TO: TRAFFIC AND TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
FROM: MARIA B. TIPPING, CITY ENGINEER
DATE: APRIL 13, 2026
SUBJECT:
Title
2026 CITY OF CLAREMONT SPEED SURVEY
Body
SUMMARY
Staff brought the 2026 City of Claremont Speed Survey item to the Traffic and Transportation Commission (TTC) on March 26, 2026. The City’s traffic engineering consultant who prepared the 2026 Speed Survey presented the item to the TTC.
During the presentation, the TTC had questions and comments regarding certain street segments, and at the conclusion of the meeting the TTC voted to continue the item, requesting more information. Draft TTC Meeting Minutes of March 26, 2026, are provided in Attachment A.
Staff scheduled a special meeting to provide additional information as requested by the TTC. At tonight’s special meeting, staff is bringing forth responses to questions and comments raised by the TTC, and additional information addressing the street segments’ revisions requested, with a recommendation for the Commission to recommend City Council approval of the revised 2026 Speed Survey (Attachment B).
RECOMMENDATION
Recommended Action
Staff recommends the Traffic and Transportation Commission consider the additional information provided and recommend the City Council adopt, through local ordinance, the speed limit zones as outlined in the revised 2026 Radar Speed Survey.
Body
FINANCIAL REVIEW
The cost for staff to prepare this report, study and administer this program is $95,698, and is included in the operating budget of the Community Development Department.
The costs associated with the implementation of the speed survey are those needed to replace the existing speed limit signs, and associated roadway stenciling to reflect the modifications of the final recommended speed limits. This effort is currently estimated at $175,000. This figure is an estimate and is expected to change once bids are received to move forward with this implementation, following City Council adoption of the 2026 Speed Survey.
ANALYSIS
MARCH 26, 2026 TRAFFIC AND TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEETING
At the March 26, 2026, staff brought forth the 2026 Speed Survey that was prepared following the new speed limit setting criteria set forth by AB43. AB43 created a new path forward to set speed limits in the State of California. The new legislation requirements from AB43 went into effect on January 1, 2022, and gave the cities throughout the state more control over deciding how speed limits should be set and whether they should be reduced on certain roadway segments and highways.
AB43 contains new provisions that allow local governments more flexibility to lower speed limits on certain roadways, and under certain conditions, without strictly following the “85th percentile” rule mandated by state law in the past. For example, under AB43, local jurisdictions can now lower speed limits to accommodate pedestrians and bicyclists with more flexibility. Positive feedback received indicates that the community is looking forward to the implementation of a speed survey with more flexible criteria.
During the March 26, 2026, presentation, Commissioners had questions and concerns regarding certain street segments, and at the conclusion of the meeting the TTC voted to continue the item to have staff and the consultant review specific roadway segments. As a result, a special meeting was scheduled to continue the item, and staff prepared this staff report carefully reviewing and addressing the questions, feedback and the direction received from the TTC to review certain street segments.
It should be noted that the additional information presented tonight addresses the Commission’s comments and feedback. No written public comment was received at the March 26, 2026, meeting, nor was any public comment given during the meeting. However, since the March 26, 2026, meeting, staff has received public comment, which is included in Attachment C.
REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL REVIEW
The following summarizes the assessment conducted to address the request for additional review of the street segments the TTC had concerns with. Staff responses are in italics. Attachment D contains excerpts from the revised 2026 Speed Survey with the analysis justifying the recommended speeds for the following street segments:
• Miramar Avenue (Mills to Padua Avenues),
• First Street (College to Columbia and Columbia to Claremont Boulevard),
• Mount Baldy Road (city limits to Padua Avenue) and
• Indian Hill Boulevard (Vista/Oak Park to Arrow Highway)
Miramar Avenue (Mills to Padua Avenues): This is one contiguous street that does not have a stop sign, but it has been broken into two sections.
Commission question: Why do we have one speed limit for one segment and a different speed limit for a different segment when the street is the same?
o Speed data for Miramar was collected in two different segments to reflect the different street layout configurations found along Miramar Avenue. The primary difference is one of the street segments lacks continuous sidewalks and is rural. After additional review, engineering judgment was used to combine both street segments as one, under the same speed limit. The resulting analysis of this combined street segment delivers a recommendation for the posting of 25 mph for Miramar, from Mills to Padua Avenues, as one segment. This is reflected in the revised 2026 Speed Survey.
First Street (College Avenue to Columbia Avenue and Columbia Avenue to Claremont Boulevard)
o First Street was evaluated as two separate segments, as required, to acknowledge the stop-controlled intersection at Columbia, which disrupts free flowing traffic. Combining the two segments would not be appropriate as it would not meet the requirements for data collection and analysis for the preparation of the speed survey.
o As a result, the prior analysis provided for these two segments remains the same, recommending 35 mph from Columbia to Claremont Boulevard and 30 mph from Columbia to College, approaching the busy downtown environment of the Claremont Village.
Mount Baldy Road from City Limits to Padua Avenue:
Commission question: Does it need to go to 45 mph?
o The street segment was reviewed as requested, and the analysis delivered the same recommendations. The provisions stated in the justification for lowering the speed limit to 45 mph (conditions not readily apparent to the driver), are consistent with the speed setting requirements and for that reason, keeping the current posted 50 mph speed limit could not be recommended. This recommendation is based on safety reasons, resulting from collision rates, and roadway geometry.
Indian Hill Blvd, Vista/Oak Park Drive to Arrow Highway recommended 30 mph and Vista/Oak Park Drive to San Jose Avenue recommended 35 mph
o The Indian Hill Boulevard segment between Arrow Highway and Vista/Oak Park was re-evaluated as requested and a new recommendation is now being made to post 35 mph, instead of 30 mph. As a result, this segment is no longer proposed to be decreased by 10 mph but is being reduced by 5 mph.
Although not requested for additional review, the following roadway segments received a minor modification as part of the overall revision process. These minor modifications are reflected in the revised 2026 Speed Survey.
Indian Hill Boulevard, Foothill Boulevard to Scripps Drive
o Modified limits - Foothill Boulevard to Claremont High School
o Recommended Posted Speed Limit remains unchanged
Indian Hill Boulevard, Scripps Drive to Base Line Road
o Modified limits - Claremont High School to Base Line Road
o Recommended Posted Speed Limit remains unchanged
Mountain Avenue, Thompson Creek to San Andres Way and Mountain Avenue, San Andres Way to End
• Modified limits - Thompson Creek Trail to End
• Recommended Posted Speed Limit remains unchanged
Padua Avenue, El Circuito to Grand Avenue
• Modified street name as result of street name changes - El Circuito is now Via Saint Ambrose and the extension of Grand Avenue, north of Mount Baldy is Via Padova
• Recommended Posted Speed Limit remains unchanged
After the revisions, the street segments considered with the revised 2026 Speed Survey decreased from 95 to 93. This is the result of combining street segments with the same speed limit. The street segments with changes in -5 mph went from 45 to 44, and only one street segment is proposed to be reduced by -10 mph (First Street between College and Columbia Avenues), reducing the -10 mph changes from 2 to 1.
|
Revised 2026 Speed Survey-Summary of Changes |
|
Street Segments |
No Change |
-5 MPH |
-10 MPH |
|
93 |
48 |
44 |
1 |
COMMISSION QUESTIONS/COMMENTS AND STAFF/CONSULTANT RESPONSES (in Italics)
The following summarizes responses to the TTC’s questions and comments raised during the March 26, 2026, meeting. The responses are organized by category since several questions and comments were similar in nature.
Crash History
• Are crash history and ticket history done through the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) or Claremont Police Department (CPD)?
• Are those accidents that were called in or accidents reported to the DMV?
o Per the DMV website: www.dmv.ca.gov/portal/dmv-virtual-office/accident-reporting/. A private party or insurance agent, broker, or legal representative must complete an SR-1 report and send it to DMV within 10 days if someone is injured (no matter how minor the injury) or killed, or property damage is over $1000.
• Was data obtained from SWITRS (Statewide Integrated Traffic Records System)?
o Yes. Claremont Police Department provides collision records from the SWITRS database. SWITRS collision data used to prepare the survey is reflected in the survey document, and it comes from the SWITRS database.
• Is that the standard to use 5 years of accident collection?
o Yes
Typographical Error/Oversight
• There is a typographical error identifying the reduction in posted speed for Mills Avenue from Pomello Drive to Mt. Baldy Road Segment, in the Summary of Recommended Speed Limits
o There was a typographical error showing the current posted speed limit as 45 mph for this segment. The current posted speed limit has been corrected to reflect 40 mph. That was the error.
• Feedback regarding page 74 in the agenda packet, addressing justification for the proposed speed limit for American Avenue.
o The justification section was copied from page 72 verbatim. This was an oversight. The proper justification is now included in Appendix C of the revised 2026 Speed Survey.
General TTC Questions/Comments
• I understand City can now lower speed. I don’t think that means we have to.
o The speed limits being recommended are not arbitrary. The analysis for each street segment is done independently, taking into consideration the unique nature of the segment being considered. The setting of speed limits is based on criteria outlined in AB43, the CVC and the CA MUTCD, engineering knowledge, experience and judgement, staff’s deep knowledge of the community and street network and the consistent community feedback regarding concerns with speeding traffic.
• The scope of this survey was just speed, right? Was there any analysis done on volume of traffic flowing?
o Setting speed limits requires the collection and analysis of properly collected speed data, not volume data.
• Base Line Road has a dedicated bike lane where there’s no parking. It’s just a blanket (measure) that the law says you can apply to those streets?
o Setting speed limits does not require collecting vehicle or bike volumes, nor does it matter whether there is a marked bike lane. The speed limit setting criteria does not require counting bikes to justify the use of high concentration of bicycle and pedestrian volumes as justification. Evaluation of land uses that generate bike and ped use (parks, schools, senior centers/communities, downtown areas, etc.) within ¼ mile of the surveyed roadway segment are used for analysis and justification.
• Are E-Bikes taken into consideration in this process?
o They are not considered for speed survey preparation purposes.
• Under the new state laws, in order to use some of the justifications, the City has to pass ordinances designating that section as a high concentration in order to use that justification in the speed surveys. Is that something that’s going to happen concurrently?
o A City Council ordinance is required to adopt the Speed Survey. The 2026 Speed Survey is not creating any districts. High concentration of bikes and peds does not require an ordinance to designate them as high concentration of bikes and pedestrian corridors.
• So, we’re reducing the speed of 50% of the streets citywide, correct? The other 50% are residential streets, correct?
o Residential/local roads “prima facie” streets are not required to be surveyed.
o Approximately, 74% of the street network is 25 mph prima facie.
o As part of this survey, approximately 36 miles of street network was required to be surveyed, out of the total 138 miles of the citywide street network.
o Of those 36 miles surveyed, approximately 18 miles are recommended to be reduced in posted speed limits, which is approximately 13% of the citywide street network.
o The following table summarizes these figures and percentages.
|
City Streets Surveyed |
Center Line Miles |
36 |
|
Total City Street Network |
Center Line Miles |
138 |
|
Percent Streets Surveyed |
|
26% |
|
Roadway Segments Reduced |
Center Line Miles |
18 |
|
Percent Streets Reduced in Speed |
Center Line Miles |
13% |
• For those cities who have already done this and approved them the speed survey recommendations to lower speeds. Have there been any court cases?
o AB43 is State Law and local jurisdictions are required to follow it to set enforceable speed limits. AB 43 no longer adheres to the strict 85th percentile methodology, allowing more flexibility for professionals to recommend lower speeds based on different considerations such as bicyclists and pedestrians’ safety.
o Consulted with City Attorney and she is not aware of any case challenging AB43.
Future Steps
With a recommendation from TTC, staff will move forward with preparing an Ordinance to be considered for adoption by the City Council, adopting the revised 2026 Speed Survey, as presented tonight.
Staff will also develop a project to implement the 2026 Speed Survey to complete the necessary signage and striping improvements to reflect the recommended speed limits. This project will need to go to City Council for contract award following the adoption of the 2026 Speed Survey.
CEQA REVIEW
This item is not subject to environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
PUBLIC NOTICE PROCESS
The agenda and staff report for this item have been posted on the City website and distributed to interested parties. If you desire a copy, please contact the City Clerk’s Office.
Submitted by: Prepared by:
Maria B. Tipping, P.E. Vincent Ramos
City Engineer Associate Engineer
Maria B. Tipping, P.E.
City Engineer
Attachments:
A - Draft TTC Meeting Minutes of March 26, 2026
B - Revised 2026 Speed Survey
C - Public Comment Received
D - Excerpts from the revised 2026 Speed Survey