DOCSLIB.ORG

Summary of State Speed Laws (12Th Edition)

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Summary of State Speed Laws (12Th Edition) DOT HS 811 769 December 2013 Summary of State Speed Laws Twelfth Edition Current as of October 8, 2012 DISCLAIMER This publication is distributed by the U.S. Department of Transportation, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, in the interest of information exchange. The opinions, findings, and conclusions expressed in this publication are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the Department of Transportation or the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. The United States Government assumes no liability for its contents or use thereof. If trade names, manufacturers’ names, or specific products are mentioned, it is because they are considered essential to the object of the publication and should not be construed as an endorsement. The United States Government does not endorse products or manufacturers. TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................................................... iii OVERVIEW NARRATIVE OF KEY PROVISIONS OF STATE SPEED LAWS .............................. v Key Provisions of State Speed Laws through October 8, 2012 .............................................................. vi ALABAMA .................................................................................................................................................. 1 ALASKA ...................................................................................................................................................... 5 ARIZONA .................................................................................................................................................... 8 ARKANSAS............................................................................................................................................... 13 CALIFORNIA ........................................................................................................................................... 18 COLORADO ............................................................................................................................................. 25 CONNECTICUT....................................................................................................................................... 31 DELAWARE ............................................................................................................................................. 35 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ................................................................................................................... 41 FLORIDA .................................................................................................................................................. 45 GEORGIA ................................................................................................................................................. 51 HAWAI’I ................................................................................................................................................... 57 IDAHO ....................................................................................................................................................... 62 ILLINOIS .................................................................................................................................................. 66 INDIANA ................................................................................................................................................... 73 IOWA ......................................................................................................................................................... 78 KANSAS .................................................................................................................................................... 83 KENTUCKY ............................................................................................................................................. 87 LOUISIANA .............................................................................................................................................. 91 MAINE ....................................................................................................................................................... 95 MARYLAND ........................................................................................................................................... 100 MASSACHUSETTS ............................................................................................................................... 105 MICHIGAN ............................................................................................................................................. 109 MINNESOTA .......................................................................................................................................... 114 MISSISSIPPI ........................................................................................................................................... 119 MISSOURI .............................................................................................................................................. 124 MONTANA ............................................................................................................................................. 129 NEBRASKA ............................................................................................................................................ 134 SUMMARY OF SPEED LAWS, 12TH EDITION i NEVADA ................................................................................................................................................. 140 NEW HAMPSHIRE ............................................................................................................................... 146 NEW JERSEY ......................................................................................................................................... 151 NEW MEXICO ....................................................................................................................................... 157 NEW YORK ............................................................................................................................................ 161 NORTH CAROLINA ............................................................................................................................. 167 NORTH DAKOTA ................................................................................................................................. 174 OHIO ........................................................................................................................................................ 179 OKLAHOMA .......................................................................................................................................... 184 OREGON ................................................................................................................................................. 189 PENNSYLVANIA ................................................................................................................................... 194 PUERTO RICO ...................................................................................................................................... 200 RHODE ISLAND .................................................................................................................................... 204 SOUTH CAROLINA .............................................................................................................................. 210 SOUTH DAKOTA .................................................................................................................................. 215 TENNESSEE ........................................................................................................................................... 220 TEXAS ..................................................................................................................................................... 225 UTAH ....................................................................................................................................................... 231 VERMONT .............................................................................................................................................. 236 VIRGINIA ............................................................................................................................................... 241 WASHINGTON ...................................................................................................................................... 248 WEST VIRGINIA ................................................................................................................................... 254 WISCONSIN ........................................................................................................................................... 260 WYOMING ............................................................................................................................................. 266 SUMMARY OF SPEED LAWS, 12TH EDITION ii INTRODUCTION The National Highway Traffic Safety provides that a slow speed is permissible when Administration is responsible for reducing reduced speed is necessary for safe operation or vehicle-related fatalities and injuries on our compliance with law. nation’s highways. Research
Load more

Recommended publications
  • TRB Special Report 267: Regulation of Weights, Lengths, And
    Regulation of Weights, Lengths, and Widths of Commercial Motor Vehicles SPECIAL REPORT 267 TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH BOARD 2002 EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE* Chairman: E. Dean Carlson, Secretary, Kansas Department of Transportation, Topeka Vice Chairman: Genevieve Giuliano, Professor, School of Policy, Planning, and Development, University of Southern California, Los Angeles Executive Director: Robert E. Skinner, Jr., Transportation Research Board William D. Ankner, Director, Rhode Island Department of Transportation, Providence Thomas F. Barry, Jr., Secretary of Transportation, Florida Department of Transportation, Tallahassee Michael W. Behrens, Executive Director, Texas Department of Transportation, Austin Jack E. Buffington, Associate Director and Research Professor, Mack-Blackwell National Rural Transportation Study Center, University of Arkansas, Fayetteville Sarah C. Campbell, President, TransManagement, Inc., Washington, D.C. Joanne F. Casey, President, Intermodal Association of North America, Greenbelt, Maryland James C. Codell III, Secretary, Kentucky Transportation Cabinet, Frankfort John L. Craig, Director, Nebraska Department of Roads, Lincoln Robert A. Frosch, Senior Research Fellow, Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, John F. Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts Susan Hanson, Landry University Professor of Geography, Graduate School of Geography, Clark University, Worcester, Massachusetts Lester A. Hoel, L.A. Lacy Distinguished Professor, Department of Civil Engineering, University
    [Show full text]
  • Muncy Creek Township
    Muncy Creek Planning Area Plan Adoptions 2016 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN REVIEW AND IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY Plan Adoptions HUGHESVILLE BOROUGH COUNCIL – Adopted <MONTH DAY, YEAR> MUNCY BOROUGH COUNCIL – Adopted <MONTH DAY, YEAR> PICTURE ROCKS BOROUGH COUNCIL – Adopted <MONTH DAY, YEAR> MUNCY CREEK TOWNSHIP BOARD OF SUPERVISORS – Adopted <MONTH DAY, YEAR> SHREWSBURY TOWNSHIP BOARD OF SUPERVISORS – Adopted <MONTH DAY, YEAR> WOLF TOWNSHIP BOARD OF SUPERVISORS – Adopted <MONTH DAY, YEAR> Lycoming 2030: Plan the Possible 2 Muncy Creek Planning Area Acknowledgements 2016 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN REVIEW AND IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY Acknowledgements Muncy Creek Planning Advisory Team (PAT) WALTER REED, REPRESENTATIVE OF HUGHESVILLE BOROUGH RICHARD SMITH, REPRESENTATIVE OF HUGHESVILLE BOROUGH STEVE JAQUITH, REPRESENTATIVE OF MUNCY BOROUGH (ALTERNATE) BILL RAMSEY, REPRESENTATIVE OF MUNCY BOROUGH LINDA STEIN, REPRESENTATIVE OF MUNCY BOROUGH STEVEN CULVER, REPRESENTATIVE OF MUNCY CREEK TOWNSHIP BILL POULTON, REPRESENTATIVE OF MUNCY CREEK TOWNSHIP ANGELA SNYDER, REPRESENTATIVE OF MUNCY CREEK TOWNSHIP BILL DORMAN, REPRESENTATIVE OF PICTURE ROCKS BOROUGH EUGENE OTTERBEIN, REPRESENTATIVE OF PICTURE ROCKS BOROUGH DEAN BARTO, REPRESENTATIVE OF WOLF TOWNSHIP MELANIE MCCOY, REPRESENTATIVE OF WOLF TOWNSHIP TERRY DINCHER, REPRESENTATIVE OF SHREWSBURY TOWNSHIP REBECCA FOUGHT, REPRESENTATIVE OF EAST LYCOMING RECREATION AUTHORITY DAVID MACIEJEWSKI, REPRESENTATIVE OF EAST LYCOMING SCHOOL DISTRICT MICHAEL PAWLIK, REPRESENTATIVE OF EAST LYCOMING SCHOOL DISTRICT GENE CAHN, REPRESENTATIVE
    [Show full text]
  • Draft 2021 LRTP
    DRAFT SEDA‐COG Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) LONG RANGE TRANSPORTATION PLAN The Draft Long Range Transportation Plan includes regional overview information and the MPO region’s long range vision for prioritizing transportation investments. This copy of the draft plan is available as part of a 30‐day comment period beginning on May 24, 2021, and ending on June 22, 2021. The public comment period provides the public an opportunity to provide feedback on all facets of the Long Range Transportation Plan before its adoption. The plan can be reviewed online at: http://www.seda‐cog.org/departments/transportation/long‐range‐plan. Written and electronic comments may be submitted via email, SEDA‐COG web portal, fax, or Postal Service by 4:00 p.m. on Tuesday, June 22, 2021. Email comments may be submitted to lrtp@seda‐cog.org or through the web portal at http://www.seda‐cog.org/departments/transportation/transportation‐comments Comments may be faxed to 570‐524‐9190 Please address all written comments to: Mr. Don Kiel SEDA‐COG MPO 201 Furnace Road Lewisburg, PA 17837 If you would like to provide comments or discuss the draft plan in person, a Virtual Public Meeting will be held during the public comment period as follows: Date: June 3, 2021 Time: 7:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m. Location: The content of this Notice is available in alternative formats and other languages upon request by contacting the SEDA‐COG MPO at 570‐524‐4491, or by written correspondence directed to the MPO at 201 Furnace Road, Lewisburg, PA 17837, or by email at jsaylor@seda‐cog.org.
    [Show full text]
  • 2010 Annual Report.Pdf
    U.S. Department of Energy Office of Environmental Management Transportation Emergency Preparedness Program 2010 Annual Report 2010 Annual Report Department of Energy Transportation Emergency Preparedness Program Executive Summary The mission for the Transportation Emergency Preparedness Program (TEPP) is to ensure federal, state, tribal, and local responders have access to the plans, training, and technical assistance necessary to safely, efficiently, and effectively respond to radiological transportation accidents. To support this mission TEPP has formed strong partnerships over the last 15 years with state, tribal and local response organizations, Federal agencies and other national programs integrating TEPP planning tools and training into a variety of hazardous materials preparedness programs. These partnerships have resulted in states and tribes either using all or portions of the TEPP resources in their programs. Many have adopted the TEPP training program, Modular Emergency Response Radiological Transportation Training (MERRTT), into their hazardous material training curriculums to assist them in preparing their fire departments, law enforcement organizations, hazardous materials response teams, emergency management officials, public information officers and emergency medical technicians to respond to a radiological transportation accidents. This Fiscal Year (FY) 2010 DOE TEPP Annual Report highlights events, outreach, partnerships and training where TEPP has proven to be integral in building radiological response capabilities of states and tribes that may need to respond to radiological incidents. To help build those capacities, TEPP promotes state and tribal implementation by providing responders who successfully complete a MERRTT Train-the-Trainer (T3) course with the tools and knowledge to integrate MERRTT into their state, tribal, or local training programs. TEPP has proven to be an effective and growing preparedness resource across the nation.
    [Show full text]
  • I-180/I-80 Interchange Signing Project
    NEBRASKA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION NOTICE OF HIGHWAY IMPROVEMENT PROJECT I-180/I-80 Interchange Signing HSIP-180-9(4); C.N. 13349 Identified as I-180/I-80 Interchange Signing, Construction is tentatively scheduled to begin the proposed project would install new spring of 2018 with completion within three overhead guide signs and two new overhead working days. sign structures at the Interstate 80 (I-80) and The proposed project would require short Interstate 180 (I-180) interchange located within duration detours during the removal and the city limits of Lincoln in Lancaster County. installation of the overhead signs and structures. The proposed project would begin on I-80 at mile The detours would be required for the on/off- marker (MM) 401.00 and end at MM 401.25 and ramps from westbound I-80 to northbound and begin on I-180 at MM 0.00 and end at MM 1.15. southbound I-180 and from northbound I-180 to westbound I-80. All detours would utilize I-80 The purpose of this project is to preserve the Exit 399 and Cornhusker Highway. I-180 and I-80 transportation asset, improve the reliability of the transportation system, and NDOT has worked to develop this project to perpetuate the mobility of the traveling public. minimize inconvenience and hardships. We are The need for this proposed project is based dedicated to improving Nebraska’s Highway on the condition of the overhead signs and system and with your help we can achieve this structures. goal. Proposed construction would consist of removing the existing overhead guide signs and Any questions or comments regarding this project should sign structures and installing new overhead guide be submitted to: Sarah Soula, Public Involvement Manager, Nebraska Department of Transportation, P.O.
    [Show full text]
  • Construction Suspended Where Possible for July 4
    State of Illinois JB Pritzker, Governor Illinois Department of Transportation Omer Osman, Acting Secretary FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: CONTACT: July 1, 2020 Paul Wappel 217.685.0082 Maria Castaneda 312.447.1919 Construction suspended where possible for July 4 Non-emergency closures called off, but motorists should still expect work zones SPRINGFIELD – The Illinois Department of Transportation announced today that lanes that have been closed for construction will reopen, where possible, for the Fourth of July holiday to minimize travel disruption. Non-emergency closures will be suspended from 3 p.m. July 2 to 11:59 p.m. July 5. The following lane closures will remain in place during the holiday weekend. Work zone speed limits will remain in effect where posted. Please buckle up, put your phone down and drive sober. District 1 City of Chicago: • The following ramps in the Jane Byrne Interchange work zone will remain closed: • o Inbound Kennedy (Interstate 90/94) Expressway exit to inbound Ida B. Wells Drive. o Outbound Dan Ryan Expressway exit to Taylor Street and Roosevelt Road. o Outbound Ida B. Wells Drive entrance from Canal Street. o Outbound Ida B. Wells Drive exit to outbound Dan Ryan. o Outbound Ida B. Wells Drive exit to outbound Kennedy. o Inbound Eisenhower Expressway (Interstate -290) to outbound Kennedy; detour with U-turn posted. o Inbound Eisenhower; lane reductions continue. o Inbound Ida B. Wells Drive; lane reductions continue. • Outbound Kennedy exit at Canfield Road; closed. • Westbound Bryn Mawr Avenue between Harlem and Oriole avenues; lane reductions continue. • Westbound Higgins Avenue between Oriole and Canfield avenues; lane reductions continue.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter Four
    CHAPTER FOUR EXISTING TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM INVENTORY WITH NEEDS ASSESSMENT ANALYSIS This Chapter of the WATS Long Range Transportation Plan provides a description of the existing multi-modal transportation system in Lycoming County encompassing highways and bridges, public transportation, airports, railroads and bike / pedestrian facilities. There are no waterway or inland ports located in the County. An inventory of current transportation assets by transportation mode will be provided, including a current physical condition and operational performance needs assessment. This data driven inventory and assessment is important to properly address transportation asset management needs and to improve operational performance of the overall system in terms of public safety, security, efficiency and cost effective movement of people and goods. HIGHWAY SYSTEM Highway Designations / Classification System According to the PennDOT Bureau of Planning and Research, there are 1,995.18 linear miles of publicly owned roadways throughout Lycoming County. PennDOT owns 716.59 linear miles, (35%) of public roadways in Lycoming County. In addition, there are 1,258.86 miles, (63%) of locally-owned roadways owned by 52 different local municipalities included on the PennDOT Liquid Fuels System. Other agencies own the remainder of roads in the County. Lycoming County government only owns two roads which are County Farm Road at the Lysock View county complex housing the Department of Public Safety (911 center), Pre- Release and county farm and an entrance road to the White Deer Recreation Complex. There are federal designations and classifications established for highway systems in the nation as noted in the following sections. Road Functional Classification System The Federal Highway Administration, PennDOT and Metropolitan & Rural Planning Organizations cooperatively establish and update maps that delineate various road classifications which group roadways into a hierarchy based on the type of highway service provided.
    [Show full text]
  • EVALUATING the IMPACT of OVERWEIGHT LOAD ROUTING on BURIED UTILITY FACILITIES By
    1. Report No. 2. Government Accession No. 3. Recipient's Catalog No. FHWA/TX-12/0-6394-2 4. Title and Subtitle 5. Report Date EVALUATING THE IMPACT OF OVERWEIGHT LOAD October 2011 ROUTING ON BURIED UTILITY FACILITIES Published: December 2011 6. Performing Organization Code 7. Author(s) 8. Performing Organization Report No. Edgar Kraus, Jeong Ho Oh, Emmanuel Fernando, Eric Yingfeng Li, Report 0-6394-2 Cesar Quiroga, and Nicholas Koncz 9. Performing Organization Name and Address 10. Work Unit No. (TRAIS) Texas Transportation Institute The Texas A&M University System 11. Contract or Grant No. College Station, Texas 77843-3135 Project 0-6394 12. Sponsoring Agency Name and Address 13. Type of Report and Period Covered Texas Department of Transportation Technical Report: Research and Technology Implementation Office September 2009–August 2011 P.O. Box 5080 14. Sponsoring Agency Code Austin, Texas 78763-5080 15. Supplementary Notes Project performed in cooperation with the Texas Department of Transportation and the Federal Highway Administration. Project Title: Evaluation of Overweight Load Routing on Buried Utility Plant URL: http://tti.tamu.edu/documents/0-6394-2.pdf 16. Abstract Overweight traffic movements can negatively affect pavement integrity and quality. However, it is less known to what degree buried utility facilities along and across the right of way are affected by these overweight loads, especially if the utility facility is aged, placed under an exception to the Utility Accommodation Rules (UAR), and/or subjected to repetitive loads. Routing decisions for repetitive overweight loads may be determined without consideration of cumulative impacts to utility infrastructure, particularly municipally owned lines that could be aged, accommodated under an exception, or of substandard materials.
    [Show full text]
  • State of Illinois
    State of Illinois Illinois Department of Transportation District 1 – Urban Interstate Resurfacing Milling and resurfacing on Interstate 290 from Sacramento Boulevard to Interstate 90/94 in Chicago. District 2 – Rural 4 Lane Bridge Rehabilitation Miscellaneous repairs on the structure carrying Interstate 80 over the Mississippi River. District 6 – Rural 2 Lane Concrete pavement on County Highway 10 east of Elkhart. District 6 – Urban Streetscape Streetscape reconstruction that includes new concrete pavers, sidewalks, lighting, planting beds and traffic signals on Capitol Avenue between 5th Street and 7th Street in Springfield. District 8 – Urban Pedestrian Bridge Construction Construction of a 3-span pedestrian bridge, sidewalk, lighting, landscaping, sewer and retaining walls for the city of Alton over US 67 at Riverfront Park. Printed by authority of the State of Illinois, 0445-11, 01/11, 500 FY 2012-2017 Proposed Highway Improvement Program Spring 2011 Published by the Illinois Department of Transportation Springfield, Illinois 62764 Printed by authority of State of Illinois, April 2011, 275 copies. This document is printed on recycled paper. This document is available on-line at www.dot.il.gov/opp/publications.html. CONTENTS Page Program Development Process ................................... 1 Seeking Public Involvement – Outreach Meetings ....... 3 Executive Summary ..................................................... 5 Department of Transportation District Map ................. 21 Public Review and Comment Form ...........................
    [Show full text]
  • 2018 Susquehanna Brochure
    2 0 1 8 E M E RGE NCY P R E PARE DNES S GUIDE IMPORTANT EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS INFORMATION INSIDE EMERGENCY Emergency Information 1 3 Any emergency at the Susquehanna plant would fall into one of the following 2 4 our categories, established by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. CLASSIFICATIONS Noti�ication of Unusual Event General Emergency Events are in process or have occurred which Events are in process or have occurred that involve indicate a potential degradation of the level of actual or imminent substantial core degradation or safety of the plant or indicate a security threat to melting with potential for loss of containment facility protection has been initiated. No releases of integrity or hostile action that results in an actual radioactive material requiring offsite response or loss of physical control of the facility. Radioactive monitoring are expected unless further releases can be reasonably expected to exceed degradation of safety systems occurs. EPA Protective Action Guideline exposure levels offsite for more than the immediate site area. Alert Events are in process or have occurred that involve an actual or potential substantial degradation Siren Maintenance of the level of safety of the plant or a security event that involves probable life-threatening risk To maintain a high level of siren to site personnel or damage to site equipment because of hostile action. Any releases are system performance, periodic expected to be limited to small fractions of the maintenace and testing may U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Protective Action Guideline exposure levels. occur. Testing may result in a growl or short 10-second sound Site Area Emergency of the siren.
    [Show full text]
  • Summary of State Speed Laws
    DOT HS 810 826 August 2007 Summary of State Speed Laws Tenth Edition Current as of January 1, 2007 This document is available to the public from the National Technical Information Service, Springfield, Virginia 22161 This publication is distributed by the U.S. Department of Transportation, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, in the interest of information exchange. The opinions, findings, and conclusions expressed in this publication are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the Department of Transportation or the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. The United States Government assumes no liability for its contents or use thereof. If trade or manufacturers' names or products are mentioned, it is because they are considered essential to the object of the publication and should not be construed as an endorsement. The United States Government does not endorse products or manufacturers. TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction ...................................................iii Missouri ......................................................138 Alabama..........................................................1 Montana ......................................................143 Alaska.............................................................5 Nebraska .....................................................150 Arizona ...........................................................9 Nevada ........................................................157 Arkansas .......................................................15 New
    [Show full text]
  • Roadwork 2020 Construction Season Gets Underway with Warmer
    Wyoming Road Work Guide Pre-sorted WYOMING Wyoming Department of Transportation 5300 Bishop Blvd. Standard WYOMING Cheyenne, Wyoming 82009-3340 U.S. Postage Paid Cheyenne, WY 82009 RoadWorkGUIDE Permit No. 24 Address Service Requested Information contained herein may be reprinted without permission. Art and photos are available to the press upon ProvidedRoad monthly during construction season Work request. For more information write: by the Wyoming Department of Transportation GUIDE Public Affairs Office Vol. 20, No. 1 May 2020 WYOMING Wyoming Department of Transportation DEPARTMENT 5300 Bishop Boulevard OF TRANSPORTATION Cheyenne, Wyoming 82009-3340 2020 construction season gets underway with warmer temperatures Interstate and state highway projects ramp up for season By Jordan Achs, District 1 Spring often means rising tempera- tures, melting snow and longer days, but it also marks the start of construc- tion season for the Wyoming Depart- ment of Transportation. WYDOT packs a lot of construc- Continued from front page tion into a short season, which typical- Work has begun in downtown Cheyenne on Central and Another two-year project beginning this year on approx- ly spans from late spring through early Warren Avenue where they cross the railroad tracks, also imately nine miles of US 30 between Kemmerer and Opal fall. That work is spread out over both known as Interstate 180. Crews are replacing bridge joints involves bridge rehabilitation and other miscellaneous work. interstates and highways statewide, and patching parts of the deck on both structures. Simulta- The estimated completion date is the end of June 2021. and projects include on- and off-ramp neously, crews will be replacing concrete slabs on either side In and around Douglas, crews have begun an $11 million, repairs, pavement improvements, of the structures between Ninth Street and Lincolnway.
    [Show full text]