US-101: Speed Limit reduced King City to San Miguel

[michravera]

I just completed a trip from my home in the Bay Area to our favorite resort in San Luis Obispo county. It seems that the speed limit south of King City to San Miguel which had been 70 MPH for cars has been reduced to 65MPH. Does anyone know the authority under which this was done? Did someone at CalTrans after nearly 30 years suddenly discover (as they did within a year or so with a section of CASR-58) that it wasn't freeway? Was a survey conducted? Where would I find this?

[cl94]

Caltrans lowered the limit after a safety review. The stretch in question had seen an increased number of injury crashes in recent years, as well as a disproportionate number of 100+ MPH tickets.

https://www.ksby.com/news/local-news/caltrans-to-reduce-highway-101-speed-limit-north-of-san-miguel

[hotdogPi]

Reducing the speed limit from 70 to 65 isn't going to stop people from going 100, since they're obviously ignoring the limit to begin with...

[Max Rockatansky]

Safety types don't seem to understand the concept that people who go over 100 ignore signs.

[ClassicHasClass]

It's definitely reduced the attractiveness of the coast route when I need to be in the south Bay Area. That said, I haven't seen increased enforcement over that stretch since the change.

[hotdogPi]

Just wondering: is there a way to design curves/barriers/anything where people going 100 would be safely removed from the road while not affecting those going 80 or less? I'm imagining a curve where anyone who can't turn tightly enough is forced to the outside and essentially takes a runaway truck ramp-type straight line off the road. Two things must be essential: 1. the people in the car that was affected don't get hurt, and 2. does not affect anyone (not even 1 in 10000) going a reasonable speed.

[Max Rockatansky]

Got me, none of this struck me as much of a problem to begin with.  You can't stop people from full on tempting Darwinism in remote areas like that usually.  5 and 99 run at similar speeds when they are wide open to traffic also.

[michravera]

Reducing the speed limit from 70 to 65 isn't going to stop people from going 100, since they're obviously ignoring the limit to begin with...

I had RCC set for 78MPH and passed a CHP CAR, not a truck, who didn't even blink. If what I've now read on this forum is to be believed, (and it would seem that cl94 knows about what they write), I now think that they were hiding and looking for 100+. They do that at some places on I-5 as well. This wasn't a pursuit Mustang or the like (some Yank Tank with a rounded body style), but it looked like it could easily catch someone going just over 100MPH.

[Quillz]

Reducing the speed limit from 70 to 65 isn't going to stop people from going 100, since they're obviously ignoring the limit to begin with...

I had RCC set for 78MPH and passed a CHP CAR, not a truck, who didn't even blink. If what I've now read on this forum is to be believed, (and it would seem that cl94 knows about what they write), I now think that they were hiding and looking for 100+. They do that at some places on I-5 as well. This wasn't a pursuit Mustang or the like (some Yank Tank with a rounded body style), but it looked like it could easily catch someone going just over 100MPH.

I've gone 80 on that stretch and either had no one around, or a cop drove by. I agree, I don't see much enforcement here. Likely just hoping to get the 75 people to go 70, if that truly makes a safety difference. 

[cl94]

Reducing the speed limit from 70 to 65 isn't going to stop people from going 100, since they're obviously ignoring the limit to begin with...

I had RCC set for 78MPH and passed a CHP CAR, not a truck, who didn't even blink. If what I've now read on this forum is to be believed, (and it would seem that cl94 knows about what they write), I now think that they were hiding and looking for 100+. They do that at some places on I-5 as well. This wasn't a pursuit Mustang or the like (some Yank Tank with a rounded body style), but it looked like it could easily catch someone going just over 100MPH.

I've gone 80 on that stretch and either had no one around, or a cop drove by. I agree, I don't see much enforcement here. Likely just hoping to get the 75 people to go 70, if that truly makes a safety difference.

Part of the thing to remember with CA is that it's stupidly easy to challenge a speeding ticket if you're familiar with speed limit requirements. It is generally not worth their time to stop you if going 10 over is the only thing you're doing wrong because there's a decent chance you can get it tossed. Notably, you need an active speed study to enforce speed limits, and speed limit recalibrations like this are one of the requirements after completing a speed study.

With super high speeds, you can argue for a reckless driving charge or something else not explicitly dependent on a speed study, making it more likely that something will stick.

[Techknow]

Reducing the speed limit from 70 to 65 isn't going to stop people from going 100, since they're obviously ignoring the limit to begin with...

I had RCC set for 78MPH and passed a CHP CAR, not a truck, who didn't even blink. If what I've now read on this forum is to be believed, (and it would seem that cl94 knows about what they write), I now think that they were hiding and looking for 100+. They do that at some places on I-5 as well. This wasn't a pursuit Mustang or the like (some Yank Tank with a rounded body style), but it looked like it could easily catch someone going just over 100MPH.

I've gone 80 on that stretch and either had no one around, or a cop drove by. I agree, I don't see much enforcement here. Likely just hoping to get the 75 people to go 70, if that truly makes a safety difference.

Part of the thing to remember with CA is that it's stupidly easy to challenge a speeding ticket if you're familiar with speed limit requirements. It is generally not worth their time to stop you if going 10 over is the only thing you're doing wrong because there's a decent chance you can get it tossed. Notably, you need an active speed study to enforce speed limits, and speed limit recalibrations like this are one of the requirements after completing a speed study.

With super high speeds, you can argue for a reckless driving charge or something else not explicitly dependent on a speed study, making it more likely that something will stick.

I know you are talking about maximum speed limits, but violations of the state's basic speed law could stick too. I only have one anecdote for this, a friend that I went skiing with got a ticket for going too fast in winter conditions last week. He claim that he was ticketed for going 39 MPH, the speed limit of the road was 45 MPH, but the CHP officer claimed that the "safe speed" was 35 MPH. I'm pretty sure there were no chain conditions in effect, but I don't any more details like what road it was other than it was in South Lake Tahoe, he's not a roadgeek. Also he could appeal the ticket but he would have to travel to El Dorado county, which would be too much of a hassle for him.

[michravera]

Reducing the speed limit from 70 to 65 isn't going to stop people from going 100, since they're obviously ignoring the limit to begin with...

I had RCC set for 78MPH and passed a CHP CAR, not a truck, who didn't even blink. If what I've now read on this forum is to be believed, (and it would seem that cl94 knows about what they write), I now think that they were hiding and looking for 100+. They do that at some places on I-5 as well. This wasn't a pursuit Mustang or the like (some Yank Tank with a rounded body style), but it looked like it could easily catch someone going just over 100MPH.

I've gone 80 on that stretch and either had no one around, or a cop drove by. I agree, I don't see much enforcement here. Likely just hoping to get the 75 people to go 70, if that truly makes a safety difference.

Part of the thing to remember with CA is that it's stupidly easy to challenge a speeding ticket if you're familiar with speed limit requirements. It is generally not worth their time to stop you if going 10 over is the only thing you're doing wrong because there's a decent chance you can get it tossed. Notably, you need an active speed study to enforce speed limits, and speed limit recalibrations like this are one of the requirements after completing a speed study.

With super high speeds, you can argue for a reckless driving charge or something else not explicitly dependent on a speed study, making it more likely that something will stick.

I know you are talking about maximum speed limits, but violations of the state's basic speed law could stick too. I only have one anecdote for this, a friend that I went skiing with got a ticket for going too fast in winter conditions last week. He claim that he was ticketed for going 39 MPH, the speed limit of the road was 45 MPH, but the CHP officer claimed that the "safe speed" was 35 MPH. I'm pretty sure there were no chain conditions in effect, but I don't any more details like what road it was other than it was in South Lake Tahoe, he's not a roadgeek. Also he could appeal the ticket but he would have to travel to El Dorado county, which would be too much of a hassle for him.

All sorts of things could work, but, when posted for 65MPH, no study is required. It's the state maximum (except on freeways when a study was conducted to prove 70MPH is right). A study is actually required to post 70MPH in California.

[cl94]

Reducing the speed limit from 70 to 65 isn't going to stop people from going 100, since they're obviously ignoring the limit to begin with...

I had RCC set for 78MPH and passed a CHP CAR, not a truck, who didn't even blink. If what I've now read on this forum is to be believed, (and it would seem that cl94 knows about what they write), I now think that they were hiding and looking for 100+. They do that at some places on I-5 as well. This wasn't a pursuit Mustang or the like (some Yank Tank with a rounded body style), but it looked like it could easily catch someone going just over 100MPH.

I've gone 80 on that stretch and either had no one around, or a cop drove by. I agree, I don't see much enforcement here. Likely just hoping to get the 75 people to go 70, if that truly makes a safety difference.

Part of the thing to remember with CA is that it's stupidly easy to challenge a speeding ticket if you're familiar with speed limit requirements. It is generally not worth their time to stop you if going 10 over is the only thing you're doing wrong because there's a decent chance you can get it tossed. Notably, you need an active speed study to enforce speed limits, and speed limit recalibrations like this are one of the requirements after completing a speed study.

With super high speeds, you can argue for a reckless driving charge or something else not explicitly dependent on a speed study, making it more likely that something will stick.

I know you are talking about maximum speed limits, but violations of the state's basic speed law could stick too. I only have one anecdote for this, a friend that I went skiing with got a ticket for going too fast in winter conditions last week. He claim that he was ticketed for going 39 MPH, the speed limit of the road was 45 MPH, but the CHP officer claimed that the "safe speed" was 35 MPH. I'm pretty sure there were no chain conditions in effect, but I don't any more details like what road it was other than it was in South Lake Tahoe, he's not a roadgeek. Also he could appeal the ticket but he would have to travel to El Dorado county, which would be too much of a hassle for him.

All sorts of things could work, but, when posted for 65MPH, no study is required. It's the state maximum (except on freeways when a study was conducted to prove 70MPH is right). A study is actually required to post 70MPH in California.

More specifically, a study is required to maintain the 70 MPH limit. A speed and safety study is required every few years to keep a limit that isn't the default posted. In this case, the study showed that the segment had an above-average number of crashes and other issues relative to other 70 MPH roads, which meant the increased limit was no longer justified. This is how it should work - be willing to move limits around if a new limit does not work over time.

And re: the basic speed law, that's the law I was thinking of but could not remember the name of. That is quite easy to get a ticket for relative to speed limits themselves.

[jdbx]

Reducing the speed limit from 70 to 65 isn't going to stop people from going 100, since they're obviously ignoring the limit to begin with...

I had RCC set for 78MPH and passed a CHP CAR, not a truck, who didn't even blink. If what I've now read on this forum is to be believed, (and it would seem that cl94 knows about what they write), I now think that they were hiding and looking for 100+. They do that at some places on I-5 as well. This wasn't a pursuit Mustang or the like (some Yank Tank with a rounded body style), but it looked like it could easily catch someone going just over 100MPH.

I've gone 80 on that stretch and either had no one around, or a cop drove by. I agree, I don't see much enforcement here. Likely just hoping to get the 75 people to go 70, if that truly makes a safety difference.

Part of the thing to remember with CA is that it's stupidly easy to challenge a speeding ticket if you're familiar with speed limit requirements. It is generally not worth their time to stop you if going 10 over is the only thing you're doing wrong because there's a decent chance you can get it tossed. Notably, you need an active speed study to enforce speed limits, and speed limit recalibrations like this are one of the requirements after completing a speed study.

With super high speeds, you can argue for a reckless driving charge or something else not explicitly dependent on a speed study, making it more likely that something will stick.

From my anecdotal observations, you need to either really be trying or be especially unlucky to get a ticket for anything up to 79 MPH on a 65 MPH signed highway. My son played basketball with a CHP officer's son a few years back, and I talked to him about the speed of traffic, enforcement, etc and he said that on his beat (I-680 in the Bay Area) the average speed is about 74 MPH and that he's more worried about people that are weaving around other cars and doing things likely to cause a crash, not somebody who is rolling with the flow in the express lane.  Seems like a reasonable approach to me.

[Max Rockatansky]

Just passed through this segment of US 101 yesterday.  Traffic is still flowing at about 80 MPH regardless of the new signage.

[Plutonic Panda]

Reducing the speed limit from 70 to 65 isn't going to stop people from going 100, since they're obviously ignoring the limit to begin with...

I had RCC set for 78MPH and passed a CHP CAR, not a truck, who didn't even blink. If what I've now read on this forum is to be believed, (and it would seem that cl94 knows about what they write), I now think that they were hiding and looking for 100+. They do that at some places on I-5 as well. This wasn't a pursuit Mustang or the like (some Yank Tank with a rounded body style), but it looked like it could easily catch someone going just over 100MPH.

I've gone 80 on that stretch and either had no one around, or a cop drove by. I agree, I don't see much enforcement here. Likely just hoping to get the 75 people to go 70, if that truly makes a safety difference.

Part of the thing to remember with CA is that it's stupidly easy to challenge a speeding ticket if you're familiar with speed limit requirements. It is generally not worth their time to stop you if going 10 over is the only thing you're doing wrong because there's a decent chance you can get it tossed. Notably, you need an active speed study to enforce speed limits, and speed limit recalibrations like this are one of the requirements after completing a speed study.

With super high speeds, you can argue for a reckless driving charge or something else not explicitly dependent on a speed study, making it more likely that something will stick.

I'm not sure the way you meant this, but I wouldn't say that's a bad thing at all. And didn't just get repealed to some extent?

But I've always appreciated the fact that California required studies to allow cities to enforce their speed limits instead of just having politicians or the city arbitrarily setting some number on a sign which creates a lot of situations where you have revenue generation in mind instead of wanting to protect actual public safety. If you want slower speeds on your road design them better. I can't stand a lot of roads in New Mexico, Texas, and Oklahoma where they're super wide two lanes each way and yet the speed limit just arbitrarily drops to 25 with absolutely no change in the road Design because you're going through some stupid town that says it's like every other town they have Some historic building or landmark or whatever.

Lately I've been preferring to get off the interstate and drive on the back roads, but I love exploring new towns. I just can't stand speed traps.

[michravera]

Reducing the speed limit from 70 to 65 isn't going to stop people from going 100, since they're obviously ignoring the limit to begin with...

I had RCC set for 78MPH and passed a CHP CAR, not a truck, who didn't even blink. If what I've now read on this forum is to be believed, (and it would seem that cl94 knows about what they write), I now think that they were hiding and looking for 100+. They do that at some places on I-5 as well. This wasn't a pursuit Mustang or the like (some Yank Tank with a rounded body style), but it looked like it could easily catch someone going just over 100MPH.

I've gone 80 on that stretch and either had no one around, or a cop drove by. I agree, I don't see much enforcement here. Likely just hoping to get the 75 people to go 70, if that truly makes a safety difference.

Part of the thing to remember with CA is that it's stupidly easy to challenge a speeding ticket if you're familiar with speed limit requirements. It is generally not worth their time to stop you if going 10 over is the only thing you're doing wrong because there's a decent chance you can get it tossed. Notably, you need an active speed study to enforce speed limits, and speed limit recalibrations like this are one of the requirements after completing a speed study.

With super high speeds, you can argue for a reckless driving charge or something else not explicitly dependent on a speed study, making it more likely that something will stick.

I'm not sure the way you meant this, but I wouldn't say that's a bad thing at all. And didn't just get repealed to some extent?

But I've always appreciated the fact that California required studies to allow cities to enforce their speed limits instead of just having politicians or the city arbitrarily setting some number on a sign which creates a lot of situations where you have revenue generation in mind instead of wanting to protect actual public safety. If you want slower speeds on your road design them better. I can't stand a lot of roads in New Mexico, Texas, and Oklahoma where they're super wide two lanes each way and yet the speed limit just arbitrarily drops to 25 with absolutely no change in the road Design because you're going through some stupid town that says it's like every other town they have Some historic building or landmark or whatever.

Lately I've been preferring to get off the interstate and drive on the back roads, but I love exploring new towns. I just can't stand speed traps.

In California, you needn't worry about manufacturing charges. 100MPH+ is a separate offense.