Urbanization of the MUTCD

1
Urbanizationof theMUTCD
W. Scott Wainwright, P.E., PTOE Highway
Engineer Federal Highway Administration Office of
Transportation Operations, MUTCD Team
2
The Issue

• History, roots of MUTCD State Rural
• Many long-standing standards guidance based on
  rural, higher-speed conditions

3
BUT

• Many changes over the years to include urban
  realities

4
Continuing Concerns

• - Residential streets

5
- Downtown (CBD) streets
6
- Alleys
7
- Private roads shopping mall lots
open to public travel
8
On Those Types of Roads

• Different Conditions

9
- More constraints
10
- Lower speeds
11
For Urban/Suburban Situations, Is MUTCD

• Insufficiently Flexible in Standards?
• Unclear where to apply existing different levels
  of Standards Guidance?

12
Challenge

• How to allow sufficient flexibility, WITHOUT
• compromising safety efficiency
• weakening basic rural standards with too many
  exceptions
• making application of different levels of
  standards unclear

13
SUCCESS

• Urban suburban users believe MUTCD addresses
  their unique practicalities constraints
• Other users FHWA feel safety and efficiency not
  compromised by changes

14
MUTCD Urbanization Needs Survey

• 100 targeted knowledgeable users (current or
  former city or urban/suburban county traffic
  engineers)
• 19 questions to solicit user input to
• ID specific items of concern in MUTCD
• ID specific recommendations for changes or
  additions to MUTCD

15
Timeline

• August 2002 - Survey e-mailed out
• Through Nov. 2002 - 46 surveys returned completed
  (fully or partially)
• Dec. 2002 - Responses comments tabulated
• Jan. 2003 Presentation to NCUTCD
• 2004 or 2005 Next proposed rulemaking?

16
Survey Distribution

• Sent Returned
• NCUTCD Members 34 21
• ITE MUTCD Reviewers 6 4
• ITE T.E. Council Members 56 18
• Other 5 3
• _____ _____
• TOTAL 101 46

17
Survey Distribution

• Sent Returned
• Current City Traffic Engr 70 30
• Former City Traffic Engr 7 5
• Current County Traffic Engr 18 7
• Former County Traffic Engr 2 0
• Urban State Traffic Engr 0 1
• Other 4
  3
• ____ ____
• TOTAL 101 46

18
Distribution---Cities

• Sent Returned
• Suburb of larger city 16 7
• Small city (50-100 k) 13
  7
• Medium city (150 300 k) 15 3
• Large city (400 k 2 Mill.) 28 13
• Very large city (gt 2 Mill.) 5
  5
• ____ ____
• TOTAL 77 35

19
Distribution Urban Counties

• Sent Returned
• Small county 3
  1
• Medium county 4
  1
• Large county 13
  5 ____ ____
• TOTAL 20 7

20
Signs Questions

• Found any standards or guidance inappropriate or
  difficult to apply in urban conditions?
• 24 - YES, for - Residential streets (18)
• - CBD streets (18)
• - Alleys (10)
• - Other arterials
  (2), airport frontage rd (1),
• 
  unspecified (1)
• 18 NO
• 4 (No response)

21
Signs Questions

• 2. Found standards or guidance flexible enough
  for signs used with traffic calming?
• 31 - YES
• 9 NO
• 6 (No response)

22
Signs Questions

• Should MUTCD provide uniform design and
  application of wayfinding signs used
  for certain areas of
  communities, for drivers and
  for peds?
• 24 - YES
• 18 NO
• 4 (No response)

23
Signs Questions

• 4. Are there sign messages or
  symbols, or CMS applications,
  widely used for urban situations
  but not uniform because theyre not
  in MUTCD?
• 12 YES, for
• - Unless Otherwise Posted
• w/ speed limit _at_ neighb. entr.
• - Parking guide signs with
• CMS elements for spaces open
• - etc.
• 23 NO
• 11 (No response)

24
Signs Questions

• 5. Have any other comments or suggestions re
  MUTCD signing for urban suburban residential
  streets, CBD streets, or alleys?
• 18 - YES
• 25 NO
• 3 (No response)

25
Urban Signing Issues

• Size lateral clearance options for alleys,
  narrow medians, constrained r-o-w
• Minimum sizes needed for more signs

26
Urban Signing Issues

• Advance placement spacing difficult in
  constrained conditions
• Discourage Children at Play
• Exceptions to min. mounting heights

27
Urban Signing Issues

• - Guidance flexibility for community wayfinding
  signs (peds vehicles)

28
Urban Signing Issues

• Left turns in front of residential mini-circles
• Alternating 2-way stops as legitimate form of
  residential neighborhood traffic control

29
Urban Signing Issues

• Guidance or standards for uniformity of
  jug-handle signing

30
Urban Signing Issues

• Guidance or standards for uniformity of signing
  for chicanes, pinch points, raised intersections,
  other traffic calming features
• Option to mount
  parking restriction
  signs under other R-
  or W- series signs

31
Urban Signing Issues

• More flexibility for colors of street name signs

32
Urban Signing Issues

• - More uniform guide signing for 2-lane
  exit ramps and ramp splits involving shared thru
  exit lane

33
Markings Questions

• Found any standards or guidance inappropriate or
  difficult to apply in urban conditions?
• 12 - YES, for - Residential streets (4)
• - CBD streets (3)
• - Alleys (1)
• - Other arterials
  (2), industrial streets (1),
• 
  roundabouts (1), unspecified (1)
• 30 NO
• 4 (No response)

34
Markings Questions

• 7. Found standards or guidance flexible enough
  for markings used with traffic calming?
• 33 - YES
• 6 NO
• 7 (No response)

35
Markings Questions

• 8. Are there unique markings widely
  used for urban situations, not
  uniform because theyre not in
  MUTCD?
• 10 YES, for
• - Dont Block the Box
• - Other keep clear x-hatching
• - School zone start end lines
• - Bus stop markings
• - etc.
• 27 NO
• 9 (No response)

36
Markings Questions

• 8. Are there crosswalk markings needed for
  unique urban situations that should be added to
  MUTCD?
• 10 YES, for
• - zig-zags on approach
• - yellow-green supplement
  
• to white x-walk stripes
• - etc.
• 32 NO
• 4 (No response)

37
Markings Questions

• 10. Have any other comments or suggestions re
  MUTCD markings for urban suburban residential
  streets, CBD streets, or alleys?
• 8 - YES
• 33 NO
• 5 (No response)

38
Urban Markings Issues

• Lane drop markings for non-freeway trap lane
  applications
• Low-cost marking
  pattern to indicate
  center of
  residential street
  without implying
  passing or
  no-passing

39
Urban Markings Issues

• - Guidance or standards for uniformity of
  markings for chicanes, pinch points, raised
  intersections, other traffic calming features

40
Traffic Signals Questions

• 11. Found any standards or guidance
  inappropriate or difficult to apply in urban
  conditions?
• 10 - YES, for
• - Warrants
• - Max. distance from stop
• line to heads
• - U-turn signals
• - etc.
• 27 NO
• 9 (No response)

41
Traffic Signals Questions

• 12. Have any other comments or suggestions re
  MUTCD traffic signals for urban suburban
  residential streets, CBD streets, or alleys?
• 14 - YES
• 26 NO
• 6 (No response)

42
Urban Signals Issues

• - Review of Peak Hour Warrant
• - U-turn arrow signal indications
• - Signalized intersections within reduced speed
  school zones with flashers

43
Temp. Traf. Controls Questions

• 13. Found any standards or guidance or details of
  TAs inappropriate or difficult to apply in urban
  conditions?
• 15 - YES, for - Residential streets (9)
• - CBD
  streets (7)
• -
  Alleys (6)
• -
  Other arterials collectors(2),
• airport frontage rds (1),
  - unspecified (1)
• 30 NO
• 4 (No response)

44
Temp. Traf. Controls Questions

• 14. Are there aspects of TTC unique to urban
  situations that are insufficiently covered by the
  TAs or Part 6 text?
• 12 YES, for - very low speeds
• - on-street parking
• -
  reversible lanes
• - etc.
• 28 NO
• 6 (No response)

45
Temp. Traf. Controls Questions

• 15. Have any other comments or suggestions re
  MUTCD TTC for urban suburban residential
  streets, CBD streets, or alleys?
• 6 - YES
• 35 NO
• 5 (No response)

46
Urban TTC Issues

• - Flexibility for block length and other urban
  impacts on device location and spacing, tapers,
  etc.

47
Urban TTC Issues

• Visibility obstructions from drum spacings too
  close together for low-speed roadways.

48
Urban TTC Issues

• - TAs more suited to urban conditions (low
  speeds, low-volume residential streets, 2WLTLs,
  parking, bus stops) urban events (parades,
  races, block parties, etc.)

49
Other TCDs Questions

• 16. Have any other comments or suggestions re
  MUTCD other TCDs (schools, bikes, grade xings,
  etc.) for urban suburban residential streets,
  CBD streets, or alleys?
• 12 - YES
• 28 NO
• 6 (No response)

50
Urban Other TCD Issues

• - Additional flexibility for designating bike
  routes, other than numbered routes or
  supplemental signs.
• - Bike box markings
• - Cross-hatch markings
  at grade crossings for
  keep clear zone.
• - Gates across ped movements
  at rail- highway grade
  crossings, similar to those
  shown in Part 10 (light rail).

51
Shopping Mall Other Private Roads Pkng. Lots
Questions

• 17. Are there typical conditions in these types
  of facilities that may require a different level
  of standards and guidance than apply to public
  roads?
• 21 - YES
• 19 NO
• 6 (No response)

52
Shopping Mall Other Private Roads Pkng. Lots
Questions

• 18. Do physical layouts of shopping mall roads
  and lots (such as lack of islands at ends of
  aisles) make complying with MUTCD impractical?
• 20 YES
• 19 NO
• 7 (No response)

53
Shopping Mall Other Private Roads Pkng. Lots
Questions

• 19. How should such issues be addressed in the
  MUTCD?
• 10 Retain current stds/guidance but
• modify w/ except for private rds
• parking lots w/ very low speeds
• 23 Add new Part to MUTCD for private rds
  parking lots w/ appropriate
• standards, guidance, etc.
• 7 -- Other
• 6 (No response)

54
Next Steps

• Each NCUTCD Technical Committee has
• - Copy of complete survey results all
  comments.
• - List of FHWA priority urbanization issues
  from survey
• - FHWA looking for recommended text from NCUTCD
  to address identified issues for next NPA.

55
(No Transcript)