Speeding ticket in a residential area

[wittywoman]

What is the name of your state? New Jersey

I was issued a speeding ticket for doing 39 mph in a 25 mph zone in a suburban residential area (which did not have a sign posted before I was pulled over). I pulled the statute below from the NJ DMV website. I'm not sure I understand which would apply to this situation, b1 or b2. Can you offer any guidance? I'm considering contesting the ticket . . .

39:4-98. Rates of speed
39:4-98. Rates of speed. Subject to the provisions of R.S.39:4-96 and R.S.39:4-97 and except in those instances where a lower speed is specified in this chapter, it shall be prima facie lawful for the driver of a vehicle to drive it at a speed not exceeding the following:

a.Twenty-five miles per hour, when passing through a school zone during recess, when the presence of children is clearly visible from the roadway, or while children are going to or leaving school, during opening or closing hours;

b. (1) Twenty-five miles per hour in any business or residential district;

(2) Thirty-five miles per hour in any suburban business or residential district;

c.Fifty miles per hour in all other locations, except as otherwise provided in the "Sixty-Five MPH Speed Limit Implementation Act," pursuant to section 2 of P.L.1997, c.415 (C.39:4-98.3 et al.).


Thank you!

[racer72]

I'm not sure I understand which would apply to this situation, b1 or b2.

It would be quite obvious to the casual observer.

b. (1) Twenty-five miles per hour in any business or residential district;

The officer felt you were not in a "suburban" district. Your homework is to now determine whether you were in an urban or suburban district.

[wittywoman]

From NJ

How does one determine what is an urban and what is a suburban area???

This was in the Borough of Bound Brook. It's a small, working-class town. The street is lined with one- and two-family homes as well as apartments. The section where I was ticketed runs between two streets that are zoned for business.

[racer72]

A quick check reveals Bound Brook, New Jersey is an incorporated area southwest of Newark. Being as it is an incorporated area, I would speculate that the urban, not suburban defacto speed limit would be the one enforced in the area in which you were stopped. Also, being lined with homes and apartments does not help your argument a bit.

[wittywoman]

I would consider Bound Brook to be suburban, unlike Newark or Paterson, which are clearly urban areas. How is one supposed to determine on the fly which speeding laws apply when it is not clear what type of district one is in? It seems to me the law is set up to entrap people. There was no speed posted before the speed trap; I turned onto the street from a 35 mph zone and went nearly 2/10 of a mile downhill where the officer was parked, just after the first posted speed limit sign.

[moburkes]

Originally Posted by wittywoman

I would consider Bound Brook to be suburban, unlike Newark or Paterson, which are clearly urban areas. How is one supposed to determine on the fly which speeding laws apply when it is not clear what type of district one is in? It seems to me the law is set up to entrap people. There was no speed posted before the speed trap; I turned onto the street from a 35 mph zone and went nearly 2/10 of a mile downhill where the officer was parked, just after the first posted speed limit sign.

If you were going downhill, then you were required to use your breaks to keep your speed low enough as to be driving under the speed limit. If you can't control the speed of your vehicle going down a hill, then don't go down any.

[wittywoman]

That is a ridiculous argument. Did you read this entire thread, in which I made it very clear that I turned onto this road from a 35 mph zone and there was no speed posted for nearly 2/10 mile going downhill??? Why would I apply my brakes when I thought I was still in a 35 mph zone?

I didn't get on this site to get a lecture; I was hoping for some constructive help. I have not had a moving violation for 12+ years and I feel this was a case of entrapment. The speeding laws are ambiguous, I think intentionally so. And citizens are not given the opportunity to argue this ambiguity without the threat of huge fines and insurance surcharges. It's patently unfair.

[moburkes]

Originally Posted by wittywoman

That is a ridiculous argument. Did you read this entire thread, in which I made it very clear that I turned onto this road from a 35 mph zone and there was no speed posted for nearly 2/10 mile going downhill??? Why would I apply my brakes when I thought I was still in a 35 mph zone?

I didn't get on this site to get a lecture; I was hoping for some constructive help. I have not had a moving violation for 12+ years and I feel this was a case of entrapment. The speeding laws are ambiguous, I think intentionally so. And citizens are not given the opportunity to argue this ambiguity without the threat of huge fines and insurance surcharges. It's patently unfair.

Not a cop. Sorry. You got that wrong. I responded to the downhill part, because YOU bolded it, as if it made a huge difference.

By the way: You also have the option to stop driving.

[The Occultist]

If you turn off your road onto another one, you simply cannot assume the previous speed limit applies to the new road. If a speed limit is not posted, then you must assume a speed limit according to the rules as laid out in the basic driver's manual that they give to teenagers, which will clearly state that the assumed speed limit, unless otherwise posted, for residential streets is 25 mph. Ignorance of the law will not excuse you from it.

[sukharev]

Save the attitude, and focus of what will happen. You will go to court, and see DA before you see the judge. DA will likely offer to reduce the speeding charge to below 10 mph over the limit, in exchange to the guilty plea. You can take it or leave it, if I recall, in NJ that makes a difference of 2 points. If you decide not to take it, you can still get lucky if the officer does not show up, in which case ticket gets dismissed. If he is there, you likely loose, unless the judge is in good mood and would listen to your argument. Make sure you take the picture of the area with you, the argument about urban vs suburban is mute in NJ (unless you are in Newark, where it's obvious ), but picture is better that nothing...

[CdwJava]

One definition is in 39:1-1 ...

"Suburban business or residential district" means that portion of highway and the territory contiguous thereto, where within any 1,320 feet along that highway there is land in use for business or residential purposes and that land occupies more than 660 feet of frontage on one side or collectively more than 660 feet of frontage on both sides of that roadway.

It would seem, then, that the 25 limit would have to have been posted somewhere as the prima facie speed would appear to be 35 MPH in a suburban residential area.

Ultimately, the state will have to present its case in court and fulfill the elements of the offense. Certainly the argument that there was no sign can be raised. You might not want to raise the suburban argument too hard because if you lose, and the court finds the area to be "urban", then the PF speed becomes 25 ... not good for you.

- Carl

[cepe10]

Originally Posted by CdwJava

One definition is in 39:1-1 ...

"Suburban business or residential district" means that portion of highway and the territory contiguous thereto, where within any 1,320 feet along that highway there is land in use for business or residential purposes and that land occupies more than 660 feet of frontage on one side or collectively more than 660 feet of frontage on both sides of that roadway.

It would seem, then, that the 25 limit would have to have been posted somewhere as the prima facie speed would appear to be 35 MPH in a suburban residential area.

Ultimately, the state will have to present its case in court and fulfill the elements of the offense. Certainly the argument that there was no sign can be raised. You might not want to raise the suburban argument too hard because if you lose, and the court finds the area to be "urban", then the PF speed becomes 25 ... not good for you.

- Carl

Carl is correct - and it is the burden of the state to prove the district when they are trying for a more restictive limit, an addtioinal factor is that NJ has to comply with the manual of uniform traffic control devices - the MUTCD section on speed limit signs requires posted speed limits based upon a traffic engineering study.

Section 2B.13 Speed Limit Sign (R2-1)

Standard:
After an engineering study has been made inaccordance with established traffic engineering practices, the Speed Limit (R2-1) sign (see Figure 2B-1) shall display the limit established by law, ordinance, regulation, or as adopted by the authorized agency. The speed limits shown shall be in multiples of 10 km/h or 5 mph.
Guidance:
At least once every 5 years, States and local agencies should reevaluate non-statutory speed limits on segments of their roadways that have undergone a significant change in roadway characteristics or surrounding land use since the last review.

No more than three speed limits should be displayed on any one Speed Limit sign or assembly.

When a speed limit is to be posted, it should be within 10 km/h or 5 mph of the 85th-percentile speed of free-flowing traffic.

I would doubt the 85% speed is 25 mph on that section...

[wittywoman]

Thank you . . . these last two posts were some of the only constructive ones I received here (as opposed to those that asserted I was clearly in the wrong). I think it is obvious that there is some serious ambiguity in the law concerning what constitutes a residential area.

Unfortunately, my court date was 1/17 and I decided--because I have kids & could not stay in court for hours to fight the charge (nevermind risking exhorbitant fines)--to plead guilty & apply the two points on my previously unsullied driving record. The cost of pleading down to an "unsafe driving" charge when you throw in the court costs and $250 state surcharge was not appealing. I was told (by the Bound Brook prosecutor) that my insurance company can't raise my rates for just two points. Does anyone know if this is the case?

Thanks to those who offered constructive advice and insight into the law.

[moburkes]

I'll let the helpful people answer your question.

[CdwJava]

Unfortunately, I am not versed on insurance procedures - neither is Cepe, I imagine. That is Moburkes realm of knowledge. Perhaps if you asked real nice ...

One caution ... the DA does not likely know what your particular insurance company can, or cannot, do.

- Carl