Does my Virginia sheriff's office need a VDOT permit to put up a photo speed enforcement sign on an interstate, and can the sign go on private property?

Subject

Whether a Virginia law enforcement agency must obtain a VDOT permit before placing a photo speed enforcement sign along an interstate highway, and whether such a sign may be placed on private property within view of the enforcement zone.

Plain-English summary

In 2020 the General Assembly authorized state and local law enforcement to use photo speed monitoring devices in school crossing zones and highway work zones (Va. Code § 46.2-882.1). The statute requires a "conspicuous sign" within 1,000 feet of the zone, alerting drivers that photo enforcement is in use. Wythe County Sheriff Foster, planning to deploy photo enforcement along I-77 and I-81, asked the AG two questions: does he need a VDOT permit, and can the sign go on private property?

AG Miyares answered both. First, the opinion states that if an agency wants to place the sign within a VDOT right-of-way, VDOT regulations require it to first obtain a land use permit, and if the sign is within the interstate right-of-way or within 660 feet of the edge of that right-of-way, VDOT regulations require that the sign's location and installation be approved by VDOT. The opinion refers to "VDOT regulations" generally and does not cite specific regulation sections.

Second, the sign can be on private property outside the right-of-way. Section 46.2-882.1 does not require that the sign be in the right-of-way; it only requires that the sign be conspicuous and within 1,000 feet of the enforcement zone. If the sheriff's office uses private property, it must obtain the landowner's consent (it cannot just put a sign on someone else's property), and if the private property location happens to fall within 660 feet of the interstate, the VDOT approval also applies.

The opinion is careful to limit itself. The AG specifically said it does not address every law or regulation that might apply to sign placement or sign characteristics. The Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices, federal interstate signage rules, and local zoning ordinances could all add requirements that the opinion does not cover.

What this means for you

If you are a Virginia sheriff or local police chief deploying photo speed enforcement

The opinion holds that a photo speed monitoring sign placed within a VDOT right-of-way requires a VDOT land use permit, and that a sign within the interstate right-of-way or within 660 feet of the edge of that right-of-way must have its location and installation approved by VDOT. It holds that the sign may instead be placed on private property outside the right-of-way, provided it is conspicuous, but the agency must obtain the landowner's consent and a VDOT permit if applicable. The opinion expressly notes it does not consider all laws or regulations that may apply to the specific placement or characteristics of the sign.

If you work in VDOT permitting

The opinion holds that VDOT regulations require a land use permit before a photo speed monitoring sign is placed in a VDOT right-of-way, and require VDOT approval of the sign's location and installation when the sign is within the right-of-way or within 660 feet of its edge. It does not address VDOT's internal permitting procedures or treat law enforcement signs as a special category.

If you own land near a school zone or work zone

The opinion holds that a sign placed on private property outside the right-of-way requires the landowner's consent (the agency cannot place it without consent), plus a VDOT permit if the location is within the right-of-way or its 660-foot buffer. It does not address the terms of any agreement between the landowner and the agency.

If you have received a photo speed enforcement ticket

The opinion notes that § 46.2-882.1 requires a "conspicuous sign" placed within 1,000 feet of the school crossing zone or highway work zone indicating that a photo speed monitoring device is in use. The opinion addresses only VDOT approval for sign placement; it does not address enforcement of citations or what happens if signage is absent.

If you are a state legislator

The opinion holds that the 2020 photo enforcement statute (§ 46.2-882.1) operates against existing VDOT permitting regulations and does not itself create a photo enforcement permit category. It does not recommend any change to that framework.

Common questions

Q: How close does the sign need to be to the enforcement zone?
A: Within 1,000 feet of the school crossing zone or highway work zone, per Va. Code § 46.2-882.1. The sign also needs to be "conspicuous," which is a fact-specific standard.

Q: Can the sign be on the median or shoulder of an interstate?
A: The median and shoulder of an interstate are within the VDOT right-of-way. A sign there requires a VDOT land use permit.

Q: What if the school zone is on a city street, not a state highway?
A: Then VDOT permitting rules typically do not apply because the road is not under VDOT jurisdiction. Local sign ordinances and the city's own right-of-way rules would govern. The 1,000-foot and conspicuousness requirements in § 46.2-882.1 still apply.

Q: Does the sign have to be a specific size or color?
A: The statute requires a "conspicuous sign," but does not specify dimensions or colors. The opinion expressly does not consider all laws or regulations that may apply to the sign's specific placement or characteristics, so other standards (such as the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices) could apply beyond what the opinion addresses.

Background and statutory framework

Section 46.2-882.1, enacted by 2020 Va. Acts ch. 1232, authorized the use of photo speed monitoring devices in school crossing zones and highway work zones. It was a measured expansion of automated enforcement: Virginia had not previously allowed photo speed enforcement on general roadways, and the statute was carefully drafted to limit deployment to specific safety-critical zones.

The signage requirement is a key procedural safeguard. Notice to drivers that automated enforcement is in use serves both due process and deterrence goals. The statute does not require the sign to be in the right-of-way, just that it be conspicuous and within 1,000 feet. That flexibility is what makes private property placement possible.

VDOT's land use permit regulations are general-purpose: they apply to any installation in a VDOT right-of-way, not just photo enforcement signs. The opinion refers to "VDOT regulations" without citing specific sections, including for the 660-foot rule it applies to signs near (but not in) an interstate right-of-way.

The opinion is narrow by design. The AG declined to opine on every regulatory requirement that might apply, and explicitly noted that the analysis "does not consider all laws or regulations that may apply concerning the specific placement or characteristics of the sign." A complete signage plan would need to coordinate with the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices, federal interstate signage rules, and local sign ordinances.

Citations and references

Statutes:

• Va. Code Ann. § 46.2-882.1 (photo speed monitoring devices)

The opinion refers to VDOT land use permit regulations generally without citing specific sections.

Source

• Landing page: https://www.oag.state.va.us/annual-reports-opinions/official-opinions
• Original PDF: https://www.oag.state.va.us/files/Opinions/2022/22-014-Foster-issued.pdf

Original opinion text

Best-effort transcription from a scanned PDF. Minor errors may remain; the linked PDF is authoritative.

COMMONWEALTH of VIRGINIA

Office of the Attorney General

Jason S. Miyares
Attorney General
202 North Ninth Street
Richmond, Virginia 23219
804-786-2071
Fax 804-786-1991
Virginia Relay Services
800-828-1120
7-1-1

August 15, 2022

The Honorable Charles W. Foster
Wythe County Sheriff
Wythe County Law Enforcement & Judicial Complex
245 South Fourth Street
Wytheville, Virginia 24382

Dear Sheriff Foster:

I am responding to your request for an official advisory opinion in accordance with § 2.2-505 of the Code of Virginia.

Issues Presented

You pose two questions regarding the placement of a sign alerting drivers that a photo speed monitoring device is being used in a highway work zone (a "photo speed monitoring sign"). You first ask whether a law enforcement agency, such as the Wythe County Sheriff's Office, must obtain a permit from the Virginia Department of Transportation ("VDOT") before placing such a sign along an interstate highway. Second, you ask whether such a sign must be placed within the right-of-way, or whether it could be placed on private property within view of the highway work zone. You state that the sign you describe would be a temporary sign.

Facts

You relate that Interstate 77 and Interstate 81 intersect in Wythe County. You state that a speeding study conducted by your office has recorded "disturbing" speeding violations occurring within the County, and that your office seeks to employ photo speed enforcement to protect public safety.

Applicable Law and Discussion

Virginia Code § 46.2-882.1, which was enacted by the General Assembly in 2020, permits state and local law enforcement agencies to conduct photo speed enforcement in school crossing zones and highway work zones. The statute requires that a "conspicuous sign" be placed "within 1,000 feet of [the] school crossing zone or highway work zone" indicating that a photo speed monitoring device is being used within the zone.

With respect to your first question, if a law enforcement agency desires to place a photo speed monitoring sign within a VDOT right-of-way, VDOT regulations require that it must first obtain a land use permit from the agency.

With respect to your second question, § 46.2-882.1 does not specify whether a photo speed monitoring sign must be placed within the highway right-of-way. It does, however, provide that the sign must be "conspicuous" and placed within 1,000 feet of the school crossing zone or highway work zone. If the sign is within the interstate right-of-way or within 660 feet of the edge of such right-of-way, VDOT regulations require that the location and installation of the sign must be approved by VDOT. Further, provided the sign is conspicuous, in my opinion it could be placed on private property outside the right-of-way. In such an instance, the law enforcement agency would be required to obtain the consent of the landowner in addition to obtaining a VDOT permit, if applicable.

Conclusion

For the foregoing reasons, it is my opinion that if a law enforcement agency desires to place a photo speed monitoring sign within the interstate right-of-way or within 660 feet of the edge of such a right-of-way, the location and installation of the sign must be approved by VDOT. Provided the sign is conspicuous, it could be placed on private property outside the right-of-way, but the law enforcement agency would be required to obtain the consent of the landowner in addition to obtaining a VDOT permit, if applicable.

Please note that this opinion focuses on the question of VDOT approval for placement of such a sign, and it does not consider all laws or regulations that may apply concerning the specific placement or characteristics of the sign.

With kindest regards, I am,

Very truly yours,

Jason S. Miyares
Attorney General