BILL ANALYSIS Ó AB 529 Page 1 Date of Hearing: May 11, 2011 ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS Felipe Fuentes, Chair AB 529 (Gatto) - As Amended: May 3, 2011 Policy Committee: TransportationVote:13-0 Local Government 9-0 Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program: No Reimbursable: SUMMARY This bill requires Caltrans to revise the California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CMUTCD), as it read on January 1, 2012, to require Caltrans or a local authority to round speed limits to the nearest five miles per hour (mph) of the 85th percentile of the free-flowing traffic; however, in cases where the speed limit needs to be rounded up to the nearest 5-mph increment of the 85th percentile speed, the Caltrans or a local authority may instead round the speed limit down to the lower 5-mph increment, but may not reduce the speed limit any further. (Currently, an entity must round to the nearest 5 mph, and if this results in rounding up, the entity can instead round down by formally demonstrating safety-related considerations. In cases where the speed limit needs to be rounded down, the entity can establish a speed limit with an additional 5 mph reduction by demonstrating safety-related considerations. This bill allows an entity, in cases where it is required to round up, to instead round down without providing documentation. However, in these cases the entity would not be able to formally seek a further 5-mph reduction in the speed limit.) FISCAL EFFECT Negligible fiscal impact to Caltrans and administrative savings to local agencies in establishing speed limits. COMMENTS 1)Background . A speed limit is generally set at or near the 85th AB 529 Page 2 percentile of the prevailing speed (i.e., the speed which is exceeded by 15% of motorists) as measured by an engineering and traffic survey (ETS). In cases where the 85th percentile speed is not an increment of 5 mph, a jurisdiction rounds the speed limit to the closest 5 mph increment. For example, if the survey shows an 85th percentile speed of 34 mph, the speed limit will be set at 35 mph. The CMUTCD 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. According to Caltrans, California is the only state in the nation that allows for a 5-mile reduction in speed limit after rounding to the nearest 5 mph increment closest to the 85th percentile. The process for setting speed limits is guided by federal standards contained in the National MUTCD. Any change to the process in California must be approved by the Federal Highway Administration as being "in substantial compliance" with the National MUTCD. Caltrans is responsible for maintaining the guidance and standards in the CMUTCD. In 1996, speed limits were set at the first 5 mph increment below the 85th percentile, a process that put downward pressure on posted speed limits. The speed limit could then be lowered an additional 5 mph for safety-related reasons as discussed above. In 2004, California revised its process to conform more closely to federal standards by providing that the speed limit should be set at the nearest 5 mph increment of the 85th percentile. After the 2004 change, many speed limits were being raised after applying the "nearest 5 mph increment" criteria. In response to raising speed limits, Caltrans found that many jurisdictions would then apply the additional 5 mph reduction without appropriate justification. Without justification for lowering speed limits, speeding tickets were often not upheld in court if the presiding official found that the speed limit was set below the 85th percentile. On May 15, 2009, Caltrans adopted two policy changes for setting speed limits, as follows: a) Rather than guiding local jurisdictions to set the speed AB 529 Page 3 limits at the nearest 5 mph, the California MUTCD now requires it. b) If the 5 mph reduction is applied, the ETS shall document in writing the conditions and justification for the reduced speed limit and be approved by a registered Civil or Traffic Engineer. 2)Purpose . According to the author, these recent changes to the CMUTCD will likely require speed limit increases on 44% of local streets and roads in the City of Glendale, prompting the need for the bill. According to the League of California Cities, cities can currently round down Ýspeed limits] only when there are safety needs as identified by an engineering judgment, a policy that does not allow a city to decide what is actually in the best interest of its community. The process changes in this bill (described in the summary above) will return some decision-making authority to cities to address their unique local conditions. Analysis Prepared by : Chuck Nicol / APPR. / (916) 319-2081