[Federal Register Volume 67, Number 98 (Tuesday, May 21, 2002)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 35850-35886]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 02-12269]
[[Page 35849]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Part II
Department of Transportation
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Federal Highway Administration
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
23 CFR Part 655
National Standards for Traffic Control Devices: Manual on Uniform
Traffic Control Devices for Streets and Highways; Revision; Proposed
Rule
Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 98 / Tuesday,
May 21, 2002 / Proposed Rules
[[Page 35850]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Highway Administration
23 CFR Part 655
[FHWA Docket No. FHWA-2001-11159]
RIN 2125-AE93
National Standards for Traffic Control Devices: Manual on Uniform
Traffic Control Devices for Streets and Highways; Revision
AGENCY: Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), DOT.
ACTION: Notice of proposed amendments to the Manual on Uniform Traffic
Control Devices (MUTCD); request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The MUTCD is incorporated by reference in 23 CFR part 655,
subpart F, approved by the Federal Highway Administration, and
recognized as the national standard for traffic control devices used on
all public roads. The purpose of this notice of proposed amendments is
to revise standards, guidance, options, and supporting information
relating to the traffic control devices in all parts of the MUTCD. The
proposed changes are intended to expedite traffic, promote uniformity,
improve safety, and incorporate technology advances in traffic control
device application. These proposed changes are being designated
Revision No. 2.
DATES: Comments must be received on or before August 19, 2002.
ADDRESSES: Mail or hand deliver comments to the U.S. Department of
Transportation, Dockets Management Facility, Room PL-401, 400
Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC 20590-0001 or submit
electronically at http://dmses.dot.gov/submit. All comments should
include the docket number that appears in the heading of this document.
To facilitate documenting comments, please include the applicable MUTCD
section number with each of your comments. All comments received will
be available for examination at the above address between 9 a.m. and 5
p.m., e.t., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. Those
desiring a notification of receipt of comments must include a self-
addressed, stamped envelope or postcard, or print the acknowledgement
page that appears after submitting comments electronically.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Ernest Huckaby, Office of
Transportation Operations, Room 3408, (202) 366-9064, or Mr.
Raymond Cuprill, Office of the Chief Counsel, Room 4230, (202)
366-0791, U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway
Administration, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC 20590. Office
hours are from 7:45 a.m. to 4:15 p.m., e.t., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Electronic Access and Filing
You may submit or retrieve comments online through the Document
Management System (DMS) at http://dmses.dot.gov/submit. Acceptable
formats include: MS Word (versions 95 to 97), MS Word for Mac (versions
6 to 8), Rich Text File (RTF), American Standard Code Information
Interchange (ASCII)(TXT), Portable Document Format (PDF), and
WordPerfect (versions 7 to 8). The DMS is available 24 hours each day,
365 days each year. Electronic submission and retrieval help and
guidelines are available under the help section of the web site.
An electronic copy of this document may also be downloaded from the
Government Printing Office's Electronic Bulletin Board Service at (202)
512-1661 by using a computer, modem and suitable communications
software. Internet users may also reach the Office of the Federal
Register's home page at: http://www.nara.gov/fedreg and the Government
Printing Office's web page at: http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara.
Background
A list of the items of Revision No. 2 and the text of the
Millennium Edition of the MUTCD with Revision No. 2 text incorporated
are available for inspection and copying, as prescribed in 49 CFR part
7, at the FHWA Office of Transportation Operations, Room 3408, 400
Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC 20590. Furthermore, the list of
items of Revision No. 2 and the text of the 2000 Millennium Edition of
the MUTCD with Revision No. 2 text incorporated are available on the
MUTCD Internet site http://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov. The current version of
the 2000 Millennium Edition of the MUTCD with Revision No. 1 text
incorporated is also available on this Internet site.
This notice of proposed amendments is being issued to provide an
opportunity for public comment on the desirability of these proposed
amendments to the MUTCD. Based on the comments received and its own
experience, the FHWA may issue a final rule concerning the proposed
changes included in this notice.
The notice of proposed amendments is being published in response to
many comments received after the final rule creating the Millennium
Edition of the MUTCD was published on December 18, 2000. About 150 of
the 7100 comments that were received on the eight notices of proposed
amendments leading to the creation of the Millennium Edition of the
MUTCD, while extremely worthy, were deemed to result in too significant
a change from the text in the notices of proposed amendments to be
incorporated in the final rule without allowing the public an
additional comment period. Also, this notice addresses the many
advances in technology, and the traffic and safety management
strategies that have occurred since the beginning of the updating
process of the 1988 edition of the MUTCD in 1997.
The FHWA invites comments on these proposed changes to the MUTCD.
The FHWA proposes giving figure numbers and titles to all pages
that did not have a figure number for images of traffic control devices
in the Millennium Edition of the MUTCD, to facilitate easy reference.
The FHWA also proposes changing the titles of a number of figures to
clarify a figure as either "typical" or "example(s)
of." In general, the FHWA proposes using the word
"typical" in the title if the figure portrays preferred or
recommended practice, and the words "example(s) of" in the
title if the figure portrays one or several of a variety of things that
would be acceptable practice with no recommended preference. Also,
where appropriate, the FHWA proposes modifying figures to reflect
proposed changes in the text.
Additionally, throughout the MUTCD, minor changes in text are
proposed for grammatical or style consistency, to improve consistency
with related text or figures, to improve clarity, or to correct minor
errors. Where the FHWA proposes to add new sections within a chapter of
the MUTCD, the sections in the chapter that follow the proposed
addition would be renumbered accordingly. All Tables of Contents, Lists
of Figures, Lists of Tables, and page headers and footers would be
revised as appropriate to reflect the proposed changes.
The FHWA is aware that Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act, 29
U.S.C. 794 (2001), requires that certain electronic and information
technology ("EIT") be accessible to individuals with
disabilities. By regulation, 36 CFR 1194.4 (2001), EIT includes
information contained on world wide websites. Because the FHWA
distributes the MUTCD via the Internet site (http://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov), it is aware that it must comply with Section 508,
and it will do so by providing, in addition to the PDF file format, an
alternative
[[Page 35851]]
format (hypertext markup language-HTML), that is accessible to
individuals with disabilities. Included within those HTML files will be
narrative descriptions of the illustrations (figures) that are
contained within the affected non-accessible format electronic files.
However, because of the very large number of figures of traffic control
devices and of their possible applications in the 1150 page MUTCD, it
was determined that the FHWA would be tentatively exempted from meeting
this regulation due to onerous and costly effort resulting in a
fundamental alteration of the electronic version of the MUTCD. The FHWA
does have a contractual task underway, that will be completed
approximately in a year, to develop the hypertext markup language tags.
Furthermore, the FHWA determined that this notice of proposed
amendments go forward immediately as the proposed changes would be
beneficial to the traveling public, including those with visual
disabilities.
A summary of the significant proposed changes for each of the parts
of the MUTCD is included in the following discussion.
1. On Page i the FHWA proposes including addresses for several
additional organizations whose publications are referenced in the
various parts of the MUTCD.
Discussion of Proposed Amendments to the Table of Contents
2. The FHWA proposes condensing the Table of Contents to include
only the list of Parts and Chapters. Each Part will continue to begin
with a "table of contents" that contains the page number of
every section, figure, and table. This change will simplify the search
for an item by those with visual disabilities by enabling them to
advance to the appropriate Part and then page more quickly and easily.
Discussion of Proposed Amendments to the Introduction
3. In the Introduction, the FHWA proposes adding a fourth SUPPORT
statement to clarify the organization of the MUTCD and explain how one
could reference portions of the MUTCD.
The FHWA also proposes adding a new section that lists special
compliance dates for various portions of the MUTCD. The purpose of this
list is to provide a convenient reference guide to the user of special
compliance dates for various portions of the MUTCD.
Discussion of Proposed Amendments to Part 1-General
4. In Section 1A.05 Maintenance of Traffic Control Devices, in the
second paragraph of the GUIDANCE statement, the FHWA proposes revising
the text to eliminate redundancy.
5. In Section 1A.10 Interpretations, Experimentations, and Changes,
the FHWA proposes changing the first GUIDANCE statement to a STANDARD
statement to ensure that these requests come to the FHWA's Office of
Transportation Operations.
Additionally, following the fourth GUIDANCE statement the FHWA
proposes adding STANDARD, GUIDANCE, OPTION, and SUPPORT statements
describing a new "interim approval" process for the FHWA
approving the use of new traffic control devices pending official
rulemaking. Additionally, the FHWA proposes modifying Figure 1A-2
to reflect the "interim approval" process.
6. In Section 1A.11 Relation to Other Documents, the FHWA proposes
modifying the STANDARD statement to update the documents to the latest
editions. Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding additional sources of
information in the SUPPORT statement. The FHWA also proposes revising
the order of the sources of information, alphabetizing first by source,
then by the title of the document.
7. In Section 1A.12 Color Code, the FHWA proposes adding to the
STANDARD statement the assignment of the color fluorescent coral to
incident management to make it easier for road users to follow
directions relating to traffic incidents. The items will be reordered
so that the colors appear in alphabetical order. The color coordinates
for the color coral are indicated below.
The Commission Internationale de l'Eclairage (CIE) (English:
International Commission on Illumination) chromaticity coordinates (x,
y), defining the corner of the Fluorescent Coral daytime color region
are as follows:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
X y
------------------------------------------------------------------------
0.450........................................................... 0.270
0.590........................................................... 0.350
0.644........................................................... 0.290
0.536........................................................... 0.230
------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Luminance Factor Limits (Y)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
D65 D150
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Min Max YF Min Max
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fluorescent Pink..................... 25 None......................... 15 25 None.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fluorescent materials differ from non-fluorescent materials in that
the total luminance is the sum of the luminances due to reflection and
fluorescence. The luminance factor Y of such materials is the sum of
the luminance due to reflection (YR) and the luminance due
to fluorescence (YF). Therefore,
Y=YR+YF. If the value YF is greater
than zero, the material is fluorescent; if YF equals zero,
then the luminance factor Y is equal to YR.
These four pairs of chromaticity coordinates determine the
acceptable color in terms of CIE 1931 Standard Colorimetric System (2
degree standard observer) measured with CIE Standard Illuminant D65 in
accordance with ASTM E991. In addition, the color shall be fluorescent,
as determined by ASTM E1247.
8. In Section 1A.13 Definitions of Words and Phrases in This
Manual, the FHWA proposes in the STANDARD statement revising
definitions for: "Active Grade Crossing Warning System,"
"Average Day," "Beacon,"
"Crosswalk," and "Highway Traffic Signal" to
better reflect accepted practice and terminologies.
Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding definitions for
"Crashworthy," "Detectable," "Inherently
Low Emission Vehicle (ILEV)," "Pedestrian
Facilities," and "Roundabout Intersection" since they
are used in the MUTCD.
Additionally, the FHWA proposes removing the definition for
"Preferential Lane Marking" since it is no longer used in
the MUTCD.
9. In Section 1A.14 Abbreviations Used on Traffic Control Devices,
the FHWA proposes in the first STANDARD statement revising the text to
clarify that the abbreviations shown in Table 1A-1 are not the
only word messages that can be abbreviated.
The FHWA also proposes adding a GUIDANCE statement at the end of
this section to give guidance regarding the consistency of
abbreviations within a single jurisdiction.
[[Page 35852]]
Additionally, the FHWA proposes revising Tables 1A-1 and
1A-2 to include additional abbreviations, delete some
abbreviations, and modify some abbreviations, based on research on
driver understanding of abbreviations.
Discussion of Proposed Amendments to Part 2-Signs
10. In Section 2A.06 Design of Signs, the FHWA proposes adding to
the SUPPORT statement that the "general appearance" of the
sign legends, colors and sizes are shown in the illustrations and do
not exactly correspond to the letter brush stroke widths of the
"Standard Highway Signs" \1\ book and the FHWA
central values and tolerance limits of colors.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ "Standard Highway Signs," FHWA, 2002
Edition is available for purchase from the U.S. Government Printing
Office Bookstore, Superintendent of Documents, Room 118, Federal
Building, 1000 Liberty Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15222. Internet web
site at http://bookstore.gpo.gov. It is also available on the FHWA's
web site at http://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov and is available for
inspection and copying at the FHWA Washington Headquarters and all
FHWA Division Offices as prescribed at 49 CFR part 7.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding to the STANDARD statement
that, unless otherwise stated in the MUTCD for a specific sign, phone
numbers or Internet addresses shall not be shown on any sign to reduce
the possibility of driver distraction.
11. In Section 2A.07 Changeable Message Signs, the FHWA proposes
revising the GUIDANCE statement to include safety messages as one of
the types of allowable displays for changeable message signs.
Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding at the end of the section
OPTION, SUPPORT, GUIDANCE, and STANDARD statements regarding the use,
design, and format of safety and other messages so that they do not
adversely affect the usefulness of the sign.
12. In Section 2A.08 Retroreflectivity and Illumination, the FHWA
proposes clarifying Table 2A-1 by replacing "Patterns of
incandescent light bulbs" with "Incandescent light
bulbs" and by adding "Light Emitting Diodes (LEDs)"
to the listed Means of Illumination under Other Devices to reflect
current technology.
Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding a new SUPPORT statement at
the end of the section referencing information contained in Section
2A.22 on the use of retroreflective material on the sign support.
13. In Section 2A.10 Shapes, the FHWA proposes clarifying Table
2A-3 by removing the Emergency Evacuation Route Marker from the
listed signs for the circle shape as the FHWA proposes that the design
of this sign be a rectangular plate in accordance with other guide
signs, as indicated in Section 2I.03.
Additionally, the FHWA proposes clarifying the information for the
Trapezoid shape signs to be "Recreational and Cultural Interest
Area Series" and "National Forest Route" signs.
14. In Section 2A.11 Sign Colors, the FHWA proposes modifying the
STANDARD statement to read "The colors to be used on standard
signs and their specific use on these signs shall be as indicated in
the applicable sections of this Manual. The color coordinates and
values shall be as described in 23 CFR, Part 655, Subpart F,
Appendix." This proposed modification will clarify that the color
requirements apply to all signs in the MUTCD, not just those in Part 2,
and would refer to the correct location of the color coordinates and
values. The FHWA also proposes modifying the SUPPORT statement by
deleting the color coral from the reserved colors, because FHWA
proposes that the color coral be assigned for incident management uses.
Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding to the SUPPORT statement that
information regarding color coding of destinations on guide signs is
contained in Section 2D.03. The FHWA also proposes modifying Table
2A-4 by adding a new column on the right hand side for the color
coral, by adding a new row "Incident Management" to the
bottom, by adding a second new row at the bottom, following Incident
Management, "Changeable Message Signs**" and by adding or
revising color designation and note to reflect proposed changes in
other parts of the MUTCD.
15. In Section 2A.12 Dimensions, the FHWA proposes adding a second
paragraph to the SUPPORT statement describing and clarifying the
different sizes of signs, as detailed in the Standard Highway Signs
book.
16. In Section 2A.14 Word Messages, the FHWA proposes modifying the
first GUIDANCE statement to clarify that the specific ratio of 25 mm (1
in) of letter height per 12 m (40 ft) of legibility distance should be
a minimum.
Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding a new SUPPORT statement
after the first paragraph of GUIDANCE to provide additional information
that some research indicates that a ratio of 25 mm (1 in) of letter
height per 10m (33 ft) of legibility distance could be beneficial for
addressing the needs of older road users. A new GUIDANCE heading would
be added after the new SUPPORT statement.
17. In Section 2A.15 Sign Borders, the FHWA proposes modifying the
STANDARD statement to clarify that the corners of all sign borders,
except for STOP signs, shall be rounded. The FHWA also proposes
modifying the GUIDANCE statement to clarify that, where practical, the
corners of the sign should be rounded to fit the border, except for
STOP signs.
18. In Section 2A.16 Standardization of Location, the FHWA proposes
relocating Figures 2A-3, 2A-4, 2A-5, and 2A-6
to Section 2B.32 and removing Figure 2A-7. These relocated
figures are more appropriate in Chapter 2B. The first SUPPORT statement
would be revised to reflect these changes.
19. In Section 2A.17 Overhead Sign Installations, the FHWA proposes
modifying the GUIDANCE statement to clarify that overhead guide signs
should be used on freeways as well as expressways, under certain
conditions.
20. In Section 2A.18 Mounting Height, the FHWA proposes relocating
the first OPTION and SUPPORT statements so that they appear after the
second paragraph of the first STANDARD statement. This proposed change
will improve the clarity of the section.
Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding a paragraph to the last
OPTION statement heading to state that if the vertical clearance for
the design of other structures is less than 4.9 m (16 ft), the vertical
clearance to overhead sign structures or supports may be as low as 0.30
m (1 ft) higher than the vertical clearance for the design of the other
structures. These lower clearances for the sign structures are
sometimes needed to maximize the visibility of the signs when low
bridge structure or tunnel clearances limit the sign visibility.
21. In Section 2A.19 Lateral Offset, the FHWA proposes dividing the
first STANDARD statement into a STANDARD and a GUIDANCE statement. The
proposed STANDARD statement will deal with the lateral offset of
overhead sign supports, and the proposed GUIDANCE statement will deal
with the lateral offset of roadside-mounted signs. This will provide
additional flexibility to jurisdictions for roadside-mounted signs.
22. In Section 2A.20 Position of Signs, the FHWA proposes to
removing the second sentence under the SUPPORT statement as the
references to the figures duplicates other references elsewhere.
23. In Section 2A.22 Posts and Mountings, the FHWA proposes adding
an OPTION statement after the
[[Page 35853]]
SUPPORT statement, indicating that a strip of retroreflective material
may be used on the supports of regulatory and warning signs to draw
attention to the sign during nighttime conditions.
Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding a second STANDARD statement
after the OPTION statement specifying the size, location, and color of
the strip of retroreflective material if it is used. This will provide
for uniformity of application.
24. In Section 2A.24, the FHWA proposes changing the title of the
section from "Wrong Way Traffic Control" to "Median
Opening Treatments for Divided Highways with Wide Medians," to
better clarify the content of the section.
Additionally, the FHWA proposes removing the existing GUIDANCE
statement and to change the STANDARD statement to a GUIDANCE statement,
to clarify that at the median opening of a divided highway with side
streets and driveways, where the median width at the median opening is
9 m (30 ft) or more, the median openings should be signed as two
separate intersections. This will provide additional signing
flexibility to jurisdictions.
25. In Section 2B.02 Design of Regulatory Signs, the FHWA proposes
adding OPTION and GUIDANCE statements at the end of the section
regarding the use of Changeable Message Signs to provide for the
display of regulatory signs.
26. In Section 2B.03 Size of Regulatory Signs, the FHWA proposes
modifying Table 2B-1 by adding and removing signs to reflect
proposed changes in Part 2, and by adding additional sign sizes. These
new sign sizes reflect proposed changes in Part 2, are values from the
"Standard Highway Signs" book, and reflect regular use by
highway agencies.
Additionally, the FHWA proposes that the ONE WAY (R6-2) sign
and the DIVIDED HIGHWAY CROSSING (R6-3, R6-3a) signs be
increased in size for all roads based on the research addressing the
needs of older road users. The FHWA proposes adding sign sizes in the
"Expressways" and "Freeways" columns for these
signs and the R6-1 ONE WAY sign, since these are the main signs
to alert road users of the divided highway.
The FHWA proposes that the new sizes of these signs become
effective immediately for new or replacement of damaged existing sign
installations. The FHWA proposes a phase-in compliance period of 10
years for existing signs in good condition to minimize any impact on
State or local highway agencies.
Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding to the OPTION statement that
signs larger than those shown in Table 2B-1 may be used.
Sometimes there are special conditions that warrant much larger signs
and this flexibility is needed.
27. In Section 2B.06 STOP Sign Placement, the FHWA proposes
correcting an error in the STANDARD statement by changing the word
"correct" to "right" so that the statement
reads, "The STOP sign shall be installed on the right side of the
traffic lane to which it applies."
Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding that other than a DO NOT
ENTER sign, no other sign shall be mounted back-to-back with a STOP
sign, to assure that the shape of the STOP sign is visible to road
users on other approaches to the intersection. The proposed exception
for the DO NOT ENTER sign is to allow flexibility in urban areas where
there may not be enough room to install separate poles for each sign
and both signs must be installed at the corner.
28. In Section 2B.09 YIELD Sign Applications, the FHWA proposes
clarifying the OPTION statement by adding a reference to STOP signs.
The proposed change states that instead of using a STOP sign, a YIELD
sign may be used if engineering judgment indicates that one or more of
the conditions listed exist. The conditions for using a YIELD sign are
not being changed.
Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding a STANDARD statement after
the OPTION statement to require the use of a YIELD sign to assign
right-of-way at the entrance to a roundabout intersection. An essential
design feature of a modern roundabout is "yield-on-entry"
so a YIELD sign is necessary at all entrances to the roundabout.
29. In Section 2B.10 YIELD Sign Placement, the FHWA proposes
correcting an error in the first paragraph of the STANDARD statement by
changing the word "correct" to "right" so that
the first sentence reads, "The YIELD sign shall be installed on
the right side of the traffic lane to which it applies."
Additionally, FHWA proposes adding a new sentence after the first
sentence of the STANDARD statement to require that YIELD signs shall be
placed on both the left and right sides of the approaches to roundabout
intersections with more than one approach lane. This is in concert with
best practices of modern roundabout design and to assure adequate
visibility of the YIELD signs.
The FHWA also proposes adding a paragraph to the STANDARD
statement, which states that other than a DO NOT ENTER sign, no other
sign shall be mounted back-to-back with a YIELD sign.
Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding a paragraph to the GUIDANCE
statement stating that, at a roundabout intersection, the face of the
YIELD sign should not be visible from the circulating roadway. This is
recommended to prevent circulating vehicles in the roundabout from
yielding unnecessarily.
The FHWA also proposes adding an OPTION statement at the end of the
section to allow the installation of an additional YIELD sign on the
left side of the road and/or the use of a YIELD line at wide-throat
intersections. This will provide for improved visibility of the YIELD
signs where needed.
30. In Section 2B.11 Speed Limit Sign (R2-1), the FHWA
proposes modifying the STANDARD statement to reflect that as indicated
in Figure 2B-1, the FHWA proposes a new unique design for the
metric speed limit sign. The sign will have a red circle around the
speed value with a "km/h" legend below. Based on this new
design, the FHWA proposes removing the first SUPPORT statement, as it
is no longer needed. The new design of the metric Speed Limit sign will
better differentiate a metric speed limit sign from an English units
speed limit sign, and will also remedy the possible situation where the
"METRIC" plaque used in the old design is damaged or stolen
and the sign appears to be an English units Speed Limit sign with a
higher but erroneous value.
The FHWA also proposes clarifying the third paragraph of the
GUIDANCE statement to differentiate the rounding of a speed limit on a
sign located on a non-residential street from a sign located on a
residential street. The proposed GUIDANCE states that when a speed
limit is posted, it should be the 85th-percentile speed of free-flowing
traffic, rounded up to the nearest 10 km/h (5 mph) on non-residential
streets and rounded up or down to the nearest 10 km/h (5 mph) increment
on residential streets. Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding a
paragraph to the beginning of the GUIDANCE statement, which states that
States and local agencies should reevaluate their non-statutory speed
limits on their streets and highways at least once every 5 years to
determine whether adjustments would be appropriate.
The FHWA proposes adding a paragraph to the end of the OPTION
statement, which states that a changeable message sign that displays to
approaching drivers the speed at which they are traveling may be
installed in conjunction with a Speed Limit sign.
[[Page 35854]]
The FHWA also proposes adding, following the OPTION statement, a
GUIDANCE statement, which states that if a changeable message sign
displaying approach speeds is installed, the legend YOUR SPEED XX KM/H
(MPH) or similar legend should be shown. Changeable message signs
displaying the actual speeds of approaching drivers have been shown to
be valuable tools to enhance driver compliance with speed limits.
31. Following Section 2B.14 Minimum Speed Limit Sign (R2-4),
the FHWA proposes adding a new section numbered and titled
"Section 2B.15 Fines Higher Sign (R2-6)." The
proposed Section 2B.15 will consist of OPTION, GUIDANCE, and STANDARD
statements on the uses of the FINES HIGHER sign; namely, to advise road
users when increased fines are imposed for traffic violations within
designated roadway segments; and on the installation of the FINES
HIGHER sign; namely, below an applicable regulatory or warning sign in
a temporary traffic control zone, a school zone, or other applicable
designated zone. The sections following Section 2B.15 will be
renumbered accordingly.
32. The FHWA proposes removing existing Section 2B.16 Reduced Speed
Ahead Signs (R2-5) Series, as these signs are proposed to be
revised to be warning signs and added to Chapter 2C. The FHWA proposes
this change because the intended message is more properly categorized
as a warning message rather than a regulatory message. The FHWA
proposes that this change become effective immediately for new or
replacement of damaged existing sign installations. The FHWA proposes a
phase-in compliance period of 10 years for existing signs in good
condition to minimize any impact on State or local highway agencies.
33. In Section 2B.17, the FHWA proposes retitling the section from
"Turn Prohibition Signs (R3-1 through R3-4)" to
"Turn Prohibition Signs (R3-1 through R3-4, and
R3-18)" to include a new symbol sign which combines the No
Left Turn and the No U-Turn symbol signs into one symbol sign, and to
add to the OPTION and GUIDANCE statements information on the proper use
of the sign. This proposed new sign will reduce the sign clutter at an
intersection where both movements are restricted and make it easier for
road users to understand the multiple turn restrictions.
34. In Section 2B.19 Mandatory Movement Lane Control Signs
(R3-5, R3-5a, and R3-7), the FHWA proposes clarifying
the GUIDANCE statement that the lane control pavement markings
mentioned are lane-use arrow markings.
35. In Section 2B.23, the FHWA proposes changing the title from
"Reversible Lane Control Signs (R3-9c through
R3-9i)" to "Reversible Lane Control Signs
(R3-9d, R3-9f through R3-9i)" and removing the
R3-9c and R3-9e signs and all of their references in the
section. Using just the R3-9d sign will improve uniformity and
maintain consistency with the red X symbol used in reversible lane
signal systems. The DO NOT ENTER symbol is intended to be used to
prohibit entry into a roadway or ramp, and using this symbol to
prohibit use of a single lane of a roadway that is otherwise available
for travel is inconsistent and degrades the meaning of the symbol.
The FHWA proposes clarifying in the first STANDARD statement that
the barriers mentioned are physical barriers.
Additionally, the FHWA proposes modifying item B of the second
OPTION statement to read, "An engineering study indicates that
the use of the Reversible Lane Control signs alone would result in an
acceptable level of safety and efficiency." This is proposed to
clarify the specific types of signs used for control of a reversible
lane operation that the study needs to evaluate to determine whether
such signs alone, without reversible lane signals, would be acceptable.
The FHWA proposes that these changes in Section 2B.23 become
effective immediately for new or replacement of damaged existing sign
installations. The FHWA proposes a phase-in compliance period of 10
years for existing signs in good condition to minimize any impact on
State or local highway agencies.
36. In Section 2B.28 Keep Right and Keep Left Signs (R4-7,
R4-8), the FHWA proposes adding to the first OPTION statement
that the Keep Left (R4-8) sign may be used at locations where it
is necessary for traffic to pass only to the left of a roadway feature
or obstruction.
The FHWA proposes adding to the GUIDANCE statement to clarify that
the Keep Right sign should be mounted on the face of, or just in front
of, a pier or other obstruction separating opposite directions of
traffic in the center of the highway such that traffic will have to
pass to the right of the sign.
Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding a new STANDARD statement
following the GUIDANCE statement that the Keep Right sign shall not be
installed on the right side of the roadway in a position where traffic
must pass to the left of the sign.
The proposed changes in Section 2B.28 are to clarify the proper
uses of Keep Right and Keep Left signs.
37. In Section 2B.29 DO NOT ENTER Sign (R5-1), the FHWA
proposes modifying the GUIDANCE statement by clarifying the placement
of the DO NOT ENTER sign. The proposed GUIDANCE states that, if used,
the DO NOT ENTER sign should be placed directly in view of the road
user at the point where a road user could wrongly enter a divided
highway, one-way roadway, or ramp, and includes a reference to Figure
2B-8.
Additionally, the FHWA proposes renumbering and retitling Figure
2B-2 from "Typical Wrong-Way Signing for a Divided
Highway" to "Figure 2B-8. Example of Wrong-Way
Signing for a Divided Highway with a Median Width of 9 m (30 ft) or
Greater."
38. In Section 2B.31 Selective Exclusion Signs, the FHWA proposes
changing item H in the SUPPORT statement from "Hazardous
Cargo" to "Hazardous Material" to reflect the changes
proposed in Section 2B.46.
39. In Section 2B.32 ONE WAY Signs (R6-1, R6-2), the
FHWA proposes relocating four figures from Section 2A.16 to Section
2B.32. Figure 2A-5 will be renumbered and retitled "Figure
2B-10. Examples of Locations of ONE WAY Signs"; Figure
2A-6 will be renumbered and retitled "Figure 2B-11.
Examples of Locations of ONE WAY Signs"; Figure 2A-4 will
be renumbered and retitled "Figure 2B-12. Examples of ONE
WAY Signing for Divided Highways with Medians 9 m (30 ft) or
Greater"; and Figure 2A-3 will be renumbered and retitled
"Figure 2B-13. Example of ONE WAY Signing for Divided
Highways with Medians Less Than 9 m (30 ft)." The FHWA also
proposes to add a new figure, "Figure 2B-14. Examples of
ONE WAY Signing for Divided Highways with Medians Less Than 9 m (30 ft)
and Separated Left-Turn Lanes." These figures are most directly
associated with ONE WAY signs and should be located adjacent to Section
2B.32, which contains the text about ONE WAY signs.
Additionally, the FHWA proposes showing the optional Keep Right
signs on the medians on Figures 2B-13 and 2B-14 at a 45
degree angle facing the road users on the cross street, to make it
easier for them to determine the location of the median nose and to
enter the proper roadway of a divided highway.
40. In Section 2B.35 Design of Parking, Standing, and Stopping
Signs, the FHWA proposes adding to the GUIDANCE statement that where
special parking restrictions are imposed
[[Page 35855]]
during heavy snowfall, Snow Emergency signs should be installed, and
that the legend will vary according to the regulations, but the signs
should be vertical rectangles, having a white background with the upper
part of the plate a red background. This GUIDANCE was inadvertently
left out of the current MUTCD. However, signs of this type are used by
many jurisdictions.
41. In Section 2B.39 Pedestrian Crossing Signs (R9-2,
R9-3), the FHWA proposes modifying the second OPTION statement by
changing the "PEDESTRIANS PROHIBITED" to "NO
PEDESTRIAN CROSSING" as the proper word message sign to be used
as an alternate to the No Pedestrian Crossing (R9-3a) symbol
sign. "NO PEDESTRIAN CROSSING" is the intended meaning of
the symbol and more clearly describes the actual restriction of
pedestrian movement.
42. In Section 2B.40, the FHWA proposes changing the title from
"Traffic Signal Signs (R10-1 through R10-13)"
to "Traffic Signal Signs (R10-1 through
R10-21)" to reflect proposed additional traffic signal
signs. These signs are shown in new Figures 2B-17 and
2B-18.
The FHWA proposes adding to the second OPTION statement that the
R10-3d sign may be used if the pedestrian clearance time is
sufficient only for the pedestrian to cross to the median. This sign is
similar to the existing R10-3b sign except that next to the DON'T
WALK symbol is the message "START CROSSING TO MEDIAN WATCH FOR
VEHICLES." The FHWA also proposes modifying Figure 2B-17 to
add illustrations of the R10-3d sign and the R10-3e sign.
The R10-3e sign is a variant incorporating "time remaining
to finish crossing" and is consistent with countdown pedestrian
signals as proposed in Part 4.
Additionally, the FHWA proposes revising and relocating the third
OPTION statement to follow the second STANDARD statement to indicate
that a symbolic NO TURN ON RED (R10-11) sign may be used as an
alternate to the R10-11a and R10-11b signs. The symbolic
sign is proposed to have a symbolic red ball rather than using the
"No Right Turn" symbol, to avoid confusion with the
R3-1 (No Right Turn) sign.
Additionally, the FHWA proposes relocating the last item in the
second GUIDANCE statement to the first paragraph under the third OPTION
statement (new fourth OPTION statement) and changing it to read that
when right turn on red after stop is permitted and pedestrian
crosswalks are marked, the TURNING TRAFFIC MUST YIELD TO PEDESTRIANS
(R10-15) sign may be used. This proposed change is necessary to
prevent potential overuse and reduced impact of the sign. Additionally,
the FHWA proposes adding a paragraph to the third OPTION statement (new
fourth OPTION statement) allowing the use of supplemental plaques
showing times of day or with the legend WHEN PEDESTRIANS ARE PRESENT
below a NO TURN ON RED sign, to allow the flexibility to restrict turns
on red only during certain times or when a pedestrian conflict is
present.
Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding to the second GUIDANCE
statement that where turns on red after stop are permitted and the turn
signal indication is a RED ARROW, the RIGHT (LEFT) TURN ON RED ARROW
PERMITTED AFTER STOP (R10-17 or R10-17a) sign should be
installed adjacent to the RED ARROW signal indication to conform to the
"Uniform Vehicle Code and Model Traffic
Ordinance" \2\ (UVC) as revised. The revised UVC prohibits
turns on a RED ARROW after stop unless a sign specifically allowing the
turn is in place.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ The "Uniform Vehicle Code and Model Traffic
Ordinance," 2000 edition, is published by the National
Committee on Uniform Traffic Laws and Ordinances, 107 S. West
Street, #110, Alexandria, Virginia 22314. It is available for
inspection as prescribed at 49 CFR part 7. Purchase information is
available on the web site for the National Committee at http://www.ncutlo.org.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding to the third STANDARD
statement that the EMERGENCY SIGNAL-STOP WHEN FLASHING RED
(R10-14) sign shall be used in conjunction with emergency beacons
and that the U-TURN YIELD TO RIGHT TURN (R10-16) sign shall
be installed near the left-turn signal face if U-turns are allowed on a
protected left-turn movement from which drivers making a right turn
from the conflicting approach to their left are simultaneously being
shown a right-turn GREEN ARROW signal indication, to correspond with
proposed changes in Part 4 of the MUTCD, which will require the use of
these signs with Emergency Beacons and when right turns conflict with
U-turns, respectively.
43. In Section 2B.46 the FHWA proposes changing the title from
"Hazardous Cargo Signs (R14-2, R14-3)" to
"Hazardous Material Signs (R14-2, R14-3)" and
revising the OPTION and GUIDANCE statements to replace
"cargo" with the word "material" and to revise
the symbol for the Hazardous Material sign (R14-3) sign to be HM
rather than HC, to correspond with Section 2B.31 and to reflect the
change in terminology in the industry. The FHWA proposes that this
change become effective immediately for new or replacement of damaged
existing sign installations. The FHWA proposes a phase-in compliance
period of 5 years for existing signs in good condition to minimize any
impact on State or local highway agencies.
44. In Section 2B.48 Preferential Lane Signs (R3-10 through
R3-17), the FHWA proposes modifying the first paragraph of the
third GUIDANCE statement to include light rail transit in the list of
preferential lane signs for which the diamond symbol should not be
used, because the diamond symbol is intended to be used only to denote
HOV lanes. The FHWA also proposes changing the last paragraph of the
third GUIDANCE statement to a second STANDARD statement because
changeable message signs serving as HOV signs shall be the required
sign size and shall display the required letter height and legend
format that corresponds to the type of facility and design speed as
articulated in Section 2A.07. This proposed change from a recommended
practice to a required practice is being made to preclude the use of
insufficiently sized or designed changeable message signs to display
these important regulatory messages for HOV lane use.
Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding a new GUIDANCE statement at
the end of the section that the Inherently Low Emission Vehicle (ILEV)
(R3-10b) sign should be used to indicate that it is permissible
for a properly labeled and certified ILEV, regardless of the number of
occupants, to operate in the HOV lanes and that the ILEV signs should
be ground mounted in advance of the HOV lanes and at intervals along
the HOV lanes based upon engineering judgment. A uniform sign design
and application are needed to enhance driver understanding and
compliance regarding ILEV use of HOV lanes and also to correspond to
proposed changes in Section 2B.49.
45. In Section 2B.49 High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Lanes, the FHWA
proposes modifying the STANDARD statement to allow motorcycles to use
HOV lanes that received Federal-aid program funding.
The FHWA also proposes three additions to this STANDARD statement.
The first addition requires agencies to allow a vehicle with less than
the required number of occupants to operate in the HOV lanes if:
A. The vehicle is properly labeled and certified as an ILEV and the
HOV lane is not a bus-only HOV lane; or
[[Page 35856]]
B. The HOV lanes are part of a project that is participating in the
FHWA Value Pricing Pilot Program.
The second addition requires that the requirements for a minimum
number of occupants in a vehicle to use an HOV lane shall be in effect
for most, or all, of at least one of the usual times during the day
when the demand to travel is greatest (such as morning or afternoon
peak travel periods) and the traffic congestion problems on the roadway
and adjoining transportation corridor are at their worst. The final
addition requires a Federal review prior to initiating a proposed test
or demonstration project that seeks to significantly change the
operation of the HOV lanes for any length of time.
The last major change that the FHWA proposes to this section is the
addition of a SUPPORT statement at the end of the Section. The SUPPORT
statement states that the Inherently Low Emissions Vehicle (ILEV)
program requirements, certification program, and other regulatory
provisions are developed and administered through the U.S.
Environmental Protection Administration (EPA). The U.S. EPA is the only
entity with the authority to certify ILEVs. Vehicle manufacturers must
request the U.S. EPA to grant an ILEV certification for any vehicle to
be considered and labeled as meeting these standards. According to the
U.S. EPA, 1996 was the first year that they certified any ILEVs. The
U.S. EPA regulations specify that ILEVs must meet the emission
standards specified in 40 CFR 88.311-93 and their labeling must
be in accordance with 40 CFR 88.311-93(c).
The proposed changes in Section 2B.49 are to assure consistency
with the provisions of Titles 23 and 49 of the United States Code
(USC), with commitments made by FHWA during the National Environmental
Policy Act process, and with requirements under the Clean Air Act.
46. In Section 2B.50 High-Occupancy Vehicle Sign Applications and
Placement, the FHWA proposes adding a SUPPORT statement after the
GUIDANCE statement, which states that Figures 2E-44 through
2E-48 show application and placement examples of HOV signing for
entrances to barrier-separated HOV lanes and direct entrances to and
exits from HOV lanes. This figure reference will clarify the intended
use of these signs.
47. The FHWA proposes redesignating current Section 2B.51 Other
Regulatory Signs, as Section 2B.54 and revising the STANDARD statement
to indicate that the symbol for the seat belt symbol is in the
"Standard Highway Signs" book.
48. The FHWA proposes adding a new Section 2B.51 Photo Enforced
Signs (R10-18, R10-19). The purpose of this new section is
to provide guidance to State and local agencies on the use of the photo
enforcement signs to alert road users of this type of traffic
enforcement. The FHWA proposes including an OPTION statement with two
paragraphs. The first paragraph states that a TRAFFIC LAWS PHOTO
ENFORCED (R10-18) sign may be installed at a jurisdictional
boundary to advise road users that some of the traffic regulations
within that jurisdiction are being enforced by photographic equipment.
The second paragraph states that a PHOTO ENFORCED (R10-19) sign
(see Figure 2B-1) may be mounted below a regulatory sign to
advise road users that the regulation is being enforced by photographic
equipment.
Additionally, the FHWA proposes including a STANDARD statement,
which states that if the PHOTO ENFORCED (R10-19) sign is used
below a regulatory sign, it shall be a rectangle with black legend and
border on a white background.
The FHWA proposes that these signs become effective immediately for
new or replacement of damaged existing sign installations. The FHWA
proposes a phase-in compliance period of 10 years for existing signs of
different designs that are in good condition to minimize any impact on
State or local highway agencies.
49. The FHWA proposes adding a new Section 2B.52 Yield Here To
Pedestrians Signs (R1-6, R1-6a). These proposed new signs
alert road users of the presence of an unsignalized midblock pedestrian
crossing. The FHWA proposes including a STANDARD statement, which
states that if YIELD lines are used in advance of an unsignalized
marked crosswalk, the YIELD HERE TO PEDESTRIANS (R1-5 or
R1-5a) signs, shall be placed 6.1 to 15 m (20 to 50 ft) in
advance of the nearest crosswalk line. The purpose of the STANDARD is
to provide for the uniform use and placement of these signs and
improved pedestrian safety.
The FHWA proposes that this change become effective immediately for
new or replacement of damaged existing sign installations. The FHWA
proposes a phase-in compliance period of 10 years for existing signs in
good condition to minimize any impact on State or local highway
agencies.
50. The FHWA proposes adding a new Section 2B.53 In-Street
Pedestrian Crossing Signs (R1-6, R1-6a). These proposed new
signs remind road users of the laws regarding right-of-way at an
unsignalized pedestrian crossing. The FHWA proposes including OPTION,
GUIDANCE, and STANDARD statements describing the proposed use, design
and application of the In-Street Pedestrian Crossing (R1-6,
R1-6a) signs. These signs are proposed in order to provide for
uniformity of these regulatory messages and for improved pedestrian
safety.
The FHWA also proposes adding a new figure numbered and titled
Figure 2B-22, "Unsignalized Pedestrian Crosswalk
Signs" to illustrate the design of the R1-5, R1-5a,
the R1-6, and the R1-6a signs.
51. In Section 2C.02 Application of Warning Signs, the FHWA
proposes modifying the SUPPORT statement to reflect that
"categories" not "applications" of warning
signs are shown in Table 2C-1. This change is necessary to make
the text and Table 2C-1 consistent.
Additionally, the FHWA proposes changing the title of Table
2C-1 from "Application of Warning Signs" to
"Categories of Warning Signs" and to add new roadway
related and traffic related signs and supplemental plaques to the table
based on proposed changes in other sections of Chapter 2C. The change
in the title of the table is being proposed to better reflect the
actual content of the table.
52. In Section 2C.04 Size of Warning Signs, the FHWA proposes
changing Table 2C-2 to add sizes for the Expressway W1 series
Arrows signs, sizes for the Expressways and Freeways W7 series truck
runaway signs, sizes for the Expressways and Freeways W12-2P low
clearance signs, and increasing the sizes for all roadways except
Freeways for the W10-1 advance grade crossing sign, to enhance
visibility of this sign for all road users, including older drivers.
The FHWA proposes that the larger sizes become effective immediately
for new or replacement of damaged existing sign installations. The FHWA
proposes a phase-in compliance period of 10 years for existing signs in
good condition to minimize any impact on State or local highway
agencies.
53. In Section 2C.05 Placement of Warning Signs, the FHWA proposes
changing Table 2C-4 so that the distances for the placement of
advance warning signs correspond to the values in the 2001 AASHTO
"A Policy on Geometric Design of Highway and Streets"\3\
book and to make the table easier to use.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ "A Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and
Streets," 4th Edition, 2001, in both hardcopy and
CD-ROM, is available from the American Association of State
Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) by telephone (800)
231-3475, facsimile (800) 525-5562, mail AASHTO, P.O.
Box 96716, Washington, DC 20090-6716, or at its web site
http://www.transportation.org and click on Bookstore.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 35857]]
In Table 2C-4, the FHWA proposes combining the
"Condition B" and "Condition C" columns and
labeling them "Condition B". The FHWA also proposes adding
columns for 90, 100, and 110 km/h and 60 and 70 mph for the
deceleration to the listed advisory speed and rows for 70 and 75 mph
for the Posted or 85th Percentile Speed. Finally, the FHWA proposes
revising the Notes to reflect the proposed changes throughout the
MUTCD. These changes to Table 2C-4 are proposed to reflect the
needs of older road users, and to improve the clarity of the Notes.
54. In Section 2C.06, the FHWA proposes changing the title from
"Horizontal Alignment Signs (W1-1 through
W1-5)" to "Horizontal Alignment Signs (W1-1
through W1-5, W1-10, W1-11, W1-15)" to
reflect the proposed Hairpin Curve (W1-11) sign and the 270
Degree Loop (W1-15) sign.
In the first OPTION statement, the FHWA proposes recommending the
use of the Hairpin Curve sign and the 270 Degree Loop sign based on the
change in horizontal alignment. These new signs would better portray
the severe curvature for these types of alignment changes.
The FHWA also proposes adding to the GUIDANCE statement. The
proposed addition recommends installing a One-Direction Large Arrow
(W1-6) sign or Chevron Alignment (W1-8) sign on the outside
of a turn or curve when the Hairpin Curve sign or 270-Degree Loop sign
is installed. The reason for this recommendation is to provide for
enhanced warning to road users of the severe alignment change and
reduce run-off-the-road crashes.
The FHWA also proposes adding a second GUIDANCE statement following
the STANDARD statement. This proposed GUIDANCE recommends that the need
for additional curve warning signs or advisory speed reduction warning
plaques be based on an engineering study or on engineering judgment.
The reason for this recommendation is that highway curves tend to be
high crash locations with the crash rate about three times the rate for
highway tangent segments and with the run-off-the-road crash rate about
four times the tangent segment rate.
The FHWA proposes adding an OPTION statement that provides a method
that may be used to determine the need for additional speed reduction
warning signs. The FHWA proposes these optional criteria for
determining the need for additional recommended speed reduction signs
to mitigate the high number of run-off-the-road crashes along curves
and ramps. Most curves are very well outlined with delineators or
chevron signs. Since crashes are still occurring, the FHWA believes
that there is a need to remind drivers of the recommended reduction in
speed as they proceed along the curve or ramp.
Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding to Table 2C-5 to show
the metric speed value of less than or equal to 50 km/h along with the
English unit of less than or equal to 30 mph and showing the metric
speed value of greater than 50 km/h along with the English unit of
greater than 30 mph. The metric values were inadvertently omitted from
the Millennium Edition of the MUTCD.
55. In Section 2C.07, the FHWA proposes changing the title from
"Combination Horizontal Alignment/Advisory Speed Signs
(W1-9)" to "Combination Horizontal Alignment/Advisory
Speed Signs". The FHWA also proposes changes to the first OPTION
statement to allow the combination into a single sign of any Horizontal
Alignment sign with an Advisory Speed (W13-1) plaque. The
resulting sign number for the combination sign would be the Horizontal
Alignment sign number with an "a" added. This change will
provide additional flexibility to jurisdictions.
The FHWA proposes revising the STANDARD statement. When a
combination Horizontal Alignment/Advisory Speed sign is used, the
proposed revised STANDARD statement will require that the advisory
speed match the advisory speed on the Advisory Speed plaque mounted
with the advance warning sign and that the sign also be installed as
near as practical to the beginning of the turn or curve, as depicted on
new Figure 2C-2. When the recommended reduction in speed is 20
km/h (15 mph) or greater, the proposed revised STANDARD will require
that the combination Horizontal Alignment/Advisory Speed sign
supplement other advance warning signs.
Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding an OPTION statement, which
states that when the recommended reduction in speed is less than 25
km/h (15 mph), instead of installing other advance warning signs,
the combination Horizontal Alignment/Advisory Speed sign alone may be
installed just before the point of curvature. The combination
Horizontal Alignment/Advisory Speed sign may be used throughout the
turn or curve.
The proposed changes to Section 2C.07 provide for enhanced
uniformity of application of these types of signs and improved safety
on curves and turns.
56. In Section 2C.10 Chevron Alignment Sign (W1-8), the FHWA
proposes adding to the STANDARD statement that a border shall not be
used on the CHEVRON ALIGNMENT sign. The purpose of this change is to
correct an error in the current edition.
57. In Section 2C.11 Hill Signs (W7-1, W7-1a,
W7-1b), the FHWA proposes adding to the GUIDANCE statement to
clarify that on longer grades, the Hill sign with distance
(W7-3a) plaque or the combination distance/grade (W7-3b)
plaque at periodic intervals of approximately 1.6 km (1 mi) spacing
should be considered. This change is proposed to clarify that the
plaques should not be used alone but should supplement the Hill sign.
58. In Section 2C.12 Truck Escape Ramp Signs (W7-4 Series),
the FHWA proposes adding to the STANDARD statement to indicate that at
least one of the W7-4 series warning signs shall be used when
truck escape ramps are installed. This change clarifies that additional
warning signs may be used as conditions warrant.
59. In Section 2C.13, the FHWA proposes changing the title from
"ROAD NARROWS Sign (W5-1)" to "ROAD NARROWS
Sign (W5-1, W5-1a)" to reflect the new symbolic Road
Narrows (W1-5a) sign. The Narrow Bridge (W5-2a) symbol sign
would be renumbered and retitled as the new Road Narrows (W5-1a)
symbol sign. The Road Narrows (W5-1a) symbol sign may be used as
an alternate to the word message ROAD NARROWS (W1-5) word sign.
The FHWA proposes these changes because the road user's understanding
of the symbol is not exclusively as "narrow bridge ahead,"
but rather as symbolic of any narrowing of the road, such as the
presence of curb bulb-outs or chicanes.
60. In Section 2C.14 NARROW BRIDGE Sign (W5-2), the FHWA
proposes removing the reference to the Narrow Bridge symbol
(W5-2b) sign from the OPTION statement. This change reflects the
proposed change of the Narrow Bridge symbol (W5-2b) sign to the
Road Narrows symbol (W5-1a) sign.
61. In Section 2C.17 Divided Highway (Road) Ends Sign (W6-2),
the FHWA proposes modifying the GUIDANCE statement to clarify that a
Divided Highway Ends (W6-2) symbol sign should be used in advance
of the end of a section of physically divided highway (not an
intersection or junction) as a warning of two-way traffic ahead. The
reason for this change is that the
[[Page 35858]]
warning sign should be placed in advance of, rather than at, the start
of the divided highway section.
62. In Section 2C.19 DEAD END/NO OUTLET Sign (W14-1,
W14-2), the FHWA proposes modifying the STANDARD statement to
clarify that when the W14-1 or W14-2 sign is used, the sign
shall be posted as near as practical to the entry point or at a
sufficient advance distance to permit the road user to avoid the dead
end or no outlet condition by turning off, if possible, at the nearest
intersecting street. The change is proposed to give additional
flexibility to jurisdictions when posting the sign at the exact entry
point is not practical due to obstructions or other factors.
63. In Section 2C.20 Low Clearance Signs (W12-2 and
W12-2P), the FHWA proposes clarifying the STANDARD statement by
removing the words "or minimum structure height". This
change is proposed to clarify the proper application of Low Clearance
signs.
Additionally, the FHWA proposes clarifying the GUIDANCE statement
by changing the phrase "legal limit" to "legal
maximum vehicle height" to reflect more precisely the proper
dimension.
64. In Section 2C.21 BUMP and DIP Signs (W8-1, W8-2),
the FHWA proposes modifying the second GUIDANCE statement to clarify
that a short stretch of depressed alignment that might momentarily hide
a vehicle should be treated as a no-passing zone when centerline
striping is provided on a two-lane or three-lane road. The proposed
change replaces the word "may" with "might" to
avoid possible confusion of this as an OPTION statement, and clarifies
that the use of a no-passing zone in this situation only applies when
centerline striping is provided on the road.
65. In Section 2C.22 SPEED HUMP Sign (W17-1), the FHWA
proposes adding a sentence to the OPTION statement to allow the use of
the legend SPEED BUMP instead of the legend SPEED HUMP on the
W17-1 sign. This proposed addition provides additional
flexibility to jurisdictions and to reduce sign inventory.
66. In Section 2C.24, the FHWA proposes changing the title from
"SHOULDER Signs (W8-4, W8-9, W8-9a, and
W8-11)" to "SHOULDER and UNEVEN LANES Signs
(W8-4, W8-9, W8-9a, and W8-11)". This new
title is more accurate since the UNEVEN LANES (W8-11) sign is
distinguished from the Shoulder signs.
The FHWA proposes adding a STANDARD statement just before the
GUIDANCE statement. The proposed STANDARD statement requires the use of
the SHOULDER DROP-OFF (W8-9a) sign when a shoulder drop-off,
adjacent to the travel lane, exceeds 75 mm (3 in) in depth and is not
protected by portable barriers. The FHWA also proposes removing the
part of the GUIDANCE statement concerning the use of the SHOULDER DROP-
OFF sign since it is covered in the proposed new STANDARD statement.
This STANDARD statement is identical to the STANDARD statement in
Section 6F.41 (Shoulder and UNEVEN LANES Signs). This proposed
requirement is to represent the state-of-the-practice.
67. In Section 2C.26 Advance Traffic Control Signs (W3-1a,
W3-2a, W3-3, W3-4), the FHWA proposes clarifying that
the reference to a beacon in the second OPTION statement and the second
GUIDANCE statement is a reference to a warning beacon. This
clarification is necessary to be consistent with prescribed use of
warning beacons in Part 4 of the MUTCD.
68. In Section 2C.27 CROSS TRAFFIC DOES NOT STOP Plaque
(W4-4), the FWHA proposes replacing the entire section with new
OPTION and STANDARD statements. The OPTION statement specifies that the
CROSS TRAFFIC DOES NOT STOP (W4-4) plaque may be used in
combination with a STOP sign when engineering judgment indicates
drivers frequently misinterpret the intersection as a multi-way stop
condition. The STANDARD statement specifies that if the W4-4
plaque is used, it shall be installed below the STOP sign. The proposed
new text for this section is necessary to provide for more uniform
application of this plaque.
Additionally, the FHWA proposes removing the arrow from the design
of the plaque to reduce potential confusion and misunderstanding as to
whether the arrow denotes the direction cross traffic is flowing or the
direction toward which the driver is to look for cross traffic.
69. In Section 2C.28 Merge Sign (W4-1), the FHWA proposes
changing the title to reflect the addition of the new Entering Roadway
Merge (W4-1a) sign. In addition to the title change, the FHWA
proposes adding a recommendation to the GUIDANCE statement, which
states that when a Merge sign is to be installed on an entering roadway
that curves before merging with the major roadway, the Entering Roadway
Merge (W4-1a) sign should be used. This sign is recommended for
this condition because it would better portray the actual geometric
conditions to road users on the entering roadway. The FHWA proposes
that this change become effective immediately for new or replacement of
damaged existing sign installations. The FHWA proposes a phase-in
compliance period of 10 years for existing signs in good condition to
minimize any impact on State or local highway agencies.
70. In Section 2C.29 Added Lane Sign (W4-3), the FHWA
proposes changing the title to reflect the addition of the new Entering
Roadway Added Lane (W4-3a) sign. In addition to the title change,
the FHWA proposes an addition to the GUIDANCE statement, which states
that when an Added Lane sign is to be installed on a roadway that
curves before converging with another roadway that has a tangent
alignment at the point of convergence, the Entering Roadway Added Lane
(W4-3a) sign should be used. This sign is recommended for this
condition because it would better portray the actual geometric
conditions to road users on the entering roadway. The FHWA proposes
that this change become effective immediately for new or replacement of
damaged existing sign installations. The FHWA proposes a phase-in
compliance period of 10 years for existing signs in good condition to
minimize any impact on State or local highway agencies.
71. In Section 2C.30, the FHWA proposes changing the title of the
section from "Lane Ends Signs (W9-1, W9-2)" to
"Lane Ends Signs (W4-2, W9-1, W9-2)."
This title change reflects the addition of the Lane Reduction
(W4-2) sign, which was included in previous editions of the MUTCD
but not in the Millennium Edition.
The FHWA proposes changing the design of the Lane Reduction
(W4-2) symbol sign to improve the comprehension by road users.
The new design has been developed by human factors research studies and
will be similar to one being used successfully in Canada. The FHWA
proposes that this change become effective immediately for new or
replacement of damaged existing sign installations. The FHWA proposes a
phase-in compliance period of 10 years for existing signs in good
condition to minimize any impact on State or local highway agencies.
Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding the Lane Reduction
(W4-2) symbol sign to the first and second GUIDANCE statements
and to the OPTION statement, indicating that the W4-2 symbol sign
is an alternative to the LANE ENDS MERGE LEFT (RIGHT) (W9-2) word
sign. This will provide additional flexibility to jurisdictions.
72. In Section 2C.33 Advisory Exit, Ramp, and Curve Speed Signs
(W13-2, W13-3, W13-5), the FHWA proposes
[[Page 35859]]
changing the design of the metric exit speed, ramp speed, and curve
speed signs, and advisory speed signs/plaques so that the metric speed
value is within a black circle with "km/h" below. This new
design will better differentiate between signs and plaques with metric
units for speed from those using English units for speed.
The FHWA also proposes adding "Figure 2C-8 Example of
Advisory Speed Signing for an Exit Ramp". This figure illustrates
the use of the Exit Speed sign along the deceleration lane and the use
of the Ramp Speed signs along the actual ramp. The figure will clarify
application of these signs to jurisdictions.
Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding to the OPTION statement at
the end of the section, which states that the 85th percentile speed,
which is equivalent to the 16 degree ballbank indication or an 85 mm/
second (0.28 ft/second) reading on an accelerometer, may be used to
determine the recommended speed along the ramp or curve as it is the
speed at which most road users' judgment recognizes incipient
instability along a ramp or curve. The FHWA proposes this OPTION
criteria to enhance the uniformity of determining the recommended
advisory speed and to provide additional warning to motorists since
highway curves have a crash rate about three times the rate for highway
tangent segments and a run-off-the-road crash rate about four times the
tangent segment rate.
73. In Section 2C.34 Intersection Warning Signs (W2-1 through
W2-6), the FHWA proposes changing the design of the CIRCULAR
INTERSECTION (W2-6) sign to a symbol sign with three rotating
arrows to better portray the operations at circular intersections. The
FHWA proposes that this change become effective immediately for new or
replacement of damaged existing sign installations. The FHWA proposes a
phase-in compliance period of 10 years for existing signs in good
condition to minimize any impact on State or local highway agencies.
Additionally, the FHWA proposes modifying the GUIDANCE statement.
The proposed changes clarify that the recommendation to not use
Intersection Warning signs on controlled approaches does not apply to
the use of the Circular Intersection Warning symbol (W2-6) sign,
and add a recommendation that this sign should be used on the approach
to a YIELD sign controlled roundabout intersection. These changes are
proposed to reflect state of the practice regarding roundabouts.
74. In Section 2C.36, the FHWA proposes changing the title from
"Motorized Traffic Signs (W8-6, W11-5, W11-8,
W11-10)" to "Motorized Traffic Signs (W8-6,
W11-5, W11-5a, W11-8, W11-10, W11-10a,
W11-12)" to include the optional Farm Machinery
(W11-5a) symbol sign which was inadvertently omitted, and to
reflect a proposed Dump Truck (11-10a) sign for use in work zones
and other locations where there is a concentration of dump truck
crossing or entering the roadway, and a proposed Emergency Signal Ahead
(W11-12) supplemental plaque for use with the W11-8 sign.
In the first OPTION statement, the FHWA proposes adding a statement
that the TRUCK CROSSING (W8-6) word message sign may be used as
an alternate to the Truck Crossing symbol sign, to provide additional
flexibility.
In the second OPTION statement, the FHWA proposes adding that a
supplemental plaque with the legend SHARE THE ROAD may be mounted below
Motorized Traffic warning signs. The purpose of this addition is to
allow the use of this sign to provide additional warning to road users.
75. In Section 2C.37, the FHWA proposes changing the title from
"Crossing Signs (W11-1, W11-2, W11-3,
W11-4, W16-7P)" to "Nonvehicular Signs
(W11-1, W11-2, W11-3, W11-4, W11-11,
W11-14, W11-14a, W11-15)" to reflect the
addition of the following proposed signs: Golf Cart (W11-11)
symbol sign, Horse and Buggy (W11-14) symbol sign, Horse and
Carriage (W11-14a) symbol sign, and the Waterfowl Crossing
(W11-15) symbol sign. Many variations of these symbol signs are
currently being used and these designs will create a set of uniform
symbol messages for road users. The FHWA proposes that these changes
become effective immediately for new or replacement of damaged existing
sign installations. The FHWA proposes a phase-in compliance period of
10 years for existing signs in good condition to minimize any impact on
State or local highway agencies.
The FHWA also proposes clarifying the first OPTION statement to add
golf carts and horse-drawn vehicles to the list of crossing activities
for which Nonvehicular signs may be used to alert road users. This
reflects the addition of new signs for this purpose.
The FHWA also proposes clarifying the second OPTION statement to
clarify that the supplemental plaques such as AHEAD or XX METERS may be
used with the Nonvehicular warning signs, when used in advance of a
crossing. These plaques are specifically intended to provide advance
notice to road users of crossing activity.
Additionally, the FHWA proposes modifying the STANDARD statement to
clarify that when Nonvehicular warning signs are used at the crossing,
the signs shall be supplemented with a diagonal downward pointing arrow
(W16-1) plaque showing the location of the crossing. This
proposed modification reflects the fact that Nonvehicular warning signs
can be used either in advance of or at the crossing, and is consistent
with the practice of using the diagonal downward pointing arrow with
other crossing signs.
Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding to the third OPTION
statement to clarify that Pedestrian, Bicycle, School Advance Crossing,
and School Crossing signs and their related supplemental plaques may
have a fluorescent yellow-green background with a black legend and
border. This proposed change reflects the common practice for
supplemental plaques to be of the same color as the signs they
supplement.
76. In Section 2C.42 Advisory Speed Plaque (W13-1), the FHWA
proposes adding to the first OPTION statement to clarify that the
Advisory Speed (W13-1) plaque may be used to supplement any
warning sign to indicate the recommended speed for a condition. This
will provide additional flexibility for jurisdictions.
In the STANDARD statement, the FHWA proposes requiring the use of
the Advisory Speed plaque where an engineering study indicates a need
to advise road users of the recommended speed for a condition and if
they are used, the speed shown shall be a multiple of 10 km/h (5 mph).
This change is needed to clarify that engineering studies are needed to
determine the need for an Advisory Speed plaque and to determine what
the recommended speed is for the condition.
Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding an OPTION statement at the
end of the section, which states that the 85th-percentile speed, which
is equivalent to the 16 degree ballbank indication or an 85 mm/second
(0.28 ft/second) reading on an accelerometer, may be used to determine
the recommended speed along the ramp or curve as it is the speed at
which most road users' judgment recognizes incipient instability along
a ramp or curve. This provides jurisdictions with several optional
methods of determining recommended speeds, reflecting current
practices.
77. In Section 2C.43, the FHWA proposes changing the title from
[[Page 35860]]
"Supplemental Arrow Plaques (W16-5P, W16-6P)"
to "Supplemental Arrow Plaques (W16-5, W16-6,
W16-7)" to remove the "p" suffix and to reflect
the existence of the diagonally pointing down arrow plaque and include
the designation in the section text.
78. In Section 2C.46 DEAD END/NO OUTLET Plaques (W14-1P,
W14-2P), the FHWA proposes adding to the OPTION statement to
clarify that DEAD END (W14-1P) or NO OUTLET (W14-2P)
plaques may be used in combination with Street Name (D3) signs to warn
turning traffic that the crossroad ends in the direction indicated by
the arrow on the plaque and that where there the cross street has no
name, the plaque may be used alone in place of a street name sign. The
proposed change will clarify the proper use of these types of plaques
with street name signs or alone.
Additionally, the FHWA proposes removing the STANDARD statement,
which requires the use of the DEAD END or NO OUTLET plaque where
traffic can proceed straight through the intersection to the dead end
or no outlet street. This STANDARD is proposed for removal because it
is no longer appropriate. The preferred practice under the conditions
cited is the use of the DEAD END (W4-1) and NO OUTLET
(W4-2) warning signs rather than the plaques.
79. The FHWA proposes adding a new section, numbered and titled
"Section 2C.48 High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Plaque
(W16-1)." This proposed new section includes an OPTION
statement on the use of the proposed High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV)
Plaque. Specifically, an HOV (W16-1) plaque may be used to warn
drivers in an HOV lane of a specific condition and to differentiate a
warning sign specific for HOV lanes when the sign is also visible to
traffic on the adjoining general purpose roadway. Additionally the
diamond symbol may be used instead of the word message HOV and, when
appropriate, the words LANE or ONLY may be used. This will enhance road
user understanding of which signs apply to which lanes.
80. The FHWA proposes adding a new section numbered and titled
"Section 2C.49 PHOTO ENFORCED Plaque (W16-10)." This
proposed new section includes an OPTION statement on the use of the
proposed PHOTO ENFORCED plaque in advance of locations of photo
enforcement of traffic laws, thereby, alerting motorists of the use of
cameras as an enforcement tool. This change is proposed for consistency
with the proposed addition of the PHOTO ENFORCED plaque for use with
regulatory signs, as described in proposed Section 2B.51. The FHWA
proposes that this change become effective immediately for new or
replacement of damaged existing sign installations. The FHWA proposes a
phase-in compliance period of 10 years for existing signs in good
condition to minimize any impact on State or local highway agencies.
Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding a STANDARD statement to
require that, if used below a warning sign, the PHOTO ENFORCED plaque
be a rectangle with a black legend and border on a yellow background.
This STANDARD is proposed to make the color of the plaque consistent
with the color of the warning sign it supplements.
81. The FHWA proposes adding a new section, numbered and titled
"Section 2C.50 HILL BLOCKS VIEW Sign (W7-6)." This
proposed new section includes an OPTION statement on the use of the
proposed HILL BLOCKS VIEW sign in advance of the crest of a vertical
curve to advise road users to reduce speed and to look for vehicles and
other roadway users as they approach and traverse the hill as only
limited sight distance is available. The FHWA proposes adding this sign
because it is in use, fulfills an important need, and has been found by
research to be well understood by road users.
Additionally, the FHWA proposes including a GUIDANCE statement,
which states that when a HILL BLOCKS VIEW sign is used, an Advisory
Speed plaque based on available stopping sight distance should
accompany it. This is proposed because road users should be advised of
the recommended speed for traversing the hillcrest.
82. The FHWA proposes adding a new section, numbered and titled
"Section 2C.51 Speed Reduction Signs (W3-5,
W3-5a)." This proposed new section includes a GUIDANCE
statement, which recommends using the proposed Speed Reduction signs to
inform road users of a reduced speed zone when engineering judgment
indicates the need for advance notice to comply with the posted speed
limit ahead. These proposed new warning signs replace the R2-5a,
b, and c signs because the intended message is more properly
categorized as a warning message rather than regulatory message. The
FHWA proposes that this change become effective immediately for new or
replacement of damaged existing sign installations. The FHWA proposes a
phase-in compliance period of 10 years for existing signs in good
condition to minimize any impact on State or local highway agencies.
Additionally, the FHWA proposes including a STANDARD statement,
which requires that a Speed Reduction sign be followed by a Speed Limit
(R2-1) sign installed at the beginning of the zone where the
speed limit applies and that the speed limit displayed on the Speed
Reduction sign shall be identical to the speed limit displayed on the
subsequent Speed Limit sign. This is needed to provide for uniform
application of these signs.
82. The FHWA proposes adding a new section, numbered and titled
"Section 2C.52 BRIDGE ICES BEFORE ROAD Sign (W8-13)."
This proposed new section includes an OPTION statement on the use of
the proposed BRIDGE ICES BEFORE ROAD sign, which states that the sign
may be used in advance of bridges to advise road users as they approach
and traverse the bridge during winter weather conditions.
Additionally, the FHWA proposes including a GUIDANCE statement,
which recommends that the BRIDGE ICES BEFORE ROAD sign be removed or
covered during seasons of the year when its message is not relevant.
This proposed new section will provide for uniform design and
application of a sign for warning of the specific condition.
84. The FHWA proposes adding a new section, numbered and titled
"Section 2C.53 Traffic Signal Signs (W25-1,
W25-2)." This proposed new section includes a STANDARD
statement on the use of the proposed CAUTION ONCOMING GREEN EXTENDED
(W25-1) and CAUTION ONCOMING GREEN MAY BE EXTENDED (W25-2)
traffic signal signs. The STANDARD statement requires that unless a
separate left-turn signal face is provided and is operated as described
in Section 4D.06, if the possibility exists that a CIRCULAR YELLOW
signal indication could be displayed to an approach from which drivers
are turning left permissively without the simultaneous display of a
CIRCULAR YELLOW signal indication to the opposing approach (see Section
4D.05), either a W25-1 or a W25-2 sign be installed near
the left-most signal head. The FHWA proposes adding this new section
because these signs are proposed in Chapter 4D as one of several ways
to eliminate or reduce safety issues associated with the "yellow
trap" in some traffic signal phasing sequences.
85. The FHWA proposes adding a new section, numbered and titled
"Section 2C.54 Truck Rollover Warning Signs (W1-13,
W1-13a)." This proposed new section includes OPTION and
STANDARD statements on the use of
[[Page 35861]]
the proposed Truck Rollover Warning signs to warn driver of vehicles
with a high center of gravity of a curve or turn having geometric
conditions that are prone to cause such vehicles to lose control and
overturn. This proposed new section will provide for uniform design and
application of signs for this purpose. The FHWA proposes that this
change become effective immediately for new or replacement of damaged
existing sign installations. The FHWA proposes a phase-in compliance
period of 10 years for existing signs in good condition to minimize any
impact on State or local highway agencies.
86. In Section 2D.03 Color, Retroreflection, and Illumination, the
FHWA proposes adding a SUPPORT statement following the STANDARD
statement, which states that color coding is sometimes used to help
road users distinguish between multiple potentially confusing
destinations. The SUPPPORT statement gives examples of valuable uses of
color coding including guide signs for roadways approaching or inside
an airport property with multiple terminals serving multiple airlines,
and wayfinding signs for various neighborhoods, business areas, or
traffic generator destinations within a community or area.
The FHWA proposes adding a second STANDARD statement that prohibits
the use of different color sign backgrounds to provide color-coding of
destinations and that requires that the color-coding shall be
accomplished by the use of different colored square or rectangular
panels on the face of the guide signs.
The FHWA also proposes adding an OPTION statement, which states
that the different colored panels may include a black or white
(whichever provides the better contrast with the panel color) letter,
numeral, or other appropriate designation to identify the airport
terminal or other destination.
Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding a SUPPORT statement, which
states that two examples of color-coded guide sign assemblies are shown
in Figure 2D-1. Figure 2D-1 is a proposed new figure titled
"Examples of Color-Coded Destination Guide Signs" and
illustrates two overhead guide signs examples of color-coded airport
terminal destination guide signs and an example of a color-coded
community destination guide sign.
The proposed changes to Section 2D.03 will provide for enhanced
uniformity of design and application of color-coding of destinations in
guide signs.
87. In Section 2D.04 Size of Signs, the FHWA proposes rephrasing
the first OPTION statement to clarify that reduced letter height,
reduced interline spacing, and reduced edge spacing may be used on
guide signs if the sign size is limited by factors such as lane width,
and vertical and lateral clearance.
Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding a STANDARD statement that
prohibits the use of reduced spacing between the letters or words of
the legend as a means of reducing the overall size of a guide sign.
The proposed changes to this section will provide for enhanced
legibility of guide signs, especially for older road users.
88. In Section 2D.06 Size of Lettering, the FHWA proposes removing
the last paragraph in the STANDARD statement, which required sign
panels to be large enough to accommodate the legend without crowding.
That information has been modified and included in Section 2D.04, where
it is more appropriately located.
89. In Section 2D.17 ALTERNATE Auxiliary Signs (M4-1,
M4-1a), the FHWA proposes adding the qualifiers of time or
distance to the word "shorter" in the GUIDANCE statement.
This addition clarifies that the shorter (time or distance) or better-
constructed route should retain the regular route number. This will
clarify that the shorter route can be defined in terms of either time
or distance, and will provide additional flexibility.
90. In Section 2D.23, the FHWA propose changing the title from
"TEMPORARY Auxiliary Sign (M4-7)" to "TEMPORARY
Auxiliary Sign (M4-7, M4-7a)" to reflect the addition
of the new TEMP (M4-7a) sign and to add the TEMP (M4-7a)
sign to the OPTION and STANDARD statements. The TEMP sign is proposed
for improved legibility.
91. In Section 2D.26 Directional Arrow Auxiliary Signs (M6 Series),
the FHWA proposes removing the M6-8 and M6-9 multiple
direction advance arrow auxiliary signs. These specific arrow signs are
not consistent in design concept with the other Directional Arrow
Auxiliary Signs, and the M6-6 and M6-4 signs or separate
assemblies for each route direction should be used instead to provide
enhanced clarity to road users.
92. In Section 2D.27 Route Sign Assemblies, the FHWA proposes
renumbering Figure 2D-2 to become Figure 2D-6 and modifying
all three sheets of the figure to make the sign assemblies illustrated
in the figure consistent with requirements in Section 2D.15 regarding
the size of the initial letter of the Cardinal Direction Auxiliary
Signs, and to illustrate directional assemblies that reflect the most
recent state of the practice.
93. In Section 2D.31 Confirming or Reassurance Assemblies, the FHWA
proposes removing from the STANDARD statement the requirement that, if
used, the Confirming Assembly be installed just beyond intersections of
numbered routes.
Additionally, in the first GUIDANCE statement, the FHWA proposes
recommending that a Confirming Assembly should be installed just beyond
intersections of numbered routes.
These changes are proposed because use of the confirming assembly
beyond intersections with numbered routes should be a recommended
practice rather than completely optional. The confirming assembly
provides highly desirable information to road users. These proposed
changes allow flexibility in installing the signs to adjust to roadside
conditions.
94. In Section 2D.34, the FHWA proposes changing the title from
"Destination Signs" to "Destination Signs (D1
Series)" and to add the sign number designations to the section
text to clarify which signs are applicable to the material in the
section.
The FHWA proposes moving material concerning the use of a sloping
arrow at an irregular intersection from the second GUIDANCE statement
to a new second OPTION statement. This proposed change removes unclear
language and clarifies that the sloping arrow use is optional.
95. In Section 2D.36, the FHWA proposes changing the title from
"Distance Signs" to "Distance Signs (D2
Series)", adding the sign number designations to the section text
to clarify which signs are applicable to the material in the section,
and adding the D2-3 (3 destination distance sign) to the text, to
reflect all the signs included in the series.
Additionally, in the first GUIDANCE statement, the FHWA proposes
adding a recommendation that the distance shown on the sign be the
distance to the center of the central business district, or to the
point where the major north/south and east/west routes serving the city
intersect, or to some point near the center of the city. The FHWA
proposes this addition because this distance measurement is the general
practice used by State and local agencies.
96. In Section 2D.38, the FHWA proposes changing the title from
"Street Name Sign (D3)" to "Street Name Sign
(D3-1)". In the first GUIDANCE statement the FHWA proposes
adding a recommendation that on multi-lane streets with speed limits of
60 km/h (40 mph) or more the minimum letter size should be 200 mm (8
in). Larger letter
[[Page 35862]]
sizes are needed to improve sign legibility and safety for older
drivers. In this same GUIDANCE statement, the FHWA proposes deleting
the recommendation that larger letter heights be used for Street Name
signs mounted overhead, because more specific guidance is being
proposed to be added elsewhere in this section.
The FHWA also proposes adding a clarification to the first OPTION
statement. Currently the OPTION statement generally states that a
symbol or letter designation may be used to identify the government
jurisdiction. The proposed paragraph provides more specificity by
stating that a symbol or letter designation may be used on a Street
Name sign to identify the governmental jurisdiction, area of
jurisdiction, or other government-approved institution. This change is
proposed to provide additional flexibility for jurisdictions that
install Street Name signs.
The FHWA proposes adding to the first STANDARD statement that if a
symbol or letter designation is used, the height, in addition to the
width, of the symbol or letter designation shall not exceed the letter
height of the sign. This proposal will provide for more uniform Street
Name sign design and assure that the name of the street will have more
prominence on the sign than the jurisdictional symbol or letter
designation.
Two changes are proposed in the second OPTION statement. First, the
FHWA proposes eliminating midblock locations from the provision
concerning locations where Street Name signs may be installed, because
Street Name signs are not appropriate at non-intersection locations. At
midblock locations, Advance Street Name signs, as described in a
subsequent section, are appropriate to provide advance notice of the
next intersection. Second, the FHWA proposes eliminating the provision
allowing the installation of a supplemental Street Name sign separately
or below an intersection-related warning sign on intersection
approaches, because this is an inappropriate use. Instead, the Advance
Street Name plaque, as described in Section 2C.45, is appropriate for
this purpose.
The FHWA proposes changes to the fourth GUIDANCE statement. First,
the FHWA proposes eliminating the recommendation on the color of the
supplemental Street Name sign when it is combined with a warning sign,
because this is now termed an Advance Street Name plaque and is
discussed in Section 2C.45. Second, the FHWA proposes recommending that
in urban and suburban areas, especially where Advance Street Name signs
are not used, overhead-mounted street name signs be considered. If
overhead Street Name signs are used, the lettering should be at least
300 mm (12 inch) high in capital letters or 300 mm (12 in) upper-case
letters with 225 mm (9 in) lower-case letters. This proposal reflects
the need for enhanced visibility and legibility of Street Name signs
for road users, especially older people, in the complex driving
environments of urban and suburban areas.
Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding a SUPPORT statement at the
end of the section referencing Section 2C.45 for information regarding
the use of street name signs as supplemental plaques below
intersection-related warning signs. The FHWA proposes that these
changes become effective immediately for new or replacement of damaged
existing sign installations. The FHWA proposes a phase-in compliance
period until January 9, 2012, for existing signs in good condition to
minimize any impact on State or local highway agencies. This date
corresponds with the existing compliance period for increasing the
letter height to 150 mm (6 in) on all street name signs.
97. The FHWA proposes adding a new section, numbered and titled
"Section 2D.39 Advance Street Name Signs (D3-2)"
immediately following Section 2D.38. The FHWA proposes SUPPORT,
STANDARD, OPTION, and GUIDANCE statements to describe the uses,
placement, legend, and lettering sizes for Advance Street Name signs.
The proposed new section is needed to provide for uniform design and
application of Advance Street Name signs. The following sections would
be renumbered accordingly. The FHWA proposes a phase-in compliance
period until January 9, 2012, for existing signs in good condition to
minimize any impact on State or local highway agencies. This date
corresponds with the existing compliance period for increasing the
letter height to 150 mm (6 in) on all street name signs.
98. In existing Section 2D.44 (new Section 2D.45) General Service
Signs (D9 Series), the FHWA proposes adding Electric Vehicle Charging
to the list of services, one or more of which General Services signs
must carry, in accordance with the second STANDARD statement.
The FHWA proposes removing references in the fourth OPTION
statement to the Road Conditions Dial 511 (D12-5) sign and adding
new OPTION, STANDARD, and GUIDANCE statements regarding the use and
design of the redesigned TRAVELER INFO CALL 511 (D12-5) sign.
These changes reflect the assignment of 511 as the nationwide traveler
information telephone number.
Additionally, the FHWA proposes changing the words "CB
Monitoring" in the existing fifth OPTION statement to
"Channel 9 Monitored" and to make a corresponding change in
item C of the following GUIDANCE statement. These changes reflect
current practice and terminology. The FHWA proposes that this change
become effective immediately for new or replacement of damaged existing
sign installations. The FHWA proposes a phase-in compliance period of
10 years for existing signs in good condition to minimize any impact on
State or local highway agencies.
99. In existing Section 2D.45 (new Section 2D.46), the FWHA
proposes changing the title from "Reference Posts (D10-1
through D10-3)" to "Reference Location Signs
(D10-1 through D10-8)" and to change the term
"reference posts" to "reference location signs"
throughout the section to correspond to terminology used throughout the
MUTCD.
The FHWA proposes two changes to the first STANDARD statement.
First, the FHWA proposes distinguishing between use on conventional
roads and freeways. The design of reference location signs used on
conventional roads is the same as currently listed in the STANDARD. If
reference location signs are used on freeways or expressways, the FHWA
proposes requiring that the reference location signs be designed in
accordance with the STANDARDS contained in Section 2E.54, for
consistency with other signs used on expressways or freeways. Second,
the FHWA proposes requiring the installation of reference location
signs on the right side of the roadway, except where conditions limit
or restrict the use of such signs on the right side of the roadway.
This is proposed for enhanced uniformity of location of these signs.
The FHWA proposes two changes to the last OPTION statement. First,
the FHWA proposes changing the suggested spacing of intermediate
reference location signs from one, two, or five tenths of a kilometer
(or mile) to one-tenth of a kilometer (or mile) or some other regular
spacing, for enhanced consistency and uniformity. Second, the FHWA
proposes that to further enhance the reference location sign system, a
new enhanced reference location (D10-7) sign and a new enhanced
intermediate reference location (D10-8) sign may be installed at
one-tenth of a kilometer (mile) interval, or at some other regular
spacing. Evaluation of experimental systems indicates that this
[[Page 35863]]
type of sign greatly assists road users in reporting a more precise
location of an incident or other emergency.
The FHWA proposes adding a STANDARD statement describing the design
of the enhanced reference location signs and the enhanced intermediate
reference location signs. The proposed STANDARD requires that the signs
shall be vertical panels having green backgrounds with white numerals,
letters, and borders, except for the route shield which shall be the
standard color and shape. The top line shall consist of the cardinal
direction for the roadway; the second line shall consist of the
applicable route shield for the roadway; the third line shall identify
the units in metric or English; the fourth line shall identify the
kilometer (mile) reference for the location; and for the enhanced
intermediate reference location sign the fifth line shall give the
tenth of a kilometer (mile) using a decimal point.
Although a blue background has been used in some experimental
projects, the FHWA believes that the standard green background of the
30-year old "mile marker" system should be used. Although
most of the signs of experimental projects use an abbreviation and do
not spell out the cardinal direction, the FHWA believes that most road
users do not understand the abbreviations, thus spelling out the
cardinal direction would assist road users in reporting incidents.
Likewise, most of the signs of experimental projects do not use a
decimal point before the tenth of kilometer (mile), however, recent
research indicates that road users better understand that the location
is a fraction of a kilometer (mile) with the decimal point.
The FHWA proposes that the design of this optional enhanced
reference location sign become effective immediately for new location
referencing system installations. The FHWA proposes a phase-in
compliance period of 10 years for existing signs of existing systems to
minimize any impact on State or local highway agencies.
The FHWA also proposes requiring the installation of the enhanced
reference location signs on the right side of the roadway in rural
areas except where conditions limit or restrict the use of enhanced
reference location signs on the right side of the roadway.
Finally, the FHWA proposes adding an OPTION statement, which states
that in urban areas, enhanced reference location signs may be installed
on the right side of the roadway, in the median, or on ramps to replace
or to supplement reference location signs. This will provide
flexibility to jurisdictions.
100. In existing Section 2D.47 (new Section 2D.48) General
Information Signs (I Series), the FHWA proposes removing all references
concerning Adopt-a-Highway signs from the MUTCD. Current State and
local practices pertaining to Adopt-A-Highway signs vary widely and, in
some cases, include the use of commercial logos for indicating Adopt-A-
Highway sponsors. The use of logos has raised deeper policy issues
regarding Federal and State laws concerning advertising along the
right-of-way, general commercialization of the right-of-way, the safety
to motorists and workers, and the ability to raise revenues for
activities such as litter removal.
Recent discussions of the signing criteria in the MUTCD, along with
dialogue of several American Association of State Highway and
Transportation Officials (AASHTO) subcommittees, have highlighted these
deeper issues that go beyond the simple standards included in the
MUTCD. For example, the AASHTO Subcommittee on Maintenance has argued
that several States have existing contracts that allow a commercial
entity to exchange maintenance and litter pickup services for signs
acknowledging the commercial sponsors who pay for the services. These
contracts supplement scarce maintenance resources for these States. The
Subcommittee also noted that the use of more experienced crews used in
such arrangements is safer than using volunteers.
The AASHTO Subcommittee on Traffic Engineering, on the other hand,
has argued that these acknowledgements of the commercial sponsors is an
opening for other types of advertising (including electronic
advertising on overhead dynamic message signs along freeways and at
signalized intersections) and raise serious concerns over driver
distraction, confusion, and crash potential and liability. At the
request of the Subcommittee on Maintenance, the AASHTO Standing
Committee on Highways has established a task force to consider
commercialization within the right-of-way, including, but not limited
to, signage for the Adopt-A-Highway program.
Until the AASHTO study is completed, the FHWA is proposing the
removal of all references to Adopt-A-Highway signs in the MUTCD.
In this section, the FHWA also proposes adding new OPTION,
GUIDANCE, and STANDARD statements regarding the use of signs to display
safety or transportation-related messages. These messages, such as SEAT
BELTS BUCKLED? and DON'T DRINK AND DRIVE, are in common and widespread
use in many jurisdictions and they provide valuable reminders to road
users of important laws. The proposed additions to this section provide
for consistency in application of these types of messages on General
Information signs and reduce the possibility of such signs being
misused.
Finally, the FHWA proposes in the second STANDARD statement
replacing the words "jurisdiction logos" with
"boundary" to provide additional flexibility highway
agencies to use different colors for political boundary signs.
101. In existing Section 2D.48 (new Section 2D.49) Signing of Named
Highways, in the first STANDARD statement the FHWA proposes adding
additional requirements for installing memorial signs on the mainline.
These requirements prohibit the use of memorial names on the
directional guide signs, interference with necessary highway signing,
and placement which compromises the safety or efficiency of traffic
flow. The proposed STANDARD statement is identical to the STANDARD
statement in Section 2E.08. The FHWA proposes this addition for
consistency and to clarify the acceptable locations to install memorial
signs.
102. The FHWA proposes adding a new section, numbered and titled
"Section 2D.52 National Scenic Byways Marker (D6-4)."
The FHWA proposes including SUPPORT, OPTION, and STANDARD statements
that describe the National Scenic Byways program and the markers that
may be placed on roads designated as National Scenic Byways or All-
American Roads by the Secretary of Transportation of the U.S. DOT. As
of January 2002 there were 72 such designated byways in 32 States. This
new section is proposed to provide for uniformity of design and
application of markers on designated National Scenic Byways.
103. In Section 2E.10, the FHWA proposes changing the title from
"Number of Signs at an Overhead Installation" to
"Number of Signs at an Overhead Installation and Sign
Spreading" and relocating the SUPPORT and GUIDANCE statements on
sign spreading from Section 2E.11 because they are more appropriately
associated with sign location installation.
104. In Section 2E.11, the FHWA proposes changing the title from
"Sign Spreading and Pull-Through Signs" to "Pull-
Through Signs" to reflect the proposed relocation of the sign
[[Page 35864]]
spreading SUPPORT and GUIDANCE statements to Section 2E.10.
In the first GUIDANCE statement, the FHWA proposes replacing the
words "only when" with "where" to broaden the
use of Pull-Through signs. The FHWA proposes this change to recognize
that Pull-Through signs can be beneficial in congested traffic for road
users, especially older drivers, at many locations. The FHWA also
proposes recommending that Pull-Through signs with down arrows be used
where alignment of the through lanes is curved and the exit direction
is straight ahead, where the number of through lanes is not readily
evident, and at multilane exits. This will enhance the information
provided to road users.
105. In Table 2E-3 Minimum Letter and Numeral Sizes for
Freeway Guide Signs According to Interchange Classification, the FHWA
proposes adding dimensions for the "Action Message Word"
row and adding a row with dimensions for the sizes of "Numerals
and Letter" for Gore signs. These were inadvertently omitted from
the current edition.
106. In Section 2E.19 Diagrammatic Signs, the FHWA proposes to
adding to item A of the first STANDARD statement the option of showing
each individual lane arrangement. Research of the needs of older road
users indicates that it is easier to comprehend a diagrammatic sign
with one arrow for each lane than one arrow for all lanes as the width
of each lane on a single arrow is too small. Additionally, the FHWA
proposes adding a second illustration to the Diagrammatic Sign for a
Single-Lane Left Exit (Figure 2E-3) which shows two diagrammatic
arrows instead of just one.
107. In Section 2E.20 Signing for Interchange Lane Drops, the FHWA
proposes clarifying the second STANDARD statement that an EXIT ONLY
(down arrow) (E11-1) panel shall not be used on an Exit Direction
sign that contains an arrow in its design.
108. In Section 2E.28 Interchange Exit Numbering, the FHWA proposes
relocating the second OPTION statement to the first GUIDANCE statement.
Because road users might not expect a left exit and have difficulty in
maneuvering to the left, the FHWA is recommending that the word LEFT be
added to the exit number plaque. The FHWA is proposing this change
because of numerous complaints of the difficulty that road users have
in knowing when an exit is on the left. Very few road users know that
when the exit plaque is installed on the top left edge of the sign, it
means the exit is on the left. The FHWA proposes that this new GUIDANCE
become effective immediately for new or replacement of damaged existing
sign installations. The FHWA proposes a phase-in compliance period of
15 years for existing signs in good condition to minimize any impact on
State or local highway agencies.
The FHWA proposes adding a new OPTION statement following the first
GUIDANCE statement, which states that the portion of the exit number
plaque containing the word LEFT may have a black legend and border on a
yellow background. This proposed OPTION statement mirrors other similar
uses of the black on yellow color pattern for signs and panel
associated with left exits in the MUTCD.
Additionally, the FHWA proposes removing the EXIT 13 sign from
Figure 2E-3 to reflect the changes in Section 2E.28.
109. In Section 2E.34 Exit Gore Signs, the FHWA proposes adding an
OPTION statement to allow the mounting of a panel under the Exit sign
indicating the advisory speed for the ramp. This option provides
jurisdictions additional flexibility for reminding road users of the
recommended speed for an exit ramp.
110. In Section 2E.49 Signing of Approaches and Connecting
Roadways, the FHWA proposes removing the entire text of the section and
adding new SUPPORT, GUIDANCE, STANDARD, and OPTION statements, as well
as five new figures. The proposed new section addresses sign sequences
and sign design for conventional roads with one lane and those with
more than one lane of traffic approaching an interchange. The proposed
new section also clarifies the use of signs for approaches and
connecting roadways in order to better convey to road users the ramp
configuration and the maneuver that a road user would have to make to
get on the desired connecting roadway.
111. In Section 2E.51 General Service Signs, the FHWA proposes
changing from 3 to 2 the number of meals per day for which a food
establishment should have a continuous operation to serve in item B.2
in the first GUIDANCE statement. The FHWA proposes this change to
accommodate more food businesses.
112. In Section 2E.54, the FHWA proposes changing the title from
"Reference Posts" to "Reference Location Signs"
to reflect the new enhanced reference location sign and to be
consistent with changes in other parts of the MUTCD.
The FHWA proposes clarifying that the sign sizes in the STANDARD
statement refer to reference location signs placed on freeways or
expressways, and that the abbreviation KM (MILE) shall be in 100 mm (4
in) white letters.
Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding a paragraph to the OPTION
statement at the end of the section, which states that intermediate and
enhanced reference location signs may also be used on freeways and
expressways. It is on those types of facilities where such signs have
the most common application.
113. In Section 2E.56 Radio Information Signing, the FHWA proposes
adding OPTION and STANDARD statements at the end of the section
describing the use and design of a TRAVELER INFO CALL 511 (D12-5)
sign. With the adoption of 511 as the nationwide traveler information
phone number, a uniform sign design is needed. The proposed changes in
this section are consistent with the proposed changes in Section 2D.45.
114. In Section 2E.57 Carpool Information Signing, the FHWA
proposes adding to the OPTION statement that Carpool Information signs
may include Internet addresses or telephone numbers within the legend.
The proposal reflects common current practice and provides for
additional information to road users.
Additionally, the FHWA proposes changing the size of the maximum
vertical dimension of the logo or symbol in the STANDARD statement from
900 mm (36 in) to 450 mm (18 in), to enhance the legibility of the
primary message.
115. Following Section 2E.58, the FHWA proposes adding a new
section, numbered and titled "Section 2E.59 High-Occupancy
Vehicle (HOV) Signs." This proposed section includes STANDARD,
GUIDANCE, OPTION, and SUPPORT statements regarding the use and
placement of signs for HOV lanes and facilities. The FHWA also proposes
including five figures illustrating examples of HOV signing
applications. This proposed section reflects current state-of-the-
practice.
116. In Section 2F.01 Eligibility, the FHWA proposes changing from
3 to 2 the number of meals per day for which a food establishment
should have a continuous operation to serve in item B.2 of the fourth
GUIDANCE statement. The FHWA proposes this change to accommodate more
food businesses. This proposed change is consistent with the proposed
change in Section 2E.51.
117. In Section 2F.04 Number and Size of Logos and Signs, the FHWA
proposes changing the second STANDARD statement to require that a logo
panel on signs for conventional roads and ramps not exceed 750 mm (30
[[Page 35865]]
in) in width instead of 600 mm (24 in) to be consistent with the
proportions of panels for freeways and expressways.
118. In Section 2F.08 Double-Exit Interchanges, the FHWA proposes
adding to the OPTION statement that at a double-exit interchange where
there are four logo panels displayed for one of the exits and one or
two panels to be displayed for the other exit, the logo panels may be
arranged in three rows with two panels per row, to make the layout of
the sign more logical.
119. In Chapter 2G TOURIST-ORIENTED DIRECTIONAL SIGNS, the FHWA
proposes changing from "Typical" to "Examples
of" in the titles of Figures 2G-1 and 2G-2 because
the information shown is only an example of many acceptable
arrangements of signs.
120. In Section 2G.01 Purpose and Application, in the second
STANDARD statement, the FHWA proposes prohibiting the placement of
tourist-oriented directional signs on conventional roads in urban
areas. This proposal will clarify and strengthen the current
requirement that such signs shall only be used on rural conventional
roads.
Also, the FHWA proposes relocating the current first paragraph of
the GUIDANCE statement to become a new second paragraph of the second
STANDARD statement. This proposed change would require, rather than
recommend, that tourist-oriented directional signs incorporate
information from and be used in place of Specific Service signs where
both types of signs are needed at an intersection. The FHWA is
proposing this change in order to reduce sign clutter at intersections
and enhance road user safety.
121. In Section 2G.07 State Policy, the FHWA proposes changing the
phrase "State or Federal laws" to "State and Federal
laws" in the STANDARD statement, to clarify that both types of
laws must be heeded.
122. In Section 2H.09 Destination Guide Signs, the FHWA proposes
clarifying the second STANDARD statement that linear parkway-type
highways that primarily, rather than merely, function as arterial
connectors, even if they also provide access to recreational or
cultural interest areas, shall not qualify for the use of white-on-
brown destination guide signs. The FHWA proposes this change to improve
uniformity of guide signing on these important arterials.
The FHWA also proposes adding illustrations of trapezoidal-shaped
directional guide signs to Figure 2H-2 to correspond with the
optional use of this shape for recreational or cultural interest area
directional signing as provided for in Section 2G.09.
123. In Section 2I.03 EVACUATION ROUTE Sign (EM-1), in the
first STANDARD statement, the FHWA proposes changing the design of the
EVACUATION ROUTE (EM-1) sign to a rectangle sign with a blue
circular symbol with a directional arrow and the legend EVACUATION
ROUTE. The proposed minimum size is 600x600 mm (24x24 in)
and the proposed circular symbol diameter is 2.54 mm (1 in) smaller
than the width of the sign. This change reserves the circular shape
sign exclusively for rail grade crossings and enhances the conspicuity
and legibility of the EVACUATION ROUTE sign. The FHWA proposes that
this change become effective immediately for new or replacement of
damaged existing sign installations. The FHWA proposes a phase-in
compliance period of 10 years for existing signs in good condition to
minimize any impact on State or local highway agencies.
In the second STANDARD statement, the FHWA proposes changing the
detail regarding the colors to be used on the EVACUATION ROUTE
(EM-1) sign and requiring that the entire sign be
retroreflective. This proposed change corresponds with the proposed
design changes required by the first STANDARD statement.
The FHWA proposes adding to the second OPTION statement that the
legend on the EVACUATION ROUTE sign may be modified to describe the
type of evacuation route, such as HURRICANE, to provide additional
information to road users.
Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding to Figure 2I-1
illustrations of the HURRICANE EVACUATION ROUTE, AREA CLOSED, TRAFFIC
CONTROL POINT, MEDICAL CENTER, and HURRICANE SHELTER signs and
illustrations of six new directional signs for EMERGENCY SHELTER,
FALLOUT SHELTER, CHEMICAL SHELTER, WELFARE CENTER, REGISTRATION CENTER,
and DECONTAMINATION CENTER signs.
Discussion of Proposed Amendments to Part 3-Markings
124. In Section 3A.04 Colors, the FHWA proposes revising the
STANDARD statement to clarify the use of black markings. Black markings
can be used in conjunction with any other color marking to add contrast
to it. The FHWA proposes removing the existing reference to object
markers because it was not an appropriate reference.
125. The FHWA proposes changing the title of Section 3A.05 from
"Colors of Longitudinal Pavement Markings" to "Colors
of Pavement Markings," because this section defines the use of
colors for all pavement markings, not just longitudinal line markings.
The FHWA also proposes revising this entire section to clarify the
function of each color of pavement marking.
126. In Section 3A.06 Widths and Patterns of Longitudinal Pavement
Markings, the FHWA proposes removing item A of the STANDARD statement,
which states that a solid line prohibits or discourages crossing. This
item does not describe the width or pattern of longitudinal lines. The
remaining items would be renumbered accordingly.
In existing item D (new item C) of the STANDARD statement, the FHWA
proposes replacing the word "normal" with
"parallel" to clarify the pattern of a double line.
In existing items D, E, and F (new items C, D, and E) of the
STANDARD statement, the FHWA proposes removing the last sentence of
each item, since these sentences describe the function of various
markings, rather than the width and pattern of longitudinal markings.
The FHWA proposes revising the GUIDANCE statement to clarify that
this guidance refers to all roadway types, not just rural highways.
Additionally, the FHWA proposes revising the OPTION statement to
differentiate between the dimensions for dotted lines used for line
extensions and lane drop/add markings. The dimensions for the line
segments and gaps for each are also proposed, for consistency with
other sections in Part 3.
127. The FHWA proposes changing the title of Section 3B.01 from
"Yellow Centerline and Left Edge Line Pavement Markings and
Warrants" to "Yellow Centerline Pavement Markings and
Warrants," and moving the fourth STANDARD statement of Section
3B.01 to Section 3B.06 since edge lines are appropriately covered in
Section 3B.06.
128. In Section 3B.02 No-Passing Zone Pavement Markings and
Warrants, the FHWA proposes revising the second STANDARD statement to
clarify that no-passing zone markings on approaches to highway-rail
grade crossings shall conform with Section 8B.19, and eliminating the
requirement that no passing zone markings be used at other appropriate
locations, to be consistent with Part 8 and eliminate overlap with more
specific requirements for no passing zone markings elsewhere in Section
3B.02.
Additionally, the FHWA proposes revising the third STANDARD
statement
[[Page 35866]]
to clarify the dimensions of a no-passing buffer zone, and eliminating
the buffer zone dimensions specific to areas where no passing zones are
required because of limited passing sight distance. The proposed
dimension of "at least 15 m (50 ft) in length" is suitable
for all no passing zone buffers regardless of the reason for the
buffer.
129. In Section 3B.03 Other Yellow Longitudinal Pavement Markings,
the FHWA proposes revising the text in the first paragraph of the first
STANDARD statement to substitute the phrase "normal double"
for "two double" in the description of the pavement marking
requirements for reversible lanes. In the third paragraph of the first
STANDARD statement, the FHWA proposes clarifying that the pavement
marking requirements for a two-way left turn lane applies to such lanes
that are never operated as a reversible lane. The FHWA proposes these
changes to improve the clarity of the requirements and for consistency
with requirements elsewhere in Chapters 3A and 3B.
130. The FHWA proposes changing the title of Section 3B.04 from
"Edge Line Pavement Markings and Warrants" to "White
Lane Line Pavement Markings and Warrants," and moving the fourth
STANDARD statement of Section 3B.04 to Section 3B.06 since edge lines
are appropriately covered in Section 3B.06.
131. In Section 3B.05 Other White Longitudinal Pavement Markings,
the FHWA proposes changing the gap length for lane drop markings from
3.6 m (12 ft) gaps to 2.7 m (9 ft) gaps in the third OPTION statement
to be consistent with the spacing of other marking gaps.
132. In Section 3B.06 Edge Line Pavement Markings, the FHWA
proposes adding to the STANDARD statement text the requirements that
are being relocated from Sections 3B.01 and 3B.04 pertaining to left
and right edge lines. These proposed changes would result in all edge
line pavement marking information being contained within one section.
The FHWA also proposes adding an OPTION statement, which states
that wide solid edge line markings may be used for greater emphasis.
Wide edge lines can sometimes be useful in reducing run-off-the-road
crashes at curves and this proposal will provide additional flexibility
for jurisdictions to use these markings where needed.
133. In Section 3B.08 Extensions Through Intersections or
Interchanges, the FHWA proposes adding to the GUIDANCE statement on the
placement and dimensions of pavement markings that are continued
through intersections and interchanges. The FHWA proposes recommending
that edge lines not be extended into or continued through intersections
or interchanges. This guidance is needed so that pavement marking
extensions through intersections and interchanges do not confuse
drivers in adjacent or opposing travel lanes.
134. In Section 3B.11 Raised Pavement Markers, the FHWA proposes
clarifying in the first SUPPORT statement that the 10 mm (0.4 in)
height of a raised pavement marker is for the retroreflective surface
and that this height is the actual height or optical height. The FHWA
also proposes clarifying the first SUPPORT statement to include marking
the position of fire hydrants as one of the uses of raised pavement
markings, for consistency with other proposed revisions in this
section.
Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding an OPTION statement after
the STANDARD statement, which states that blue raised pavement markers
may be used to mark the positions of fire hydrants. This is common
practice in many jurisdictions.
135. In Section 3B.12 Raised Pavement Markers as Vehicle
Positioning Guides with Other Longitudinal Markings, in the first
SUPPORT statement, the FHWA proposes revising the spacing used between
raised pavement markers along longitudinal line markings from 2N to 3N
because this is an acceptable spacing for most applications. The value
"N" is equal to the length of one line segment plus one
gap.
Additionally, in the second OPTION statement, the FHWA proposes
changing from "N or less" to "2N or less" for
the reduced spacing that may be used where it is desired to alert the
road user to changes in the travel path, because this is an acceptable
spacing for most applications.
136. In Section 3B.13 Raised Pavement Markers Supplementing Other
Markings, the FHWA proposes revising item B1 of the GUIDANCE statement
to indicate that raised pavement markers should not supplement right
edge line markings unless they are spaced closely enough (no greater
than 3 m (10 ft) apart) to approximate the appearance of a solid line.
This proposed exception is needed to give jurisdictions the ability to
use raised pavement markers to supplement edge lines in situations
where additional wet-night delineation is needed, such as on curves.
In item B.2 of the GUIDANCE statement, the FHWA proposes revising
the recommended spacing to be used between raised pavement markers
along broken line markings from 2N to 3N because this is an acceptable
spacing for most applications.
Additionally, in item B.5 of the GUIDANCE statement, the FHWA
proposes revising the recommended spacing to be used between raised
pavement markers that supplement edge line extensions through freeway
interchanges from N/2 to N because this is an acceptable spacing for
most applications.
137. In Section 3B.14 Raised Pavement Markers Substituting for
Pavement Markings, in the first STANDARD statement, the FHWA proposes
revising the required spacing between raised pavement markers when
substituted for broken line markings from N/12 to N/8 and revising the
required spacing between raised pavement markers when substituted for
solid lane line markings from N/8 to N/4. In the third STANDARD
statement, the FHWA proposes revising the required spacing between
raised pavement markers when substituted for dotted line markings from
N/8 to N/4. The FHWA proposes these changes because these spacings are
acceptable for most applications.
The FHWA proposes that these changes become effective immediately
for new raised pavement marker installations. The FHWA proposes a
phase-in compliance period of 10 years for existing raised pavement
markers in good condition to minimize any impact on State or local
highway agencies.
138. In Section 3B.15 Transverse Markings, in the first STANDARD
statement the FHWA proposes adding "yield lines" and
"speed hump" markings to the list of transverse markings
required to be white markings.
Additionally, the FHWA proposes changing the second paragraph of
the GUIDANCE statement to a STANDARD statement, which requires that
pavement marking letters, numerals, and symbols be installed in
accordance with the "Standard Alphabets for Highway Signs and
Pavement Markings" to correct an oversight in the Millennium
Edition of the MUTCD.
139. In Section 3B.16 Stop and Yield Lines, in the second paragraph
of the first GUIDANCE statement, the FHWA proposes clarifying that
YIELD signs are an exception to the recommendations on the use of stop
lines, to be consistent with the intended use of yield lines.
The FHWA also proposes modifying the OPTION statement to clarify
that yield lines may also be placed at locations where vehicles are to
yield to pedestrians in compliance with a YIELD HERE TO PEDESTRIANS
(R1-5 or R1-5a) sign, to correspond with the
[[Page 35867]]
proposed addition of this new sign to Chapter 2B.
The FHWA proposes revising and adding to the second GUIDANCE
statement to clarify the recommended placement of yield lines at
unsignalized midblock crosswalks, to enhance pedestrian safety. The
FHWA also proposes adding a new paragraph to the second GUIDANCE
statement regarding placement of yield lines at midblock crosswalks.
The FHWA also proposes adding a new figure numbered and titled
"Figure 3B-15 Examples of Yield Lines at Unsignalized
Midblock Crosswalks" relating to the new text. All of the
following figures in the chapter would be renumbered accordingly.
Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding a new SUPPORT statement at
the end of the section to emphasize that drivers who yield too close to
crosswalks on multi-lane approaches place pedestrians at risk by
blocking other drivers' view of pedestrians. The FHWA proposes this to
clarify the reasons for the recommended locations of stop and yield
lines.
140. In Section 3B.17 Crosswalk Markings, in the second GUIDANCE
statement the FHWA proposes increasing the upper limit of the range for
spacing diagonal or longitudinal crosswalk marking lines from 300 to
600 mm (12 to 24 in) to 300 to 1500 mm (12 to 60 in) and to specify the
relationship between marking spacing and line width, to provide more
flexibility to jurisdictions.
141. In Section 3B.19 Pavement Word and Symbol Markings, the FHWA
proposes modifying the third STANDARD statement to allow the use of
STOP markings at the ends of aisles in parking lots even though there
is no STOP sign. In parking lots, often there is no practical way to
install a stop sign at the end of the aisles, so the STOP legend
pavement marking is needed to clarify right-of-way.
142. In Section 3B.21 Curb Markings, in the first paragraph of the
STANDARD statement, the FHWA proposes clarifying that the requirement
for signs to be used with curb markings does not apply if the no
parking zone is controlled by statute or local ordinance, to minimize
unnecessary sign clutter.
The FHWA also proposes adding a new OPTION statement immediately
following the first item in the first GUIDANCE statement to clarify the
use of signs and word markings when curb markings are used to convey
statutory law.
143. In Section 3B.22 Preferential Lane Word and Symbol Markings,
the FHWA proposes adding to the second STANDARD statement that more
than one symbol or word marking can be used to mark a preferential
lane, that the word message HOV is acceptable as a preferential marking
(relocating this from the OPTION statement), and that the
"T" marking be the light rail transit preferential lane
symbol. Additionally, in the same STANDARD statement, the FHWA proposes
requiring that symbol or word markings for each preferential lane use
be installed if two or more preferential lane uses are permitted in a
single lane. The FHWA proposes these changes to provide uniformity for
marking of multi-use preferential lanes and to provide a distinctive
symbol for light rail transit.
144. In Section 3B.24 Markings for Roundabouts, the FHWA proposes
adding a new STANDARD statement, which prohibits marking bicycle lanes
on roundabouts. The FHWA proposes the prohibition to enhance bicyclist
safety by avoiding giving bicyclists a false sense of security when
traveling through the roundabout with conflicting and turning traffic.
This proposed change is consistent with state of the practice for
roundabout design.
145. In Section 3C.01 Object Marker Design and Placement Height,
the FHWA proposes adding to the first STANDARD statement that the
minimum width of both the yellow and black stripes on a Type 3 striped
marker shall be 75mm (3 in), to provide for uniformity of appearance of
these markers. The FHWA proposes that this change become effective
immediately for new or replacement of damaged existing sign
installations. The FHWA proposes a phase-in compliance period of 10
years for existing signs in good condition to minimize any impact on
State or local highway agencies.
146. In Section 3D.01 Delineators, the FHWA proposes changing the
STANDARD statement indicating that delineators are considered guidance
devices rather than warning devices to a SUPPORT statement to be
consistent with other parts of the MUTCD.
147. In Section 3E.01 General, the FHWA proposes several changes to
reflect that red colored pavement is no longer being considered a
traffic control device. Accordingly, the FHWA proposes adding to the
SUPPORT statement that colored pavement located between the crosswalk
lines is not considered to be a traffic control device, removing
existing item A of the STANDARD statement concerning when the color red
is used, and removing the second GUIDANCE statement concerning how the
color red is used. These proposed changes will provide additional
flexibility for jurisdictions to use colored pavements as aesthetic
treatments, such as in redevelopment areas, as long as the crosswalk is
marked by standard, retroreflectorized, white lines.
Additionally, in the first GUIDANCE statement, the FHWA proposes
recommending that colors that degrade the contrast of white crosswalk
lines, or that might be mistaken by road users as a traffic control
application, not be used for colored pavement located between crosswalk
lines. This proposed change is needed to reduce the possibility of uses
of colored pavements in ways that might confuse road users or reduce
pedestrian safety.
Discussion of Proposed Amendments to Part 4-Highway Traffic
Signals
148. In Section 4A.02 Definitions Relating to Highway Traffic
Signals, the FHWA proposes revising the definition for "Average
Day" and "Flashing" and adding a new definition for
"Flashing Mode". These definitions would be identical to
the proposed revised definitions in Section 1A.13 and are repeated in
Section 4A.02 because they are especially pertinent to Highway Traffic
Signals.
Additionally, the FHWA proposes revising the definitions for
"Backplate" (change to "Signal Backplate"),
"Detector," "Louver" (change to "Signal
Louver"), "Signal Face," "Signal Head,"
and "Visibility-Limited Signal Face or Section" to better
reflect accepted practice and terminologies.
The FHWA also proposes revising the definition of "Pedestrian
Clearance Time" to correspond to proposed changes in the
standards contained in Section 4E.10 (formerly 4E.09).
Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding new definitions for
"Dual-Arrow Signal Section," "Emergency
Beacon," "Moveable Bridge Signal," "Separate
Left Turn Signal Face," and "Shared Left Turn Signal
Face" because these terms are frequently used in Part 4. The
entire list of definitions is renumbered accordingly.
149. In Section 4B.02 Basis of Installation or Removal of Traffic
Control Signals, the FHWA proposes revising the first GUIDANCE
statement to more specifically define the elements that should be
considered as traffic conditions, because vehicles, pedestrians, and
bicyclists are all considered to be traffic.
In the SUPPORT statement, the FHWA proposes changing the word
"intersections" to "locations," since traffic
signals are not always located at intersections. Traffic signals can be
at shopping center driveways and other locations that are not legally
considered
[[Page 35868]]
intersections. This proposed revision is carried throughout Part 4.
The FHWA proposes adding a paragraph to the beginning of the second
GUIDANCE statement, which states that engineering judgment should be
applied in the review of operating traffic control signals to determine
whether the type of installation and the signal timing meet the current
requirements of traffic. This information is relocated from Section
4B.03.
Additionally, in item E of the OPTION statement, the FHWA proposes
removing the maximum time limit of one year for signal poles and cables
to remain in place after removal of the signal heads, since it is too
restrictive.
150. In Section 4B.03 Advantages and Disadvantages of Traffic
Control Signals, the FHWA proposes revising item B of the second
paragraph of the SUPPORT statement, to clarify that signal timing
review and updating be conducted if needed and to clarify that every
two years is just one of several possible frequencies of review.
151. In Section 4C.01 Studies and Factors for Justifying Traffic
Control Signals, the FHWA proposes adding a recommendation to the
GUIDANCE statement, which states that a traffic control signal
installed under projected conditions should be studied again within one
year after placing it in stop-and-go operation to determine if it is
still justified and, if it is not justified, it should be taken out of
stop-and-go operation or removed. The FHWA proposes this addition
because it reflects best practice to prevent continued operation of
unjustified signals. Additionally, the FHWA proposes categorizing a
wide median (for purposes of signal warrant analysis) as one with a
width greater than 9 m (30 ft), for consistency with other parts of the
MUTCD.
Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding a paragraph at the beginning
of the OPTION statement, which explains the option of using the left-
turn volume on the major-street as the minor-street volume and the
corresponding single direction of opposing traffic as the major street
volume. The proposed change reflects commonly used and accepted
practices and provides additional flexibility to practitioners in
analyzing a location for a traffic signal.
The FHWA proposes adding an item H to the existing first (new
second) paragraph of the OPTION statement to indicate that bicyclists
may be counted as either vehicles or pedestrians when studying the need
for a traffic control signal. This proposed change provides a more
complete listing of recommended data for the engineering study.
Additionally, in item A of the existing second (new third)
paragraph of the OPTION statement, the FHWA proposes removing the
reference to the Peak Hour Warrant to correct an error in the previous
edition.
152. In Section 4C.02 Warrant 1, Eight-Hour Vehicular Volume, in
the first OPTION statement, the FHWA proposes changing the phrase
"exceeds 70 km/h (40 mph)" to "exceeds 70 km/h or
exceeds 40 mph" to clarify that, for purposes of evaluating
warrant satisfaction, either 70 km/h or 40 mph (depending on whether
metric or English units are used for speeds, and regardless of metric-
English conversion factors) is the speed above which the 70% factor may
be used. This change is carried throughout the applicable text and
figures in Chapter 4C.
The FHWA proposes adding a new GUIDANCE statement following the
first OPTION statement, and a new SUPPORT statement at the end of the
section to better clarify the intended use of the combination of
Conditions A and B under Warrant 1.
Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding a new OPTION statement after
the second STANDARD statement to explain the use of 56% traffic volumes
under certain conditions and modifying Table 4C-1 to include
additional criteria for a combination of Conditions A and B as
reflected in the text. These changes will better reflect commonly
accepted practice that was implicitly allowed in the 1988 MUTCD.
153. In Section 4C.08 Warrant 7, Crash Experience, the FHWA
proposes adding a new OPTION statement at the end of the section to
explain the use of 56% traffic volumes. This proposed change is
consistent with similar proposed changes in Section 4C.02.
154. In Section 4D.01, General, the FHWA proposes removing from the
STANDARD statement the requirement that a traffic control signal be
operated in either a steady (stop-and-go) mode or a flashing mode at
all times. This change is proposed because it is in conflict with other
STANDARD statements in Chapter 4E that require flashing indications
(flashing UPRAISED HAND pedestrian signal indications) to be displayed
during an otherwise steady mode of traffic control signal operation.
This change also allows practitioners the flexibility to use flashing
indications along with steady indications where appropriate in a signal
sequence to improve the efficiency or safety of the intersection.
Additionally, the FHWA proposes reordering the paragraphs in this
STANDARD statement so that existing last paragraph will become the
first paragraph. This revision is proposed to improve clarity.
The FHWA also proposes adding to the GUIDANCE statement that the
location of signalized midblock crosswalks should be at least 30 m (100
ft) away from adjacent stop or yield controlled driveways or streets.
The purpose of this proposed change is to reduce potential conflicts
and improve safety, and to codify previous official interpretations of
the MUTCD on this subject. The FHWA proposes that this guidance become
effective immediately for new signalized midblock crosswalks. The FHWA
proposes a phase-in compliance period of 10 years for existing
signalized midblock crosswalks in good condition to minimize any impact
on State or local highway agencies.
155. In Section 4D.04 Meaning of Vehicular Signal Indications, the
FHWA proposes removing the phrase "unless otherwise determined by
law" from the beginning of the STANDARD statement to conform to
the Uniform Vehicle Code.
The FHWA proposes adding to item A.3 that the pedestrian does not
automatically have the right of way when starting to cross on a green
signal to conform to the Uniform Vehicle Code.
The FHWA proposes adding to item C.2 that a turn on a RED ARROW
signal indication after stopping is allowed when a sign is in place
permitting the turn on red arrow to conform to the Uniform Vehicle
Code. Additionally, the FHWA proposes removing the existing OPTION
statement at the end of the section dealing with right-turn on a red
arrow to eliminate redundancy with the change in the STANDARD
statement.
156. In Section 4D.05 Application of Steady Signal Indications, the
FHWA proposes adding protected/permissive mode left-turn operation with
separate left-turn signal faces as an exception to when a steady
CIRCULAR RED signal indication is required to be displayed with the
appropriate GREEN ARROW signal indication. This proposed change
clarifies the proper display with the "Dallas" type left
turn phasing.
The FHWA proposes adding a new item B.4 to the STANDARD statement
to prohibit signal displays that result in what is referred to as the
"yellow trap" unless certain ameliorating measures are
taken. The "yellow trap" is a potentially adverse safety
situation inherent in some signal phasing sequences involving lagging
left turns in one direction. A left turning driver, in the intersection
waiting for gaps in oncoming traffic in order to turn left on
[[Page 35869]]
a permissive green signal indication, sees the signals for adjacent
through traffic change from green to yellow and mistakenly assumes that
oncoming through traffic also has yellow signals at the same time and
will be soon coming to a stop. The proposed new text reflects current
best practices and addresses the safety concerns. The FHWA proposes
that this standard become effective immediately for new or replacement
of damaged existing traffic control signal installations. The FHWA
proposes a phase-in compliance period of 5 years for existing traffic
control signals in good condition to minimize any impact on State or
local highway agencies.
The FHWA proposes revising item D of the STANDARD statement to
correspond with changes to Section 4D.04 that a turn on a RED ARROW
signal indication after stopping is allowed when a sign is in place
permitting the turn on red arrow, to conform to the Uniform Vehicle
Code.
Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding to item F.2 of the STANDARD
statement to require the use of a "U Turn Yield to Right
Turn" sign when U-turns on a green arrow signal conflict with
right turns on a green arrow signal. This proposed change is necessary
to establish right-of-way of one movement over a conflicting movement,
and to provide for safe operations.
157. In Section 4D.06 Application of Steady Signal Indications for
Left Turns, the FHWA proposes replacing the existing item A in the
STANDARD statement with new text that provides for the use of separate
or shared left turn signal faces and the use of "Dallas"
type displays and sequences for "permissive only" mode of
operation. This revision is proposed in order to make this type of
solution available to practitioners to eliminate the "yellow
trap" situation for "permissive only" mode left turns
as well as for "protected-permissive" mode.
Additionally, the FHWA proposes revising the text of item B.2 of
the STANDARD statement for clarity and to correct an error from the
previous edition. The proposed change reflects the fact that a
visibility-limited CIRCULAR RED signal indication is considered not
readily visible to drivers in the through lane(s).
Additionally, the FHWA proposes to revise the text of item C of the
STANDARD statement to remove the requirement that the left-turn signal
face simultaneously display a CIRCULAR RED signal indication with the
left-turn GREEN ARROW signal indication during the protected left-turn
movement in Protected/Permissive Mode, if a separate left-turn signal
face is provided. This proposed change corrects an error from the
previous edition.
158. In Section 4D.07 Application of Steady Signal Indications for
Right Turns, in item B.2 of the STANDARD statement, the FHWA proposes
correcting an error in the previous edition on the proper use of the
RIGHT TURN SIGNAL sign and revising the statement for clarity. The
proposed change reflects the fact that a visibility-limited CIRCULAR
RED signal indication is considered not readily visible to drivers in
the through lane(s).
159. In Section 4D.09 Unexpected Conflicts During Green or Yellow
Intervals, the FHWA proposes revising item A of the STANDARD statement
to add an exception for the situation regarding U-turns as described in
item F.2 of Section 4D.05 to the prohibition of displaying a steady
GREEN ARROW or YELLOW ARROW signal indication to vehicular movements
that conflict with other vehicles moving on a green or yellow signal
indication. This proposed change corresponds to the change proposed in
Section 4D.05.
160. In Section 4D.12 Flashing Operation of Traffic Control
Signals, the FHWA proposes revising the GUIDANCE statement to eliminate
the word maximum in describing the duration of six seconds for a steady
red clearance interval in the change from red-red flashing mode to
steady (stop and go) mode. This change is proposed because six seconds
has been found by practitioners to be a reasonable and practical
duration to provide for safe operation in the transition of modes.
Since this specific duration of six seconds is a recommended condition,
this proposed change allows agencies to use longer or shorter durations
if justified by unique conditions. The FHWA proposes that this guidance
become effective immediately for new or replacement of damaged existing
traffic control signal installations. The FHWA proposes a phase-in
compliance period of 5 years for existing traffic control signals in
good condition to minimize any impact on State or local highway
agencies.
161. In Section 4D.13 Preemption and Priority Control of Traffic
Control Signals, the FHWA proposes changing the first paragraph of the
SUPPORT statement to an OPTION statement to be consistent with similar
conditions in other parts of the MUTCD.
The FHWA proposes revising the remaining portions of the SUPPORT
statement to clarify that boats and trains are not
"vehicles" under accepted definitions. The FHWA proposes
adding light rail transit to the list of modes that typically get
preemption control, to reflect current typical practice. Additionally,
in the last paragraph of the SUPPORT statement, the FHWA proposes
switching the first two items in the order of priority from
"boat, train" to "train, boat" because trains
typically cannot be stopped as easily as boats.
162. In Section 4D.15 Size, Number, and Location of Signal Faces by
Approach, the FHWA proposes revising item D in the second STANDARD
statement to change from 45 m (150 ft) to 55 m (180 ft) the maximum
distance beyond the stop line that a signal face installed to satisfy
the requirements of Items B and C in this STANDARD and at least one and
preferably both of the signal faces required by item A in this STANDARD
be located unless a supplemental near side signal face is provided.
Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding a new item D.2 to the second
STANDARD statement to require the use of engineering judgment of the
conditions, including worst-case visibility conditions, to determine if
the provision of a supplemental near-side signal face would be
beneficial, if the nearest signal face is located between 45 and 55 m
(150 and 180 ft) from the stop line. The FHWA also proposes changing
Figure 4D-2 to reflect the text.
The proposed changes to the second STANDARD statement and to Figure
4D-2 better accommodate signal design at large intersections.
163. In Section 4D.16 Number and Arrangement of Signal Sections in
Vehicular Traffic Control Signal Faces, the FHWA proposes revising the
seventh paragraph of the STANDARD statement to change the phrase
"variable indication" to "dual-arrow" to
clarify that single sections that display green and yellow arrows are
permissible. Single section heads capable of displaying red, yellow,
and green indications in the one section are not allowed due to color
blindness and other issues. This proposed change is carried throughout
the MUTCD.
164. In Section 4D.18 Design, Illumination, and Color of Signal
Sections, the FHWA proposes removing the last GUIDANCE statement
concerning the color of signal housings as there is no consensus that
yellow signal housings are universally best in all of the various
environments. In actual practice, far fewer than 50 percent of the
signal heads in the United States are highway yellow. California, New
York, and many other very large jurisdictions require signal heads to
be other colors, such as green, black, gray, brown, etc. Some states
require the front
[[Page 35870]]
surfaces of the housings to be black while painting the back surfaces
of the housing yellow.
165. In Section 4D.21 Traffic Signal Signs, Auxiliary, the FHWA
proposes revising the first paragraph of the STANDARD statement to
specify that the required minimum clearance of the total assembly of
traffic signal signs is the minimum vertical and horizontal clearances
of sign assemblies.
Additionally, the FHWA proposes revising the GUIDANCE statement to
clarify that traffic signal signs should be located adjacent to the
signal face to which they apply.
166. In Section 4E.02 the FHWA proposes changing the title of the
section from "Meaning of Pedestrian Signal Indications" to
"Meaning of Pedestrian Signal Head Indications" to make it
clear that what is being referred to are the "walk-don't
walk" pedestrian signal heads, and not the red-yellow-green
signal heads that may serve as indications for pedestrians at some
locations. This proposed change is made throughout Chapter 4E.
Additionally, the FHWA proposes revising item A of the STANDARD
statement to indicate that a pedestrian does not automatically have the
right of way when starting to cross on a WALK signal. This proposed
change conforms to the Uniform Vehicle Code.
167. In Section 4E.03 Application of Pedestrian Signal Heads, the
FHWA proposes removing item D of the STANDARD statement because it
implies that pedestrian signal heads are required at all locations
where split phase timing is used without regard to the presence or
absence of pedestrian activity. That is not the intent of this section.
168. In Section 4E.04, the FHWA proposes changing the title of the
section from "Size, Design, and Illumination of Pedestrian Signal
Indications" to "Size, Design, and Illumination of
Pedestrian Signal Head Indications" for consistency with the
proposed change in Section 4E.02. The FHWA also proposes specifying in
the first paragraph of the STANDARD statement that symbolized messages
for pedestrian signal heads are required to be solid and disallowing
use of "outline style" symbols. The FHWA also proposes
changing Figure 4E-1 to reflect the text and to eliminate the
illustration of the "outlined symbol." These changes are
proposed because of the difficulty that elderly people and people with
diminished visual acuity have in seeing the outline style symbols. The
outline style symbols are also often occluded when used with egg crate
baffles. Solid symbols provide the necessary luminous intensity and can
be economically manufactured using light emitting diodes (LEDs) or
other technologies. The FHWA proposes that this standard become
effective immediately for new or replacement of damaged existing
pedestrian signal faces. The FHWA proposes a phase-in compliance period
of 10 years for existing pedestrian signal faces in good condition to
minimize any impact on State or local highway agencies.
The FHWA also proposes adding a seventh paragraph to the STANDARD
statement to specify the flash rate for the flashing upraised hand
pedestrian signal head indication. The FHWA proposes this change to be
consistent with flash rates specified in other sections of Part 4.
Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding an OPTION statement and a
STANDARD statement at the end of the section to allow and describe the
use of an animated eyes symbol on pedestrian signal heads. The FHWA
proposes adding the animated eyes traffic control device because
research has documented benefits to alerting pedestrians to look both
ways for approaching vehicles.
169. In Section 4E.06 Accessible Pedestrian Signals, the FHWA
proposes adding to the second paragraph of the fourth GUIDANCE
statement how sound pressure levels of the accessible walk signal tone
should be measured, to reflect typical industry practices.
170. The FHWA proposes adding a new section following Section 4E.06
Accessible Pedestrian Signals. The proposed new section is numbered and
titled "Section 4E.07 Countdown Pedestrian Signals" and
contains OPTION, STANDARD, and GUIDANCE statements on the design, use,
and operation of countdown pedestrian signals. The remaining sections
in Chapter 4E would be renumbered accordingly. Countdown pedestrian
signals have been shown by research and experimentation to be
beneficial to pedestrians by providing additional information to help
pedestrians judge the time remaining to cross the street. Uniformity in
the design and operation of countdown pedestrian signals is needed to
minimize pedestrian confusion. The FHWA proposes that this section
become effective immediately for new or replacement of damaged existing
countdown pedestrian signal installations. The FHWA proposes a phase-in
compliance period of 10 years for existing countdown pedestrian signals
in good condition to minimize any impact on State or local highway
agencies.
171. In existing Section 4E.07 (new Section 4E.08) Pedestrian
Detectors, the FHWA proposes removing from the last STANDARD statement
the statement that instructional signs are not required if special
purpose pushbuttons are used. The current design of special purpose
pushbuttons does not require a sign to make users aware of their
intended purpose. Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding to the third
GUIDANCE statement comparable text that the special purpose pushbuttons
do not need an instructional sign.
The FHWA proposes adding an OPTION statement at the end of the
section to allow the use of special pedestrian detectors to provide
additional crossing time for pedestrians with special needs. This
proposed change reflects the availability of new technology and can
improve safety for pedestrians with special needs.
172. In existing Section 4E.08 (new Section 4E.09) Accessible
Pedestrian Signal Detectors, the FHWA proposes changing the SUPPORT
statement to a STANDARD statement for consistency, since other
definitions in the MUTCD are STANDARDS. Additionally, the FHWA proposes
relocating the existing first STANDARD statement to become part of the
new first STANDARD statement at the beginning of the section.
The FHWA proposes retitling Figure 4E-2 from
"Recommended Pushbutton Locations for Accessible Pedestrian
Signals" to "Typical Locations for Accessible Pedestrian
Signals" to be consistent with terminology used throughout the
MUTCD for figures. The FHWA also proposes clarifying the arrows
symbolizing push buttons in Figure 4E-2.
173. In existing Section 4E.09 (new Section 4E.10) Pedestrian
Intervals and Signal Phases, the FHWA proposes removing from the first
OPTION statement the desire to favor the length of an opposing signal
phase as a condition for using walk intervals as short as 4 seconds.
This change is proposed to encourage enhanced consideration of
pedestrian timing needs.
In the second GUIDANCE statement the FHWA proposes increasing the
pedestrian clearance time so that it is sufficient to allow the
pedestrian to clear the full width of the traveled portion of the
roadway. The current pedestrian clearance time is sufficient to allow
the pedestrian to clear just to the center of the farthest traveled
lane. With the increases in the number of coordinated signal systems,
and with platoons of vehicles potentially arriving at the intersection
at the start of the
[[Page 35871]]
green indication, it is a significant safety concern for pedestrians to
be given only enough clearance time that they are in the middle of a
travel lane when the platoon arrives at the start of green. The
proposed change will result in only a very small increase in the
pedestrian clearance time but will significantly enhance pedestrian
safety. The FHWA proposes that this guidance become effective
immediately for new or replacement of damaged existing signal
installations. The FHWA proposes a phase-in compliance period of 5
years for existing traffic control signals in good condition to
minimize any impact on State or local highway agencies.
Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding to the first paragraph of
the last OPTION statement the option of containing the pedestrian
clearance time within the vehicular green and yellow change intervals.
This proposed change reflects common practice of many jurisdictions.
174. In Section 4F.01 Applications of Emergency-Vehicle Traffic
Control Signals, the FHWA proposes adding to the OPTION statement the
choice of installing an Emergency Beacon instead of an emergency
vehicle traffic control signal. This proposed changes corresponds to
the proposed new Section 4F.04 that adds Emergency Beacons as an
alternative to Emergency Vehicle Traffic Control Signals.
Additionally, the FHWA proposes revising the GUIDANCE statement to
recommend following the provisions of Chapter 4D not only if a
numerical signal warrant is met, but also if a decision is made to
install a signal after an engineering study, for consistency with
Chapter 4C.
175. In Section 4F.02 Design of Emergency-Vehicle Traffic Control
Signals, the FHWA proposes revising the GUIDANCE statement to indicate
that two signal faces are required for each major street approach, and
that at least one of those two signal faces should be located over the
roadway. This proposed change is for consistency with Chapter 4D.
176. The FHWA proposes adding a new section following Section 4F.03
Operation of Emergency-Vehicle Traffic Control Signals. This proposed
new section is numbered and titled "Section 4F.04 Emergency
Beacon" and contains STANDARDS, SUPPORT, GUIDANCE, and OPTIONS
concerning the design, use, and application of Emergency Beacons. The
FHWA proposes adding the Emergency Beacon to the MUTCD to provide for
uniformity in the design and operation of this type of device. Research
and experimentation has indicated that, under certain circumstances,
the Emergency Beacon is more effective than an Emergency Vehicle
Traffic Control Signal in terms of capturing the approaching driver's
attention and achieving compliance with the requirement to come to a
stop when emergency vehicles are egressing. The Emergency Beacon is
typically less costly to install and thus imposes less of a burden on
jurisdictions in providing safe operations at locations where emergency
vehicles cross or enter a major road. The FHWA proposes that this
section become effective immediately for new or replacement of damaged
existing emergency beacon installations. The FHWA proposes a phase-in
compliance period of 10 years for existing emergency beacons in good
condition to minimize any impact on State or local highway agencies.
177. In Section 4G.02 Design of Traffic Control Signals for One-
Lane, Two-Way Facilities, the FHWA proposes changing the GUIDANCE
statement, concerning the applicability of provisions of Chapter 4D to
traffic control signals for one-lane two-way facilities and exceptions
to these provisions, to a STANDARD statement. This change is proposed
to enhance safety and operation for road users, who do not readily
distinguish signals for one-lane, two-way facilities from any other
type of highway traffic signals.
178. In Section 4I.02 Design and Location of Movable Bridge Signals
and Gates, the FHWA proposes removing from item A of the STANDARD
statement the explanation that then three-section signal faces with
red, yellow and green signal lenses are generally used if movable
bridge operation is quite frequent. The FHWA also proposes adding
comparable text in a proposed SUPPORT statement, which follows the
third paragraph of the STANDARD statement. The FHWA proposes this
change because the statement is too vague for a STANDARD.
Additionally, the FHWA proposes removing the phrase "on long
bridges or causeways" from the eighth paragraph of the STANDARD
statement because two sets of gates may be used on bridges or causeways
of any length and what constitutes a long bridge or causeway is not and
cannot be readily defined.
179. In Section 4J.03 Design of Lane-Use Control Signals, the FHWA
proposes adding to the OPTION statement to allow the use of smaller
size lane-use control signal faces for one-way and two-way left turn
arrows in areas with minimal visual clutter and low speeds. The FHWA
proposes changing the definition of low speeds from 70 km/h (45 mph) or
less to 60 km/h (40 mph) or less to be consistent with similar
criteria regarding signal lens sizes in Chapter 4D. In these
circumstances, the use of smaller sizes provides a cost savings and
improves aesthetics without compromising effectiveness.
180. In Section 4K.04 Speed Limit Sign Beacon, the FHWA proposes
adding to the STANDARD statement a requirement that a Speed Limit
Beacon be used only to supplement a Speed Limit sign. This change is
proposed to reinforce proper use of the different types of beacons.
181. In Section 4L.01 Application of In-Roadway Lights, the FHWA
proposes revising the SUPPORT statement to include marked crosswalks in
advance of roundabouts, highway-rail grade crossings, and highway-light
transit rail grade crossings as additional situations for possible use
of in-roadway lights. The state-of-the-art in designing modern
roundabouts calls for pedestrian crosswalks to be located about one
vehicle length in advance of the "yield line" where
approaching vehicles enter the roundabout. A crosswalk located in this
position operates essentially as a mid-block uncontrolled crosswalk
because the yield sign controlling vehicle entry into the roundabout
does not also control the vehicles at the crosswalk. The proposed
reference to grade crossings is added due to the proposed new Section
4L.03.
182. The FHWA proposes adding a new section following Section 4L.02
In-Roadway Warning Lights at Crosswalks. The proposed new section is
numbered and titled "Section 4L.03 In-Roadway Lights at Highway-
Rail Grade Crossings and Highway-Light Rail Grade Crossings" and
contains STANDARD, GUIDANCE, and OPTION statements describing the
design, application, and operation of in-roadway warning lights and in-
roadway stop line lights at highway-rail and highway-light rail transit
grade crossings. Research and experimentation has indicated that red
in-roadway lights at the stop line of an approach to a grade crossing
controlled by active grade crossing warning systems can provide
effective additional emphasis of the need for road users to stop and
remain stopped for the passage of a train or light rail vehicle. Also,
the use of yellow in-roadway warning lights in advance of the grade
crossing provides further warning of the crossing to approaching road
users, supplementing advance warning signs and pavement markings. The
FHWA proposes that this section become effective immediately for new or
replacement of existing in-roadway lights at highway-rail and highway-
light
[[Page 35872]]
rail transit grade crossings. The FHWA proposes a phase-in compliance
period of 10 years for existing installations of in-roadway lights at
highway-rail and highway-light rail transit grade crossings in good
condition to minimize any impact on State or local highway agencies.
Discussion of Proposed Amendments to Part 5-Traffic Control
Devices for Low-Volume Roads
183. In Section 5A.03 Design, the FHWA proposes revising Figure
5A-1 Minimum Sign Sizes on Low-Volume Roads to reduce the minimum
size of the W20-1, W20-7a, W20-7b, W21-1a, and
W21-6 signs from 900 x 900 mm (36 x 36 in) to 600
x 600 mm (24 x 24 in) to be consistent with minimum sizes
of other signs of comparable design.
184. In Section 5B.03 Speed Limit Signs (R2 Series), the FHWA
proposes revising the illustration of the metric speed limit sign to
correspond to a similar proposed revision in Chapter 2B. The proposed
design of the metric speed limit sign includes the metric speed value
within a green circle with the legend "km/h" below it.
185. In Section 5B.04 Traffic Movement and Prohibition Signs (R3,
R4, R5, R6, R9, R10, R11, R12, R13, and R14), the FHWA proposes adding
an illustration of the PASS WITH CARE, (R4-2), sign to accompany
the DO NOT PASS (R4-1) sign, because this sign is commonly used.
186. In Section 5C.05, the FHWA proposes retitling the section from
"Narrow Bridge Sign (W5-2a)" to "NARROW BRIDGE
Sign (W5-2)" because in Chapter 2C of the MUTCD the FHWA
proposes removing the symbol version of this sign and requiring the use
of only the word version of the sign.
187. In Section 5C.10 Advisory Speed Plaque (W13-1), the FHWA
proposes revising the illustration of the metric advisory speed plaque
to correspond to a similar proposed revision in Chapter 2C. The
proposed design of the metric advisory speed plaque includes the metric
speed value within a black circle with the legend "km/h"
below it.
188. In Section 5F.04, STOP and YIELD Signs, FHWA proposes removing
the words "State or local" from the OPTION statement, to
reflect that jurisdictions responsible for grade crossings may be any
level of government or may be quasi-governmental or non-governmental.
189. In Section 5G.03 Channelization Devices, the FHWA proposes
replacing the phrase "temporary traffic control zone" with
"work space" in the OPTION statement to correspond with the
appropriate terminology in Part 6.
191. In Section 5G.05 Other Traffic Control Devices, the FHWA
proposes adding a SUPPORT statement referring to Figure 5G-1 for
some of the signs that might be applicable in a temporary traffic
control zone on a low-volume road. The FHWA also proposes revising
Figure 5G-1 Temporary Traffic Control Signs on Low-Volume Roads,
to change the W20-7a Flagger sign to conform with the correctly
designed sign in Section 6F.29 and to change the metric version of the
W13-1 Advisory Speed Plaque to conform to the use of the black
circle for metric speed values as proposed in Chapter 2C.
Discussion of Proposed Amendments to Part 6-Temporary Traffic
Control
192. In Section 6A.01 General, the FHWA proposes adding to a number
of places in this section, and in a number of sections in Part 6,
references to ensure that temporary traffic controls involving or
impacting pedestrian walkways and paths account for the needs of
pedestrians with disabilities. These proposed additions follow the
accessibility requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act of
1990 (ADA) (Public Law 101-366, 104 Stat. 327, July 26, 1990. 42
USC 12101-12213 (as amended)). In this regard FHWA proposes a
SUPPORT statement identifying the Act following the first STANDARD
statement.
Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding to this section and in a
number of sections in Part 6, references to ensuring that the needs of
bicyclists through temporary traffic control zones are met, as many
temporary traffic control plans affect a substantial amount of bicycle
activity.
Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding to a number of places in
this section and a number of sections in Part 6 statements that
temporary traffic control principles are applicable to managing traffic
incidents along the roadway, as incidents are temporary road or lane
closures and are one of the major causes of congestion. In this regard
the FHWA proposes adding a new chapter titled "Chapter 6I Control
of Traffic Through Incident Areas."
193. In Section 6B.01 Fundamental Principles of Temporary Traffic
Control, the FHWA proposes adding to a number of places in this section
references about accounting for the needs of pedestrians with
disabilities, bicyclists, and traffic incident management responders.
Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding to the first and second
GUIDANCE statements that the needs of pedestrians with disabilities
should be considered when planning, designing and establishing a
temporary traffic control zone. This is in accordance with ADA, Title
II, paragraph 35.130.
Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding to the second GUIDANCE
statement that the needs of operators of commercial vehicles should be
assessed and appropriate accommodations made when developing a public
relations plan for a temporary traffic control zone.
194. In Section 6C.01 Temporary Traffic Control Plans, the FHWA
proposes adding to the first GUIDANCE statement that planning for all
road users, including pedestrians (especially those with disabilities)
and bicyclists, should be part of the planning and design of the
temporary traffic control plan. The FHWA also proposes adding to the
first GUIDANCE statement that provisions for effective continuity of
accessible circulation paths for pedestrians should be incorporated
into the temporary traffic control process.
These proposed changes will enhance the quality of traffic control
plans in terms of addressing the needs of all road users.
195. In Section 6C.02 Temporary Traffic Control Zones, the FHWA
proposes adding to the SUPPORT statement that the incident area begins
at the first warning sign or vehicle with a rotating/strobe light and
extends to the last temporary traffic control device or to a point
where road users are allowed to return to the original lane alignment.
This proposed change is needed to clarify the limits of an incident
area.
196. In Section 6C.06 Activity Area, the FHWA proposes adding a new
table numbered and titled "Table 6C-2 Stopping Sight
Distance as a Function of Speed." This table is identical to
Table 6E-1. The current Table 6C-2 is renumbered as Table
6C-3, Taper Length Criteria for temporary Traffic Control Zones.
The FHWA also proposes adding a reference to new Table 6C-2 to
the second OPTION statement, as these distances may be used to
determine the length of a buffer space.
197. In Section 6C.07 Termination Area, the FHWA proposes adding to
the OPTION statement that a longitudinal buffer space may be used
between the work space and the beginning of the downstream taper, to
provide flexibility to jurisdictions.
198. In Section 6D.01 Pedestrian Considerations, the FHWA proposes
adding a new GUIDANCE statement at the beginning of the section to
indicate that pedestrians of all ages and abilities should be provided
a detectable and usable travel path.
[[Page 35873]]
Additionally, the FHWA proposes modifying the first SUPPORT
statement to include information on other publications that can provide
useful data for assisting the planning for, and the design of
pedestrian facilities.
Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding to the first STANDARD
statement that in addition to visual signage, equivalent information in
alternate formats for pedestrians who have visual disabilities shall be
provided so that they are not trapped on a closed facility.
Additionally, in the existing first, second, third, fourth, fifth,
and sixth GUIDANCE statements the FHWA proposes adding information
about the general needs of pedestrians with visual disabilities; the
desirability for providing a channelized pedestrian route through or
around the activity area as opposed to closing the walkway; the
possible need for audible warnings and directions; the need for fencing
or barriers with a continuous edging at the bottom for assisting a cane
user; the need to minimize abrupt changes in grade or terrain; that
temporary traffic control devices and any ballast or mounting equipment
should not intrude into the minimum 1500 mm (60 in) width of clear
accessible passageway; and that lining a walkway with tape, rope, or
plastic chain strung between devices is not detectable to pedestrians
with visual limitations.
The FHWA proposes the changes to this section to enhance the
consideration of pedestrian needs in temporary traffic control zones.
The FHWA proposes a phase-in compliance period of 5 years for these
changes in order to minimize any impact on State or local highway
agencies as they design and advertise new projects, and as they
undertake maintenance activities.
199. In Section 6D.02 Worker Considerations, the FHWA proposes
adding to the SUPPORT statement information on the need to separate
workers on foot from moving construction vehicles.
Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding to the GUIDANCE statement
that workers exposed to the risks of moving roadway traffic or
construction equipment should wear high visibility apparel meeting the
requirements of the American National Standard for High Visibility
Safety Apparel \4\ and labeled as meeting ANSI 107-1999
Standard Performance for Class 1, 2, or 3 risk exposure. The FHWA
proposes a phase-in compliance period of 5 years for this change in
order to minimize any impact on State or local highway agencies.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ American National Standard for High Visibility Safety
Apparel,'' ANSI/ISEA 107-1999, 1999 edition, is available from
ISEA-The Safety Equipment Association (ISEA) by telephone
(703) 525-1695, facsimile (703) 528-2148, mail ISEA,
1901 North Moore Street, Suite 808, Arlington, VA 22209, or at its
web site http://www.safetycentral.org/isea.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Additionally, in the same GUIDANCE statement, the FHWA proposes
adding "Activity Area" and "Worker Safety
Planning" to the list of key elements of worker safety and
temporary traffic control management that should be considered to
improve worker safety. The FHWA proposes that the worker safety plan
should be in accordance with the Occupational Safety and Health Act
"General Duty Clause" Section 5(a)(1) " Public Law
91-596, 84 Stat. 1590, December 29, 1970, as amended, and with
the requirement to assess worker risk exposures for each job site and
job classification as per 1926.20(b)(2) of the Occupational Safety and
Health Administration (OSHA) Regulations as contained in 29 CFR.
These proposed additions are expected to improve worker safety by
reducing the conflicts between vehicles and workers, by making workers
more visible to road users, and by recommending a thorough risk
exposure analysis as part of the worker safety planning process.
200. In Section 6E.01 Qualifications for Flaggers, the FHWA
proposes rewriting the GUIDANCE statement in its entirety to describe
in terms more appropriate to a temporary traffic control zone
environment the recommended skills and abilities for a flagger. This
proposed change is needed to reflect the state of the practice in
flagger selection and training.
201. In Section 6E.02 High-Visibility Clothing, the FHWA proposes
adding to the first STANDARD statement the requirement that flaggers
wear safety apparel meeting the requirements of the American National
Standard for High Visibility Apparel and labeled as meeting ANSI
107-1999 Standard Performance for Class 3 risk exposure, to
improve worker visibility to approaching road users. The FHWA proposes
a phase-in compliance period of 5 years for these changes in order to
minimize any impact on State or local highway agencies.
202. In Section 6E.03 Hand-Signaling Devices, the FHWA proposes
adding to the OPTION statement other design configurations for adding
white lights to the STOP/SLOW paddle to improve conspicuity. These
additional design configurations of white lights will provide
additional flexibility in improving visibility of the paddle.
Additionally, the FHWA proposes to add to the second STANDARD
statement requirements for the performance of flashing lights that are
used on the STOP/SLOW paddle. These flashing rate values are identical
to the flashing rate used in other parts of the MUTCD. This is proposed
for consistency.
203. In Section 6E.05 Flagger Stations, the FHWA proposes adding a
GUIDANCE statement following the first STANDARD statement to indicate
that flagger stations should be located so that an errant vehicle has
space to stop without entering the work space, to enhance worker
safety.
Additionally, the FHWA proposes changing the title of Table
6E-1 from "Distance of Flagger Station in Advance of the
Work Space" to "Stopping Sight Distance as a Function of
Speed" and changing the distance values to be in agreement with
AASHTO's "A Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and
Streets" book.
Additionally, the FHWA proposes changing the GUIDANCE statement to
a STANDARD statement to indicate that flagger stations shall be
preceded by an advance warning sign or signs, and that flagger stations
shall be illuminated at night. The FHWA believes that anytime a flagger
is active at night, illumination of the flagger station is important to
make the flagger more visible to approaching road users.
204. In Section 6F.02 General Characteristics of Signs, the FHWA
proposes adding to the first OPTION statement that warning and guide
signs used for temporary traffic control of incident management
situations may have a black legend and border on a fluorescent coral
background. This change is proposed based on research and
experimentation conducted in Virginia.
205. In Section 6F.03 Sign Placement, in the first STANDARD
statement, the FHWA proposes adding "bicycle movements" to
the list of reasons why in urban areas the distance between the bottom
of the sign and the top of the near edge of the traveled way shall be
at least 2.1 m (7 ft), to enhance safety for bicyclists.
Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding language requiring signs to
be mounted and placed in accordance with Section 4.4 of the
"Americans with Disabilities Act Accessibility Guidelines for
Buildings and Facilities (ADAAG)." \5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ "American with Disabilities Act Accessibility
Guidelines for Buildings and Facilities," as amended through
January 1998, is published by the U.S. Architectural and
Transportation Barriers Compliance Board, 1331 F Street, NW, Suite
1000, Washington, D.C. 20004-1111. It may be obtained from the
Access Board, or viewed electronically at http://www.access-board.gov.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 35874]]
Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding to the second GUIDANCE
statement that signs mounted lower than 2.1 m (7 ft) should not project
more than 100 mm (4 in) into pedestrian facilities, in accordance with
the "Americans With Disabilities Act Accessibility Guidelines For
Buildings And Facilities (ADAAG)".
Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding to the OPTION statement at
the end of the section that sign supports that are approved for use
with longer-term signs may be used for shorter-term signs.
206. In Section 6F.06 Regulatory Sign Design, the FHWA proposes
changing the first sentence of the SUPPORT statement to become a new
STANDARD statement at the beginning of the section, stating that
temporary traffic control regulatory signs shall conform to the
standards for regulatory signs presented in Part 2 and in the FHWA's
"Standard Highway Signs" book. This sentence currently
contains a "shall" but is inadvertently in the SUPPORT
statement. The remainder of the SUPPORT statement will remain a SUPPORT
statement.
Additionally, the FHWA proposes identifying the three existing page
images of regulatory signs that follow page 6F-7 as Figures
6F-3, 6F-4, and 6F-5 and titling them as
"Regulatory Signs in Temporary Traffic Control Zones,"
"Additional Regulatory Signs in Temporary Traffic Control
Zones," and "Regulatory Signs for Road Closure and Weight
Limits in Temporary Traffic Control Zones." Additionally, on the
figure proposed to be identified as Figure 6F-4, Regulatory Signs
in Temporary Traffic Control Zones, the FHWA proposes to increase the
size of the PEDESTRIAN CROSSWALK sign from 600 x 300 mm (24
x 12 in) to 900 x 450 mm (36 x 18 in), increase the
size of the SIDEWALK CLOSED sign from 600 x 300 mm (24 x 12
in) to 750 x 450 mm (30 x 18 in), increase the size of the
SIDEWALK CLOSED USE OTHER SIDE and SIDEWALK CLOSED CROSS HERE signs
from 600 x 300 mm (24 x 12 in) to 1200 x 600 (48
x 24 in), and increase the size of the SIDEWALK CLOSED AHEAD
CROSS HERE sign from 600 x 300 mm (24 x 12 in) to 1200
x 900 mm (48 x 36 in), to make it easier for a pedestrian
to read these signs from across a wide street.
207. In Section 6F.12 PEDESTRIAN CROSSWALK Sign (R9-8), the
FHWA proposes adding a STANDARD statement following the OPTION
statement that if a temporary crosswalk is established, it shall be
accessible to pedestrians with disabilities. This proposed change
reflects the need to provide accessibility for disabled pedestrians.
208. In Section 6F.13, SIDEWALK CLOSED Signs (R9-9,
R9-10, R9-11, R9-11a), the FHWA proposes adding to
the first GUIDANCE statement that Bicycle/Pedestrian Detour
(M4-9a) or Pedestrian Detour (M4-9b) signs should be used
where pedestrian flow is rerouted, to provide adequate route guidance
information to pedestrians.
Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding to the SUPPORT statement
that printed signs are not useful to pedestrians with visual
disabilities. Nearby accessible pedestrian signals can provide
temporary audible information about closures and alternate routes.
Tactile map modules available on some accessible pedestrian signal
housings can also provide information about closures and alternate
routes. These proposed changes are to enhance the provision of
information to pedestrians with visual disabilities.
209. In Section 6F.14 Special Regulatory Signs, the FHWA proposes
adding a SUPPORT statement referencing Section 2B.15 for information
regarding the use of the FINES HIGHER sign, since this sign can be
useful in enhancing speed enforcement in temporary traffic control
zones.
210. In Section 6F.15 Warning Sign Function, Design, and
Application, the FHWA proposes adding to the first OPTION statement
that warning signs used for temporary traffic control incident
management situations may have a black legend and border on a
fluorescent coral background, as an alternative to black on orange.
This is consistent with proposed changes in Section 6F.02 and the
proposed new Chapter 6I.
Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding to the GUIDANCE statement
that where road users include pedestrians with hearing or visual
disabilities, the provision of supplemental audible or tactile warning
information should be considered to alert pedestrians.
211. In Section 6F.17 ROAD (STREET) WORK Sign (W20-1), the
FHWA proposes adding an OPTION statement indicating that, where traffic
can enter a temporary traffic control zone from a crossroad or a major
(high volume) driveway, an advance warning sign may be used on the
crossroad or major driveway to alert road users. This proposed change
allows jurisdictions additional flexibility to provide warning signs
when needed.
212. In Section 6F.24 the FHWA proposes changing the title of the
section from "Lane Reduction Sign (W4-2)" to
"Lane Ends Sign (W4-2)" to reflect the sign's name
change and to be consistent with Part 2.
213. In Section 6F.28 EXIT OPEN, EXIT CLOSED Signs (E5-2,
E5-2a), the FHWA proposes adding a GUIDANCE statement indicating
that when an exit ramp is closed, a black on orange EXIT CLOSED panel
should be placed diagonally across the interchange/intersection guide
signs, to enhance the information provided to road users.
214. In Section 6F.41, the FHWA proposes changing the title of the
section from "SHOULDER DROP-OFF Sign (W8-9a)"
to "Shoulder and UNEVEN LANES Signs (W8-4, W8-9,
W8-9a, and W8-11)" to reflect the additional signs
added to this section.
Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding an OPTION statement to allow
the use of the SOFT SHOULDER sign to warn of a soft shoulder condition
and the LOW SHOULDER sign to warn of a shoulder condition where there
is an elevation difference of less than 75 mm (3 in) between the
shoulder and the travel lane. This is proposed to differentiate from
shoulder drop-off conditions, which exceed 75 mm (3 in).
Additionally, the FHWA proposes moving the text from Section 6F.42
UNEVEN LANES Sign (W8-11), in its entirety to this section. This
information will become a GUIDANCE statement regarding the use of the
UNEVEN LANES Sign. With the proposed deletion of Section 6F.42 the
remaining sections will be renumbered accordingly.
215. The FHWA proposes adding a new section following existing
Section 6F.43 (new Section 6F.42) NO CENTER STRIPE Sign (W8-12).
This proposed new section will be numbered and titled "Section
6F.43 Double Reverse Curve Signs (W24 Series)" and will provide
information regarding the use of the new Double Reverse Curve signs.
The FHWA is proposing these new signs to provide a better depiction of
actual roadway conditions when the tangent distance between two reverse
curves is insufficient for a second Reverse Curve sign to be placed
between the curves.
216. In Section 6F.47 Guide Signs, the FHWA proposes adding to the
OPTION statement that guide signs used for temporary traffic control
incident management situations may have a black legend and border on a
fluorescent coral background, as an alternative to black on orange, to
correspond with the proposed change in Section 6F.02.
217. In Section 6F.50 the FHWA proposes changing the title of the
section from "Detour Signs and Markers (M4-8, M4-8a,
M4-8b, M4-9, and M4-10)" to "Detour Signs
and Markers (M4-8, M4-8a, M4-8b, M4-9,
M4-9a, M4-
[[Page 35875]]
9b, M4-9c, and M4-10)" to include signs specifically
for detouring pedestrians and bicyclists.
Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding to the first OPTION
statement that signs used for temporary traffic control of incident
management situations may have a black legend and border on a
fluorescent coral background, as an alternative to black on orange, to
correspond to proposed changes in Section 6F.02.
Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding a STANDARD statement
following the first GUIDANCE statement that the Pedestrian/Bicycle
Detour (M4-9a) sign shall be used where a pedestrian/bicycle
detour route has been established because of the closing of a
pedestrian/bicycle facility to through traffic. If used, the
Pedestrian/Bicycle Detour sign shall have an arrow pointing in the
appropriate direction.
Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding to the second OPTION
statement that an arrow may be on the sign face or on a supplemental
plaque. The Pedestrian/Bicycle Detour (M4-9a) sign or Bicycle
Detour (M4-9c) sign may be used where a pedestrian or bicycle
detour route (not both) has been established because of the closing of
that particular facility to through traffic.
218. In Section 6F.52 Portable Changeable Message Signs, the FHWA
proposes adding to the first STANDARD statement that each character
module shall use at least a five wide and seven high pixel matrix,
based on research regarding visibility and legibility of changeable
message signs.
Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding to the first GUIDANCE
statement that for a trailer or large truck mounted sign, the letter
height should be a minimum of 450 mm (18 in). For a service patrol
truck mounted sign, the letter height should be a minimum of 250 mm (10
in). The message panel should have adjustable display rates (minimum of
3 seconds per phase) so that the entire message can be read at least
twice at the posted speed, the off-peak 85th percentile prior to work
starting, or the anticipated operating speed. Since the FHWA is
proposing to retain the current guidance that road users should be able
to read the entire message twice, there may be a need in some temporary
traffic control zones to use more than one portable Changeable Message
sign. The FHWA proposes these changes in response to research
addressing the needs of older road users.
Additionally, the FHWA proposes moving the GUIDANCE information
regarding the factors that should be taken into account when designing
changeable messages from the end of the section to the end of the first
GUIDANCE statement, for better clarity.
Additionally, the FHWA proposes changing and relocating from the
first GUIDANCE statement to the following OPTION statement that smaller
letter sizes may be used on a sign mounted on a trailer or large truck
provided that the message is legible from a minimum distance of 200 m
(650 ft), or a sign mounted on a service patrol truck provided that the
message is legible from a minimum distance of 100 m (330 ft). This
proposed change will provide flexibility to use smaller letter sizes as
long as the legibility distance can be maintained
Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding to the second STANDARD
statement to clarify that the mounting of Portable Changeable Message
signs on a trailer, a large truck, or a service patrol truck shall be
such that the bottom of the message sign panel shall be a minimum or
2.1 m (7 ft) above the roadway in urban areas and 1.5 m (5 ft) in rural
areas when it is in the operating mode, to correspond with mounting
heights for post-mounted signs.
219. In Section 6F.53 Arrow Panels, the FHWA proposes adding to the
first GUIDANCE statement that an arrow panel in the arrow mode should
be used to advise approaching road users of a lane closure along major
multilane roadways in situations involving heavy traffic volumes, high
speeds, and or limited sight distances, or at other locations and under
other conditions where road users are less likely to expect such lane
closures. This change is proposed to enhance the information provided
to road users.
220. In Section 6F.55 Channelizing Devices, following the first
SUPPORT statement, the FHWA proposes adding a STANDARD statement,
GUIDANCE statement, and another STANDARD statement defining the use of
channelizing devices to channelize pedestrians and that they have to be
detectable to users of long canes.
Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding a note to Figure 6F-14
(Sheet 1 of 2) that where drums, cones, or tubular markers are used to
channelize pedestrians, they shall be located such that there are no
gaps between the bases of the devices, in order to create a continuous
bottom, and the height of each individual drum, cone, or tubular marker
shall be no less than 915 mm (36 in) to be detectable to users of long
canes.
Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding a note to Figure 6F-14
(Sheet 2 of 2) that where barricades are used to channelize
pedestrians, there shall be continuous detectable bottom and top rails
with no gaps between individual barricades to be detectable to users of
long canes. The bottom of the bottom rail shall be no higher than 150
mm (6 in) above the ground surface. The top of the top rail shall be no
lower than 915 mm (36 in) above the ground surface.
These proposed changes are needed to assure detectability to long
cane users of devices used to channelize pedestrians in temporary
traffic control zones. The FHWA proposes a phase-in compliance period
of 5 years for these changes in order to minimize any impact on State
or local highway agencies.
221. In Section 6F.56 Cones, the FHWA proposes adding to the
STANDARD statement that retroreflectorization of cones that are more
than 900 mm (36 in) in height shall be provided by horizontal,
circumferential, alternating orange and white retroreflective stripes
that are 100-150 mm (4 to 6 in) wide. Each cone shall have a
minimum of two orange and two white stripes with the top stripe being
orange. Any non-retroreflective spaces between the orange and white
striped shall not exceed 75 mm (3 in) in width. These proposed changes
will enhance the visibility of cones and improve safety in temporary
traffic control zones. The FHWA proposes a phase-in compliance period
of 5 years for these changes in order to minimize any impact on State
or local highway agencies.
Additionally, in the first GUIDANCE statement the FHWA proposes
adding that cones should not be used for pedestrian channelization or
as pedestrian barriers in temporary traffic control zones on or along
sidewalks unless they are continuous between individual devices and
detectable to users of long canes. Non-continuous, non-detectable
series of cones have been found to be safety problems for pedestrians
with visual disabilities.
222. In Section 6F.57 Tubular Markers, the FHWA proposes adding to
the GUIDANCE statement that tubular markers should not be used for
pedestrian channelization or as pedestrian barriers in temporary
traffic control zones on or along sidewalks unless they are continuous
between individual devices and detectable to users of long canes. .
Non-continuous, non-detectable series of tubular marker have been found
to be safety problems for pedestrians with visual disabilities.
223. In Section 6F.58 Vertical Panels, the FHWA proposes adding to
the first STANDARD statement that vertical panels shall be mounted with
the top a minimum of 900 mm (36 in) above the roadway and a minimum of
1050 mm
[[Page 35876]]
(42 in) above the pedestrian travel way, so as not to interfere with
pedestrians.
219. In Section 6F.59 Drums, the FHWA proposes adding to the
GUIDANCE statement that drums should not be used for pedestrian
channelization or as pedestrian barriers in temporary traffic control
zones on or along sidewalks unless they are continuous between
individual devices and detectable to users of long canes. Non-
continuous, non-detectable series of drums have been found to be safety
problems for pedestrians with visual disabilities.
220. In Section 6F.60 Type I, II, or III Barricades, the FHWA
proposes adding a STANDARD statement following the first GUIDANCE
statement that barricade supports shall not project into circulation
routes more than 100 mm (4 in) from the support between 675 mm (27 in)
and 2000 mm (80 in) from the surface, as described in Section 4.4.1 of
THE "AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT ACCESSIBILITY GUIDELINES FOR
BUILDINGS AND FACILITIES (ADAAG)", and supports shall not narrow
the pedestrian facility to less than 1200 mm (48 in) in width, with a
1500 x 1500 mm (60 x 60 in) passing space at least every 60
m (200 ft), as described in Section 4.3.4 of ADAAG.
Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding to the third existing
STANDARD statement that the ballast used with barricades shall not
extend into the accessible passage width of 1500 mm (60 in).
These proposed changes will provide for accessible pedestrian
passes in temporary traffic control zones. The FHWA proposes a phase-in
compliance period of 5 years for these changes in order to minimize any
impact on State or local highway agencies.
226. In Section 6F.62 Temporary Traffic Barriers as Channelizing
Devices, the FHWA proposes adding SUPPORT and STANDARD statements
related to the use of temporary traffic barriers as traffic control
devices. These statements are being relocated from Section 6G.04, as
they more properly belong in Section 6F.62.
227. The FHWA proposes adding two new sections following Section
6F.62 Temporary Traffic Barriers as Channelizing Devices. The remaining
sections will be renumbered accordingly.
Proposed Section 6F.63 Longitudinal Channelizing Barricades,
consists of GUIDANCE, OPTION, and SUPPORT statements relating to the
use of longitudinal channelizing barricades that are lightweight,
deformable devices that can be used singly as Type I, II, or III
barricades.
Proposed Section 6F.64 Other Channelizing Devices, consists of an
OPTION statement and a GUIDANCE statement that there may be
channelizing devices other than those already described in Part 6 that
may be used in special situations based on an engineering study. If
used, these other channelizing devices should conform to the general
size, color stripe pattern, retroreflectivity, and placement
characteristics established for the devices described in Chapter 6F.
This use of other channelizing devices was included in the 1988 MUTCD
but was inadvertently omitted in the Millennium Edition of the MUTCD.
228. In existing Section 6F.63 (new Section 6F.65) Temporary Raised
Islands, the FHWA proposes adding a STANDARD statement following the
GUIDANCE statement that at pedestrian crossing locations temporary
raised islands shall be cut through or reduced in size to provide at
least a 1500 mm (60 in) wide pathway for pedestrians, to meet the ADA
requirements and to ensure that all pedestrians, including disabled
pedestrians, have a clear and useable facility. The FHWA proposes a
phase-in compliance period of 5 years for these changes in order to
minimize any impact on State or local highway agencies.
229. In existing Section 6F.64 (new Section 6F.66) Opposing Traffic
Lane Divider, the FHWA proposes adding to the STANDARD statement that
opposing traffic lane dividers shall not be placed across pedestrian
crossings, to ensure that pedestrians have a clear and useable
facility.
230. In existing Section 6F.65 (new Section 6F.67) Pavement
Markings, the FHWA proposes adding to the STANDARD statement that
delineation and channelizing devices for use by pedestrians shall be
accessible and detectable to pedestrians who have disabilities and
shall be continuous throughout the temporary traffic control zone, to
ensure that pedestrians have a useable facility.
Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding a SUPPORT statement at the
end of the section that pavement markings alone are generally not
sufficient for use by pedestrians who have visual disabilities. Tactile
warnings on the roadway surface or audible devices are usually more
helpful to these pedestrians.
231. In existing Section 6F.66 (new Section 6F.68) Temporary
Pavement Markings, the FHWA proposes modifying the OPTION statement and
the second GUIDANCE statement to indicate the acceptable use of DO NOT
PASS and PASS WITH CARE signs instead of pavement markings for
temporary situations, rather than the NO PASSING ZONE sign, because
these signs provide a more effective regulatory message.
232. In existing Section 6F.69 (new Section 6F.71) Lighting
Devices, the FHWA proposes adding to the GUIDANCE statement that the
maximum spacing for warning lights should be identical to the
channelizing device space requirements, for consistency.
Additionally, the FHWA proposes changing the SUPPORT statement to
an OPTION statement to more accurately reflect the uses of lighting
devices.
233. In existing Section 6F.70 (new Section 6F.72) Floodlights, the
FHWA proposes adding a SUPPORT statement at the end of the section that
research indicates that 50 lux (5 foot candles) is a desirable
nighttime illumination level where workers are active.
234. In existing Section 6F.72 (new Section 6F.74) Warning Lights,
the FHWA proposes adding Type D 360-degree warning lights to the first
and second STANDARD statements, the third OPTION statement, and the
second GUIDANCE statement, to provide more flexibility in the use of
lighting devices.
235. In existing Section 6F.74 (new Section 6F.76) Temporary
Traffic Control Signals, the FHWA proposes adding to the first GUIDANCE
statement that, where pedestrian traffic is detoured to a temporary
traffic control signal, engineering judgment should be used to
determine if pedestrian signals or accessible pedestrian signals are
needed, to enhance consideration of pedestrian needs in temporary
traffic control zones.
Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding a new STANDARD statement
that indicates that the supports for temporary traffic control signals
shall not encroach into the minimum required pedestrian pathway width
of 1500 mm (60 in), to meet the ADA requirements and assure a clear
pathway for all pedestrians, including disabled pedestrians.
Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding to the second SUPPORT
statement a new item, "the nature of adjacent land uses" to
the list of factors related to the design and application of temporary
traffic control signals. The remaining items will be re-lettered.
236. In existing Section 6F.75 (new Section 6F.77) Temporary
Traffic Barriers, the FHWA proposes modifying the first SUPPORT
statement by deleting the last two sentences related to the
[[Page 35877]]
functions of temporary traffic barriers and adding a portion of text
from Section 6G.11, to more clearly describe the four primary functions
of temporary traffic barriers.
237. In existing Section 6F.76 (new Section 6F.78) Crash Cushions,
the FHWA proposes adding a STANDARD statement that damaged crash
cushions shall be promptly repaired or replaced, to maintain their
crashworthiness.
238. In existing Section 6F.78 (new Section 6F.80) Rumble Strips,
the FHWA proposes adding to the SUPPORT statement a definition for
longitudinal rumble strips, and clarifying throughout the section which
statements refer specifically to longitudinal rumble strips and which
statements refer specifically to transverse rumble strips, to clarify
which ones go on travel lanes and which ones go on the shoulder.
Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding a STANDARD statement
following the SUPPORT statement that, if it is desirable to use a color
other than the color of the pavement for a longitudinal rumble strip,
the color of the rumble strip shall be the same as the longitudinal
line the rumble strip supplements. If the color of a transverse rumble
strip used within a travel lane is not the color of the pavement, the
color of the rumble strip shall be white. These proposed changes are
needed to conform to general principles for colors of pavement
markings.
Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding to the GUIDANCE statement
that transverse rumble strips should not be placed on roadways used by
bicyclists unless a minimum clear path of 1.2 m (4 ft) is provided at
the edge or the roadway; that rumble strips should not be placed
through pedestrian crossings or on bicycle routes; and that
longitudinal rumble strips should not be placed on the shoulder of a
roadway that is used by bicyclists unless a minimum clear path of 1.2 m
(4 ft) is also provided at each edge of the roadway. These proposed
changes will minimize interference caused by rumble strips to
bicyclists using the roadway or shoulder.
239. In Section 6G.01 Introduction, the FHWA proposes adding to the
SUPPORT statement that temporary traffic control zones are subject to
all accessibility requirements for use by all types of pedestrians.
This is in accordance with the requirements of the Americans with
Disability Act of 1990 (ADA).
Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding a GUIDANCE statement
following the second SUPPORT statement that bicyclists and pedestrians
should not be exposed to unprotected excavations, open utility access,
overhanging equipment, or other hazards.
240. In Section 6G.04 Modifications to Fulfill Special Needs, the
FHWA proposes adding throughout the GUIDANCE statement additional
information related to the need to take into account pedestrian and
bicycle usage.
Additionally, the FHWA proposes moving the SUPPORT and STANDARD
statements at the end of the section to Section 6F.62, because this
text regarding temporary traffic barriers is more appropriately located
there.
241. In Section 6G.05 Work Outside of Shoulder, the FHWA proposes
adding to the first GUIDANCE statement that pedestrians should be
separated from the worksite by appropriate barriers that maintain the
accessibility and detectability for pedestrians with disabilities.
242. In Section 6G.06 Work on the Shoulder with No Encroachment,
the FHWA proposes adding to the first STANDARD statement that, where
pedestrian routes are closed, alternate pedestrian routes shall be
provided.
Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding to the GUIDANCE statement
that, where feasible, signs should be placed such that they do not
narrow any existing pedestrian passage to less than 1500 mm (60 in).
243. In Section 6G.07 Work on the Shoulder with Minor Encroachment,
the FHWA proposes adding to the GUIDANCE statement that, where
feasible, pedestrian routes should be protected or alternate accessible
and detectable routes should be provided.
244. In Section 6G.09 Work within the Traveled Way of Two-Lane
Highways, the FHWA proposes adding to the GUIDANCE statement that
pedestrian detours should be avoided, since pedestrians rarely observe
them and the cost of providing accessibility and detectability might
outweigh the cost of maintaining a continuous route.
Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding to the GUIDANCE statement
that, whenever possible, work should be done in a manner that it does
not create a need to detour pedestrians from existing routes or
crossings.
245. In Section 6G.10 Work Within the Traveled Way of Urban
Streets, the FHWA proposes adding to the first STANDARD statement that,
if the temporary traffic control zone affects an accessible and
detectable pedestrian facility, the accessibility and detectability
along the alternate pedestrian route shall be maintained.
Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding to the GUIDANCE statement
that work sites within the intersection should be protected against
inadvertent pedestrian incursion by providing detectable barriers.
246. In Section 6G.11 Work Within the Traveled Way of Multilane,
Nonaccess Controlled Highways, the FHWA proposes adding to the first
SUPPORT statement that Chapter 6D contains information regarding the
steps to follow when pedestrian facilities are affected by the
worksite.
Additionally, the FHWA proposes moving the information in the
second SUPPORT statement related to the four primary functions of
temporary traffic barriers to existing Section 6F.75 (new Section
6F.77) as they more properly belong in that section.
247. In Section 6G.12 Work Within the Traveled Way at an
Intersection, the FHWA proposes adding to the first STANDARD statement
and the second GUIDANCE statement regarding contact with the highway
agency having jurisdiction at intersections where pedestrian visibility
problems are anticipated, to reinforce proper contact procedures.
Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding a STANDARD statement after
the second GUIDANCE statement that pedestrian crossings shall be
protected with a pedestrian barrier detectable to pedestrians with
visual disabilities.
Additionally, the FHWA proposes modifying the third OPTION
statement to indicate that flaggers or uniformed law enforcement
officers can be used to direct road users when work is within an
intersection.
248. In Section 6G.19 Control of Traffic Through Incident Areas,
the FHWA proposes moving all of the information in this section to a
new chapter, numbered and titled "Chapter 6I Control of Traffic
Through Traffic Incident Management Areas." In its place, the
FHWA proposes a new Section 6G.19 titled "Temporary Traffic
Control During Nighttime Hours." This proposed new section will
contain SUPPORT and GUIDANCE statements regarding the temporary traffic
control measures appropriate during nighttime hours.
249. In Section 6H.01 Typical Applications, the FHWA proposes
changing the Typical Applications to reflect the proposed changes to
all parts of the MUTCD with particular reference to Part 6 changes.
Additionally, the FHWA proposes changing the titles of Figure
6H-11 from "Lane Closure on Low-Volume Two-Lane Road"
to "Lane Closure on Two-Lane Road with Low Traffic
Volumes,"
[[Page 35878]]
Figure 6H-15 from "Work in Center of Low-Volume Road"
to "Work in Center of Road with Low Traffic Volumes," and
Figure 6H-16 from "Surveying Along Centerline of Low-Volume
Road" to "Surveying Along Centerline of Road with Low
Traffic Volumes." These proposed changes will avoid confusion
with material in Part 5 Traffic Control Devices for Low-Volume Roads.
Low-volume roads as covered in Part 5 are specifically defined in
Section 5A.01 as, among other criteria, being outside a built-up area
and having a traffic volume of less than 400 AADT. The Typical
Applications in Part 6 that refer to low volume roads are not intended
to be limited only to roads meeting the limited definition of Part 5.
Additionally, the FHWA proposes the following changes to the notes
to the figures of typical applications:
a. Notes for Figure 6H-1: The FHWA proposes replacing
existing item 5 in the STANDARD statement with a new item 5 in the
OPTION statement, stating that vehicle hazard warning signals may be
used to supplement rotating lights or strobe lights, and a new item 6
in the STANDARD statement, which states that vehicle hazard warning
signals shall not be used instead of the vehicle's rotating lights or
strobe lights. This change is proposed for clarity.
b. Notes for Figure 6H-3: The FHWA proposes replacing
existing item 5 in the STANDARD statement with a new item 5 in the
OPTION statement, which states that vehicle hazard warning signals may
be used to supplement rotating lights or strobe lights, and a new item
6 in the STANDARD statement, which states that vehicle hazard warning
signals shall not be used instead of the vehicle's rotating lights or
strobe lights. This change is proposed for clarity. Additionally, the
FHWA proposes to add a new item 7 to the STANDARD statement at the end
of the Notes that when paved shoulders having a width of 2.4 m (8 ft)
or more are closed, at least one advance warning sign shall be used. In
addition, channelizing devices shall be used to close the shoulder in
advance to delineate the beginning of the work space and direct motor
vehicle traffic to remain within the traveled way. This change is
proposed to enhance safety for road users.
c. Notes for Figure 6H-4: The FHWA proposes replacing
existing item 5 in the STANDARD statement with a new item 5 in the
OPTION statement, stating that vehicle hazard warning signals may be
used to supplement rotating lights or strobe lights, and a new item 6
in the STANDARD statement, which states that vehicle hazard warning
signals shall not be used instead of the vehicle's rotating lights or
strobe lights. This change is proposed for clarity.
d. Notes for Figure 6H-6: The FHWA proposes replacing
existing item 10 in the STANDARD statement with a new item 10 in the
OPTION statement, stating that vehicle hazard warning signals may be
used to supplement rotating lights or strobe lights, and a new item 11
in the STANDARD statement, which states that vehicle hazard warning
signals shall not be used instead of the vehicle's rotating lights or
strobe lights. This change is proposed for clarity.
e. Notes for Figure 6H-11: The FHWA proposes removing item 2
of the STANDARD statement because this Typical Application specifically
does not involve the use of flaggers. Typical Application 10 covers the
temporary traffic control zone applicable to this STANDARD, using
flaggers.
f. Notes for Figure 6H-12: The FHWA proposes adding to item 2
of the STANDARD statement that durations of red clearance intervals
shall be adequate to clear the one-lane section of conflicting
vehicles. Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding a new item 5 to the
STANDARD statement that adequate means, such as interconnection, shall
be provided to prevent conflicting signal indications at opposite ends
of the lane closure. The remaining items would be renumbered. These
changes are proposed for consistency with applicable requirements for
temporary traffic control signals in Part 4.
g. Notes for Figure 6H-13: The FHWA proposes modifying item 2
of the STANDARD statement to indicate that a flagger or law enforcement
officer shall be used during a temporary road closure. Additionally,
the FHWA proposes removing item 3 of the OPTION statement, since it is
not applicable. The FHWA also proposes adding a new item 3 as a
GUIDANCE statement, which states that the law enforcement officer, if
used for this application, should follow the procedures of Section
6E.04 and 6E.05. This proposal is to encourage law enforcement officers
to use proper flagging devices and procedures for a temporary road
closure, if it is practical.
h. Notes for Figure 6H-15: The FHWA proposes adding a new
item 2 to the GUIDANCE statement that workers in the roadway should
wear high-visibility clothing as described in Section 6D.02.
Additionally, the FHWA proposes replacing existing item 6 in the
STANDARD statement with a new item 7 in the OPTION statement, which
states that vehicle hazard warning signals may be used to supplement
rotating lights or strobe lights, and a new item 8 in the STANDARD
statement, which states that vehicle hazard warning signals shall not
be used instead of the vehicle's rotating lights or strobe lights. This
change is proposed for clarity.
i. Notes for Figure 6H-17: The FHWA proposes adding a new
item 3 to the STANDARD statement that if an arrow panel is used, it
shall be used in the caution mode. The remaining items would be
renumbered. Additionally, the FHWA proposes removing existing item 5 of
the GUIDANCE statement and moving it to the OPTION statement as part of
existing item 9 that the use of a truck mounted attenuator is optional
on either a shadow vehicle or a work vehicle. These changes are
proposed for clarity.
j. Notes for Figure 6H-21: The FHWA proposes replacing
existing item 7 in the STANDARD statement with a new item 7 in the
OPTION statement, which states that vehicle hazard warning signals may
be used to supplement rotating lights or strobe lights, and a new item
8 in the STANDARD statement, which states that vehicle hazard warning
signals shall not be used instead of the vehicle's rotating lights or
strobe lights. This change is proposed for clarity.
k. Notes for Figure 6H-22: The FHWA proposes removing item 5,
regarding a right-turn island using channelizing devices, from the
OPTION statement, since it is inappropriate for the depicted
application.
l. Notes for Figure 6H-26: The FHWA proposes replacing
existing item 7 in the STANDARD statement with a new item 7 in the
OPTION statement, which states that vehicle hazard warning signals may
be used to supplement rotating lights or strobe lights, and a new item
8 in the STANDARD statement, which states that vehicle hazard warning
signals shall not be used instead of the vehicle's rotating lights or
strobe lights. This change is proposed for clarity.
m. Notes for Figure 6H-27: The FHWA proposes replacing
existing item 9 in the STANDARD statement with a new item 9 in the
OPTION statement, which states that vehicle hazard warning signals may
be used to supplement rotating lights or strobe lights, and a new item
10 in the STANDARD statement, which states that vehicle hazard warning
signals shall not be used instead of the vehicle's rotating lights or
strobe lights. This change is proposed for clarity.
n. Notes for Figure 6H-28: The FHWA proposes adding a new
item 3 to the GUIDANCE statement that audible
[[Page 35879]]
warnings should be considered where midblock closings and changed
crosswalk areas cause inadequate communication to be provided to
pedestrians who have visual disabilities. The remaining items would be
renumbered. Additionally, the FHWA proposes to add the use of Type D
360-degree Steady-Burn warning lights to existing item 6 (new item 7)
of the OPTION statement. These changes are proposed for consistency
with other sections in Part 6.
o. Notes for Figure 6H-29: The FHWA proposes to add a new
item 3 to the GUIDANCE statement that audible warnings should be
considered where midblock closings and changed crosswalk areas cause
inadequate communication to be provided to pedestrians who have visual
disabilities, for consistency. The remaining items would be renumbered.
p. Notes for Figure 6H-32: The FHWA proposes adding a new
item 2 to the STANDARD statement that when paved shoulders having a
width of 2.4 m (8 ft) or more are closed, at least one advance warning
sign shall be used. In addition, channelizing devices shall be used to
close the shoulder in advance to delineate the beginning of the work
space and direct motor vehicle traffic to remain within the traveled
way. The remaining items would be renumbered. The FHWA also proposes
removing the word "optional" from the shoulder taper
illustrated on Figure 6H-32, to correspond to the proposed
addition of new item 2 in the STANDARD statement. These changes are
proposed to improve advance warning and channelization for road users
approaching the half road closure on multilane high-speed highways.
q. Notes for Figure 6H-33: The FHWA proposes to add a new
item 3 to the STANDARD statement that when paved shoulders having a
width of 2.4 m (8 ft) or more are closed, at least one advance warning
sign shall be used. In addition, channelizing devices shall be used to
close the shoulder in advance to delineate the beginning of the work
space and direct motor vehicle traffic to remain within the traveled
way. These changes are proposed to improve advance warning and
channelization for road users approaching a lane closure on a divided
highway. Additionally, the FHWA proposes removing existing item 3 of
the GUIDANCE statement, since it is not applicable to the application
depicted.
r. Notes for Figure 6H-40: The FHWA proposes adding to item 3
that YIELD or STOP lines should be installed, if needed, across the
ramp to indicate the point at which road users should YIELD or STOP.
Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding a dimension of 7.5 m (25 ft)
spacing between channelizing devices shown on Figure 6H-40. This
additional guidance, beyond the general guidance in Section 6F.55 about
channelizing device spacing, is proposed to help improve channelization
specifically in the median crossover by providing a recommended device
spacing to minimize the tendency of vehicles to drive between devices.
s. Figure 6H-41: The FHWA proposes adding a dimension of 7.5
m (25 ft) spacing between channelizing devices shown on Figure
6H-41. This additional guidance, beyond the general guidance in
Section 6F.55 about channelizing device spacing, is proposed to help
improve channelization specifically in the median crossover by
providing a recommended device spacing to minimize the tendency of
vehicles to drive between devices.
t. Notes for Figure 6H-42: The FHWA proposes removing items 6
and 7 of the OPTION statement since they are not applicable to the
specific application depicted on Figure 6H-42. The remaining item
would be renumbered.
u. Notes for Figure 6H-44: the FHWA proposes removing item 5
in the GUIDANCE statement since it is too vague and there is no
accepted practice to determine how traffic is stabilized. The remaining
items would be renumbered.
250. The FHWA proposes adding a new chapter, numbered and titled
"Chapter 6I Control of Traffic Through Traffic Incident
Management Areas." This proposed new chapter will contain
existing Section 6G.19 Control of Traffic Through Incident Areas in its
entirety with several modifications and additional information on the
use of temporary traffic control devices for traffic incident
management zones. The proposed new chapter will contain a general
section as well as sections on major, intermediate, and minor traffic
incidents, and on use of emergency-vehicle lighting (flashing or
rotating beacons or strobes.) The FHWA proposes this new chapter in
recognition of the importance of safely and efficiently controlling
traffic through traffic incident management areas, and the unique
characteristics of incidents and the traffic controls that should be
utilized.
Discussion of Proposed Amendments to Part 7-Traffic Controls for
School Areas
251. In Section 7B.01 Size of School Signs, the FHWA proposes
revising Table 7B-1 to increase the standard and special sizes of
the End School Zone (S5-2) sign and the Speed Limit (School Use)
(English) (R2-1) sign from 600 x 750 mm (24 x 30 in)
and 900 x 1200 mm (36 x 48 in) respectively to 900 x
1125 mm (36 x 45 in) and 1200 x 1500 mm (48 x 60 in)
respectively. The FHWA also proposes revising Table 7B-1 to add
the School Speed Limit Ahead (S4-5, S4-5a) and the School
Speed Limit XX When Flashing (English and Metric) (S5-1) signs.
The FHWA also proposes revising Table 7B-1 to revise the standard
size of the When Children are Present (S4-2) plaque from 900
x 500 mm (36 x 20 in) to 900 x 375 mm (36 x 15
in), to revise the minimum, standard, and special sizes of the XXX FT
(W16-2) plaque from 600 x 450 mm (24 x 18 in), 750
x 600 mm (30 x 24 in), and 750 x 600 mm (30 x
24 in) respectively to 600 x 300 mm (24 x 12 in), 750
x 375 mm (30 x 15 in), and 900 x 450 mm (36 x
18 in) respectively, to revise the minimum, standard, and special sizes
of the XXX Feet (W16-2a) plaque from 600 x 300 mm (24
x 12 in), 750 x 450 mm (30 x 18 in), and 750 x
450 mm (30 x 18 in) respectively to 600 x 450 mm (24
x 18 in), 750 x 525 mm (30 x 21 in), and 900 x
600 mm (36 x 24 in) respectively. The FHWA also proposes to
revise Table 7B-1 to revise the standard and special sizes of the
Ahead (W16-9p) plaque from 900 x 500 mm (36 x 20 in)
and 1200 x 750 mm (48 x 30 in) respectively to 900 x
375 mm (36 x 15 in) and 1200 x 500 mm (48 x 20 in)
respectively, and to revise the standard and special sizes of the
Diagonal Arrow (W16-7) plaque from 750 x 450 mm (30 x
18 in) and 750 x 450 mm (30 x 18 in) respectively to 900
x 375 mm (36 x 15 in) and 1200 x 500 mm (48 x
20 in) respectively. These proposed changes in the table are to reflect
proposed changes throughout Part 7 and to make the sizes of
supplemental plaques correspond more closely with the sizes of the
signs they supplement.
252. In Section 7B.07 Sign Color for School Warning Signs, the FHWA
proposes changing item D in the OPTION statement to clarify that only
the SCHOOL portion on the School Speed Limit (S5-1) sign may have
a fluorescent yellow-green background. The SCHOOL portion of the sign
is the warning message.
253. In Section 7B.08 School Advance Warning Sign (S1-1), the
FHWA proposes giving the page of sign images a number and title,
"Figure 7B-1 School Area Signs" for easier reference.
Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding a new figure to be numbered
and titled, "Figure 7B-2 Example of Signing for School
Crosswalk Warning
[[Page 35880]]
Assembly" to illustrate the placement of these assemblies as
described in Section 7B.09.
Additionally, the FHWA proposes renumbering and retitling Figure
7B-1 to "Figure 7B-3 Example of Signing for School
Area Traffic Control with School Speed Limits."
254. In Section 7B.11 School Speed Limit Assembly (S4-1,
S4-2, S4-3, S4-4, S5-1), the FHWA proposes
adding to the OPTION statement that changeable message signs should
subscribe to the principles established in Section 2A.07 and other
sections of the MUTCD, for consistency with Section 6F.52. The FHWA
also proposes adding at the end of the OPTION statement to provide
information on the use of the FINES HIGHER (R2-6) sign to advise
road users when increased fines are imposed for traffic violations in
school zones. This sign can be used to enhance road user compliance
with school speed limits.
255. In Section 7C.03 Crosswalk Markings, the FHWA proposes adding
a new SUPPORT statement at the beginning of the section to provide
information on the use of crosswalk markings. While this SUPPORT
statement is identical to that in Section 3B.17, the FHWA believes that
it is important to have this information in both parts of the MUTCD.
Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding at the end of the first
GUIDANCE statement additional guidance that crosswalks should not be
used indiscriminately and that an engineering study should be performed
before placing crosswalks at locations away from traffic control
signals or STOP signs, for consistency with Section 3B.17.
256. In Section 7C.04 the FHWA proposes revising the title from
"Stop Line Markings" to "Stop and Yield Lines"
because the FHWA proposes to include both stop and yield lines in this
section. The FHWA also proposes revising the entire section to
appropriately mirror the STANDARD, GUIDANCE, OPTION, and SUPPORT
statements contained in Part 3. The FHWA believes that it is important
to have this information in both parts of the MUTCD.
257. In Section 7E.04 Uniform of Adult Guards and Student Patrols,
the FHWA proposes adding a STANDARD statement that adult guards shall
wear high-visibility retroreflective clothing labeled as ANSI
107-1999 standard performance for Class 2, and that student
patrols shall wear high-visibility retroreflective material or clothing
labeled as ANSI 107-1999 standard performance for Class 1. This
clothing would make the guards and patrols (and the students they are
managing) far more visible to approaching road users. The FHWA proposes
a phase-in compliance period of 5 years for these changes in order to
minimize any impact on State or local agencies.
258. In Section 7E.05 Operating Procedures for Adult Guards, the
FHWA proposes adding an OPTION statement at the end of the section to
allow the STOP paddle to be modified by adding white flashing lights,
to enhance conspicuity of the paddle.
Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding a STANDARD statement
following the new OPTION statement to define the acceptable flashing
rate of the optional flashing lights on STOP paddles. This proposed
change is consistent with the flashing rate in other parts of the
MUTCD.
Discussion of Proposed Amendments to Part 8-Traffic Controls for
Highway-Rail Grade Crossings
259. In Section 8A.01 Introduction, in the STANDARD statement the
FHWA proposes revising the definitions for "Advance Preemption
and Advance Preemption Time" (change to "Advance
Preemption" and "Advance Preemption Time"),
"Clear Storage Distance," "Dynamic Envelope
Delineation" (change to "Dynamic Envelope"),
"Minimum Track Clearance Distance," and "Queue
Clearance Time" to reflect accepted practice and terminologies.
The FHWA also proposes adding definitions for the following, since they
are referred to later in the MUTCD: "Dynamic Exit Lane Gate
Operating Mode," "Exit Lane Gate Clearance Time,"
"Exit Lane Gate Operating Mode," "Flashing-Light
Signals," "Timed Exit Gate Operating Mode,"
"Wayside Equipment," and "Vehicle Intrusion Detection
Devices" to reflect accepted practice and terminologies.
260. In Section 8A.02 Use of Standard Devices, Systems, and
Practices, the FHWA proposes adding a GUIDANCE statement following the
STANDARD statement. This proposed GUIDANCE statement will be identical
to the second GUIDANCE statement in Section 10A.02 and reinforces that
Part 1 principles of design, placement, operation, maintenance, and
uniformity of traffic control devices should be considered for both
highway-rail and highway-light rail transit grade crossings.
261. In Section 8A.04 Highway-Rail Grade Crossing Elimination, the
FHWA proposes adding a GUIDANCE statement at the beginning of the
section. This proposed GUIDANCE statement will be identical to the
first GUIDANCE statement in Section 10A.04 and reinforces that both
highway-rail and highway-light rail transit grade crossings are a
potential source of congestion, and agencies should conduct engineering
studies to determine the cost and benefits of eliminating such
crossings.
Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding an OPTION statement at the
end of the section. This proposed OPTION statement will be identical to
the last OPTION statement in Section 10A.04 and reinforces that TRACKS
OUT OF SERVICE (R8-9) signs may be temporarily installed at
locations where both rail or light rail transit is eliminated at a
highway-rail or highway-light rail transit grade crossing until the
tracks are removed or paved over.
262. In Section 8A.05 Temporary Traffic Control Zones, the FHWA
proposes adding a SUPPORT statement at the beginning of the section.
This proposed SUPPORT statement will be identical to the SUPPORT
statement in Section 10A.05 and reinforces that temporary traffic
control planning provides for continuity of operations when the normal
function of a roadway at both a highway-rail and a highway-light rail
transit grade crossing is suspended because of temporary traffic
control operations.
263. In Section 8B.02, the FHWA proposes changing the title from
"Highway-Rail Grade Crossing (Crossbuck) Signs (R15-1,
R15-2)" to "Highway-Rail Grade Crossing (Crossbuck)
Signs (R15-1, R15-2, R15-9)" to reflect the
proposed addition to the OPTION statement for the optional use of a new
sign, the Crossbuck Shield (R15-9) sign, that is a wing-shaped
sign that may be mounted below the Crossbuck (R15-1) sign or
Number of Tracks (R15-2) sign. Experimentation with Crossbuck
Shield signs has shown benefits in calling attention to the presence of
passive grade crossings, particularly at night. The FHWA is aware that
in one of the evaluations of the Crossbuck Shield (R15-9) sign,
words (or symbols) to indicate the State law about yielding or stopping
at the grade crossing were included on the center panel of the shield.
The FHWA is not including such words or symbols as an option as it
believes that the Crossbuck Shield (R15-9) sign should be uniform
in design and that, if a stop or yield is required either by State law
or by regulation at any given crossing, the use of a standard YIELD or
STOP sign is more appropriate and will be more universally recognized
and complied with by road users than small lettering on the Crossbuck
Shield would be. The FHWA proposes that this option
[[Page 35881]]
to use a Crossbuck Shield (R15-9) sign become effective
immediately for new or replacement of damaged existing sign
installations. The FHWA proposes a phase-in compliance period of 10
years for existing signs in good condition to minimize any impact on
State or local highway agencies.
Additionally, the FHWA proposes revising the second STANDARD
statement to clarify the placement of retroreflective white material on
the front and back of the supports for highway-rail grade crossing
Crossbuck signs, to within 0.3 m (1 ft) of the ground level, except on
the side of those supports where a Crossbuck Shield sign or flashing
lights have been installed. This proposed change reflects a reasonable
distance from the ground level and reflects that such strips are not
needed to face approaching traffic when a Crossbuck Shield or flashing
lights are on that side of the support.
264. In Section 8B.03 Highway-Rail Grade Crossing Advance Warning
Signs (W10 series), the FHWA proposes revising the first STANDARD
statement, item A, to better define where Highway-Rail Grade Crossing
Advance Warning (W10-1) signs are not required on an approach to
a crossing from a T-intersection with a parallel highway.
Additionally, the FHWA proposes revising the second STANDARD
statement to clarify the proper use of the W10-2, W10-3,
and W10-4 advance warning signs if the distance from the parallel
highway to the railroad tracks is less than 30m (100 feet).
265. The FHWA proposes adding two new sections following Section
8B.08 TRACKS OUT OF SERVICE Sign (R8-9). The first proposed new
section will be numbered and titled "Section 8B.09 STOP HERE WHEN
FLASHING Sign (R8-10)" and will contain an OPTION statement
describing the use of the STOP HERE WHEN FLASHING (R8-10) sign as
it relates to highway-rail grade crossings.
The second proposed new section will be numbered and titled
"Section 8B.10 STOP HERE ON RED Sign (R10-6)"
and will contain SUPPORT, OPTION, and GUIDANCE statements describing
the use of the STOP HERE ON RED (R10-6) sign at highway-rail
grade crossings. The remaining sections would be renumbered
accordingly.
266. In existing Section 8B.12 NO SIGNAL Sign (W10-10), the
FHWA proposes renumbering and retitling the section as "Section
8B.14 NO SIGNAL Sign (W10-10) or NO GATES OR LIGHTS sign
(W10-13)" and adding to the OPTION statement that the NO
GATES OR LIGHTS (W10-13) sign may used as an alternate to the NO
SIGNAL (W10-10) sign.
267. In existing Section 8B.13 (new Section 8B.15) LOOK Sign
(R15-8), the FHWA proposes modifying the OPTION statement by
removing the phrase, "that do not have active warning
devices" to clarify that the LOOK (R15-8) sign may be
mounted at any highway-rail grade crossing.
268. The FHWA proposes adding a new section following existing
Section 8B.15 (new Section 8B.17) Storage Space Signs (W10-11,
W10-11a, W10-11b). This proposed new section will be
numbered and titled "Section 8B.18 Skewed Crossing Sign
(W10-12)" and will describe the use of the Skewed Crossing
(W10-12) sign at highway-rail grade crossings when railroad
tracks are not perpendicular to the highway.
269. In existing Section 8B.18 Dynamic Envelope Delineation, the
FHWA proposes renumbering and retitling this section as "Section
8B.21 Dynamic Envelope Markings" to clarify that the text refers
to pavement markings.
Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding a second paragraph to the
OPTION statement to clarify that dynamic envelope markings may be
installed at any highway-rail grade crossing unless a Four-Quadrant
Gate system is used.
270. In Section 8C.01 Illumination of Highway-Rail Grade Crossings,
the FHWA proposes changing the OPTION statement to a GUIDANCE statement
to indicate that illumination should be installed at and adjacent to a
highway-rail grade crossing when an engineering study determines such
illumination is needed to improve grade crossing safety.
271. In Section 8D.01 Introduction, the FHWA proposes revising the
first OPTION statement to clarify that flashing-light signals that are
post-mounted or overhead-mounted may be used separately or in
combination with each other and that flashing-light signals may be used
without automatic gate assemblies as determined by an engineering
study.
Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding to the second OPTION
statement information that In-Roadway Stop Line Lights and In-Roadway
Warning Lights may be installed at highway-rail grade crossings that
are controlled by active grade crossing warning systems, as discussed
in Chapter 4L.
272. In Section 8D.02 Flashing-Light Signals, Post-Mounted, the
FHWA proposes modifying the GUIDANCE statement to clarify the sizes of
lenses for use in highway-rail grade crossing flashing-light signals
and to provide guidance for choosing the size of background behind the
lenses.
273. In Section 8D.05 Four-Quadrant Gate Systems, the FHWA proposes
revising and adding to the GUIDANCE statement information to describe
the various operating modes of exit lane gates and how they should be
used.
Additionally, the FHWA proposes changing the title of Figure
8D-2 from "Typical Location Plan for Flashing-Light Signals
and Four-Quadrant Gates" to "Example of Location Plan for
Flashing-Light Signals and Four-Quadrant Gates."
274. In Section 8D.07 Traffic Control Signals at or Near Highway-
Rail Grade Crossings, following the second paragraph of the second
STANDARD statement, the FHWA proposes adding additional GUIDANCE,
STANDARD, GUIDANCE, and OPTION statements to better describe the use of
pre-signals to improve safety at highway-rail grade crossings at
locations in proximity to intersections controlled by traffic control
signals.
Additionally, the FHWA is proposing adding to the last OPTION
statement that at locations where a highway-rail grade crossing is
located more than 15m (50 ft) (or more that 23 m (75 ft) for a highway
regularly used by multi-unit vehicles) from an intersection controlled
by a traffic control signal, a pre-signal may be used if an engineering
study determines a need.
The FHWA proposes that these changes become effective immediately
for new installations. The FHWA proposes a phase-in compliance period
of 10 years for existing installations in good condition to minimize
any impact on State or local highway agencies.
Discussion of Proposed Amendments to Part 9-Traffic Controls for
Bicycle Facilities
275. In Section 9A.03 Definitions Relating to Bicycles, the FHWA
proposes adding to the first STANDARD statement a definition for
"Bicycle Facilities," since the term is frequently used in
Part 9. The remaining items would be renumbered accordingly.
276. In Section 9B.01 Application and Placement of Signs, the FHWA
proposes removing the first SUPPORT statement as it only references
Figure 9B-1. The FHWA proposes referencing Figure 9B-1
in the first STANDARD statement, since the sign installation standards
shown in Figure 9B-1 are discussed in this STANDARD.
277. In Section 9B.02 Design of Bicycle Signs, the FHWA proposes
replacing the term "shared-use path" with the term
"bicycle facilities" in the first STANDARD statement and in
the
[[Page 35882]]
first SUPPORT statement because the information in these statements
relates only to bicycle facilities. Shared-use paths are for the use of
pedestrians (with or without disabilities), skaters, joggers, and other
non-motorized users in addition to bicyclists.
Additionally, the FHWA proposes changing the title of Table
9B-1 from "Sign Sizes for Shared-Use Paths" to
"Minimum Sign Sizes for Bicycle Facilities" and separating
the column headed "Minimum Sign Size" into two sub columns
headed "Path" and "Roadway," to better
distinguish between the applications of signs on paths and roadways and
to be consistent with sign sizes used on roadways as described in Part
2. The FHWA also proposes revising Table 9B-1 by adding
additional signs to reflect proposed changes elsewhere in Part 9.
278. In Section 9B.03 STOP and YIELD Signs (R1-1,
R1-2), the FHWA proposes modifying the first GUIDANCE statement
so that it applies to the installation of both STOP and YIELD signs,
and not exclusively to STOP signs. This change is proposed because
YIELD signs as well as STOP signs may be appropriate for assignment of
the right-of-way at a shared-use path/roadway intersection.
279. In Section 9B.04, the FHWA proposes changing the title from
"Bicycle Lane Signs (R3-16, R3-17)" to
"Bicycle Lane Signs (R3-17, R3-17a,
R3-17b)."
Additionally, the FHWA proposes removing existing text in this
section in its entirety and replacing it with new text regarding the
use of Bicycle Lane signs. This proposed modification will replace the
existing Bicycle LANE AHEAD (R3-16), Bicycle LANE ENDS
(R3-16a), and RIGHT LANE Bicycle ONLY (R3-17) signs with a
redesigned BIKE LANE (R3-17) sign to be used in conjunction with
new supplemental AHEAD (R3-17a) and ENDS (R3-17b) plaques.
These proposed sign combinations will more clearly provide the
information contained on the old R3-16, R3-16a,
R3-17, and R3-17a signs, and will reduce road user
confusion.
280. The FHWA proposes adding a new section following Section 9B.05
BEGIN RIGHT TURN LANE YIELD TO BIKES Sign (R4-4). The proposed
new section will be numbered and titled "Section 9B.06 Bicycle
WRONG WAY and RIDE WITH TRAFFIC Signs (R5-1b, R9-3c)"
and will standardize the design and placement of Bicycle WRONG WAY
Signs. Wrong way travel by bicyclists is a major cause of conflicts and
collisions, and should be discouraged at appropriate locations. The
remaining sections would be renumbered accordingly.
281. In existing Section 9B.08 (new Section 9B.09), the FHWA
proposes changing the title from "No Parking Bicycle Lane Signs
(R7-9, R7-9a)" to "No Parking BIKE LANE Signs
(R7-9, R7-9a)" and in the first STANDARD statement
changing the name of the sign accordingly.
282. The FHWA proposes adding a new section following existing
Section 9B.10 (new Section 9B.11) Shared-Used Path Restriction Sign
(R9-7). The proposed new section will be numbered and titled
"Section 9B.12 Bicycle Signal Actuation Sign
(R10-15)" and will provide a new sign giving information to
bicyclists on how to best situate themselves within the proposed new
Bicycle Detector pavement marking symbol so that they can actuate the
traffic signal. The remaining sections would be renumbered accordingly.
283. In existing Section 9B.14 (new Section 9B.16) Bicycle Surface
Condition Warning Sign (W8-10), the FHWA proposes revising the
first OPTION statement to clarify that BUMP, DIP, Pavement Ends, and
any other word message signs are not supplemental plaques used with the
W8-10 sign, but are instead standard signs to be used
independently.
284. In Section 9C.01 Functions of Markings, the FHWA proposes
modifying the SUPPORT statement to remove the first sentence, since it
only refers to roadways with a designated bicycle lane and is not broad
enough to describe markings used for all types of bicycle facilities.
285. In Section 9C.02 General Principles, the FHWA proposes to add
a new STANDARD statement after the GUIDANCE statement. This proposed
new STANDARD statement is being moved from Section 9C.03 to Section
9C.02 because this text is applicable to all bicycle facilities, not
just shared-use paths and is more appropriate in this section than
Section 9C.03.
286. In Section 9C.03 Marking Patterns and Colors on Shared-Use
Paths, the FHWA proposes moving the STANDARD statement to Section
9C.02, since this text is applicable to all bicycle facilities, not
just shared-use paths and is more appropriate in this section than
Section 9C.03.
Additionally, the FHWA proposes removing the first SUPPORT
statement since it discourages the use of centerlines. Centerlines may
be useful and valuable for user guidance in many applications, and,
therefore, should not be discouraged.
Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding to the GUIDANCE statement
additional information on the marking of obstructions in a path.
Additionally, the FHWA proposes moving to the OPTION statement the
second item of the OPTION statement currently in Section 9C.05, because
letter, symbol, and arrow sizes to be used on shared-use paths
represent markings rather than markers.
Additionally, the FHWA proposes moving the contents of existing
Section 9C.06 in its entirety to Section 9C.03, because this
information is more applicable in Section 9C.03 as it clarifies the
design and placement of marking patterns and object markers on shared-
use paths.
287. In Section 9C.04 Markings For Bicycle Lanes, the FHWA proposes
revising the first sentence of the STANDARD statement to remove the
specific distance of "not closer than 20 m (65 ft) from the
crossroad" from the requirement for placing bicycle lane symbols,
to provide jurisdictions with additional flexibility. The specific
distance may not be feasible in urban locations, and is not necessary
for marking durability.
Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding a new item to the STANDARD
statement to prohibit the placement of bicycle lanes to the right of a
right turn only lane. A bicyclist continuing straight through an
intersection from the right of a right turn lane would be inconsistent
with normal traffic behavior and would violate the expectation of
right-turning drivers. The FHWA also proposes adding a new item to the
STANDARD statement to prohibit the placement of bicycle lanes in the
circular roadway of a roundabout, because such markings have been found
to cause a false sense of security for bicyclists traveling through the
roundabout with conflicting and turning traffic. This proposed change
is consistent with state of the practice for roundabout design and is
consistent with proposed changes to Section 3B.24.
Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding a new paragraph to the
SUPPORT statement describing that a bicyclist continuing straight
through an intersection from the right of a right turn lane would be
inconsistent with normal traffic behavior and would violate the
expectation of right-turning drivers.
Additionally, at the end of this section, the FHWA proposes adding
a new GUIDANCE statement to establish guidance for bicycle lane
markings at locations where a right through lane becomes an exclusive
right turn lane, and at locations where there is a shared through and
right turn lane next to a right turn only lane. This guidance is
important to ensure that bicycle lanes
[[Page 35883]]
are not poorly designed at such intersections.
Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding a GUIDANCE statement and a
SUPPORT statement to provide guidance on not using posts or raised
pavement markers to separate bicycle lanes from adjacent travel lanes,
since they can hinder maintenance of the bicycle lane and prevent
proper vehicle merging.
288. The FHWA proposes removing Section 9C.05 Word Messages and
Symbols Applied to the Pavement, and Section 9C.06 Object Markers on
Share-Used Paths, in their entirety. The FHWA proposes incorporating
the information from these sections into Section 9C.03 Marking Patterns
and Colors on Shared-Use Paths, as this more properly locates the
information. The remainder of the sections would be renumbered
accordingly.
289. The FHWA proposes adding a new Section 9C.05 Bicycle Detector
Symbol, containing an OPTION statement that defines a standard symbol
for the marking of detector locations for traffic signals actuated by
bicyclists. This symbol marking is shown in a proposed new figure
numbered and titled "Figure 9C-7 Example of Bicycle
Detector Pavement Marking." This symbol marking, along with the
Bicycle Signal Actuation (R10-15) sign, will assist
bicyclists at signalized intersections by clearly showing the best
location to achieve detection by loops or other vehicle detector
equipment.
290. In Section 9D.02 Signal Operations for Bicycles, the FHWA
proposes revising the STANDARD statement to require that signal timing
and actuation be reviewed and adjusted to consider the needs of
bicyclists, instead of simply requiring the consideration of
bicyclists' needs when timing signals. This greater emphasis is to
ensure that the different operating characteristics of bicyclists are
accounted for.
Discussion of Proposed Amendments to Part 10-Traffic Controls for
Highway-Light Rail Transit Grade Crossings
291. In Section 10A.01 Introduction, the FHWA proposes adding a
SUPPORT statement at the end of the section to reference Section 8A.01
for the definitions applicable to Part 10.
292. In Section 10A.03 Uniform Provisions, the FHWA proposes adding
to the STANDARD statement that no sign or signal shall be located in
the center of an undivided highway except in an island with non-
mountable curbs.
Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding a GUIDANCE statement at the
end of the section to reinforce that where the distance between tracks
exceeds 30 m (100 ft), additional signs or other appropriate traffic
control devices should be used.
293. In Section 10A.04 Highway-Light Rail Transit Grade Crossing
Elimination, the FHWA proposes removing from the second GUIDANCE
statement and adding to the STANDARD statement that if the existing
traffic control devices at a multiple-track highway-light rail transit
grade crossing become improperly placed or inaccurate because of the
removal of some of the tracks, the existing devices shall be relocated
and/or modified.
Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding to the second GUIDANCE
statement that, when a roadway is removed from a highway-light rail
transit grade crossing, appropriate signs should be placed at the end
of roadway and other appropriate locations, to alert road users that
the road no longer crosses the light rail transit tracks.
294. In Section 10A.05 Temporary Traffic Control Zones, the FHWA
proposes combining the two separate STANDARD statements into one
STANDARD statement at the beginning of the section for clarity.
295. In Section 10C.01, the FHWA proposes changing the title from
"Introduction" to "Purpose" to more accurately
reflect the contents of the section.
Additionally, the FHWA proposes correcting the text in the STANDARD
statement to properly indicate that the design and location of signs
shall conform to all of Part 2.
296. The FHWA proposes adding a new section following Section
10C.01 Introduction. The proposed new section will be numbered and
titled "Section 10C.02 Highway-Light Rail Grade Crossing
(Crossbuck) Signs (R15-1, R15-2, R15-9)" and
will provide information regarding the use of Crossbuck signs at
highway-light rail grade crossings. While this section would be
identical to Section 8B.02 (as it is proposed to be revised as
described above), the use of Crossbuck signs and the proposed optional
Crossbuck Shield signs is applicable to both highway-light rail transit
and highway-rail grade crossings, so the FHWA believes that it is
important to have this information in both parts of the MUTCD. The
remaining sections would be renumbered accordingly.
297. In existing Section 10C.03 STOP or YIELD Signs (R1-1,
R1-2, W3-1a, W3-2a), the FHWA proposes renumbering
and retitling the section as "Section 10C.04 STOP (R1-1) or
YIELD (R1-2) Signs at Highway-Light Rail Transit Grade
Crossings" to clarify the content of the section.
Additionally, the FHWA proposes revising the last sentence of the
STANDARD statement to clarify that Stop Ahead (W3-1a) and Yield
Ahead (W3-2a) Advance Warning signs shall also be installed if
the criteria for their installation given in Section 2C.26 is met.
Additionally, in the GUIDANCE statement the FHWA proposes adding to
the list of characteristics to clarify when STOP or YIELD signs may be
used the at highway-light rail transit grade crossings. The FHWA
proposes adding the following characteristics to the list: that the
determination of what constitutes low traffic volumes and low speed
limits of crossing roadways should be made by local agencies, that
light rail transit speeds do not exceed 40 km/h (25 mph), that the line
of sight for an approaching light rail transit operator is adequate
from a significant distance such that the operator can sound an audible
signal and bring the vehicle to a stop before arriving at the crossing,
and that the light rail transit tracks are located such that vehicles
are not likely to stop on the tracks while waiting to enter a cross
street or highway.
298. In Section 10C.04 (new Section 10C.05) DO NOT STOP ON TRACKS
Sign (R8-8), the FHWA proposes adding to the OPTION statement to
clarify that DO NOT STOP ON TRACKS (R8-8) signs may be placed on
both sides of the track, to enhance visibility of the signs for road
users.
299. Following existing Section 10C.04 (new Section 10C.05) DO NOT
STOP ON TRACKS Sign (R8-8), the FHWA proposes adding a new
section. This proposed new section will be numbered and titled
"Section 10C.06 TRACKS OUT OF SERVICE Sign (R8-9)"
and will describe the use of the TRACKS OUT OF SERVICE (R8-9)
sign at highway-light rail transit grade crossings. While this section
would be identical to Section 8B.08, the use of the TRACKS OUT OF
SERVICE (R8-9) sign is applicable to both highway-light rail
transit and highway-rail grade crossings so the FHWA believes that it
is important to have this information in both parts of the MUTCD. The
remaining sections would be renumbered accordingly.
300. Following existing Section 10C.05 (new Section 10C.07) STOP
HERE ON RED Sign (R10-6), the FHWA proposes adding a new section.
This proposed new section will be numbered and titled "Section
10C.08 STOP HERE WHEN FLASHING Sign (R8-10)" and will
describe the use of the STOP HERE WHEN FLASHING (R8-10) sign at
[[Page 35884]]
highway-light rail transit grade crossings. While this section would be
identical to proposed new Section 8B.09, the use of the STOP HERE WHEN
FLASHING (R8-10) sign is applicable to both highway-light rail
transit and highway-rail grade crossings so the FHWA believes that it
is important to have this information in both parts of the MUTCD. The
remaining sections would be renumbered accordingly.
301. In existing Section 10C.06 (new Section 10C.09) Light Rail
Transit-Activated Blank-Out Turn Prohibition Signs (R3-1a,
R3-2a), the FHWA proposes adding a STANDARD statement at the end
of the section. This proposed STANDARD statement will be identical to
STANDARD statement in Section 8B.05 and reinforces that at both
highway-rail and highway-light rail transit grade crossings turn
prohibition signs that are associated with preemption shall be visible
only when the grade crossing restriction is in effect in order not to
cause confusion to road users.
302. Following existing Section 10C.06 (new Section 10C.09) Light
Rail Transit-Actuated Blank-Out Turn Prohibition Signs (R3-1a,
R3-2a), the FHWA proposes adding a new section. This proposed new
section will be numbered and titled "Section 10C.10 EXEMPT
Highway-Light Rail Transit Grade Crossing Signs (R15-3,
W10-1a)" and will describe the use of the supplemental
EXEMPT Highway-Light Rail Transit Grade Crossing (R15-3,
W10-1a) signs at highway-light rail transit grade crossings.
While this section would be identical to Section 8B.04, the use of
these supplemental signs is applicable to both highway-light rail
transit and highway-rail grade crossings, so the FHWA believes that it
is important to have this information in both parts of the MUTCD. The
remaining sections would be renumbered accordingly.
303. In existing Section 10C.09 (new Section 10C.13) Light Rail
Transit Only Lane Signs (R15-4 Series), the FHWA proposes titling
the figure illustrating regulatory sign panels as "Figure
10C-3 Regulatory Signs" and adding to and revising the
signs illustrated in the figure, to be consistent with Section 2B.48
Preferential Lane Signs, and to reflect changes elsewhere in Part 10.
304. In existing Section 10C.11 (new Section 10C.15) Highway-Light
Rail Advance Warning Signs (W10 Series), the FHWA proposes revising the
entire section by replacing it with the STANDARD, OPTION, and GUIDANCE
statements contained in Section 8B.03, including the proposed revisions
as described above in Part 8. While these sections would be identical,
the use of advance warning signs is applicable to both highway-light
rail transit and highway-rail grade crossings, and the FHWA believes
that it is important to have consistency in the use of these signs so
this information is included in both parts of the MUTCD.
The FHWA also proposes titling the figure illustrating
predominantly warning sign panels as "Figure 10C-4 Warning
Signs and Light Rail Station Sign" and adding to and revising the
signs illustrated in the figure, to reflect changes elsewhere in Part
10.
305. Following existing Section 10C.11 (new Section 10C.15)
Highway-Light Rail Advance Warning Signs (W10-Series), the FHWA
proposes adding a new section. This proposed new section will be
numbered and titled "Section 10C.16 Low Ground Clearance Highway-
Light Rail Transit Grade Crossing Sign (W10-5)" and will
describe the use of the Low Ground Clearance (W10-5) sign at
highway-light rail transit grade crossings. While this section would be
identical to Section 8B.16, the use of Low Ground Clearance
(W10-5) signs is applicable to both highway-light rail transit
and highway-rail grade crossings so the FHWA believes that it is
important to have this information in both parts of the MUTCD. The
remaining sections would be renumbered accordingly.
306. Following existing Section 10C.12 (new Section 10C.17) Light
Rail Transit Approaching-Activated Blank-Out Warning Sign
(W10-7), the FHWA proposes adding two new sections. The first
proposed new section will be numbered and titled "Section 10C.18,
Storage Space Signs (W10-11, W10-11a, W10-11b)"
and will describe the use of Storage Space (W10-11) signs at
highway-light rail transit grade crossings. The second proposed new
section will be numbered and titled "Section 10C.19 Skewed
Crossing Sign (W10-12)" and will describe the use of Skewed
Crossing (W10-12) signs at highway-light rail transit grade
crossings. While these sections would be identical to proposed Sections
8B.17 and 8B.18, respectively, these signs are applicable to both
highway-light rail transit and highway-rail grade crossings so the FHWA
believes that it is important to have this information in both parts of
the MUTCD. The remaining sections would be renumbered accordingly.
307. Following existing Section 10C.13 (new Section 10C.20) Light
Rail Station Sign (I-12), the FHWA proposes adding a new section.
This proposed new section will be numbered and titled "Section
10C.21 Emergency Notification Sign (I-13 or I-13a)"
and will describe the use of Emergency Notification (I-13 or
I-13a) signs at highway-light rail transit grade crossings. While
this section would be identical to Section 8B.14, the use of these
signs is applicable to both highway-light rail transit and highway-rail
grade crossings so the FHWA believes that it is important to have this
information in both parts of the MUTCD. The remaining sections would be
renumbered accordingly.
308. Following existing Section 10C.14 (new Section 10C.22)
Illumination at Highway-Light Rail Transit Crossings, the FHWA proposes
adding two new sections. The first proposed new section will be
numbered and titled "Section 10C.23 Pavement Markings" and
will describe the use of pavement markings at highway-light rail
transit grade crossings. The second proposed new section will be
numbered and titled "Section 10C.24 Stop Lines" and will
describe the use of stop lines at highway-light rail transit grade
crossings. While these sections would be identical to Sections 8B.19
and 8B.20, respectively, it is important that the use of pavement
markings and stop lines at highway-light rail transit and highway-rail
grade crossings is consistent so the FHWA believes that it is important
to have this information in both parts of the MUTCD. The remaining
sections would be renumbered accordingly.
309. In existing Section 10C.15, the FHWA proposes renumbering and
retitling the section from "Dynamic Envelope Delineation
Markings" to "Section 10C.25 Dynamic Envelope
Markings" to clarify that the text refers to pavement markings.
Additionally, the FHWA proposes modifying the STANDARD statement to
clarify that, if used, the pavement marking used to delineate the
dynamic envelope shall be a normal solid white line, contrasting
pavement color, and/or contrasting pavement texture. This STANDARD
would be identical to that in Section 8B.21.
310. At the end of Chapter 10C, the FHWA proposes adding two new
figures. The first proposed new figure will be numbered and titled
"Figure 10C-10 Example of Placement of Warning Signs and
Pavement Markings at Highway-Light Rail Transit Grade Crossings"
and will illustrate the placement of warning signs and pavement
markings at highway-light rail transit grade crossings. The second
proposed new figure will be numbered and titled "Figure
10C-11 Examples of Highway-Light Rail Transit Grade Crossing
Pavement Markings" and will
[[Page 35885]]
illustrate the use of R X R and associated pavement markings at
highway-light rail transit grade crossings. While these figures would
be identical to Figures 8B-7 and 8B-8, respectively, it is
important that the warning signs and pavement markings at highway-light
rail transit and highway-rail grade crossings is consistent so the FHWA
believes that it is important to have this information in both parts of
the MUTCD.
311. In Section 10D.01 Introduction, the FHWA proposes removing the
STANDARD statement since the information is already properly contained
in Section 10A.01.
Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding to the OPTION statement that
In-Roadway Stop Line Lights and In-Roadway Warning Lights may be
installed at highway-light rail transit grade crossings that are
controlled by active grade crossing warning systems, as discussed in
Chapter 4L.
312. In existing Section 10D.02 Four-Quadrant Gate Systems, the
FHWA proposes moving this entire section to follow Section 10D.03 and
renumbering it Section 10D.04. This reordering is proposed so that
content contained in these sections would appear in the same order as
it appears in Part 8.
Additionally, the FHWA proposes revising the STANDARD statement to
clarify that the exit lane gate arms shall be designed to fail-safe in
the up position except as noted in the OPTION statement, for
consistency with Section 8D.05.
Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding to the GUIDANCE statement to
make it identical to the GUIDANCE statement in Section 8D.05, to
provide information that describes the various operating modes of exit
lane gates and how they should be used at both highway-rail and
highway-light rail transit grade crossings.
313. In Section 10D.03 Automatic Gates, the FHWA proposes changing
the last SUPPORT statement to an OPTION statement to be consistent with
the same language contained in Section 8D.04 on how the effectiveness
of gates may be enhanced by the use of channelizing devices or raised
median islands to discourage driving around lowered automatic gates.
314. In existing Section 10D.04 Flashing Light Signals, the FHWA
proposes moving this entire section to follow Section 10D.01 and
renumbering it Section 10D.02. This reordering is proposed so that
content contained in these sections would appear in the same order as
it appears in Part 8.
315. In Section 10D.08 Pedestrian and Bicycle Signals and
Crossings, the FHWA proposes changing the first OPTION statement to a
GUIDANCE statement to emphasize that if an engineering study shows that
flashing-light signals alone would not provide sufficient notice of an
approaching light rail transit vehicle, the LOOK (R15-8) sign
and/or pedestrian gates should be considered.
Discussion of Proposed Amendments to Appendix A1-Congressional
Legislation
316. In Appendix A1 Congressional Legislation, the FHWA proposes to
add to the listing of pertinent sections of Public Law
104-59-Nov. 28, 1995 (National Highway System Designation
Act of 1995) Section 306. Motorist Call Boxes. This section discusses
the uses of motorist call boxes along the National Highway System.
Rulemaking Analysis and Notices
All comments received before the close of business on the comment
closing date indicated above will be considered and will be available
for examination in the docket at the above address. Comments received
after the comment closing date will be filed in the docket and will be
considered to the extent practicable, but the FHWA may issue a final
rule at any time after the close of the comment period. In addition to
late comments, the FHWA will also continue to file in the docket
relevant information that becomes available after the comment closing
date, and interested persons should continue to examine the docket for
new material.
Executive Order 12866 (Regulatory Planning and Review) and DOT
Regulatory Policies and Procedures
The FHWA has determined preliminarily that this notice of proposed
amendments will not be a significant regulatory action within the
meaning of Executive Order 12866 or significant within the meaning of
Department of Transportation regulatory policies and procedures. It is
anticipated that the economic impact of this rulemaking will be
minimal. The proposed standards and other changes in this notice are
intended to improve traffic operations and safety, and to provide
additional guidance, optional applications, and support clarification
for traffic control devices. The FHWA expects that these proposed
standards, guidance, optional applications, and support material will
create roadway uniformity, and enhance the safety and mobility of the
public at little additional expense to public agencies or the motoring
public. Therefore, a full regulatory evaluation is not required.
Regulatory Flexibility Act
In compliance with the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C.
601-612), the FHWA has evaluated the effects of this notice of
proposed amendments on small entities. This notice of proposed
amendments revising standards, guidance, optional applications, and
support material wording will improve the design and installation of
traffic control devices. The proposed changes are intended to improve
traffic operations and safety, expand guidance, and clarify the
application of traffic control devices. The FHWA hereby certifies that
these revisions would not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
This notice of proposed amendments would not impose unfunded
mandates as defined by the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub.
L. 104-4, 109 Stat. 48, March 22, 1995). This proposed action
will not result in the expenditure by State, local, and tribal
governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector, of $100
million or more in any one year (2 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).
Executive Order 13132 (Federalism)
This notice of proposed amendments has been analyzed in accordance
with the principles and criteria contained in Executive Order 13132
dated August 4, 1999, and the FHWA has determined that this proposed
action does not have a substantial direct effect or sufficient
federalism implications on States and local governments that would
limit the policymaking discretion of the States and local governments.
Nothing in this document directly preempts any State law or regulation.
The MUTCD is incorporated by reference in 23 CFR part 655, subpart F,
which requires that changes to the national standards issued by the
FHWA shall be adopted by the States or other Federal agencies within
two years of issuance. The proposed amendment is in keeping with the
Secretary of Transportation's authority under 23 U.S.C. 109(d), 315,
and 402(a) to promulgate uniform guidelines to promote the safe and
efficient use of highways.
Executive Order 13175 (Tribal Consultation)
The FHWA has analyzed this proposed action under Executive Order
13175, dated November 6, 2000, and believes that it would not have
substantial direct effects on one or more
[[Page 35886]]
Indian tribes; will not impose substantial direct compliance costs on
Indian tribal governments; and will not preempt tribal law. While the
proposed changes in this notice of proposed amendments revise
standards, guidance, optional applications, and support material, they
will create roadway uniformity, and enhance the safety and mobility of
the public at little additional expense to public agencies. Therefore,
a tribal summary impact statement is not required.
Executive Order 12372 (Intergovernmental Review)
Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Number 20.205,
Highway Planning and Construction. The regulations implementing
Executive Order 12372 regarding intergovernmental consultation on
Federal programs and activities apply to this program.
Paperwork Reduction Act
Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501, et
seq.), Federal agencies must obtain approval from the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) for each collection of information they
conduct, sponsor, or require through regulations. The FHWA has
determined that this proposed action does not contain a collection of
information requirement for purposes of the PRA.
Executive Order 12988 (Civil Justice Reform)
This proposed action meets applicable standards in Sections 3(a)
and 3(b)(2) of Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to minimize
litigation, to eliminate ambiguity, and to reduce burden.
Executive Order 13045 (Protection of Children)
The FHWA has analyzed this proposed action under Executive Order
13045, Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and
Safety Risks. This is not an economically significant proposed action
and does not concern an environmental risk to health or safety that may
disproportionately affect children.
Executive Order 12630 (Taking of Private Property)
This proposed action would not effect a taking of private property
or otherwise have taking implications under Executive Order 12630,
Governmental Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected
Property Rights.
Executive Order 13211 (Energy Effects)
The FHWA has analyzed this proposed action under Executive Order
13211, Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy
Supply, Distribution, or Use. It has been determined that it is not a
significant energy action under that order because it is not a
significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866 and is not
likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply,
distribution, or use of energy. Therefore, a Statement of Energy
Effects under Executive Order 13211 is not required.
National Environmental Policy Act
The agency has analyzed this proposed action for the purpose of the
National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and
has determined that it would not have any effect on the quality of the
environment.
Regulation Identification Number
A regulation identification number (RIN) is assigned to each
regulatory action listed in the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulations.
The Regulatory Information Service Center publishes the Unified Agenda
in April and October of each year. The RIN contained in the heading of
this document can be used to cross reference this proposed action with
the Unified Agenda.
List of Subjects in 23 CFR Part 655
Design standards, Grant programs-Transportation, Highways and
roads, Incorporation by reference, Signs, Traffic regulations.
Issued on: May 10, 2002.
Mary E. Peters,
Administrator, Federal Highway Administration.
[FR Doc. 02-12269 Filed 5-20-02; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-22-P