San Rafael staff propose 20 mph downtown zone under AB 43; committee asked for feedback

City staff and a traffic consultant presented a plan to establish a 20‑mile‑per‑hour speed‑limit zone in downtown San Rafael under Assembly Bill 43 and asked the Police Advisory and Accountability Committee (PAC) for feedback.

The plan, presented by Lynn, a junior engineer for the city, and Jimmy Jessup, an engineer with Parametrix, uses engineering and traffic survey data and AB 43 criteria to recommend most downtown segments be posted at 20 mph. Second and Third streets would remain at 25 mph in the draft; one segment currently signed at 35 mph is proposed to be reduced to 30 mph.

City staff said the work builds on the city’s Local Road Safety Plan and the downtown precise plan. The next steps outlined were: refine the draft map after public input, present an ordinance to the City Council to adopt the reduced speed limits as required by AB 43, install signs and striping, run a 30‑day trial period, and monitor speeds and crash trends for effectiveness.

Parametrix explained the technical basis: California traffic law uses engineering and traffic surveys that measure prevailing travel speeds and the 85th‑percentile (the speed at or below which 85 percent of measured vehicles travel). Under AB 43, surveys must additionally consider vulnerable road users and local conditions; cities now have more authority to set speed limits than before. Jimmy Jessup said the team evaluated each roadway segment against AB 43 provisions including land use, pedestrian activity, proximity to senior centers and schools, crash history, and planned infrastructure projects.

The presentation proposed a downtown 20 mph zone but kept specific corridors at higher limits where prevailing speeds or land‑use factors did not meet AB 43 thresholds for a 20 mph posting. "Not all downtown roadways are proposed to be posted at 20 miles an hour," Jessup said. "Second and Third, in particular, would retain their current 25 mile an hour speed limit." Joanna, assistant public works director, said the city plans outreach and a monitoring plan so changes could be expanded citywide after evaluation.

Committee members and public commenters pressed for more local data and for equity and outreach measures. Member Minh Bayon asked for pre/post crash and speed comparisons at targeted locations; Jimmy Jessup said the team is drawing on the Local Road Safety Plan’s crash analysis and will compare measured speeds before and after implementation. Resident Justin Solubai asked the project team to overlay crash severity (property damage only, injury, fatality) on the draft map; Jessup and staff said the existing safety plan contains those data and that crash history alone did not guarantee a 20 mph posting if prevailing speeds measured too high.

Several PAC members and public speakers asked how reduced limits would affect travel time and traffic flow. Jessup said published studies and the project’s experience show travel time in urban areas is driven mainly by intersection delays rather than inter‑block speed limits, and that lowering limits typically reduces speeds and crash severity without materially increasing travel time.

Members also raised implementation questions: how signage and public education will be handled, whether outreach materials and the survey will be available in Spanish and other languages, and whether measures will be extended to school areas and the Canal neighborhood. Joanna said outreach materials will be translated and the city will coordinate with neighborhood organizations. Staff said the draft will be adjusted based on input and then brought to City Council for an ordinance, with implementation planned in the spring/summer period and follow‑up monitoring.

Public commenters suggested alternatives including a citywide 25 mph standard for high‑impact corridors and prioritizing schools and residential areas for 20 mph. The committee asked staff to record feedback and bring it forward to the council presentation.

No formal PAC vote was recorded on the AB 43 draft at this meeting; staff and the consultant will incorporate the committee’s feedback before presenting an ordinance to City Council.