Comments on: Busy City Council: Some Speed Limits Increased, Bike Licenses Stalled

By: Marcus

Marcus — Tue, 20 Jan 2009 19:41:47 +0000

Thank god, speed limits everywhere are artificially low.

By: calwatch

calwatch — Fri, 16 Jan 2009 08:32:02 +0000

Actually, on further review, “engineering and traffic survey” has a specific legal definition per CVC 627.

627. (a) “Engineering and traffic survey,” as used in this code, means a survey of highway and traffic conditions in accordance with methods determined by the Department of Transportation for use by state and local authorities.

(b) An engineering and traffic survey shall include, among other requirements deemed necessary by the department, consideration of all of the following:

(1) Prevailing speeds as determined by traffic engineering measurements.

(2) Accident records.

(3) Highway, traffic, and roadside conditions not readily apparent to the driver.

(c) When conducting an engineering and traffic survey, local authorities, in addition to the factors set forth in paragraphs (1) to (3), inclusive, of subdivision (b) may consider all of the following:

(1) Residential density, if any of the following conditions exist on the particular portion of highway and the property contiguous thereto, other than a business district:

(A) Upon one side of the highway, within a distance of a quarter of a mile, the contiguous property fronting thereon is occupied by 13 or more separate dwelling houses or business structures.

(B) Upon both sides of the highway, collectively, within a distance of a quarter of a mile, the contiguous property fronting thereon is occupied by 16 or more separate dwelling houses or business structures.

(C) The portion of highway is longer than one-quarter of a mile but has the ratio of separate dwelling houses or business structures to the length of the highway described in either subparagraph (A) or (B).

(2) Pedestrian and bicyclist safety.

The last point is instructive, and if there is a danger to pedestrians or bicylcists, it needs to be made at this stage.

By: calwatch

calwatch — Fri, 16 Jan 2009 08:28:44 +0000

It’s actually CVC 40802, the anti-speed trap law, that requires an “engineering and traffic survey”, not the MUTCD, although the MUTCD could be considered in a valid E&TS.

By: Umberto Brayj

Umberto Brayj — Fri, 16 Jan 2009 01:51:47 +0000

C. Phylis,

When we are consistently marginalized by those we elect to protect our interests, who can you contact?

We’ve got to build our own political network to throw bums out and force those who stay to fight this chicanery.

I think the mayor’s office would be a great place to send our complaints – he has the authority (I believe) to direct the LADOT to change their official interpretations of various laws. I’m not sure about this, but I think that would be a good political point to rally around.

By: Allen T

Allen T — Fri, 16 Jan 2009 01:35:15 +0000

Wow Steve, it takes the local community to do the research that LADOT is supposed to do?

Why am I not surprised (sigh)

By: SoapBoxLA

SoapBoxLA — Thu, 15 Jan 2009 21:19:58 +0000

Damien, Don’t forget Fallbrook Avenue for a total of FIVE streets in the West Valley that are up for speed limit increases.

The proposed speed limit increases come in groups of six. A couple of waves ago, Zelsah was dropped because of community concerns. In this group, Wells was dropped after the community pointed out that the street had speed tables and went past a park, an orphanage and a school.

The Woodland Hills Warner Center Neighborhood Council will be convening a Town Hall with the LADOT presenting the speed limit increases to the community. (1.27.09)

Good Times!

By: C. Phylis

C. Phylis — Thu, 15 Jan 2009 20:22:57 +0000

This fucking stupid. Who do we need to contact Newton?

By: Allen T

Allen T — Thu, 15 Jan 2009 19:34:50 +0000

As long as the LADOT keeps pushing automobile efficiency over all other safety considerations, then more people will die on our streets.

By: Ingrid Peterson

Ingrid Peterson — Thu, 15 Jan 2009 19:01:01 +0000

This is unreal. In the wake of LADOT’s horrific DASH accident, the LAPD are literally going to suggest that somehow INCREASING speeds makes a road SAFER for pedestrians or cyclists or even other motorists?

Sorry to have to say this, but: I can’t deal with this.

Note to LAPD: Please think about the safety of all people using the street when making assessments about appropriate speeds on a roadway.

By: ubrayj02

ubrayj02 — Thu, 15 Jan 2009 18:44:10 +0000

Damn, this speed limit increase thing is so stupid. The LADOT acts like their hands are tied, and that they are required by law to raise the speed limit.

Quite the contrary, the MUTCD law that they are following allows them to use their professional discretion to keep speed limits low in the following circumstances:

“When qualifying an appropriate speed limit, local authorities may also consider all of the following findings:
1. Residential density, if any of the following conditions exist on the particular portion of highway and the property contiguous thereto, other than a business district:
a. Upon one side of the highway, within 0.4 km (0.25 mi), the contiguous property fronting thereon is occupied by 13 or more separate dwelling houses or business structures.
b. Upon both sides of the highway, collectively, within a distance of 0.4 km (0.25 mi) the contiguous property fronting thereon is occupied by 16 or more separate dwelling houses or business structures.
c. The portion of highway is larger than 0.4 km (0.25 mi) but has the ratio of separate dwelling houses or business structures to the length of the highway described in either subparagraph a or b.
2. Pedestrian and bicyclist safety.”
-E&TS guidelines from pg. 114 in the MUTCD

An engineer can make the determination to REJECT the speed limit increase and still be protected by the law. The LADOT talks about this like speed limit increases are a single track that can only spiral upward, but the state does give them the legal authority to sidestep speed increases and still use radar.

I am not a lawyer, but this seems pretty clear.