|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
Menlo Park council should not make speed limits artificially low
The Almanac just published an article about reducing speed limits on arterial streets in Menlo Park (“ Slow down: Menlo Park plans to lower speed limits on key streets,” July 15). This would be a violation of the California Vehicle code section 40802(a)(2).
California state vehicle code does not permit enforcement of artificially low speed limits, since they are legally considered speed traps. Regardless of the posted speed limit sign, on most non-local streets (such as Santa Cruz Avenue and Bay Road), the posted speed limit cannot be enforced unless it is supported by a properly-administered speed survey. A legally acceptable survey measures the speed at which cars flow when there are no other cars impeding them. The enforceable speed limit is the speed at which 85% of the cars are traveling below that speed.
Example: Santa Cruz Avenue has a posted speed limit of 25 mph, but 85% or more of the unimpeded cars travel at 36 mph, so the enforceable speed limit is 36 mph.
During the COVID lockdown when there was almost zero traffic, I measured the speed of unimpeded cars on Santa Cruz Avenue. Almost everyone was going 35-40 mph, with an 85% speed of 37 mph. Posting such a street at 25 mph would be creating a speed trap, and would be unenforceable. The speed surveys that the city has performed do not meet state requirements of only using the speed of unimpeded vehicles.
Section 40802 (a)(2) of the California Vehicle Code defines a speed trap. You can read it at tinyurl.com/ca-vc-speed.
I hope that our City Council does not decide to spend taxpayer money studying, and posting, artificially low, unenforceable speed limits.
Sue Kayton
Doris Drive, Menlo Park
Governor should go about gun control the right way
While I am definitely in favor of gun control, I am horrified that Gov. Gavin Newsom would suggest an Article V Constitution Convention as a solution.
Once such a convention convenes, its agenda is wide open. An Article V Constitutional Convention is certain to cause extraordinary damage to our nation from the radical right which is trying to do the same thing in order to embed Libertarian principles into the U.S. Constitution and weaken the ability of Congress to represent the citizens. The Koch network is spending millions of dollars to obtain just such an Article V convention in order to rewrite the Constitution to include their anti-democracy business-biased ideology.
The correct way to accomplish such a constitutional amendment is by way of a specific gun control amendment in Congress. I understand that is difficult with today’s Republican control of the House of Representatives, but the harm to our nation that would result from a wide-open Article V convention far, far outweighs any good that might, but is not guaranteed to, result from gun control accomplished by that route.
Gov. Newsom, stop your Article V effort now lest you magnify our problems. Let’s accomplish gun control but do it the right way, even if it takes longer.
Don Barnby
Spruce Avenue, Menlo Park
How to combat sea level rise
Even without man’s CO2 emissions, the ocean is projected to rise 12.8 feet by the year 2100, according to the EPA. Man’s emissions would increase it 19.2 feet. It comes down to whether we build a 13-foot or 19-foot high wall in the next 80 years or move back to higher ground. Even if the world went all green tomorrow, we’d still have the natural warmings that have caused the planet to warm every 1,000 years going back to the Medieval, Roman, Minoan and other warmings.
The only way to reduce man’s emissions is to develop inexpensive green energy that will drive out fossil fuel use. We can do this inexpensively today by making hydrogen with solar and wind for energy even when there is no sun or wind. It would tide us over to affordable batteries, fuel cells, and eventually fusion power, which is the power of the sun.
Ed Kahl
Whiskey Hill Road, Woodside
Most Popular
Reported ICE arrest occurs blocks from Redwood City’s DÃa de los MuertosNovember 9, 2026 10:50 am
Don,
I would argue that we really don’t need any more gun control laws. If you look at the laws already in California they are quite extensive, the problem is enforcement, prosecution and consequences. My favorite example happened a couple years ago where a convicted felon robbed a couple at gunpoint in Redwood City. He pistol whipped one person and tore off a gold chain. He was caught shortly after and still had the handgun and the chain as well as other personal property taken from the victims. I think the expression is “Caught Red Handed”. Now you would think that he would be tried and convicted of several serious crimes including a felon in possession of a loaded firearm, Using a firearm in the commission of a felony causing injury, armed robbery, etc. That should amount to serious jail time, right? Nope, the San Mateo DA, who claims to be tough on crime and wants more gun laws, decided to plea bargain it down to time served in county jail (about a year if I remember correctly) and that was that.
I think instead of more legislation we demand out District Attorneys not plea bargain any felony gun crimes or if they do they have a hard limit of 1/2 the maximum sentence for those crimes. Maybe they can do something real instead of just looking for the spotlight to enact more laws that will be on the books but won’t affect the criminals…
In response to Sue Kayton’s letter to the editor – I looked up California state law and it sets speed limits on residential streets at 25 miles per hour. MP might be agreeing with state law in posting the speed limits proposed. I wonder if that is a speed trap after all.
I find it interesting that FB ,Meta has built and is building millions of square feet of new office space, hotels, parks, housing and retail in an area literally a few feet above Sea Level. My guess is they are hiring the best Engineers in the business with much forethought and calculations for the same. What they are building now will be with the intent of lasting many decades to come. With no walls being planned. So let’s look at it, if the Sea Level will rise 13-19 feet by 2100, It will rise gradually not 13 feet in one day. So someone do the calculations, will it rise 3 feet by 2035 or 5 feet by 2060, pick a number but realize even 3 feet will inundate their campus. My money is on their engineers not random speculation. We have been hearing for the last 50 years we will all be underwater by now, 2023
And here we are 50 years later and no one is underwater. No, the sky is not falling.
However if you really want to do something about greenhouse emissions, Force China into the discussion. They are building new coal-powered plants at the rate of one a week. While we are closing down coal and nuclear plants without the infrastructure to replace that energy.
RE: lowering speed limits. Sue is indeed correct that changing the speed limit has been difficult because of the 85th percentile rule. However, the state passed AB 43 in 2021, which allows roads that are “designated as a safety corridor, or adjacent to land uses that generate a high concentration of pedestrians or bicyclists” to have their speed reduced an additional 5 mph, and business districts can have speed limits of 25 or 20 mph.
This means those roads that are currently at 30 mph (as a result of the 85th percentile) can go down to 25 mph AND that speed limit can be enforced.
This info is in the staff report, which also notes that “in recent years, a growing body of research has demonstrated that reducing speed limits can have a measurable safety benefit,” and cites these examples:
• In Boston, Massachusetts, the City reduced speed limits citywide to 25 mph. Research by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety showed, relative to comparison cities that did not adjust their speed limits, vehicles traveling over 35 mph fell by almost 30%, speeds between 30 and 35 mph fell by over 8%, and speeds between 25 and 30 mph fell by almost 3%.
• In Toronto, Canada, a quasi-experimental study of reducing speed limits by 10 kilometers per hour (approximately 6 mph) showed a reduction in pedestrian-motor vehicle collisions of 28%, including a 67% reduction in fatal and serious injury collisions.
• In Seattle, Washington, speed limits were reduced from 30 to 25 mph on a set of streets, yielding over 20% reduction in collisions and 18% reduction in injury collisions. Overall speeds dropped between 7 and 10%, including over 50% reduction in excessive speeds (over 40 mph).
I’m glad that city staff are responding to changes in the laws so that everyone can get around town more safely.