California 22350 VC, 73 in 55

[EWYLTJ]

Is that all of the survey? I didn't see anything that even attempted to justify the speed limit. If the 85th percentile is 63, the justified limit is 65. With nothing to justify a 10mph reduction, the limit is not justified.

[zaqweewqaz]

Is that all of the survey? I didn't see anything that even attempted to justify the speed limit. If the 85th percentile is 63, the justified limit is 65. With nothing to justify a 10mph reduction, the limit is not justified.

there is, but i didnt make a copy

the justification was because its a 2 lane part of the way.

[EWYLTJ]

well that is no justification at all. I'd definitely pursue the speed trap defense.

[zaqweewqaz]

I have a question before sending out any letters. By pleading not guilty does it release my rights to traffic school?

I read it somewhere that by PLEADING NOT GUILTY doesnt mean you waive the rights to traffic school.

however, when i talked to the CLERK, she said you release the rights if you plead not guilty. Any advice?

[EWYLTJ]

I have a question before sending out any letters. By pleading not guilty does it release my rights to traffic school?

I read it somewhere that by PLEADING NOT GUILTY doesnt mean you waive the rights to traffic school.

however, when i talked to the CLERK, she said you release the rights if you plead not guilty. Any advice?

Your clerk, like most clerks, is an idiot. To the contrary, the case law makes it clear that the court must give you the SAME consideration for traffic school after a conviction as it would before. However, the law also leaves traffic school to the discretion of the judge and he doesn't have to say why he decided either way. So, the question is: do you think your judge will obey the law, or will he violate the law simply because he can get away with it?

[sniper]

What I don't see in the survey is anything in it about the accident rate. It's a Cal-Trans survey. I'm sure it's in there. Anything else about intersecting roadways and private driveways. I would have to say there would have to be something elso other than 2 lane part of the way to reduce it. Curves, grades etc?

[EWYLTJ]

What I don't see in the survey is anything in it about the accident rate. It's a Cal-Trans survey. I'm sure it's in there. Anything else about intersecting roadways and private driveways. I would have to say there would have to be something elso other than 2 lane part of the way to reduce it. Curves, grades etc?

Curves and grades would be specifically excluded from reducing the speed limit, but you should see if there is a memo to the district director from the traffic engineer containing justification of a reduced speed limit.

[zaqweewqaz]

I have extended my case to April 18th. While doing more research, I have found this site:
http://www.sandiegotraffictickets.com/

If i go to court myself, I will lose a LOT of money (not working). Do you guys know if they are legit?

[zaqweewqaz]

I just got back from caltran and made copies of their jusdification:

"Two access points used by commerical trucksa re situated at the lower right portion of the grade in the southbound direction. Descending vehicles at speed of more than 55 mph will require a longer braking distance to accommodate crossing and merging traffic.

Futhermore, there is no dedicated southbound right turn pocket for either of the two access points. SR-67 vertical profile at the first commerical driveway is approximately -7%. Descending vhicles turning right into this driveway must slowdown in the right through lane and negotiate a turn with a reverse superlevation.

Increasing the statutory speed limit to 65 mph is neither reasonable nor prudent on long steep grades"

However, it also states:

"Since the study segment is 13.5 miles long and anyone spot speed survey cannot be justified to represent the entire study segment, the calculated average of all crtical speeds was selected to represent the entire study segment. The average crtical speed is 60mph"

[EWYLTJ]

Dude... that is one jacked up survey. Maybe you should read this:

22358.5. It is the intent of the Legislature that physical
conditions such as width, curvature, grade and surface conditions, or
any other condition readily apparent to a driver, in the absence of
other factors, would not require special downward speed zoning, as
the basic rule of section 22350 is sufficient regulation as to such
conditions.

And this from the MUTCD:

A location should be selected where prevailing speeds are representative of the entire speed zone
section. If speeds vary on a given route, more than one speed zone section may be required, with
separate measurements for each section. Locations for measurements should be chosen so as to
minimize the effects of traffic signals or stop signs.

This statement:

"Since the study segment is 13.5 miles long and anyone spot speed survey cannot be justified to represent the entire study segment, the calculated average of all crtical speeds was selected to represent the entire study segment. The average crtical speed is 60mph"

Makes about as much sense as saying a man can put one hand in ice water and the other hand in boiling water and statisticly he is comfortable!!!!