney would feel the same way. And as such, I am saying this for anyone who might come across this thread. This clearly shows that it may be worth the effort to try and negotiate a better outcome with the prosecuting attorney if your state utilizes one for traffic cases), but it does not necessarily mean that every prosecuting attorney is obligated to dismiss a citation simply because you disagree with where it was located or because you insist on using the term "placed incorrectly".

Good luck with the job search!