BILL ANALYSIS
AB 766
Page 1
Date of Hearing: May 11, 2009
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION
Mike Eng, Chair
AB 766 (Krekorian) - As Introduced: February 26, 2009
SUBJECT : Vehicles: speed limits
SUMMARY : Allows a local city or county to retain a prima facie
speed limit on any street, other than a state highway, if it
makes a finding after a public hearing and determines that a
higher speed limit is not appropriate and does not promote
safety.
EXISTING LAW :
1)Requires an engineering and traffic studies (ETS) to include
consideration of all of the following:
a) Prevailing speeds as determined by traffic engineering
measurements;
b) Accident records; and,
c) Highway, traffic, and roadside conditions not readily
apparent to the driver.
2)Requires that speed limits be generally set in accordance to
an ETS, which measures prevailing vehicular speeds and
establish the limit at or near the 85th percentile (i.e., the
speed which is exceeded by 15% of motorists), unless other
safety-related factors suggest that a lower speed limit would
be appropriate.
3)Requires that the 85th percentile be used to set speed limits,
except in cases where the limit is set in state law, such as
the 65 miles per hour (MPH) limit on divided highways, 55 MPH
on an undivided highway, and 25 MPH in residential districts.
Speed limits only take effect when the government authority
posts them on signs.
4)Provides that a local government can impose and post a speed
limit in a residence district that is higher or lower than the
prima facie speed limit provided it conducts an ETS to show
that a higher or lower speed limit would facilitate the
AB 766
Page 2
orderly movement of traffic and is reasonable and safe.
5)Requires a prima facie speed limit of 25 MPH on any highway
other than a state highway, in any business or residential
district.
FISCAL EFFECT : Unknown
COMMENTS : According to the author, this bill would provide
"local governments with a means of increasing pedestrian and
community safety by limiting increases in speed limits on local
streets."
Under current law, state and local authorities establish speed
limits based on the results of an ETS. An ETS is designed to
gauge prevailing speeds along a given route, takes into account
accident records, and other highway, traffic, and roadside
conditions not readily apparent to the driver.
Speed limits are usually set at or near the 85th percentile
(i.e., the speed that is adhered to by 85% of motorists).
Limits can be set at lower rates for any other safety-related
reasons.
The rationale behind the 85th percentile methodology, which has
been borne out by empirical studies, is that 85% of motorists
drive at a safe and prudent speed and that setting speed limits
at a lower level will make lawbreakers out of otherwise
law-abiding citizens, thereby engendering disrespect for the
law.
The California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD)
specifies that a jurisdiction may lower that speed limit by 5
mph (i.e., to 30 mph in the example) if safety-related factors
suggest that a lower speed is warranted. The jurisdiction
cannot, however, lower the speed limit by more than 5 mph,
regardless of additional safety factors.
The author adds that "oftentimes an ETS will show that motorists
are consistently driving above the posted speed limit and
therefore an increase in the speed limit is needed.
Unfortunately, the current process does not place enough value
on the safety of pedestrians and those who live on or near the
street being surveyed."
Historically, an ETS has been accepted as a rational process for
AB 766
Page 3
the establishment of prima facie speed limits. One criteria
used in this process is the well-documented fact that motorists
tend to drive at the speed they feel safe, which is generally
based on road conditions rather than the posted speed limit.
In opposition, the Automobile Club of Southern California and
the California State Automobile Association, state that "AB 766
abrogates the current speed trap law by essentially allowing
local authorities to ignore the conclusions of a renewed ETS in
the event the result is to adjust the speed limit upward. When
speed limits are arbitrarily set there can be a number of
unintended consequences, most notably, an increase in auto
collisions due to differences in speed traveled by vehicles."
Previous legislation: SB 570 (Maldonado) of 2009, would
establish a prima facie speed limit of 40 miles per hour (mph)
for any roadway where the residential density is eight
residential units or more fronting the street. That bill passed
out 8-0 from the Senate Housing and Transportation Committee on
April 14, 2009 and was withdrawn from the Senate Appropriations.
The bill is now in the Senate Rules Committee.
AB 564 (Portantino) of 2009, would amend the definition of a
"local street or road," under the speed trap law, for the City
of Pasadena, to mean that it is either included in the latest
maps submitted to the federal highway Administration (FHWA) or
one that is not wider than 40 feet, longer than one-half mile,
or more than one lane in each direction. That bill passed the
Assembly Transportation Committee, 8-3 on May 4, 2009.
AB 2767 (Jackson), Chapter 45, Statutes of 2000, allowed local
authorities to consider residential density and bicycle and
pedestrian safety as additional factors in ETS conducted for
purposes of setting speed limits.
Committee comments:
1)Under this bill, it is unknown if local and community input
into the speed limit setting process will lead to artificially
lower speed limit that can lead to speed traps? It is
possible that lower speed limits may increase the number of
citations but not generally reduce speed.
2)Although this bill intends to prevent accidents it may have
AB 766
Page 4
the unintended consequence of actually increasing traffic
collisions, since statistics show that reducing a speed limit
when it is not warranted, can cause a variance in speed driven
by motorists and led to more crashes.
3)This bill requires that consideration be given to pedestrian
safety when the review of local speed limits occurs during the
public process. Under existing law, in addition to gauging
prevailing speeds along a given route, taking accident records
into account, and other highway, traffic, and roadside
conditions not readily apparent to the driver , a local
authority is also granted the ability to consider other
factors such pedestrian, bicyclist safety and residential
density when considering an ETS. It would seem unnecessary
that this bill require pedestrian safety to be considered in
setting a speed limit, since they can already be considered
under the existing ETS process. If increased accidents are
also an issue in a particular street or road, accident rates
can under the current process be considered in determining an
appropriate speed limit.
4)It is possible that a locality can improve pedestrian and
neighborhood safety by instituting local measures without
altering the current ETS process. Changes can be found in
increased enforcement, engineering changes to road
configuration, road markings, and traffic control or display
signs. Such changes can bring heightened attention to
maintaining a driver within a speed limit and allow for proper
interaction with pedestrian traffic.
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION :
Support
City of Glendale (sponsor)
City of Los Angeles
1 individual
Opposition
Automobile Club of Southern California
California State Automobile Association
California Teamsters Public Affairs Council
1 individual
AB 766
Page 5
Analysis Prepared by : Alejandro Esparza / TRANS. / (916)
319-2093