Can a New York town install speed bumps on a town road, and what rules govern that?

Plain-English summary

The Town of Montgomery wanted to slow traffic on a short town road that connected two state highways. The town highway superintendent had installed a removable bump made of chain covered with rubber tubing, about two to three inches tall, stretched between posts. The town attorney asked the AG whether speed bumps were allowed under state law.

The AG concluded that nothing in state law forbids them, but that they sit in an unusual category: speed bumps are "highway design features," not "traffic control devices." That classification controls which rules apply.

Vehicle and Traffic Law § 153 defines traffic control devices as signs, signals, markings, and other items placed to regulate, guide, or warn traffic. Outside New York City, traffic control devices on local roads must conform to the Uniform Traffic Control Devices Manual adopted by the Department of Transportation. See VTL §§ 1680, 1682. The Uniform Manual is a closed catalog: it does not list speed bumps. If speed bumps were traffic control devices, the absence from the Manual would make them non-conforming and unlawful. But NYSDOT's regulation, 17 N.Y.C.R.R. § 200.9(b), and its Highway Design Manual treat speed bumps and other "vertical pavement shifts" as design features that fall outside the Uniform Manual entirely. The AG followed that classification.

The result is that speed bumps are regulated like any other highway maintenance or improvement project. Highway Law § 102 sets out the county superintendent's role in town-highway maintenance, and §§ 193, 194, 195 govern certain town-highway improvement procedures. Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1621 lets NYSDOT regulate traffic on local highways that intersect or meet state highways within 100 feet. The town should consult and, where required, secure approvals from county or state officials, based on the location and funding of the installation.

The AG flagged a serious caution. NYSDOT has not issued formal regulations on vertical shifts, but its Highway Design Manual reproduces engineering guidance that, in the AG's reading, generally counsels against speed bumps on public roads. The cited guides characterized speed bumps as appropriate for parking lots and some private streets but "should never be used on public roadways." The Manual also reports that speed bumps are not used on New York state highways to control speed.

Tort liability adds another layer. In Colyer v. State of New York, the State was liable where a roadway speed bump was found to be unreasonably dangerous. A century-old Mississippi case, Mayor v. Harralson, found liability where a speed bump was used as a warning device at a dangerous intersection. The State Comptroller's opinion (Op. State Compt. No. 78-837) raised the same liability concern in advising villages against installing them. The Light and Benjamin decisions confirm that the Highway Design Manual is evidence of the accepted standard of care, which means design choices that deviate can become exhibits in negligence cases.

The takeaway in 2003: legally permitted, but engineered-against. Towns deploying speed bumps were doing so against published guidance, and the courts had been willing to find the deviation unreasonable in particular fact patterns.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 2003. Subsequent statutory amendments, court decisions, or later AG opinions may have changed the analysis. Treat this page as historical context, not current legal advice. Verify current law before relying on any specific rule, deadline, or remedy mentioned here.

Common questions

Q: Are speed bumps illegal in New York?
A: No. The AG found no statute or regulation that prohibits them on town highways. The catch is the classification: they are highway design features, not traffic control devices, so they are regulated through general highway-improvement procedures rather than the Uniform Traffic Control Devices Manual.

Q: What is the difference between a "speed bump" and a "speed hump"?
A: The AG distinguished them, citing engineering manuals. Speed bumps are three to six inches tall and one to three feet across the roadway, designed to slow traffic to five to ten miles per hour. Speed humps are longer (around twelve feet) and gentler, designed for twenty to twenty-five miles per hour.

Q: Why didn't the Uniform Traffic Control Devices Manual apply?
A: Because NYSDOT classified speed bumps as design features, not as traffic control devices, under 17 N.Y.C.R.R. § 200.9(b). The Department had originally treated them as non-conforming traffic control devices but later concluded they were design features.

Q: What process should a town have followed to install a speed bump?
A: The same procedures applicable to highway maintenance and improvement projects. That includes Highway Law § 102(2) and (6) (county superintendent duties), §§ 193-195 (town-highway improvement procedures), and Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1621 (NYSDOT regulation of local highways near state-highway intersections). The Highway Design Manual functions as guidance even though it does not impose mandatory standards on local roads.

Q: What is the liability picture?
A: Mixed but real. Colyer v. State of New York held the State liable where a speed bump was an unreasonably dangerous condition that proximately caused injury. Deviations from the Highway Design Manual can be used as evidence of negligence, per Light v. State and Benjamin v. State. The State Comptroller's earlier opinion advised villages not to install them in part because of tort exposure.

Q: What about state highways?
A: NYSDOT does not use vertical shifts on state highways to control speed. The Highway Design Manual notes this as policy.

Background and statutory framework

The opinion turns on a classification puzzle. Traffic control devices are tightly regulated. The Uniform Traffic Control Devices Manual adopted by NYSDOT (codified at 17 N.Y.C.R.R. Part V) sets specifications for signs, signals, pavement markings, barricades, drums, cones, warning flags, and similar items. Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1680 binds local governments outside New York City to those specifications, with § 1682 reinforcing uniformity, and General Business Law § 599-a barring the sale of non-conforming traffic control devices without a NYSDOT certificate. Anything in that bucket that is not in the Manual is unlawful.

Highway design features sit in a different bucket. 17 N.Y.C.R.R. § 200.9(b) recognizes that some design features have "obvious traffic operation significance" without being traffic control devices. Speed bumps and other vertical pavement shifts are listed in NYSDOT's Highway Design Manual under § 25.6, Table 25-1, with footnote 3 distinguishing them from traffic control devices.

Once classified as design features, speed bumps fall under the general highway-maintenance and improvement regime: Highway Law § 102 (county superintendent), §§ 193-195 (town improvement procedures), § 10(9) and (12) (the Commissioner's general regulatory authority over local highway construction and maintenance), and VTL § 1621 (NYSDOT regulation near state highways).

The State Comptroller's Op. State Compt. No. 78-837 had urged villages not to erect bumps in part because of tort liability for bump-related accidents. Colyer v. State of New York supplied a New York example of that liability. The longer-running national reference, Mayor v. Harralson, made the same point in a different jurisdiction. Light v. State and Benjamin v. State treat the Highway Design Manual as evidence of the standard of care.

Citations and references

Statutes:

• General Business Law § 599-a (sale of nonconforming traffic control devices)
• Highway Law § 10(9), (12) (Commissioner's regulatory authority)
• Highway Law § 102(2), (6) (county superintendent's role)
• Highway Law §§ 193, 194, 195 (town-highway improvement procedures)
• Vehicle and Traffic Law § 153 (definition of traffic control device)
• Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1621 (NYSDOT authority near state highways)
• Vehicle and Traffic Law §§ 1680, 1682 (Uniform Traffic Control Devices Manual)

Regulations:

• 17 N.Y.C.R.R. Part V (Uniform Traffic Control Devices Manual)
• 17 N.Y.C.R.R. § 200.9(b) (highway design features)

Cases:

• Colyer v. State of New York, 208 A.D.2d 490 (2d Dep't 1994)
• Mayor v. Harralson, 101 So. 713 (Miss. 1924)
• Light v. State, 250 A.D.2d 988 (3d Dep't), lv. denied, 92 N.Y.2d 807 (1998)
• Benjamin v. State, 203 A.D.2d 629 (3d Dep't 1994)

Other authorities:

• N.Y.S. Department of Transportation, Highway Design Manual, ch. 25, App. A & App. B; § 25.6, T. 25-1
• Op. State Compt. No. 78-837
• A Guidebook for Residential Traffic Management (Dec. 1994)
• Florida Pedestrian Planning and Design Handbook (Sept. 1998)

Source

• Landing page: https://ag.ny.gov/libraries-documents/opinions/opinions-year
• Original PDF: https://ag.ny.gov/sites/default/files/opinions/I_2003-15_pw.pdf

Original opinion text

GENERAL BUSINESS LAW § 599-a; HIGHWAY LAW §§ 10, 102, 193, 194, 195; VEHICLE AND TRAFFIC LAW §§ 153, 1621, 1680, 1682; 17 N.Y.C.R.R. Part V, § 200.9(b)

Installation of a speed bump on a town highway is not prohibited by State law, but is regulated as a highway design feature.

October 28, 2003

Richard W. Hoyt, Esq.
Town Attorney
Town of Montgomery
43 Orchard Street
P.O. Box 402
Walden, New York 12586

Informal Opinion
No. 2003-15

Dear Mr. Hoyt:

You have asked, in your capacity as attorney for the Town of Montgomery, whether the Town is authorized to install "speed bumps" or similar speed control devices on a town highway. You have specified that the Town is interested in using such devices to slow traffic on a short town highway that serves as a connection between two state highways. We conclude that the installation of a speed bump on a town highway is not prohibited by State law, but is regulated as a highway design feature.

Background

Speed bumps are installations of raised pavement on roads or parking lots intended to slow vehicular traffic; they are generally three to six inches in height and one to three feet in length across the roadway or driving area. See JKS Associates, Inc., INCA Engineers, Inc. & R. David MacDonald, A Guidebook for Residential Traffic Management 41 (Dec. 1994), reprinted in N.Y.S. Dep't of Transportation, Highway Design Manual, ch. 25, App. A (Rev. 36, Feb. 5, 1999). Speed bumps generally are intended to reduce vehicle speeds to five to ten miles per hour. Florida Pedestrian Planning and Design Handbook 129 (Sept. 1998), reprinted in N.Y.S. Dep't of Transportation, Highway Design Manual, ch. 25, App. B (Rev. 36, Feb. 5, 1999). In a telephone call, you explained that the Town Superintendent of Highways installed a removable bump on the town highway in question, consisting of chain covered by rubber tubing extending across the roadway between two posts. The speed bump is approximately two to three inches high and will be removed during the winter months to allow for snow removal.

Analysis

In determining whether the use of speed bumps is authorized under State law, a preliminary consideration is whether speed bumps are regulated as traffic control devices, which are signs, signals, markings and other devices placed on a roadway to regulate, guide or warn traffic. See Vehicle and Traffic Law § 153. Except in a city having a population of over one million, the types of traffic control devices that a local government may place on its roadways is subject to state-wide uniformity in conformance with the Uniform Traffic Control Devices Manual adopted by the Department of Transportation. See Vehicle and Traffic Law §§ 1680, 1682; see also General Business Law § 599-a (prohibiting sale of traffic control devices that do not conform to Uniform Traffic Control Devices Manual without certificate of approval from Commissioner of Transportation). This Manual contains specifications for authorized traffic signs, signals, pavement markings and other traffic control devices, including barricades, drums, cones, warning flags and the like; it does not contain any reference to speed bumps. See 17 N.Y.C.R.R. Part V. Because speed bumps serve a similar purpose in regulating and guiding traffic, they conceivably could be considered non-conforming traffic control devices.

However, it appears that speed bumps and other vertical pavement shifts are considered highway design features, which are distinct from and not subject to regulation as traffic control devices even though they may "have obvious traffic operation significance." See 17 N.Y.C.R.R. 200.9(b) (design and use of "highway design features" is not prescribed by Uniform Traffic Control Devices Manual, notwithstanding that some highway design features, including pavement texture and rumble strips, impact traffic operation); N.Y.S. Dep't of Transportation, Highway Design Manual, § 25.6, T. 25-1 & n.3 (Rev. 36, Feb. 5, 1999) (hereinafter Highway Design Manual) (categorizing speed bumps and other vertical pavement shifts separately from traffic control devices used as traffic calming measures). We therefore conclude that the installation of a speed bump, whether a permanent pavement installation or a temporary, removable bump like the one installed on your town highway, is not subject to state-wide uniformity as a traffic control device.

Rather, because a speed bump is considered a highway design feature, we believe that the design and installation of a speed bump on a town highway would be subject to the laws and procedures that generally govern highway maintenance and improvement projects. We are not aware of any provision of the Highway Law, or other State law, that specifically prohibits speed bumps as a highway design feature. Thus, in considering, designing and installing a speed bump or other vertical pavement shift, the Town should follow the procedures applicable to highway maintenance and improvement projects, including consulting with or obtaining any necessary approvals from county or state officials consistent with the nature of the installation, its location and the source of funding for the project. See, e.g., Highway Law § 102(2) and (6) (duties of county superintendent with respect to repair, maintenance and improvement of town highways); id. §§ 193, 194 and 195 (procedures governing certain town highway improvements); Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1621 (Department of Transportation authorized to regulate traffic on local highways that intersect or meet state highways to a distance of 100 feet).

Moreover, although the Department of Transportation has not promulgated regulations governing the use of vertical shifts, cf., Highway Law § 10(9), (12) (Commissioner of Transportation has authority to regulate the method of construction, improvement and maintenance of local highways), we note that their use and installation are addressed in the Department's Highway Design Manual. See Highway Design Manual, supra, § 25.6, T. 25-1. According to the engineering guidelines attached as appendices to the Highway Design Manual, speed bumps generally are not recommended for installation on public roadways because they may cause vehicles to jolt when crossed at the lawful speed limit. See A Guidebook for Residential Traffic Management, supra, at 41 (speed bumps are commonly used in parking lots and on some private streets, but "should never be used on public roadways"); Florida Pedestrian Planning and Design Handbook, supra, at 129 ("speed bumps are not recommended for street use"); see also Highway Design Manual, supra, § 25.6, T. 25-1, n.3 (speed bumps and other vertical shifts are not used on state highways in New York to control speed). We note that in certain instances, courts have found the use of speed bumps unreasonable and thus have held government entities liable for resulting injuries to motorists. See Colyer v. State of New York, 208 A.D.2d 490 (2d Dep't 1994) (State found liable where claimant established that speed bump on roadway was an unreasonably dangerous condition and was proximate cause of claimant's injuries); Mayor v. Harralson, 101 So. 713 (Miss. 1924) (installation of speed bump found to be unreasonable method of warning drivers of dangerous intersection and city held liable for personal injuries of motorist); see also Op. State Compt. No. 78-837 (concluding that village should not erect bumps on street to encourage the slowing of traffic because, inter alia, such bumps could lead to potential tort liability for bump-related mishaps).

The Attorney General renders formal opinions only to officers and departments of State government. This perforce is an informal opinion and unofficial expression of the views of this office.

Very truly yours,

LAURA ETLINGER
Assistant Solicitor General
In Charge of Opinions