Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Traffic Safety topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Eureka staff recommend targeted speed reductions after radar speed survey
Summary
City staff presented a radar speed survey using 80th‑percentile methodology and recommended speed reductions on four local segments; staff asked the council to receive and adopt the radar speed‑zone report and outlined opportunities under Assembly Bill 43 and engineering measures to improve safety.
City traffic staff presented the results of a radar speed survey and an engineering and traffic report recommending targeted speed‑limit adjustments and continued engineering interventions to improve safety.
Project manager Jay Woldebore reviewed the legal and technical framework for setting speeds under the California Vehicle Code and the California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices, explaining that the measured 80th‑percentile speed is the starting point and may be adjusted by up to 5 mph based on collision history and roadside conditions (SEG 1690–1760). Woldebore said the 2024 survey found 603 segments where posted limits can remain and identified four local segments recommended for reductions to improve consistency and safety.
He itemized the proposed reductions: Fairfield (between Wabash and Harris) from 30 to 25 mph; McCollum’s Avenue (Broadway to Glen) from 30 to 25; Myrtle Avenue (West to Harris) from 35 to 30; and several residential stretches (Central/Harris→South) from 30 to 25 (SEG 1789–1801). Staff told council that about 10 signs would need replacement at an estimated material cost of roughly $250 each and recommended that council receive and adopt the radar speed‑zone report (SEG 1842–1845).
Council and staff discussed the constraints and opportunities created by Assembly Bill 43 and Vehicle Code provisions that limit repeated reductions at the same locations; staff encouraged combining speed‑limit adjustments with engineering measures such as bulb‑outs, lane reductions and quick‑build projects to slow speeds in neighborhoods (SEG 1896–1916; SEG 2168–2176).
The council received the report; staff described next steps including coordination with Caltrans for state‑controlled corridors and continuing neighborhood street pilots and quick‑build calming projects.
Ending: Staff recommended adoption of the radar speed‑zone report and follow‑up engineering work; no binding rezoning of posted limits was recorded in this meeting’s minutes beyond receiving the report.
