Proposed New Edition of MUTCD Published For Review

Thanks Richard!

Matt O.

PE said:

Proposed New Edition of MUTCD Published For Review

This morning (02 January 2008), the Federal Register 
contained a notice announcing a proposed new edition of 
the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD),
the national standard for all signs, signals, markings,
and other devices used to control traffic in the US -
including bicyclists operating on roads, streets, and paths.

FHWA has placed the proposed content for the new edition 
of the MUTCD up on their website at 
http://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/resources/proposed_amend/index.htm 
for public review and comment.

However, the manner in which this information is presented 
by FHWA might be a bit unwieldy, especially if one is 
interested in looking at one specific part of the Manual.

So what I've done is chopped up and rearranged the draft 
material a bit, and grouped it by MUTCD Part.

Each file contains (by Part):

- Proposed new MUTCD text, in "plain" format (no revisions shown) 
- Proposed new MUTCD text, with additions, revisions, and strikeouts
shown 
- Proposed new tables 
- Proposed new figures

I've tried to preserve the original page numbering, and 
bookmarks are provided for easy navigation.

For right now, I've put these files on my 
www.trafficsign.us website at 
http://www.trafficsign.us/npa.html

This webpage also has tips on posting comments to the 
docket and other useful info. Feel free to redistribute or 
forward as needed.

Part 9 of the MUTCD is the section that deals specifically
with bicycle facilities, although all the other Parts do
affect bicyclists to varying degrees. New items proposed
for Part 9 include:

- Mode-Specific signs for skaters & other users
- Revised numbered bicycle route marker signs & plaques
- Reference Location Signs (Mileposts) for paths
- Bicycle-specific direction & distance signing
- Revision of Use of Bike Lane Signs
- Shared Lane Markings
- Bikes May Use Full Lane regulatory signs

One more thing: references and citations to relevant research
or studies can help increase the credibility of individual or
organizational comments.

The docket number is 28977, and comments are accepted at 
www.regulations.gov until Thursday, 31 July 2008.
Let the rulemaking fun begin!

-- 
Richard C. Moeur, PE 
Chair, Bicycle Technical Committee 
National Committee on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (NCUTCD)

Richard C. Moeur said:

Proposed New Edition of MUTCD Published For Review

This morning (02 January 2008), the Federal Register
contained a notice announcing a proposed new edition of
the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD),
the national standard for all signs, signals, markings,
and other devices used to control traffic in the US -
including bicyclists operating on roads, streets, and paths.

FHWA has placed the proposed content for the new edition
of the MUTCD up on their website at
http://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/resources/proposed_amend/index.htm
for public review and comment.

However, the manner in which this information is presented
by FHWA might be a bit unwieldy, especially if one is
interested in looking at one specific part of the Manual.

So what I've done is chopped up and rearranged the draft
material a bit, and grouped it by MUTCD Part.

Each file contains (by Part):

- Proposed new MUTCD text, in "plain" format (no revisions shown)
- Proposed new MUTCD text, with additions, revisions, and strikeouts
shown
- Proposed new tables
- Proposed new figures

I've tried to preserve the original page numbering, and
bookmarks are provided for easy navigation.

For right now, I've put these files on my
www.trafficsign.us website at
http://www.trafficsign.us/npa.html

This webpage also has tips on posting comments to the
docket and other useful info. Feel free to redistribute or
forward as needed.

Part 9 of the MUTCD is the section that deals specifically
with bicycle facilities, although all the other Parts do
affect bicyclists to varying degrees. New items proposed
for Part 9 include:

Quoted message said:

- Shared Lane Markings
- Bikes May Use Full Lane regulatory signs

The section on Shared Lane Markings says:

Section 1 9C.07 Shared Lane Marking
2 Option:
3 The Shared Lane Marking shown in Figure 9C-9 may be used to:
4 A. Assist bicyclists with lateral positioning in a shared lane with
on-street parallel parking in order to
5 reduce the chance of a bicyclist’s impacting the open door of a parked
vehicle,
6 B. Assist bicyclists with lateral positioning in lanes that are too
narrow for a motor vehicle and a bicycle
7 to travel side by side within the same traffic lane,
8 C. Alert road users of the lateral location bicyclists are likely to
occupy within the traveled way,
9 D. Encourage safe passing of bicyclists by motorists, and
10 E. Reduce the incidence of wrong-way bicycling.
11 Guidance:
12 The Shared Lane Marking should not be placed on roadways that have a
speed limit above 50 km/h or 35
13 mph.
14 Standard:
15 Shared Lane Markings shall not be used on shoulders or in designated
bicycle lanes.
16 If used in a shared lane with on-street parallel parking, Shared Lane
Markings shall be placed so
17 that the centers of the markings are at least 3.4 m (11 ft) from the
face of the curb, or from the edge of
18 the pavement where there is no curb.
19 Guidance:
20 If used on a street without on-street parking that has an outside
travel lane that
21 is less than 4.3 m (14 ft) wide, the centers of the Shared Lane
Markings should be at
22 least 1.2 m (4 ft) from the face of the curb, or from the edge of the
pavement where
23 there is no curb.
24 If used, the Shared Lane Marking should be placed immediately after
an intersection and spaced at
25 intervals not greater than 75 m (250 ft) thereafter.

Why are people always trying to micro-regulate/micro-manage the within-
lane lateral position of bicycle drivers? No other vehicle operator is
so treated. These government people think they know where in the lane
bicyclists should operate rather than leaving it up to the bicycle user.
And if it is to be used on roads without parking, why isn't it placed on
the left side of the lane rather than 4 feet from the side? After all,
that is where bicyclists should ride and motorists should expect them to
be. Why should motorists be miseducated about bicyclist location?

Apparently they also don't see the disconnect between having a silly
shared lane marking and a use full lane sign. I vote to place use full
lane signs on all roads.

Wayne