HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 6.1 Speed Lmit Dublin Blvd (2)CITY OF DUBLIN
AGENDA STATEMENT
City Council Meeting Date: January 28, 1991
SUBJECT:
Public Hearing: Speed Limit on Dublin Boulevard
(Report by Public Works Director Lee Thompson)
EXHIBITS ATTACHED:
1) Draft Ordinance
2) Report from TJKM
3) Location Map
4) "Speed Trap" section of the California Vehicle
Code (CVC)
' k/ 3)
4)
5)
Open public hearing.
Receive Staff presentation and public testimony.
Question Staff and the public.
Close public hearing and deliberate.
Waive reading and ADOPT ordinance establishing
speed limits on Dublin Boulevard.
FINANCIAL STATEMENT:
Approximately $500 to post new signs and install
pavement markings. Sufficient funds are budgeted in
the Street Maintenance Operating Budget to cover this
cost.
DESCRIPTION: This is the second reading of a proposed ordinance
that was introduced at the January 14, 1991, City Council meeting. The City
recently approved annexation of the portion of Dublin Boulevard west of
Silvergate Drive. Alameda County has not established a speed limit on this
portion of Dublin Boulevard; hence, the existing speed limit is the State's
"maximum speed" or 55 mph. The City's Traffic Engineer, TJKM, has conducted a
speed survey on this portion of Dublin Boulevard for two reasons: (1) the
intention to establish a lower legal speed limit, and (2) so that radar can be
used for enforcement.
At the same time, TJKM also conducted a speed survey on Dublin Boulevard
between Donlon Way and Silvergate Drive. The adopted speed limit on the
Donlon to Silvergate portion of Dublin Boulevard is 35 mph; however,
conflicting signs and pavement markings had been insta]led which indicated
both 25 mph and 35 mph for this same section of roadway. In addition, concern
was expressed by both the City Council and some of the residents of Silvergate
Drive near the Dublin Boulevard intersection that vehicles traveling at 35 mph
or above on Dub]in Boulevard did not slow down for the sweeping curve onto
Silvergate Drive, causing a potential hazard for residents trying to back out
of driveways. The legal speed limit on Silvergate Drive itself is 25 mph.
The Dublin Boulevard speed survey results were as follows:
85th percentile
50th percentile
range
West of Donlon
41 mph 36 mph 21 - 49 mph
East of Silvergate: E/B 42 mph 36 mph
W/B 44 mph 38 mph
28 - 48 mph
27 - 48 mph
West of Silvergate: E/B 42 mph 36 mph
W/B 40 mph 35 mph
28 - 48 mph
28 - 45 mph
The 85th percentile speed is the highest speed at which 85% of the traffic
traveled during the period surveyed; in other words, west of Donlon Way, 85%
of the vehicles were traveling at 41 mph or below. The 50th percentile speed
is the highest speed at which 50% of the traffic traveled. A traffic court
ITEM NO.~
COPIES TO: TJKM
judge will typically use the 85th percentile speed as a safe or allowable
speed when reviewing a contested citation unless documentation has been
provided which justifies a lower safe speed. For this reason, a posted speed
limit which is considerably below the 85th percentile speed is generally not
enforceable and may be deemed a "speed trap" (see Exhibit 4).
TJKM recommends retaining the present 35 mph speed limit for Dublin Boulevard
westerly through the Silvergate Drive intersection. While both the 85th and
50th percentile speeds are above 35 mph, the 35 mph speed is appropriate for a
street with intersecting commercial/retail driveways and residential streets.
The westerly limit for the 35 mph speed is proposed to be defined as
"Silvergate Drive," as the present 35 mph speed extends to the old "City
Limit," which is approximately 400 feet west of Silvergate Drive.
West of Silvergate Drive, the prevailing speeds are about the same as those
between Donlon and Silvergate; however, there are no intersecting driveways at
this time other than the road to Valley Christian Center and the driveway of
the single house at the end of the street. It is therefore recommended that
the speed limit for this portion of Dublin Boulevard be set at 40 mph.
The City Council approved annexation of this portion of Dublin Boulevard in
August of 1990, and LAFCO approved the annexation in July of 1990 subject to
minor corrections being made by the applicant. Staff estimates that the
annexation will become final in approximately two months. The processing time
for an ordinance is also approximately two months. It is recommended that the
City Council take action on the ordinance at this time so that the ordinance
would become effective on the date that the annexation becomes official or
after the second reading and 30-day posting period for the ordinance have
passed, whichever is later.
Signing that is proposed to be installed would include the 25 mph curve
warning sign on the sweeping curve from Dublin Boulevard onto Silvergate Drive
(as discussed at a previous meeting) and standard 40 mph speed limit signs
west of Silvergate Drive.
Staff recommends that the City Council conduct a public hearing, deliberate,
waive the reading, and ADOPT the ordinance establishing speed limits on Dublin
Boulevard west of San Ramon Road.
-2-
ORDINANCE NO. -91
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
ESTABLISHING SPEED LIMITS ON DUBLIN BOULEVARD
The City Council of the City of Dublin does ORDAIN as follows:
Section 1.
In accordance with the provisions of Section 6.04.340 of the City of
Dublin Municipal Code, speed limits shall be established as follows:
(a) Dublin Boulevard, from Donlon Way through the Silvergate Drive
intersection: 35 miles per hour.
(b) Dublin Boulevard, from the westerly side of the Silvergate Drive
intersection to the westerly City Limit: 40 miles per hour.
Section 2.
The provisions of Section 1 shall be added to Chapter 14 of the City of
Dublin Traffic Code.
Section 3. Effective Date and Posting of Ordinance
Section l(a) shall become effective 30 days from the date of adoption of
this Ordinance. Section l(b) shall become effective 30 days from the date of
adoption of this Ordinance or upon recordation of Annexation No. 8, whichever
is later. The City Clerk of the City of Dublin shall cause this Ordinance to
be posted in at least three (3) public places in the City of Dublin in
accordance with Section 36933 of the Government Code of the State of
California.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Dublin
on this 28th day of January, 1991 by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ATTEST:
Mayor
City Clerk
MEMORANDUM
January 8, 1991
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Lee Thompson
David Othling
Chris Kinzel
Dublin Boulevard Traffic Control Improvements
This memo documents an analysis and observations supporting recommended traffic
control improvements along Dublin Boulevard between Donlon Way and the new
West City Limit in the City of Dublin. This study addresses concerns discussed at
the Traffic Safety Committee meeting on October 30th regarding whether the
existing speed control signing and striping is appropriate and adequate.
This study is based on field observations and radar speed surveys conducted at a
total of three locations on Monday, December 11, 1989 and Wednesday, November 7,
1990.
Road Description
The westbound section of Dublin Boulevard consists of one through lane from
Donlon Way through Hansen Drive. The one through lane section continues
through Silvergate Drive via a left-turn lane and continues to the new West City
Limit. The westbound speed limit is posted as 35 miles per hour (mph) on Dublin
Boulevard from east of Donlon Way until west of Hansen Drive where a
25 pavement marking exists. The 25 marking requires an accompanying sign and
supporting ordinance to legally reduce the speed limit. Since the controlling
ordinance designates 35 mph as the legal speed limit, the prevailing 35 mph legal
limit continues from west of Hansen Drive through Silvergate Drive, where Dublin
Boulevard continues to the west from a free flow left-turn lane. West of Silvergate
Drive, Dublin Boulevard westbound is unposted until the road curves to the right
and a yellow 40 mph curve warning sign is posted. This only indicates an advisory
safe speed and not a legal limit, so the prevailing 35 mph legal limit continues from
the curve to the old West City Limit, a distance of approximately 400 feet. The legal
speed limit between the old and new West City Limit is 55 mph since there is no
controlling ordinance.
4637 Chabot Ddve, Suite 214, Pleasanton, California 9z
PLEASANTON · SACRAMENTO. FRESNO. COl
Lee Thompson -2- January 8, 1991
The eastbound section of Dublin Boulevard consists of one through lane from the
new West City Limit through Silvergate Drive via a right-turn lane and widens to a
two through lane section east of Hansen Drive. This two through lane section
continues through Donlon Way. The eastbound speed limit is unposted at the new
West City Limit until the road curves to the left where a yellow 40 mph curve
warning sign is posted. This does not establish a legal speed limit, so Dublin
Boulevard effectively does not have a posted legal speed limit until Silvergate Drive,
where Dub]in Boulevard continues to the east from a STOP sign controlled
right-turn lane. East of Silvergate Drive, Dublin Boulevard eastbound is posted at
35 mph.
Observations
1. The 25 mph pavement marking on westbound Dublin Boulevard, west of
Hansen Drive is not accompanied by a speed limit sign and, therefore,
does not legally establish a 25 mph speed limit. It is also not appropriate
as Dublin Boulevard has been designated as a 35 mph road in the
vicinity.
2. The speed limit sign indicating 25 mph on Silvergate Drive is placed on
the westbound Dublin Boulevard to Silvergate Drive right curve curb
radius where sight distance is limited. This may not provide sufficient
distance for vehicles to stop or effectively reduce their speeds prior to
hidden residential driveways on Silvergate Drive.
3. The yellow 40 mph curve warning signs on Dublin Boulevard west of
Silvergate Drive are not appropriate with respect to the prevailing legal
speed of 35 mph in the vicinity and the absence of speed limit signs
between the new West City Limit and Silvergate Drive. Curve warning
signs are advisory only and need to be used in conjunction with standard
speed limit signs to indicate speed limits at or less than the prevailing
speed limit.
Speed Survey
The westbound Dublin Boulevard radar speed survey between Donlon Way and
Silvergate Drive indicated 85th percentile speeds of 41 and 44 mph approaching
Hansen Drive and Silvergate Drive. The speeds ranged from 21 to 49 mph and from
27 to 48 mph at each respective location. The westbound Dublin Boulevard radar
speed survey between Silvergate Drive and the new West City Limit indicated an
85th percentile speed of 40 mph with speeds ranging from 28 to 45 mph.
The eastbound Dublin Boulevard radar speed survey between the new West City
Limit and Silvergate Drive indicated an 85th percentile speed of 43 mph
approaching Silvergate Drive with speeds ranging from 29 to 44 mph. The
eastbound Dublin Boulevard radar speed survey between Silvergate Drive and
Donlon Way indicated 85th percentile speeds of 42 and 41 mph approaching
Hmasen Drive and Donlon Way. The speeds ranged from 28 to 48 mph and from
21 to 49 mph at each respective location.
SF'OT SPEED STUDY ANALYSIS
FOF.: THE CiTY OF DUBLIN
LOCATION
DIRECTION
DAY OF THE WEEK
DATE
TIME OF THE DAY
POSTED SF'EED LIMIT
VEHICLES OBSERVED
DUBLIN BLVD W/O DONLON WAY
BOTH
MONDAY
12/11/8'9
1:35-2:10 PM
35
121
DEVELOF'MENT
50th F'ERCENTILE SF'EED
85th PERF:ENTILE SPEED
10 MF'H F'ACE SPEED
PERCENT IN F'ACE SPEED
RANGE OF SPEEDS
SKEWNESS INDEX
COMM
36
41
30 TO 39
64
21 TO 4'9
0.93
SPEED
( MF'H )
21
24
26
27
28
2'3
30
31
0
34
35
36
37
38
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
53
54
56
57
5'~
6'.]
61
NUM-
BEE'.
2
2
2
2
0
0
3
7
6
4
5
6
5
14
8
9
7
14
6
4
6
1
2
t
()
(.
()
)
()
CUMULATIVE SPEED CURVE
F' E F.: C N T.
OF TOT. 100% 4
CUMUL.
F'RCNT.
1.65 1.65
0.00 l. 65
1.65 3.3I
1.65 4.96 90%
1.65 6.61
0.00 6. 61
0.00 6.61
2.4 S 9.09 80 %
5.7'3 lq. 88
4. '36 19.83
3. Jl =o. 14
4. 13 27.27 70%
4.96 o.~, -~, ~-
4. 13 36.36
11.57 47,93
6.61 54.55 60%
7.44 61. '38
5.79 67.77
11.57 7'3.34
4.96 84 ~' JU,.
3.31 87,60
4.96 95.04
0.83 95.87 40%
1.65 97, 52
0.~3 99. 17 30%
0. ,.},:} 100.00
0.00 100.00
O. O0 100. O0 20%
0.00 100.00
0. O0 100.00
0.00 100.00
0.00 100.00 10%
0.00 100.00
O. (] 0 100. 00
0. O0 100.00
0. O0 100.00 0%
O. O0 10':). O0
0 10 2:0
30 40 0
SPEED ( MPH )
+
70
FOR THE C:ITY OF DUI'~L. ID.I
LOCAT I ON
D I RECT I ON
DAY OF THE 14EEK
DATE
TIME OF ]"HE DAY
POSTI=D,-) r"-' r" c'_ ._~..='n L ! FI I. T
VEHI CLr:S OBS[EF~:VED
DUBLIN BI_, W/'O !?.ILVtEF;:GATE
EASTBOUND
U.IEDIqESDAY
11 ,' 07 /90
I) EVELOF:'HEI"-IT
50th PEP. CENTILE .~FEED
S5th PERCENTILE SPEED
lO F'IPH F'ACE SPEED
F'ERCENT IN F'ACE SPEED
RANGE OF- SF'EEDS
...; .... i ,. :c. :. X
;_ k. EWI .I ...~,..~ I I',.ID E
R E S I Ii}, E ~',I T I A L
38
43
a~ TO 44
82
:,':.' 9 T 0 44
:L. O0
l.J I"11J L..
I.-'[u....N, .
2.94
5
'.5
4. '7 1
7 ~. 47
7??,. 47
,.}0. :}">
(-) ("i Fi/"~
00. C. C,
00.0
O0.00
:];. 0.0
':} 0.
00.
OC,
00 0(')
O0
O0 O0
00
;::,'"~ 0,.}
,::) 0
O0. (.),: I
00. ,:}
,.) :;.)
C' 0.
00. }(.'
.} C,. (),:
70%
".¢_, 0 %
5 ':} %
40 %
10 .'.'
0 %
_ .DU 60 70
0 1 Q :/f 0 230 40 "- '
5t::'!!~F D ,:. HF:'H )
..~, ~._, T SF'IE F D "'?'"
FFIF. THE (.':ITY OF DUBI..IN
LOCA'I' Z 01'4
D I REK:T I 01',1
DAY [)F THE WEEK
DATE
'T IMf: OF THE
POSTI::D SF'[£1i.{D LIMIT
VEI--t!CLES OBSERVED
DUBLIN BL. E/O SII_'21SEGA"'F
EASTBOUI~ I}
11 / C:'7/90
12: ':)5- 12: S: I::' P"l
5C)
DEVEL. OPHEI'qT
5CItla F:'EF4:I-:IENT II...E SPEED
85tin F:'ERE:[k-I',I'T'I L.E SF'EEI}
:tO HF'H F'ACE SPEED
F'[EF::CEhlT IN F'ACE SF'ErED
I:;.'.AI,IGE 13F' ""-'--
!SF:tk:NI'.IESS I NDFX
NES I DEI',IT I AL
36
42
";":' TO ~ ~
64
23 TO 4S
1. CI 7
SPEED Ix. lt-.IM-"
(MF'H) BfER
....u 2
· :], ,ri
3 0 3
.:., :1. 'S
~ ~2, ..2,
36 5
3 7 2
39 2
4 0 3
41 2
42 3
4,4
,: ,'-',:fi ':';~
.4-9 0
50
r_-.-,
[53
~= ,:-4
iS 0
;£ '[
G_, :2
6 5 0
d:., (5
6 ;.3
f_': U 1"1L L A T 7[ VIE ?, F' E E D C U F:: V E
4.00
6. O0
6.0C,
(.5. O0
2. O0
6.0 0
4. C)C)
6.00
14. OC; 4. O0
G. O0
4. '.)0
0. O0
O. 00
,:D. 00
C). O0
O. oO
("). (_)%;
C.'.
O. :'-)()
O. ,:D 0
(). 00
FOR THE L.i F~- (IF" U,L,:LIN
LO...HI ION
DIRISCTION
DAY' OF 'THE WEEK
DATE
TIME OF THE DA','
POSTI~D oFE~ LIMIT
~ Ir"'[ ~ 5 OBoEE. vEI
,EH _._ES -']'- "'- '~
I}UE':L;[I"I BL. E/Q ~-..~..',,:-'.. ~' :
- ~ a- q I '.
L. II:_,.:, , ,: C)L.I ID
WEDNESDA",'
11 / 07 ," ,:z~ 0
12: ('-I 5-! 2: 30 F:' M
I.. I::.. v ELOI- i'lEl,l T
',.SOt h PEF.:E:IEI"IT I LE SPEED
,=,_,i:;h I:'EI:q:CENTILE SPEED
10 MF'H F'ACE SF'EED
r-I.::F.:.L. EI'-I r ]: i',1 F'ACIE SF'EED
l-.-.ml,l :lE 0}:- SF'I_-_'EDS
,:~ '... c ~- .... i ~ !5 I lxl D E X
SF'EED
( M F' Ft )
· '7_' '::j
3 ,:}
,~i
3S
,Z~22
4 2
43
4 4
,4 7
4 9
,-~ L]
5 6,
C. i
!::3 4
('], ,j
I.E, ];
NUM ....
BER
1
2
2:
2
3
4
5
3
3
1
()
(.
,:]
'7
,::
(
()
()
()
CUMLILATIVE SPIELED I]:UIi:VE
CUMUI_.
2.0 0
2 ?... t'. ()
3,4. ,:} 0
4'2. O0
9 ~. C, 0
100.00
1F,p,. O0
1 9 Q. O O
1 Q O. 00
10':}. O0
100. ,30
100.00
i 00 .. 00
l 00.00
t O O. 00
I. 00. O0
L O0.
I (-)0 · O0
! 00 %
9 0 %
'7 0 'Y
iS ,:} %
,4 0 %
72'.J 7'~
I
L. 0 i.-.: A T I 0 I',.I
D I I:tECT :[ O I',.I
DAY OF THIE WEEI<
D~-~ 'FE
TIME OF' THE D~Y
POS-I'ED SPIELED L_INI'F
VEHIC:LES OBSEIq:;.'ED
DEVEL_OF'HEEI'q"F
5 0 t h F' E F;: C E N'F I L E S F:' IE E D
33 5'lc h F' E F;: C E I',.I"F I L_ E S F' E E D
LO MF'H F'ACE SF'EED
I::'ERCEFIT IN PACE SPEED
RANGE OF SPEEDS
'.BKEWIxlESS INDEX
DENT I AL
S T 0,-,':'-7,
'-"-' TO 45
II ,MUI_- IVE SPEED F:UIq:VE
F' E F:: C N T'.
C) F' i!:)'T.
':= 7:1.
5.71
:L i. 4 3
! 7. 1 4
2. S6
()...) 0
0., O0
2 ~.-, r:
0 · C 0
< , .; 0
].. 0"'-"
,.]:,. O0
:_'...} 0
:). O0
,.2.
O. 0,:)
,;), ,:} 0
O. O0
0.0 C,
O. O0
O. 0(_'~
0.0 0
10,:Zl%
7 (3 % .......
0%
.;-:..ii.
.~:F
.~..?
.!4.
'i.~'
· h~- ',
?i-l
-? .~ .? ~ .~ .ie ~. + ¢~..~ ~ .~ ~ .~ ............................... +
0 10 'izt) 30 40 50 GO 70
;:F I:E:D (MF:'H)
~e arresting
itten notice
:ion and to
~fficer may i!,
)n shall h/
~lo~g lng:. ?
orrect the
exist, the
,le, and the
: to correct
~n addition
t/on, sha~
. and proof
We fee for
olation f~r
~se.
use.
delivered
ifieate of
loc.
3rreet or
tilty of a
,n by an
e alleged
trifled as
violation
~r 20.3 of
).2.
:ified as
: deputy
~rtment,
:cement
Div. 17 -- 799 -- § 40802
~l~ed Notice as C~ 'iht .
40618. Whenever proof of correction of violation is not received by the
· ing agency in. accordance ;yith Section 40610, the issuing agency may
~ver the_signed p. romise to the court having jurisdiction of the violation
d~'th a certification t~a,t no proof 9f correction has been received. If prepared
on a form approve, a oy the Judicial Council, the promise under Section
.1~610, together with the certification under this section, shall constitute a
complaint to which the defendant may enter a plea, and upon xvhieh a
warrant may be issued if the complaint is verified.
Added Ch. 1350, Stats. 1978. Operative July 1, 1979.
CHAPTER 2.5. ADMINISTRATIVE ADJUDICATION OF
TRAFFIC SAFETY VIOLATIONS
(Added Ch. 722, Stats. 1978. Effective January 1, 1979)
(Repealed Ch. 722, Stats. 1978. Operative July 1, 1984}
(Repealed Ch. 1116, Stats. 198,3. Operative July 1, 1985)
CHAPTER 3. ILLEGAL EVIDENCE
Article 1. Prosecutions Under Code
Vehicle and Uniform Used by Officers
40800. Every traffic officer on duty for the exclusive or main purpose of
enforcing the provisions of Division 10 or 11 of this code shall xvear a full
distinctive uniform, and if the officer while so on duty uses a motor vehicle,
it must be painted a distinctive color specified by the commissioner.
This section does not apply to an officer assigned exclusively to the duty
of investigating and securing evidence in reference to any theft of a vehicle
or failure of a person to stop in the event of an accident or violation of Section
2.3109 or in re!erence to any felony charge, or to any officer engaged in
serving any x~arrant when the officer is not engaged in patrolling the
highxvays for the purpose of enforcing the traffic la,vs.
Amended Ch. 202, Stats. 1961. Effective September 15, 1961.
Speed Dap Prohibition
40801. No peace officer or other person shall use a speed trap in arresting,
or participating or assisting in the arrest of, any person for any alleged
violation of this code nor shall any speed trap be used in securing evidence
as to the speed of any vehicle for the purpose of an arrest or prosecution
under this code.
Speed Trap
40802. A "speed trap" is either of the folloxving:
(a) A particular section of a highway measured as to distance and with
boundaries marked, designated, or otherwise determined in order that the
speed of a vehicle may be calculated by securing the time it takes the vehicle
to travel the known distance.
(b) A particular section of a highway with a prima facie speed limit
providedby this code or by local ordinance pursuant to paragraph (1) of
subdivision (b) of Section 2235~, or established pursuant to Section 29354,
22357, 22358, or 22358.3, which speed llmit is not justified by an engineering
and traffic survey conducted within fi~ e !jea[s prior to the date of the alleged
violation, and where enforcement ira oNes the use of radar or other
electronic devices which measure the speed of moving objects. The
provisions of this subdivision do not apply to local streets and roads.
For purposes of this section, local streets and roads shall be defined by the
latest tuncti0nal usage and federal-aid system maps as submitted to the
Federal Highxvay Administration. When these maps have not been
submitted, the following definition shall be used: A local street or road
orimarily provides access to abutting residential property and shall meet the
llowing three conditions:
(1) Roadway ~vidth of not more than 40 feet.
§ 40802 -- 8o0 Div. 17
(2) Not more than one-half mile of uninterrupted length. Interruptions
shall include official traffic control devices tis defined in Section 445.
(3) Not more than one traffic lane in each direction.
This section shall remain in effect only until January 1, 1993, and as of that
date is repealed, unless a later enacted statute, ~vhich is enacted before
January 1, 1993, deletes or extends that date.
Amended Ch. 1346, Stats. 1972. Effective iMareh 7, INa.
Amended Ch. 203, Stats. 1973. Effective Jul. 9, 1973, by terms of an urgency clause.
Amended Ch. 1210, Stats. 1978. Effective January 1, 1979.
Repealed Ch. 1210, Stats. 1978. Operative January 1, 1982.
Amended Ch. 357, Stats. 1981. Effective January 1, 1982.
P. epealed Ch. 357, Stats. 1981. Operative January 1, 1987.
Ameuded Ch. 833, Stats. 1986. Effective January 1, 1987.
NOTE: This section remains in effect only until January 1, 1993, at which time
it is repealed and the following section becomes effective.
40802. A "speed trap" is either of the follo~ving:
(a) A particular section of a highway measured as to distance and with
boundaries marked, designated, or otherwise determined in order that the
speed ora vehicle may be calculated by securing the time it takes the vehicle
to travel the known distance.
(b) A particular section of a highway with a prima faeie speed limit
provided by' this code or by local ordinance pursuant to paragraph (1) of
subdMsion (b) of Section 22352, or established pursuant to Section 22354,
22357, 22358, or 9_2358.3, which speed limlt is not justifi,ed by au engineering
and traffic survey conducted within five } ears prior to the d~ite of the alleged
violation, and where enforcement involves the use of radar or other
electronic devices ~vhich measure the speed of moving objects.
'This section shall become operative on January 1, 1993.
Amended Ch. 357, Stats. 1981. Operative January 1, 1987.
Amended Ch. &33, Stats. 1986. Etfective January 1, 1987.
Speed Trap Evidence
40803. (a) No evidence as to the speed ora vehicle upon a highway shall
be admitted in any court upon the trial of an),' person for au alleged violation
of this code when the evidence is based upon or obtained from or by the
maintenance or use of a speed trap.
(b) In any prosecution under this code of a charge invoMng the speed
of a vehicle, ~vhere enforcement involves the use of radar or other electronic
devices which measure the speed of moving objects, the prosecution shall
establish, as part of its prima facie case, that the evidence or testimony
presented is not based upon a speed trap its defined in subdivision (b) of
Section 40802. Evidence that a trafi'ie and engineering survey has been
conducted within [:ive years of the date of the alleged violation or evidence
that the offense was ~oinmitted on a local street or road as defined in
subdivision (b) of Section 40802 shall constitute a prima faeie case that tile
evidence or testimony is not based upon a speed trap as defined in
subdivision (b) of Section
An~ended Ch. 357, Stats. 1981. Effective January 1, 1982.
Testimony Based on Speed Trap
40804. (a) In any prosecution under this code upon ,a charge invoMn~
the speed of a vehicle, any officer or other person shall be incompetent
a witness if the testimony is based upon or obtaiued fi'om or by the
maintenance or use of a speed trap.
(b) Every officer arresting, or participating or assisting iii the arrest of, a
person so charged while on duly for tile exclusive or main purpose of
enforcing the provisions of Divisions 10 and 11 is incompetent as a witne~
if at the time of such arrest he was not wearing a distinctive uniform, or wa5
using a motor vehicle not painted the distinctive color specified by thc
cmnmissioner.
Div. 17
~. Interruptions
etlon 445.
3, and as of that
enacted before
toy clause.
73, at which time
istance and with
in order that the
takes the vehicle
'acie speed limit
paragraph (1) of
to Section 9.2354,
y an engineerin~
.ate of the allesec~
!radar or other
bjeets.
>n a highway shall
alleged violation
ed from or by the
volving the speed
or other electromC
~, prosecution shall
mee or testimony
subdivision (b) of
; survey has been
flatten or evidence
· oad as defined in
faeie case that the
rap as defined in
a charge involving
be incompetent as.
~d from or by th~
~ in the arrest of,
,;g main purp°.s.e e~ '"':';'
~petent as a w~m,
rive uniform,fi,r, ~e
or specified lo)
Div. 17 -- -- § 40831
This section does not apply to an officer assigned exclusively to the duty
of investigating and securing evidence in reference to any theft of a vehicle
or failure of a person to stop in the event of an accident or violation of Section
23109 or in reference to any felony charge or to any officer engaged in
serving any warrant when the officer is not engaged in patrolling the
highways for the purpose of enforcing the traffic laws.
Amended Ch. 58, Stats. 1961. Effective September 15, 1961.
Amended Ch. 84, Stats. 1978. Effective January 1, 1979.
Admission of Speed Trap Evidence
40805. Every court shall be without jurisdiction to render a judgment of
conviction against any personfor a violation of this code involving the speed
of a vehicle ff the court admits any evidence or testimony secured in
violation of, or which is inadmissible under this article.
Po~lee Reports
408013. In the event a defendant charged with an offense under this code
pleads guilty, the trial court shall not at any time prior to pronouncing
sentence receive or consider any report, verbal or written, of any police or
traffic officer or ;vitness of the offense without fully informing the defendant
of all statements in the report or statement of witnesses, or without giving
the defendant an opportunity to make ans;ver thereto or to produce
;vitnesses in rebuttal, and for suet purpose the court shall grant a
continuance before pronouncing sentence if requested by the defendant.
U~e of Evidence Regarding Departmental Action
40807. No record of any action taken by the department against a
person's privilege to operate a motor vehicle, nor any testimony regarding
the proceedings at, or concerning, or produced at, any hearing held in
connection with such action, shall be admissible as evidence in any court in
any criminal action.
No provision of this section shall in any way limit the admissibility of such
records or testimony as is necessary to enforce theprovis, ions of this code
relating to operating a motor vehicle without a valid driver s license or when
the driving privilege is suspended or revoked, the admissibility of such
records or testimony in any prosecution for failure to disclose any matter at
such a hearing ~vhen required by laxv to do so, or the admissibility of such
records and testimony when introduced solely for the purpose of
impeaching the credibility of a witness.
Added Ch. 804, Stats. 19'/7. Effective January 1, 1978.
Article 2. Civil Actions
Effect of Convictions
40830. In either of the following circnmstances a violation of any
provision of this code does not establish negligence as a matter of law, but
in any civil action under either of the circumstances negligence must be
proved as'a fact without regard to the violation. The circumstances under
which this section applies are either:
(a) Where violation of the provision xvas required by a laxv of the federal
t~vernment or by any rule, regulation, directive or order of any agency of
e federal government, the violation of which is subject to penalty under
an act of Congress or by any valid order of military authority.
(b) Where violation of the provision was required in order to comply with
*.ny regulation, directive, or order of the Governor promulgated under the
California Emergency Services Act.
~.Amended Ch. 438, Stats. 1971. Operative May 3, 1972.
o,.t Speed Con. v/chon. ' ss of an rima facie limit
. 4(B31 In any c~val action proof of sveed ~n exce y p . . .
ck~elared in Section 2.9.35g at a partieu'lar time and place does not establish
negligence as a matter of law but in all such actions it shall be necessary to