Ron_H

If anyone in Ohio happens to have a digital camera handy as they come upon on of the signs on the Interstates that designate the maximum speed on those roads, I would be most grateful for a photo of one of those signs. I confess I had full memory card when I last passed one of them and probably should have stopped to buy another card so I could photograph a sign. No rush, but sometime in the next few weeks would be nice.

What am I doing collecting photos of speed control signs?? Well, you see, those signs may be in violation of federal law. Once in awhile I find myself and some of my friends passing through Ohio. Something doesn't fit and it is irritating.

Thanks to anyone who can furnish a photo of one.

hoffman912

like a regular speed limit sign, that says speedlimit 65?

hoffman912

like this?

Ron_H

Thanks Harry. That is exactly what I needed. You see, I went by all of them so fast that I was unable to get a clear shot of one.

They are unique in the nation (or at least the part of the nation with which I am familiar) and we shall measure them against the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices with which all signs on federally funded highways must conform.

To use the sign, the limit must be set in conformance with the MUTCD. If this is a non-conforming sign, perhaps Ohio doesn't wish to conform to the MUTCD when determining the limit. Think about the jurisdictional issues if that is the case. Happy motoring in Ohio.

hoffman912

notice the source of the picture.. found it on yahoo by searching images ohio speed limit

SandyI

Okay. I'll bite. What's the difference if the sign conforms or not?

Ron_H

Okay.

You see, to qualify for federal funding to build highways, states must comply with the MUTCD and other regulations. If they post a sign in conformance with the MUTCD, the limit on that road must be determined using the guidelines in that document. If it is not, there is a question of jurisdiction and the sign cannot be the basis for the bust (if there is one). I know, I know, California doesn't comply on their freeways, and we're working on that one. They thumb their nose at the regs and "do it their way". One Caltrans official told me that if they followed the MUTCD in determining the limit on California freeways, they would need to raise the limit to 85 mph!!! Thus the argument may be made for dismissing citations on such roads because they are "speed traps" which California abhors by legislative action. In People v. Goulet (1992) it is stated: "......studies have shown that establishing a speed limit at or less than the 85th percentile (Critical Speed) generally results in an increase in accident rates......and in addition this may make violators of a disproportionate number of the reasonable majority of drivers". Further,in People v. Sullivan (1991): "commentators have suggested that the Legislature was also motivated by a desire to eliminate clandestine methods of traffic enforcement designed to augment local revenues through exorbitant fines." ......." Traffic rules account for most of the contact by average citizens with law enforcement and the courts. Enforcement of laws which are widely perceived as unreasonable and unfair generates disrespect and even contempt toward those who make and enforce those laws."

So not following MUTCD guidelines when establishing a speed limit on a federally funded highway prevents a state from using an MUTCD complying speed control sign, but California is doing that presently. Ohio appears to NOT be doing that. This may open a new can of worms for defense against citations on those highways. I wouldn't put the pedal to the metal just yet, but an officer may be rulled incompetent to base a citation on non-conformance with an illegally posted sign, and the court may be without jurisdiction to convict. Of course Ohio may assert that they have not conducted engineering studies prior to setting their limits and thus have not erected MUTCD compliant signs. The feds may think it worthwhile to look a little closer to their stated goal of uniformity in signage and practices on the Interstate system, and pay Ohio a visit. Or some other reason may be lurking beneath this maverick action. I recently drove on Ohio's section of I-70 in my 928 and regarded 65 as unreasonably low; but that is not uncommon for me and probably millions of other drivers, some of whom are cited on that road for acting on their thoughts.
At any rate, I and some others are curious to know what's up with that sign. Will use of it allow escape by Ohio from Federal requirements, unlike the arrogance of California which doesn't give a hoot about no stinkin' guidelines?
Maybe we can find a test case to give us the answers??!!??

ps: MUTCD stands for Manual On Uniform Traffic Control Devices

Auto_Werks 3.6

Ron,

If the signs were invalid I would think that the speed limit would have to revert back to Ohio's speed limit for all unmarked roads (55 mph), and you might be arguing yourself into a more expensive fine.