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