CA: Interpreting traffic survey

[BayAreaBMWFan]

What is the name of your state?What is the name of your state? California

This regarding the 40mph ticket I got in a 30mph zone on the thread which is now closed:

I went to the city PWD and obtained a copy of the traffic survey. I did not take a copy of the notes though I looked at them.

-Time of Survey: August 2001
-Average Daily Traffic (ADT): 2080
-"The 85th percentile speed on Levin ranges from "35 mph to 37 mph"
-There were 2 accidents on Levin in 2000.
-The survey results are signed by a Traffic Engineer.

Posted speed is 30 mph.

I also asked the PWD guy why the crossing near my home is a School Zone and he mentioned that it is because there is a after school day care facility on a parallel Street. That street is at least a 1000 ft away. So there is no school or day care facility within 500 ft.


Questions:
By Law they can reduce the 85%ile speed by 5 mph only. However the survey speed fudges on this limit by saying that the 85%ile speed ranges from 35 and 37. I can not understand how a %ile speed can have a range. It has to be an exact number or if there were not enough samples, then the number should be a mean of the two closest numbers.

Is this survey acceptable?

 

[absconder]

What laws are you referring to?

 

[BayAreaBMWFan]

What laws are you referring to?

What the law requires

 

[NotACopOrLawyer]

You are on the right track, at last.

The survey sounds fishy. I have never seen one, before, that gave a range for the 85th. Go back, get a copy of the field notes. Then you'll be able to tell how they fudged the 85th.

However, you need to understand that there is a way that they are allowed to reduce the posted by an additional 5 mph increment. That way is if the engineer cites, in the survey, a danger that would not be apparent to a new driver on the street. That danger could be a hidden driveway, or simply a higher than average accident rate. Using your situation as an example, lets say the 85th turns out to be 36. He could post a 35 without giving any justification for doing so. But he could only post a 30 if he said that the 2 accidents equals a higher than average accident rate, or that there is some other non-obvious danger. This is per the statutory law - the law as it was written by the legislators.

Then there is the case law. Look at the 50th% speed. Case law says (P. vs. Goulet, see footnotes at end of decision) that they can't use radar enforcement if they have set a posted speed that turns the majority of drivers into violators. Thus, if the posted is 30 and the 50th is 31, the majority of drivers are exceeding the speed limit. You can look up P. vs. Goulet at findlaw.com, which is free.

By the way, all of this is in Fight Your Ticket, by David Brown, available at every library and bookstore in California.

I also want to recommend that if you are going to be fighting tickets (or any other law), that you get familiar with West's Annotated California Codes. They allow you to look up any section of California law, including the vehicle code section you were cited for, and see what it really means. For more details about WACC, see this free website: highwayrobbery.net/redlightcamslinksref.htm#Reference

NACOL

 

[CdwJava]

It appears to be in compliance.

- Carl

 

[Douglas_Rest]

Naw, it isn't in compliance unless there are other written notations on the speed survey to justify a posted speed limit reduction of more than 5 mph from the survey's supposedly measured "critical speed" of 37 mph. Challenge the 35-37mph vagueness which is improper.

Moreover, so what if you exceeded the posted speed limit? 41 is only 4 mph more than the 85th percentile... so that's not much faster than what other presumed reasonable drivers travel. Do you know about California's "Basic Speed Law" that allows a motorist under certain safe conditions and circumstances to travel faster than the posted speed? Here's some valuable clues at the Help I Got a Ticket website.

 

[rmet4nzkx]

Check with the court, but I believe the survey is too old, therefore you could argue that the 40mph is likely the 85th percentile, if it is safe under the basic speed law.

 

[BayAreaBMWFan]

California:

I have requested a copy of the detailed survey and the notes.

The survey has to be five years old or less. There is also an automatic clause for extension for another five years.

I also talked to the court clerk. She said that the notes which the officer has are the same as what I have in my citation so filing a discovery motion will not help much. According to her, I can not question the officer with a written request for answers . She also said the citing officer is pretty senior officer and is known to the court.

I also noticed that the speedometer on BMWs show a speed 3-5 miles more than your actual speed. I had read about this in different forums and personally verified that by using a GPS device and by driving at a steady speed in front of a road-side speed measuring device (which displays your speed as you pass by). The officer said that his radar gun got me at 41mph which would translate to a speedometer speed of 44-45mph. No way was I going to be driving that fast with after seeing an officer and with a stop sign 300 yards down the road.

Unfortunately, Commissioner James Madden, who has won three Iggy awards at helpigotaticket.com works in the court I am supposed to appear at.

Rational thought would suggest traffic school but this is becoming an emtional issue for me.

 

[NotACopOrLawyer]

Don't worry about Madden. You have the right to do a Peremptory Challenge, which will keep him off your case.

Read about it in Fight Your Ticket, and on the Challenges page at highwayrobbery.net.

NACOL

 

[BayAreaBMWFan]

Traffic Survey Here but it is wierd

I finally got a copy of the "Speed Zone Survey".
The survey is a 3ft by 1 ft document, with a satellite picture of the area and other details. It has a notes section above the picture and a square graphed area below the picture. It is dated Auguest 2001. The alignment is Straight, the gradient is Flat, the district is residential.

The speed was measured at three different points. In the first zone the road is 30 feet wide (first 1000 feet of the 3700 feet) and it is 40 ft wide for the rest of the 2700 ft. The officer was standing at the point where the road widens from 30 to 40 ft (and hence hidden to traffic coming from his behind). I was ticketed in the first zone.

1. The record which the city provided me does not have any details of the actual distribution of speeds. There is no distribution graph of individual speeds measured, actual speed samples, number of measurements taken etc.

2. The speed was measured at three different spots of the road I was cited in the zone covered by the first spot.

3. The Observed Speed: Critical was 37, 35 and 36 mph in the three zones.

4. The Observed Speed: Pace was 26-36 mph in Zones 1 &2 AND 27-37 mph in Zone 3.

5. The accident rate is 4.0 ACCIDENTS/Million Vehicle Miles which I am told is very high.

6. The existing speed limit was 30 mph when the survey was taken.

Below the satellite image of the road, there is a square ruled graph area. This area plots the following speeds:
- Existing Speed Limit
- Critical Speed Limit
- Pace

I noticed that the Critical Speed Limit, in the zone I was ticketed is actually marked at 27 mph in the graph! The notes above say that the critical speed is 37 mph.

I am not sure whether the traffic survey, without the detailed notes is sufficient? Was the law changed between 2001 and now to require more detailed notes? Is it possible that the detailed survey notes are buried somewhere in the city and were not given to me?

In the absence of the detailed notes, do I have sufficient evidence (10 mph pace of 26-36) to show that at 30 mph most of the people would be speeding (Goulet?).

 

[itsacatsworld]

You mean if everyone does 75 on a freeway then that makes it legal, 45 in a residential area with kids riding their bikes?

 

[NotACopOrLawyer]

If the accident rate is high and the engineer has written in the survey "Speed limit should be reduced to the next lower 5 mph increment (30) because of higher than average accident rate," then the 30 speed limit can be justified - except where Goulet applies.

So you need to get the portion of the survey where they indicated what the 50th percentile speed is. Usually it will be listed right next to the 85th. But if not, you can figure it out by looking at the raw data of the 100 speeds measured. The raw data (field notes) is on a graphing sheet that looks like the examples given in the CalTrans Manual, or has the same function. The CalTrans examples are at http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/traffops/signtech/mutcdsupp/pdf/CA-Chap2B.pdf
Once you go there, scroll all the way to the bottom of Chapter 2B and look at figures 2B-105 and 2B-106.

NACOL

 

[BayAreaBMWFan]

NOCAL:

There are no field notes or raw data which the city gave me.
I asked them and they said that this is all they have.

What I have is 2B-103. I do not have 2B-104 to 106.

The field notes and the cover letter do not explicitly state that the speed limit is being reduced further because of these reasons. They just state all the relevant facts.

 

[NotACopOrLawyer]

Here's your defense as I see it.

Speed trap law 40802 says there has to be a survey if radar was used (and it is not a "local" road).

VC 627 says the survey has to be conducted per CalTrans requirements.

CalTrans Manual, at section 2B-116 (in subsection of 2B-116 titled "Engineering and Traffic Surveys") says they have to show the raw data of the individual speeds of the approx. 100 cars sampled. Figs. 2B-105, 106, or something having the equivalent function should be used.

So, go to court. Ask the officer if he has a survey. He will pull out a notebook with the survey in it. It may or may not have a 2B-105, 106 or equivalent. (If public works couldn't find it for you, maybe they couldn't find it for him either.)

If the raw data isn't there, move for dismissal. Tell the judge that CalTrans requires that it be there. That if it's not there, it's a speed trap. If necessary, explain to him that the public is entitled to see the raw data so that they can determine the 50th% for a potential Goulet defense.

If the officer miraculously comes up with the raw data, ask the judge to recess your case for a few minutes, handle the next case, so that you can examine the data. Figure out what the 50th% is. Also look to see if the engineer wrote down, anywhere, his rationale for moving the limit down the extra 5 mph increment. Also check the date on the documents. If they have been revised after the date of your ticket, they are irrelevant, can't be used.

When the case starts again, if the engineer didn't write down his rationale (the officer cannot provide it verbally, it has to come from the engineer), move for dismissal.

If that didn't work, then argue that the 50th makes violators of the reasonable majority, or majority, (whichever is the case) of drivers.

If nothing has worked, throw yourself upon the mercy of the court and ask for traffic school. If I was the judge and a defendant had just done the best defense I had seen all month, I would definitely give TS to him - if the defendant had been polite, respectful, dressed nicely (no torn T shirts please).

If I was the officer and I had heard via the grapevine that the defendant was looking at the survey, preparing a good case, etc., I just wouldn't bother to show up.

NACOL

 

[BayAreaBMWFan]

I have hand delivered a letter under FOIA act to the city Public Works Department requesting all information about the survey. I have included the print outs of the relevant figures from the MUTCD. Either they do not have it or they are not giving it to me. If they not have it then I have a reasonable chance of getting out.

The street is not a local road since it is 3700 ft long and exceeds the half mile limit specified in CVC: 40802 (b)1B. There are no stop signs or traffic signals on this road except at the terminal end.

"(B) Not more than one-half of a mile of uninterrupted length. Interruptions shall include official traffic control signals as defined in Section 445."

"445. An "official traffic control signal" is any device, whether manually, electrically or mechanically operated, by which traffic is alternately directed to stop and proceed and which is erected by authority of a public body or official having jurisdiction".