Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion ( 2000 )


Menu:
  •                                           February 2,200O
    The Honorable James Warren Smith, Jr.              Opinion No. JC-0175
    Frio County Attorney
    500 East San Antonio Street, Box 1                 Re: Whether a county may stripe and install
    Pearsall, Texas 78061-3 100                        speed bumps on county roads, and related
    questions (RQ-0112-X)
    Dear Mr. Smith:
    A county commissioners court may establish on county roads a system of traffic-control
    devices that conforms to the Texas Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices for Streets and
    Highways, 1980 edition, as amended by Revision Number 6 (the “Manual”). See TEX. TRANSP.
    CODEANN.$251.155 (Vernon 1999);43 TEX.ADMIN.CODE§~~.~(1999)(Dep’tofTransp.,Traffic
    Operations). You ask whether a commissioners court may “lay center stripes on paved county
    roads,” thereby allowing two-way traffic, and install speed bumps on county roads. See Letter from
    Honorable James Warren Smith, Jr., Frio County Attorney, to Attorney General of Texas, at 1
    (Sept. 15,1999) (on tile with Opinion Committee) [hereinafter “Request Letter”]. We conclude that
    center stripes and speed bumps, ifthey are used to regulate, warn, or guide traffic, are traffic-control
    devices that a county may install. Center stripes must conform to standards set out in the Manual.
    By contrast, because the Manual does not contain standards or guidelines regarding speed bumps,
    a county may, consistently with paragraph lA-6 of the Manual, install a speed bump on a county
    road only if it has received permission to do so from the Texas Department of Transportation. See
    TEX. DEP’T OF TRANSP., 1980 TEXASMANUALON UNIFORMTRAFFICCONTROL DEVICES FOR
    STREETSANDHIGHWAYS[hereinafter “MANUAL”].
    You ask both about county roads located without a municipality and those located within a
    municipality. See Request Letter at 1. Ifthe county determines that a center stripe or a speed bump
    will improve the road and the municipal governing body approves the installation ofthe center stripe
    or speed bump, a county may lay a center stripe or construct a speed bump on a county road within
    a municipality. You finally ask whether the county may enforce violations of the center stripes or
    of a speed limit. See 
    id. at 1.
    It may.
    A county commissioners court is authorized to      “regulate traffic on a county road.”   TEX.
    TRANSP. CODE ANN. 5 25 1.15 1 (Vernon 1999); accord        Hoechst Celanese Corp. Y. Compton, 
    899 S.W.2d 215
    , 226-27 (Tex. App.-Houston [14th Dist.]         1994, writ denied). In particular, a local
    authority,suchasacounty,seeT~~.Tu~~~.C~~~Am.               $541,002(3)(A)(Vemon 1999),may,with
    The Honorable James Warren Smith, Jr. - Page 2            (JC-0175)
    respect to a county road and within “the reasonable exercise of [its] police power,” regulate traffic
    by placing “traffic-control devices.” 
    Id. 5 542.202(a);
    see also 
    id. 5 544.002(b)
    (authorizing local
    authority to place and maintain traffic-control device on county road). An official traffic-control
    device is:
    a sign, signal, marking, or device that is:
    (A) consistent with this subtitle;
    (B) placed or erected by a public body or officer havingjurisdiction;
    and
    (C)    used to regulate, warn, or guide traffic.
    
    Id. 5 541.304(l).
      A county’s system of traffic-control devices “must conform to the manual and
    specifications of the Texas Department of Transportation.” 
    Id. 5 251.155(b).
    The Department of
    Transportation has adopted the Manual, as revised, to supply specifications. See 43 TEX. ADMIN.
    CODE 5 25.1(a) (1999) (Dep’t ofTransp., Traffic Operations).
    We believe both a center stripe and a speed bump may be “used to regulate, warn, or
    guide traffic” and may, therefore, be traffic-control devices. See TEX. TRANSP.CODE ANN.
    5 541,304(1)(C) (Vernon 1999). Whether, in a particular situation, either technique will be so used
    is a question of fact that must be determined in the first instance by the county commissioners court.
    See, e.g., Tex. Att’y Gen. Op. Nos. JC-0032 (1999) at 4 (stating that question of fact is beyond
    purview of this office); JC-0027 (1999) at 3 (stating that attorney general opinion cannot address
    questions of fact); JC-0020 (1999) at 2 (stating that attorney general opinion cannot investigate or
    resolve fact questions).
    Assuming that a county commissioners court determines, with respect to a road over which
    it has jurisdiction, see TEX. TRANSP.CODEANN. 5 25 1.15 1 (Vernon 1999), that a center stripe or a
    speed bump will operate as a traffic-control device, the device must conform with the Manual. See
    
    id. $5 251.155,
    541.304(l); 43 TEX. ADMIN.CODE9 25.1 (Dep’t of Transp., Traffic Operations)
    (1999). Of the two techniques about which you ask, the Manual provides specifications for the use
    and construction of center stripes only. See MANUAL,supra, at 3B-1. The Manual recommends that
    center stripes “be used on most paved roads.” 
    Id. In accordance
    with the Manual, the county’s
    decision to lay center stripes at a particular location “should be made on the basis of an engineering
    study of the location.” 
    Id. at l
    A-4. In addition, the county should refer to the Manual for width and
    pattern specifications. See 
    id. at 3A-6.
    Although the Manual does not describe speed bumps, see TEX. TRANSP.CODE ANN.
    5 25 1.155(b) (Vernon 1999) (stating that county’s system of traffic-control devices “must conform
    The Honorable James Warren Smith, Jr. - Page 3            (JC-0175)
    to the manual and specifications of the Texas Department of Transportation”), a county may install
    speed bumps if it receives express permission from the Department of Transportation to do so, in
    accordance with Manual procedures. Section l A-6 of the Manual authorizes a county to request
    permission from the Department of Transportation to install a control device not described in the
    Manual: “Requests for any change, interpretation or permission to experiment should be sent to the
    Texas Department of Transportation, Traffic Operations Division for coordination with the Federal
    Highway Administration.” MANUAL,supra, 5 lA-6. A “change includes consideration of new
    devices to replace a present standard device [or] additional devices to be added to the list of standard
    devices.” 
    Id. 5 l
    A-6(l). A request to experiment may include “consideration of testing or
    evaluating a new traffk control device, its application or manner of use.” 
    Id. 5 l
    A-6(3).
    Accordingly, a county may construct a speed bump as a traffic-control device if the Department of
    Transportation has approved the proposal. See also TEX.TRANSP.CODE ANN.5 201.803(d) (Vernon
    1999) (stating that Texas Department OfTransportation is available to consult with county officials).
    Assuming that a county generally is authorized by statute to lay center stripes or to install
    speed bumps on county roads in accordance with the Manual, we consider whether the county may
    do so on portions of county roads within the bounds of a municipality. Section 25 1,012 of the
    Transportation Code authorizes a county commissioners court to spend county money to improve
    or maintain a street that is located in a municipality, provided that the municipality’s governing body
    approves. See TEX. TRANSP.CODEANN. 5 251.012(a) (Vernon Supp. 2000); see also Tex. Att’y
    Gen. Op. No. JC-0036 (1999) at 6 (stating that expenditure of county funds to improve city street
    that is integral part of county roads serves public purpose). If a county commissioners court finds
    that laying a center stripe or erecting a speed bump improves a road in a particular situation, section
    251.012 authorizes a county to perform that improvement on that portion of a county road located
    within a municipality if the municipal governing body approves. Whether laying a center stripe or
    installing a speed bump is in fact an improvement is a question of fact that cannot be ascertained in
    the opinion process. See, e.g., Tex. Att’y Gen. Op. Nos. JC-0032 (1999) at 4 (stating that question
    of fact is beyond purview of this offtce); JC-0027 (1999) at 3 (stating that questions of fact cannot
    be addressed in attorney general opinion); JC-0020 (1999) at 2 (stating that attorney general opinion
    cannot investigate or resolve fact questions).
    Finally, we conclude that a county may enforce violations of a driver’s failure to drive in a
    single lane where the road has a center stripe or violations of a speed limit. The commissioners
    court’s authority to “regulate traffic on a county road, ” see TEX. TRANSP.CODEANN. 5 251.151
    (Vernon 1999), encompasses the authority to enforce violations ofcounty regulations. Cf: Tex. Att’y
    Gen. LO-95-064, at 2 (concluding that county has no authority to set or enforce speed limits on
    subdivision roads not accepted into county road system); XIII OXFORDENGLISHDICTIONARY            524
    (2d ed. 1989) (defining “regulate”).
    The Honorable James Warren Smith, Jr. - Page 4         (X-0175)
    SUMMARY
    A county may lay center stripes on county roads in accordance
    with the Texas Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices for
    Streets and Highways, 1980 edition, as amended by RevisionNumber
    6 (the “Manual”). A county may install a speed bump on a county
    road if it has received permission to do so from the Texas Department
    of Transportation.
    A county may lay a center stripe or place a speed bump on a
    portion of county road that is located within a municipality in
    accordance with the Manual if the county determines that the center
    stripe or speed bump is an “improvement” to the road and if the
    municipal governing body approves.            A county may enforce
    violations of a center stripe or of a speed limit.
    Attorney General of Texas
    ANDY TAYLOR
    First Assistant Attorney General
    CLARK KENT ERVIN
    Deputy Attorney General - General Counsel
    ELIZABETH ROBINSON
    Chair, Opinion Committee
    Kymberly K. Oltrogge
    Assistant Attorney General - Opinion Committee
    

Document Info

Docket Number: JC-175

Judges: John Cornyn

Filed Date: 7/2/2000

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 2/18/2017