Results 1 to 5 of 5
  1. #1

    Default Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices

    My question involves a traffic ticket from the state of: NY.

    I understand that as of 2011, all states must adopt this MUTCD.

    According to this Manual, the stop sign that I allegedly went through was supposed to be 36 inches by 36 inches but in fact it was only 30x30.

    I know this sounds like a minor item (size of sign), but can this information somehow be used in court to argue that the ticket I received is not valid?

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    38,867

    Default Re: Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices

    I have not researched the MUTCD for what you are stating but I just posted to make a comment:

    There are a lot of exceptions to the requirement to conform with the federal MUTCD. This is from the federal DOT concerning mutcd:

    Q: What does substantial conformance mean in regard to State Supplements and State MUTCDs?
    A: In 2006 a specific definition of substantial conformance was added to the Code of Federal Regulations. 23 CFR 655.603(b) states that "substantial conformance means that the State MUTCD or supplement shall conform as a minimum to the standard statements included in the National MUTCD" and that "the guidance statements contained in the National MUTCD shall also be in the State Manual or supplement unless the reason for not including it is satisfactorily explained based on engineering judgment, specific conflicting State law, or a documented engineering study." This section of the CFR also allows FHWA to grant exceptions in cases where a State MUTCD or supplement cannot conform to standard statements in the National MUTCD because of the requirements of a specific State law that was in effect prior to the January 16, 2007 effective date of this provision, if FHWA determines the non-conformance does not create a safety concern. Also, legal precedents have determined that State Supplements and State MUTCDs can be more prescriptive than the national MUTCD. This means that a State can make a national MUTCD "should" condition a "shall" condition in that State, can allow in that State only one of several national MUTCD optional designs for a particular device, or can prohibit the use in that State of a particular optional device. However, State Supplements and State MUTCDs cannot omit or change a national MUTCD "shall" to a "should" or change a "should" to a "may". The FHWA reviews each State Supplement and State MUTCD and makes determinations as to substantial
    You also need to realize that often times, in the federal mutcd, the statements are "may, should, suggested, recommended" and other similar synonyms. Those mean that the rules are not mandatory. Only if the statements are such as "must, shall, mandatory, required" and other synonyms do the specs have to be followed directly as stated.

    with that, from your post:

    the stop sign that I allegedly went through was supposed to be 36 inches by 36 inches
    so, was that supposed to be a required or a recommended dimension? Is the sign as posted deemed to be not a safety hazard and as such, an allowed exception?

    I know, you wanted answers and all you got were more questions. Sometimes that is life.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    3,577

    Default Re: Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices

    New York HAS adopted the MUTCD. According to Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1685:

    Quote Quoting Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1685
    § 1680. Department of transportation to maintain a manual of uniform traffic-control devices.

    (a) The department of transportation shall maintain a manual and specifications for a uniform system of traffic-control devices consistent with the provisions of this chapter for use upon highways within this state. Such uniform system shall correlate with and so far as practicable conform to nationally accepted standards. To the extent that the National Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (hereinafter referred to in this section as MUTCD), promulgated by the Federal Highway Administration pursuant to subpart F of part 655 of Title 23 of the Code of Federal Regulations and subject to a public comment period under federal law, does not conflict with the provisions of this chapter and the provisions of other laws of the state, the National MUTCD shall constitute such state manual and specifications; provided, however, such manual and specifications may be modified by the commissioner of transportation by the adoption of a supplement or supplements as such commissioner of transportation determines warranted and in compliance with the applicable provisions of the state administrative procedure act. The manual and its specifications is adopted as the state standard for traffic control devices on any street, highway, or bicycle path open to public travel. No person shall install or maintain in any area of private property used by the public any sign, signal, marking or other device intended to regulate, warn or guide traffic unless it conforms with the state manual and specifications maintained under this section. Unless otherwise provided for by the adoption of a supplement by the commissioner of transportation, the operational practices related to emergency incident responses provided in the manual shall apply to police officers and other emergency responders responding to an emergency only in so far as such officers or emergency responders deem compliance with the manual practicable.
    The Dept. of Transportation website publishes both the current MUTCD and the NY supplement. You can examine them both, but you'll find that STOP signs on "single-lane" roads must be at least 30x30, but must be at least 36x36 on multi-lane roads. So, you may have an argument IF you were on a multi-lane (two or more lanes in one direction) road.

    If so, the other law which pertains to your situation is § 1110:

    Quote Quoting § 1110
    § 1110 Obedience to and required traffic-control devices.
    (a) Every person shall obey the instructions of any official traffic-control device applicable to him placed in accordance with the provisions of this chapter, unless otherwise directed by a traffic or police officer, subject to the exceptions granted the driver of an authorized emergency vehicle in this title.
    (b) No provision of this title for which signs are required shall be enforced against an alleged violator if at the time and place of the alleged violation an official sign is not in proper position and sufficiently legible to be seen by an ordinarily observant person. Whenever a particular section does not state that signs are required, such section shall be effective even though no signs are erected or in place.
    (c) Whenever official traffic-control devices are placed in position approximately conforming to the requirements of this chapter, such devices shall be presumed to have been so placed by the official act or direction of lawful authority, unless the contrary shall be established by competent evidence.
    (d) Any official traffic-control device placed pursuant to the provisions of this chapter and purporting to conform to the lawful requirements pertaining to such devices shall be presumed to comply with the requirements of this chapter, unless the contrary shall be established by competent evidence.
    The "competent evidence" you'll need is contained in the MUTCD. Since it is published by the NY DOT, you should be able to ask the court to take judicial notice (meaning you do not have to have it "introduced into evidence") of its contents.

    Now, will this argument get you off? I don't have ANY idea.

    Good luck,
    Barry

  4. #4

    Default Re: Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices

    I just read the MUTCD section that seems to be applicable to my situation (Section 2B.09) which states:

    The minimum sizes for regulatory signs facing traffic on exit and entrance ramps should be as shown in the
    column of Table 2B-1 that corresponds to the mainline roadway classification (Expressway or Freeway).
    The stop sign that I allegedly went through was at the end of an exit ramp and the Table referenced says the sign must be 36"x36"

    This leads to two questions:

    1) Should I interpret the term "should" as not necessary - which means that this approach will not hold much water in court?

    2) If I am going to use this approach, given that the MUTCD has judicial notice (as you indicate), do I need to have a copy of the manual with me? I checked a web site and the price is $120 for the entire manual - this is more than my ticket cost. Is there a way just to have several relevant pages certified in some way that I can use in court?

    Thanks.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    3,577

    Default Re: Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices

    It took me a while to find what you were talking about. It's actually Section 2B.03 paragraph 9. Two problems exist: 1) the paragraph you refer to is in the "guidance" category -- NOT mandatory. 2) The last column in Table 2B-1 states: "Minimum" and the size there is 30x30. Personally, I wouldn't even bring up paragraph 9. If there are TWO lanes on the ramp, use the "standard" in paragraph 3. If it's only ONE lane, I'm afraid this approach won't work -- but it never hurts to try.

    If the court accepts judicial notice of the MUTCD, you do not have to have "certified" copies. Just print out the pages you need. If the court does not accept judicial notice, you won't even be able to get certified copies admitted without "foundation".

    Barry

    1. Sponsored Links
       

Similar Threads

  1. Lights, Signs and Traffic Controls: Ticket Due to Conflicting Traffic Control Devices
    By ikiller in forum Moving Violations, Parking and Traffic Tickets
    Replies: 48
    Last Post: 07-06-2011, 11:05 AM
  2. Traffic Court Issues: Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices
    By charles2 in forum Moving Violations, Parking and Traffic Tickets
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 12-07-2010, 05:50 PM
  3. Lights, Signs and Traffic Controls: Failure to Obey Traffic Control Devices
    By ciggy1986 in forum Moving Violations, Parking and Traffic Tickets
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 03-06-2010, 05:39 PM
  4. Lights, Signs and Traffic Controls: Contradictory Traffic Control Devices
    By eugene_traveler in forum Moving Violations, Parking and Traffic Tickets
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 10-11-2008, 08:54 AM
  5. Lights, Signs and Traffic Controls: CVC 21461(A) Failure to Obey Traffic Control Devices
    By Max2955 in forum Moving Violations, Parking and Traffic Tickets
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 07-02-2008, 08:18 PM
 
 
Sponsored Links

Legal Help, Information and Resources