Police oppose proposed speed-limit changes Crimes & Incidents, posted by Editor, Palo Alto Online, on May 27, 2008 at 11:40 am
Police chiefs throughout the Bay Area are protesting a proposed change to speed limits that they say could result in drivers going faster and faster on residential streets and getting into more accidents.
Read the full story here Web Link posted Tuesday, May 27, 2008, 11:15 AM
Posted by Confused, a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood, on May 27, 2008 at 12:16 pm
The police department have my sympathy. These new rules look even more complicated than the old 85th percentile. Because of the complexity it is becoming more and more difficult for Police Officers to issue speeding tickets. Also, it is becoming easier to challenge a speeding ticket because it's hard to know what the speed limit is on a given street.
Posted by FeatherFoot, a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood, on May 27, 2008 at 12:56 pm
Complicated or not, this proposed change will almost certainly result in a higher number of accidents. If you haven't noticed, there are many people in this city who could still benefit from driving lessons! As far as knowing what the speed limit is on a given street, that's easy. Unless it's a state road (like El Camino Real, a.k.a. State Route 82), and unless it's posted otherwise, the speed limit is 25 mph. See California Vehicle Code Section 22352(a)(2)(A).
Posted by Just Me, a resident of the Duveneck/St. Francis neighborhood, on May 27, 2008 at 2:07 pm
Residential streets should not have their speed limits jacked up at all, regardless of what speeds idiot drivers in residential neighborhoods do. It's not about making drivers happy, "going with the flow", possible fender-benders, or the need to rush to some destination. It is about kids on tricycles and skateboards being exposed to danger, and there is no amount of justification you can do that will make me feel any better about risking my kids. I see too much speeding an stop-sign running as it is. I think the better solution would be better enforcement and speed bumps rather than pandering to the speeders.
Posted by Boy Howdy, a resident of the Midtown neighborhood, on May 27, 2008 at 3:23 pm
What would you call a realistic speed on Middlefield road?? Take Alma or El Camino if you want to drive faster. Trying to turn into my driveway on Middlefield is difficult when the guy behind you wants to drive 40mph.
It's tools like you that should be getting tickets ("Driver")
Posted by Driver, a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood, on May 27, 2008 at 3:32 pm
Yes, my speedo is a tool and it tells me how fast I am going when I look at it. I would rather be looking at the hazards and other traffic.
I do sympathise with those living on Middlefield, but they chose to live on a busy street. It is residential in that there are residences there, but it is a four lane arterial and traffic needs to use it. The problem is that if a car is doing 25 mph it is causing more danger than the cars doing 30. My cruise control will not work at 25 and for me it is safer to do the same speed as other cars because one slow car can cause much more danger by crawling along and causing other cars to behave badly trying to overtake.
Alma is a bad example as it is really difficult to get onto Alma by turning left apart from lights. El Camino is not a street I need to travel very often. Middlefield however has many of my shopping and other destinations, LL ball park, church, gas station, library, dentist, etc. etc.
Posted by Just Me, a resident of the Duveneck/St. Francis neighborhood, on May 27, 2008 at 4:11 pm
I can understand wanting to go more than 25 MPH. You can do that without a problem as long as you are not on a residential street. Middlefield is a residential street.
I don't think turning Middlefield into a one-lane faster street is a very good solution. A better solution would be to have the city buy up the houses along Middlefield, allocate some of the land wo a wider street, rezone the rest of the land for small businesses, and then you could talk about raising the limit. Wanna help fund that project?
In the meantime, the limit is 25 and I think it would be reprehensable to raise that limit just because too many drivers don't care about the safety of our children.
And just between you and me, I would not want to be a driver who was speeding on Middlefield and as a result hit a kid. There are many reasons why I would not want that, from the "We're not gonna bother calling the cops" attitude of the parents and neighbors to the possibility of having to live with that guilt. There is nothing I am late for that is worth that risk.
Posted by Driver, a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood, on May 27, 2008 at 4:33 pm
I don't think anyone understands the point. It isn't that I want to go faster on Middlefield. I want to be able to travel at the speed the rest of the traffic is going, usually about 30, and pay attention to what is going on around me. If I am traveling the same as other traffic, I can pay attention to hazards. If I travel too slow, I am causing a hazard. I make it more dangerous as other cars are likely to take chances overtaking me.
On a side street doing 25 is what everyone does. If I go slow, the cars behind me go slow. Overtaking is minimal. On a two lane street, cars are more likely to switch lanes which can cause more accidents if they are stuck behind someone going too slow.
I am not advocating speeding. I am advocating safe driving habits. I think that driving at 25 on Middlefield is more dangerous as it takes concentration away from driving and causes other drivers to behave badly.
Posted by Agree, a resident of the Green Acres neighborhood, on May 27, 2008 at 4:36 pm
I agree with Driver on this. Middlefield is a four lane artery that happens to have houses. There are plenty of houses, shops, even schools, on Alma, Charleston, and Arestradero, too - should we cut the speed limit there back to 25 as well? The town needs its arterials. It is NIMBY to set an arterial speed to 25 because you happen to live there. If you don't like the arterial traffic, there are many other houses available to you.
Posted by a long time resident, a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood, on May 28, 2008 at 12:14 am
Since speeding is breaking the law changing the speed limit based on how the law is broken is like making robbing a bank ok if enough people do it.
I suspect the speed limit on University Ave won't be increased if everyone tries to drive 40 mph. The police will enforce the law where they are told to. Only certain streets are traffic laws enforced and it dosen't take much thinking to figure out where that is.
Where there is no enforcement there are actually no traffic laws and people know this and disregard sighs, red lights, etc.
Our leaders goals are to get the 60,000commuters to their jobs as fast as possible, except thru their neighborhoods.
When driving S. on Middlefield N. of Oregon Expressway cars go 20 to 25mph. Once they cross Oregon Exp. they drive as fast as their car will go.
Posted by Walter_E_Wallis, a resident of the Midtown neighborhood, on May 28, 2008 at 4:58 am
I tell my kids - when the sign is black and white it is political - when it is yellow and black it is engineering, and the penalty for violating an engineerd limit is beyond appeal. I ask again of those advocating political speed limits, show the evidence for your position.
Posted by TL, a resident of the Midtown neighborhood, on May 28, 2008 at 7:20 am
Since the speed limit on most arterials in Palo Alto is the 85th percentile, I'd forget about 25 mph. The Police don't seems to give speeding tickets to those exceeding 25 mph, they do give speeding tickets to those exceeding the 85th percentile.
You can always challenge a speeding ticket in traffic court, more and more drivers are doing just that. The condition of the roadway, time of day, weather conditions, traffic flow etc. all contribute to whether a Judge will uphold a speeding violation.
Posted by Another Driver, a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood, on May 28, 2008 at 7:25 am
You're more likely to get a ticket for running a stop sign than speeding because the law regarding speeding is so vague and convoluted. That's why you see our traffic officers targeting certain cross streets, it is easier for them to get red light runners than speeders.
Posted by Walter_E_Wallis, a resident of the Midtown neighborhood, on May 29, 2008 at 1:41 pm
Just, there needs to be a rationale behind any law other than "I feel like it and I've got the power."
The rationale behind speed limits is public safety. Unless there is a showing of unsafe speed, limiting speed is just bullying. In a rare moment of sanity, th legislature [possibly bleeding from some speed trap] passed the law that mandates the proceedure for setting limits. Setting limits contrary to the law is against the law. Live with it.