MINNEAPOLIS PARK & RECREATION BOARD DRAFT TRAIL DESIGN STANDARDS FOR: SIGNS AND PAVEMENT MARKINGS

Size: px
Start display at page:

Download "MINNEAPOLIS PARK & RECREATION BOARD DRAFT TRAIL DESIGN STANDARDS FOR: SIGNS AND PAVEMENT MARKINGS"

Transcription

1 MINNEAPOLIS PARK & RECREATION BOARD DRAFT TRAIL DESIGN STANDARDS FOR: SIGNS AND PAVEMENT MARKINGS October 14, 2014

2 CHANGE LOG Additions and changes to this document should be summarized on this page and detailed in the Appendix. Change No. Date Affected Page No. Summary of Change Appendix Page No. 1

3 MINNEAPOLIS PARK & RECREATION BOARD DRAFT TRAIL DESIGN STANDARDS FOR: SIGNS AND PAVEMENT MARKINGS CONTENTS Change log... 1 Purpose and rationale for guidance... 3 How to use this document... 4 Resources consulted... 6 Standards for signs and pavement markings on trails... 7 Standards for signs and pavement markings at street/driveway crossings Materials Items for future inclusion References Appendix: to be included in final trail standards

4 PURPOSE AND RATIONALE FOR GUIDANCE The Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board (MPRB) owns and maintains an expansive system of trails within the City of Minneapolis. The system comprises over 51 miles of bicycle, shared-use and pedestrian trails, including those located within the Grand Rounds National Scenic Byway. The trail system has a long history, dating back to the construction of the first bicycle trails in the late 1890s and has expanded incrementally over the past century, resulting in varying sign and marking types throughout the system. The MPRB system links to many other regional trails, bikeways, and sidewalks owned and operated by other agencies. Signs and markings on connecting facilities oftentimes do not match those on the MPRB trails. The variations in sign and marking types can result in confusion and uncertainty for trail users and motorists. The goal of the MPRB Trail Standards for Signs and Pavement Markings project is to create uniform standards for regulatory, warning and operational signs and pavement markings within the MPRB owned and managed trail network. The standards established will guide MPRB staff and consultants in the design and maintenance of MPRB trails including street/driveway crossings. It is also anticipated that the MPRB standards will serve as a resource for agencies with connecting facilities so that the systems can be better coordinated for the benefit of trail users. The MPRB trail system links to trails operated by the Cities of Minneapolis and St. Paul and Three Rivers Park District. It is a high priority for the MPRB to establish standards that are consistent with standards, guidelines and practices employed with the City of Minneapolis Department of Public Works, given that both agencies serve the same geographic area and many of the same system users. It is unlikely that most users are aware of the two different networks within the community, so it is very important that the networks are consistent with one another. Consistency with other agencies (City of St. Paul and Three Rivers Park District) is also important, but to a slightly lesser degree. The MPRB Trail Standards for Signs and Pavement Markings have been developed to be in compliance with the Minnesota Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MN MUTCD). The MN MUTCD establishes standards for traffic control devices on public roadways, pedestrian facilities, and bikeways within the State of Minnesota. It is a legal document and guides public agencies in the installation of traffic control devices. It is important that trail signs and markings first comply with the requirements set forth in the MN MUTCD. The development of the standards in this document have also been informed by a review of local, state, and national trail standards, guidance, and research. They are consistent with trail design requirements from the MN MUTCD and local, state, and national guidance that has been supported by thorough research and evaluation. The standards in this document are consistent with MPRB s goals to promote user safety while avoiding over-signing and over-marking trails. MPRB prefers to minimize the number of signs and markings for four primary reasons; to prevent users from becoming desensitized to regulatory signs and markings; to preserve park environment aesthetics; to minimize ongoing maintenance; and to be cognizant of future budgets. As these standards are implemented, MPRB will be making progress towards its goals of minimizing confusion and conflict points, ultimately creating a safer trail system for all users. 3

5 HOW TO USE THIS DOCUMENT Document Organization The standards in this document are organized into the following sections: STANDARDS FOR SIGNS AND PAVEMENT MARKINGS ON TRAILS Standards described in this chapter apply to signs and pavement markings for trail segments. This chapter includes signs and markings that are directed at trail users and presents guidance for the following types of signs and pavement markings: Signs: o Mode-specific guide signs o Signs and right of way assignment at intersections of two regional trails o Warning signs Pavement Markings: o Trail striping o Mode-specific guide pavement markings o Pavement marking warnings STANDARDS FOR SIGNS AND PAVEMENT MARKINGS AT STREET/DRIVEWAY CROSSINGS Standards described in this chapter apply to trail crossings of parking lot entrances, driveways, and public roadways. This chapter includes signs and pavement markings that are directed at trail and roadway users. This section includes guidance for signs and pavement markings organized by the type of crossing, including: Trail crossings of parking lot entrances or driveways Trail crossings at two- or four-way stop controlled intersections Trail crossings at roundabouts Trail crossings at signalized intersections Mid-block trail crossings This section also includes guidance on right of way assignment of trails at street/driveway crossings. MATERIALS This chapter includes standards for signage and pavement marking materials to be used on MPRB trails. DEFINITIONS The following terms are used to describe standards, recommended practices, and optional practices: Shall: Indicates a required, mandatory, or specifically prohibitive practice regarding signs and pavement markings. Should: Indicates a recommended, but not mandatory, practice in typical situations. May: Indicates an optional practice. 4

6 ENGINEERING JUDGMENT AND DESIGN EXCEPTIONS This document establishes standards for signs and pavement markings based on common situations within the MPRB trail system. However, these standards are not a substitute for engineering judgment. Specific site conditions may require variation or exception from these standards. Design exceptions should be documented and signed off by a registered professional engineer to justify variation from the standards established in this document. Documentation should include a description of the site conditions, rationale for variation from standards, and the proposed signing/marking plan. COMPLIANCE WITH MN MUTCD As noted above, MPRB Trail Standards have been developed in compliance with the January 2014 version of the Minnesota Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MN MUTCD). As with most reference documents, the MN MUTCD is revised and updated periodically as new practices are established. The latest version of the MN MUTCD should be consulted prior to installation of any new/updated signs and pavement markings to verify compliance. MPRB Asset Management staff will review and update this document following MN MUTCD updates. Any updates will be included in the Change Log. PROCESS FOR UPDATING TRAIL STANDARDS Bicycle and pedestrian facility design is continually evolving based on research and evaluation of new facility types and traffic control devices. This document is intended to be updated based on new standards, guidance, and research. The following process should be followed to update this document: 1. Review newly released standards, guidance, and research to identify inconsistencies with MPRB Trail Standards. 2. Determine proposed changes to MPRB Trail Standards. 3. Document rationale for changes to standards. 4. Engage MPRB staff, leadership, Board of Commissioners, and trail users as determined appropriate. 5. Edit MPRB Trail Standards document. 6. Document changes to standards in the Change Log at the beginning of the document. 7. Document changes to standards in the Appendix. Provide details about the changes from the previous version and rationale for changes. 5

7 RESOURCES CONSULTED The primary goal of this document is to develop standards for regulatory, warning and guide trail signs and pavement markings that are compatible with other trail systems and regulatory requirements. To further this goal, this process began with a review and comparison of local, state, and national trail standards, guidance, and research. This included interviews with local and state agency staff to gain an understanding of agency practices regarding regulatory and guide signs and pavement markings. The following resources and staff were consulted to develop standards for signs and markings on MPRB trails: Minnesota Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MN MUTCD) Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) Bikeway Facility Design Manual MnDOT Local Road Research Board (LRRB) Best Practices Synthesis and Guidance in At- Grade Trail-Crossing Treatments American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) Guide for the Development of Bicycle Facilities National Association of City Transportation Officials (NACTO) Urban Bikeway Design Guide Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Safety Effects of Marked Versus Unmarked Crosswalks at Uncontrolled Locations MnDOT staff interview Hennepin County staff interview Three Rivers Park District (TRPD) staff interview and Guidance for Three Rivers Park District Trail Crossings Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board (MPRB) staff interview and printed guidance Minneapolis Department of Public Works (DPW) staff interview and Guidelines for the Installation of Traffic Control Devices at Intersections of At-Grade Shared-Use Path and Public Streets. City of St. Paul staff interview The MN MUTCD establishes standards for traffic control devices on public roadways, pedestrian facilities, and bikeways within in the State of Minnesota. It is a legal document and guides public agencies in the installation of traffic control devices. It is important that trail signs and markings first comply with the requirements set forth in the MN MUTCD. The other resources consulted to prepare this report are guidelines and recommendations for trail design. These resources supplement but do not substitute for the MN MUTCD. 6

8 STANDARDS FOR SIGNS AND PAVEMENT MARKINGS ON TRAILS Standards described in this chapter apply to signs and pavement markings for trail segments and do not apply to signs and pavement markings at trail crossings of driveways or public roadways. This chapter includes signs and markings that are directed at trail users only. Standards in this chapter are based off the Minnesota Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MN MUTCD). Consult the MN MUTCD for the most up-to-date guidance prior to installing signs or markings. Signs MODE-SPECIFIC GUIDE SIGNS Mode-specific guide signs shall be installed on all trails to indicate whether a trail is intended for bicycle, pedestrian, or combined use. Mode-specific guide signs shall also be used on trails where bicycle and pedestrian use is designated by striping of separate lanes for bicyclists and pedestrians. Mode-specific guide signs should be installed in the following situations: At the beginning of a trail In locations where combined trails merge or separate Within 100 feet of an intersection of two trails At common entry points to a trail, such as heavily used sidewalks or parking lots Periodically along a trail to reinforce mode-specific trail or lane designation To avoid sign clutter, mode-specific guide signs should not be installed more frequently than once every quarter mile, unless conditions warrant additional guidance. MODE-SPECIFIC GUIDE SIGN DIMENSIONS & INSTALLATION Sign Dimensions: 18 x18 Post: Wood 6 x6 square. Number: Up to two signs may be installed on each sign post, as shown in the image below. Placement: 7.5 from trail to bottom edge of sign. Any part of a sign shall be at least 2 from the edge of the trail to preserve the trail clear zone. Exceptions may be made in constrained situations. Color: Mode-specific guide signs shall have white symbols with a blue background. WRONG WAY signs shall have white symbols and text with a red background. Example application of mode-specific guide signs 7

9 Bicycle and pedestrian mode-specific guide signs shall be adapted from MN MUTCD signs D11-1 and D11-2. Combined trail signs shall follow the style shown below. On one way bicycle trails, WRONG WAY signs shall be installed on the back of bicycle guide signs to reinforce that the trail is designated for one way bicycle travel. WRONG WAY signs shall be placed facing wrong way bicycle traffic. MPRB-adapted MMUTCD D11-1 and D11-2 signs Combined Trail and Wrong Way signs DEFINITIONS: Shall: Indicates a required, mandatory, or specifically prohibitive practice regarding signs and pavement markings. Should: Indicates a recommended, but not mandatory, practice in typical situations. May: Indicates an optional practice. 8

10 SIGNS AT INTERSECTIONS OF TWO REGIONAL TRAILS Trail name signs should be installed at the intersection of two regional trails. Trail name signs notify users that they are approaching another regional trail and provide users with information about their location on the trail system. Trail name signs shall follow a similar design to the Minneapolis Department of Public Works trail name signs. Trail name signs shall have a blue background and include a bicycle symbol, pedestrian symbol, and the name of the trail in white text. An example sign is shown below. INTERSECTION SIGN DIMENSIONS & INSTALLATION Sign Dimensions: 6 height, width varies. Post: Trail name signs may be placed on existing sign posts. New sign posts shall be wood 6 x6 square. Number: Two signs shall be placed on a post. As of 2014, MPRB trails that are not designated by the Metropolitan Council as regional trails are named using the adjacent parkway name. Trail name signs should be installed once there is a clear list of named regional and non-regional trails. This list should be correlated with property files and regional park master plans as on record. RIGHT OF WAY AT INTERSECTIONS OF TWO REGIONAL TRAILS At the intersection of two regional trails, the trail with a higher volume of users (bicyclists and pedestrians) should have the right of way. A yield sign shall be installed facing the lower volume trail. Placement: 8 from trail to bottom edge of sign. The edge of sign shall be at least 2 from the edge of the trail to preserve the trail clear zone. Exceptions may be made in constrained situations. Trail name signs shall be placed within 10 of an intersection of two trails. If there is not an existing post within 10 of an intersection of two trails, a new post should be installed at the northeast corner of the intersection. Color: White symbols with blue text Example application of trail name signs 9

11 WARNING SIGNS Warning signs may be installed to notify users of conditions not readily apparent, such as curves, intersections, or surface conditions that could cause hazardous conditions for trail users. Warning signs should be installed sparingly and engineering judgment should be used to determine whether warning signs are necessary. Examples of MN MUTCD warning signs are below. The MN MUTCD should be consulted for the full range of warning signs. WARNING SIGN DIMENSIONS & INSTALLATION Sign Dimensions: 18 x18 Post: Existing sign post or U-channel post. Placement: Example MN MUTCD warning signs Signal ahead, stop ahead, and yield ahead signs should be used only when topography or other conditions prevent the fastest expected trail user to see an intersection within an adequate stopping sight distance. See Table 1 to determine the stopping sight distance for bicyclists based on speed and descending grade of trail. At intersections with high volume sidewalks or other trails, pedestrian (W11-2) or trail crossing (W11-15) warning signs with downward arrows (W16-7P) may be installed facing trail traffic. Table 1: Bicyclist stopping sight distance Stopping sight distance for bicyclist (in feet) Minimum of 4 from trail to bottom edge of sign. Any part of a sign shall be at least 2 from the edge of the trail to preserve the trail clear zone. Exceptions may be made in constrained situations. Warning Sign Location: Warning signs should be located based on the stopping sight distance of the fastest expected trail users, no closer than 100 feet from the condition warranting the warning sign. See Table 1 for stopping sight distance for bicyclists based on speed and descending grade of trail. Descending grade of trail 0 1% 2% 3% 4% 5% 6% 7% 8% Speed of fastest expected trail user (MPH)

12 Pavement Markings TRAIL STRIPING Yellow centerline striping shall be installed on all bicycle and combined trails. A broken yellow line shall be used when passing is permitted, and a solid yellow line shall be used when passing is not permitted. The examples below illustrate the striping color and patterns for bicycle and combined trails. Trails narrower than 12 wide should be marked as combined bicycle and pedestrian trails. TRAIL STRIPING DIMENSIONS Striping Width: 4 Broken Line Dimensions: A 3 segment with a 9 gap should be used. TRAIL STRIPING COLOR Yellow striping shall only be used for the following: Striping color and pattern for bicycle and combined trails On 12-foot wide trails designated for both bicycle and pedestrian use, the trail should be separated into two way bicycle travel and two way pedestrian travel lanes. A yellow centerline should be used to separate each direction of bicycle traffic. Bicycle and pedestrian lanes should be separated by a solid white line. The pedestrian lane should be located closest to the water body that the trail follows (creek, lake, or river).the illustration below shows the recommended striping and symbols for 12-foot wide trails. Trails wider than 12 may follow the striping patterns below; however, the bicycle and pedestrian lanes can be widened to fill the width of the trail. Bicycle and combined trail centerline markings To warn users of obstructions in the center of the trail White striping shall only be used for the following: Separating bicycle and pedestrian lanes Edgeline striping To warn users of obstructions at the edge of the trail To designate the clear zone (when not designated by a different material than the trail) Striping color and pattern for 12-foot wide trails White edgeline striping may be considered in locations where nighttime riding is expected and low-light conditions may make it challenging for trail users to find the edge of the trail. For projects receiving federal or state aid funds, MnDOT State Aid requires a 2-foot clear zone on either edge of the trail. In most cases, the clear zone is designated by a different material than the trail, such as a natural or turf surface. Where the clear zone is not 11

13 designated by a different material than the trail, a white edgeline stripe shall be used to designate the clear zone. MODE-SPECIFIC GUIDE PAVEMENT MARKINGS On separate bicycle and pedestrian trails and where trails are divided into separate bicycle and pedestrian lanes, pavement marking symbols should be used to guide users to the appropriate location. Pavement markings should be installed in approximately the same location as mode-specific guide signs and should be used in the following situations: At the beginning of a trail In locations where combined trails merge or separate Within 100 feet of an intersection of two trails At common entry points to a trail, such as heavily used sidewalks or parking lots Periodically along a trail to reinforce mode-specific trail or lane designation for trail users, no more frequently than once every quarter mile unless conditions warrant additional guidance for trail users MODE SPECIFIC GUIDE PAVEMENT MARKINGS DIMENSIONS & INSTALLATION Symbol/Text Dimensions: Pedestrian and bicycle symbols: 20 wide x 36 tall One way arrow: 16 wide x 36 tall ONE WAY text: 20 wide x 36 tall. Symbol/Text Spacing: In locations where symbols are used in combination, they should be spaced 24 apart. Symbols shall be placed in the center of the trail or lane. Pedestrian and bicycle pavement marking symbols Symbols shall follow the style indicated in the MN MUTCD. Combined trails shall be marked with both pedestrian and bicycle symbols (as shown below) to indicate that both pedestrians and bicyclists are expected to use the trail. One way bicycle trails shall be marked with ONE WAY text, a bicycle symbol, and an arrow pointing in the direction of one way trail traffic, as shown below. Symbol/Text Direction: Symbols and text shall be installed facing the direction of expected traffic. Color: All pavement marking symbols and text shall be white. 12

14 One way bicycle trail and combined trail pavement marking symbols 13

15 PAVEMENT MARKING WARNINGS In congested areas of the trail system, pavement markings may be used to warn users of potential congestion and alert them about the need to slow down. SLOW markings may be used in these locations. When used, SLOW markings should be installed at the beginning of congested areas and periodically along the trail if congestion is present along an extended segment. Speed limits should not be marked on trails. Selection of locations for SLOW markings should be determined using engineering judgment, width of the trail, and available data on user volumes and crashes or conflicts between users. SLOW markings may be considered in locations where the total volume of trail users (both bicyclists and pedestrians) exceeds 2,000 users per day. CONGESTED AREA PAVEMENT MARKINGS DIMENSIONS & INSTALLATION SLOW Text Dimensions: 48 wide x 36 tall SLOW Text Placement: Text shall be placed in the center of the trail or lane. SLOW Text Direction: Text shall be installed facing the direction of expected trail traffic. Color: White Trail intersections with high volume sidewalks or other trails may create conflicts for trail users. A zebra-style crosswalk (illustrated on the next page) may be installed to mark intersections with high volume sidewalk or trail connections. Trail intersection markings may be considered in the following situations: Where the volume of users on the regional trail exceeds 1,000 trail users per day Where the volume of pedestrians or bicyclists crossing the trail exceeds 15 crossings per hour during the peak hour of trail use When poor sight lines make it difficult for users to see pedestrians or bicyclists crossing the trail Where there is a history of conflicts and/or crashes between trail users TRAIL/SIDEWALK INTERSECTION TRAIL/SIDEWALK PAVEMENT INTERSECTION MARKINGS PAVEMENT DIMENSIONS & MARKINGS INSTALLATION DIMENSIONS & Crosswalk Dimensions: INSTALLATION Crosswalk blocks shall be Crosswalk 1 wide by 6-10 dimensions: tall (height [waiting should for dimensions match sidewalk from City or of trail width). Crosswalk Minneapolis] blocks shall be placed 1.5 apart. Crosswalk placement: The Crosswalk crosswalk Placement: shall be placed The crosswalk at the intersection shall be of placed the main at the trail intersection and sidewalk of the main or trail intersecting and trail. sidewalk or intersecting trail. Color: White Color: White 14

16 Example trail/sidewalk intersection pavement markings OBSTRUCTION PAVEMENT MARKINGS DIMENSIONS & INSTALLATION Striping Width: 4 Yellow markings shall be used to mark obstructions in the center of the trail White markings shall be used to mark obstructions on the edge of the trail. Example obstruction pavement markings Pavement markings should be used to direct trail users away from obstructions in the trail, such as signs, light posts, or bollards. Yellow markings should be installed to mark obstructions in the center of the trail. White markings should be installed to mark obstructions at the edge of the trail. The illustration above provides examples of obstruction pavement markings. 15

17 STANDARDS FOR SIGNS AND PAVEMENT MARKINGS AT STREET/DRIVEWAY CROSSINGS Standards described in this chapter apply to trail crossings of parking lot entrances, driveways, and public roadways. This chapter includes signs and markings that are directed at trail users and at roadway users. Standards in this chapter are based on the Minnesota Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MN MUTCD). Consult the MN MUTCD for the most up-to-date guidance prior to installing signs or pavement markings. PARKING LOT/ DRIVEWAY SIGNS & MARKINGS Signs: Stop sign facing driveway or parking lot exit. Markings: None Trail crossings of parking lot entrances or driveways MPRB trails cross driveways and parking lot entrances in several locations. MPRB considers trail users to have priority at crossings of driveways and parking lot entrances. SIGNS At a trail crossing of a driveway or parking lot entrance, vehicle traffic exiting the driveway or parking lot shall be stop controlled. If the driveway or parking lot is owned and operated privately, MPRB should consider purchasing a stop sign to be installed facing the private driveway or parking lot. No other signs should be installed on the trail approach or driveway/parking lot entrance approaches. PAVEMENT MARKINGS No pavement markings shall be installed at trail crossings of driveways or parking lot entrances. DEFINITIONS: Shall: Indicates a required, mandatory, or specifically prohibitive practice regarding signs and pavement markings Should: Indicates a recommended, but not mandatory, practice in typical situations. May: Indicates an optional practice. 16

18 Trail crossings at two- or four-way stop controlled intersections Guidance in this section applies to trail crossings at two- or four-way stop controlled intersections of public streets. This guidance applies when the trail is parallel to a public street and crosses within close proximity (within 30 feet) of the intersection. SIGNS Right of way for trail users shall be governed by the parallel street. If the parallel street is not stop controlled, the trail shall not be stop controlled. Stop signs on the intersecting street shall be placed in advance of the trail crossing to indicate to roadway users that they must stop before the trail crossing, as shown on the following page. If the parallel street is stop controlled, the trail shall be stop controlled. In most situations, it is not necessary to install a stop sign directed towards trail users as trail traffic is controlled by the stop sign on the roadway. Engineering judgment should be used to determine whether it is necessary to install a stop sign directed towards trail users. Advance trail crossing warning signs (W11-15) are not recommended at most two- or four-way stop controlled intersections. Advance trail crossing warning signs may be considered at two- or four-way stop controlled intersections under the following circumstances: Where the intersecting street is not stop controlled Trail user volumes are greater than 1,000 users per day (pedestrians and bicyclists combined) Traffic volumes on the roadway approach are greater than 5,000 vehicles per day There is a history of conflicts and/or crashes Advance trail crossing warning sign: W11-15 PAVEMENT MARKINGS Crosswalk markings are not recommended at trail crossings at twoor four-way stop controlled intersections. Zebra-style crosswalk markings may be considered under the following circumstances: Where the intersecting street is not stop controlled Trail user volumes are greater than 1,000 users per day (pedestrians and bicyclists combined) Traffic volumes on the roadway approach are greater than 5,000 vehicles per day There is a history of conflicts and/or crashes TWO- OR FOUR- WAY STOP CONTROLLED INTERSECTIONS SIGNS & MARKINGS Signs directed towards the roadway: Standard: No trail-specific signs Optional: Advance crossing trail crossing warning signs based on specific criteria discussed in text Signs directed towards trail users: Standard: None Optional: Stop sign directed towards trail users if trail design or sight lines prevent trail users from clearly seeing stop sign on the roadway Markings: Standard: None Trail crossing warning sign: Optional: Zebra-style W11-15 crosswalk may be considered based on specific criteria discussed in text. Crosswalk Dimensions: 2 wide by 6-10 tall (height should match sidewalk or trail width). Crosswalk blocks shall be placed 3 apart. 17

19 Example signing and marking for a trail crossing at a side-street stop controlled intersection Example signing and marking for a trail crossing at an all-way stop controlled intersection 18

20 Trail crossings at roundabouts Guidance in this section applies to trail crossings at roundabout intersections. SIGNS Trail crossing warning signs (W11-15) with a downward arrow (W16-7P) should be installed on the roadway approaches to a trail crossing at a roundabout. In most situations, the trail approach to a roundabout should not be signed. Yield signs directed towards trail users may be considered in certain locations based on engineering judgment. Yield signs may be considered in locations where trail traffic exceeds 1,000 users per day (pedestrians and bicyclists combined). PAVEMENT MARKINGS A zebra-style crosswalk shall be marked for the trail crossing of roundabout entrances and exits. Crosswalks should be a minimum of 20 feet from the edge of the circulatory roadway, as shown in the illustration below from the MN MUTCD. ROUNDABOUT SIGNS & MARKINGS Signs directed towards the roadway: Trail crossing warning sign (W11-15) with downward arrow (W16-7P) Signs directed towards trail users: Standard: None Optional: Yield sign where trail traffic exceeds 1,000 users per day. Markings: Zebra-style crosswalks Crosswalk Dimensions: 2 wide by 6-10 tall (height should match trail width). Crosswalk blocks shall be placed 3 apart. If the trail is wider than 10, the crosswalk should be centered to follow the trail alignment. Placement: Minimum 20 from the edge of the circulatory roadway. Trail crossing warning sign (W11-15) with downward arrow 19

21 Trail crossings at signalized intersections Guidance in this section applies to trail crossings at signalized intersections of public streets. This guidance applies when the trail is parallel to a public street and crosses within close proximity (within 30 feet) of the intersection. SIGNS No signs are recommended at trail crossings at signalized intersections. Trail crossing warning signs (W11-15) shall not be installed at signalized intersections. Trail traffic is controlled by the traffic signal. In situations where the traffic signal is not visible to trail users at the stopping sight distance of the fastest expected trail user, a signal warning sign (W3-3) may be installed. PAVEMENT MARKINGS A zebra-style crosswalk shall be marked for the trail crossing at a signalized intersection. City of Minneapolis Public Works marks crosswalks at all pedestrian crossings at signalized intersections. Stop bars may be considered to emphasize that roadway users must stop behind the trail crosswalk at a signalized intersection. Stop bars should be installed to supplement a marked crosswalk and should not be installed in locations without marked crosswalks. Installation of stop bars may be considered based on engineering judgment in the following situations: The trail is wider than 10 feet wide Trail user volumes are greater than 1,000 users per day (pedestrians and bicyclists combined) Traffic volumes on the roadway approach are greater than 5,000 vehicles per day There is a history of conflicts and/or crashes SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION SIGNS & MARKINGS Signs directed towards the roadway: None Signs directed towards trail users: Standard: None Optional: Signal warning sign (W3-3) based on specific criteria explained in text Markings: Standard: Zebra-style crosswalks Crosswalk Dimensions: 2 wide by 6-10 tall (height should match trail width). Crosswalk blocks shall be placed 3 apart. If the trail is wider than 10, the crosswalk should be centered to follow the trail alignment. Optional: Addition of stop bar based on specific criteria explained in text. Stop Bar Dimensions: height, width varies depending on width and number of lanes on roadway. Stop Bar Placement: Recommended 10 in advance of the crosswalk 20

22 Example placement of stop bar and crosswalk at trail crossing at a signalized intersection 21

23 Mid-block crossings Guidance in this section applies to trail crossings of public streets at mid-block locations. Mid-block crossings are defined as crossings of roadways located more than 30 feet away from the nearest intersection. Mid-block trail crossings are not considered legal crosswalks unless marked. If MPRB is considering installation of a mid-block crosswalk across a four lane roadway, staff should consult FHWA Safety Effects of Marked Versus Unmarked Crosswalks at Uncontrolled Locations to determine whether a mid-block crosswalk should be installed with or without additional crossing enhancements. MnDOT Pedestrian Crossings: Uncontrolled Location guidance may also be consulted. SIGNS DIRECTED TOWARDS ROADWAY USERS Trail crossing warning signs (W11-15) with a downward arrow (W16-7P) shall be installed on the roadway approaches to a mid-block trail crossing. Advance crossing warning signs (W11-15) shall be installed in advance of all mid-block crossings. Placement of advance crossing warning signs is determined by roadway speeds and shall be installed in conformance with MN MUTCD Table 2C-4, as summarized below. Parking shall be restricted within 30 feet of mid-block trail crossings. No Parking Any Time (R7-1) signs shall be installed 30 feet in advance of a mid-block trail crossing. Posted or 85th- Percentile Speed 20 mph 225 ft 25 mph 325 ft 30 mph 460 ft 35 mph 565 ft 40 mph 670 ft Advance crossing warning sign placement distance from midblock trail crossing SIGNS DIRECTED TOWARDS TRAIL USERS In most situations, the trail approach to a mid-block crossing should be controlled by a yield sign. Engineering judgment may be used to determine when a stop sign may be more appropriate. Stop signs directed towards trail users may be considered depending on the volume and cross section of the intersection road or when there are poor sight lines for trail users. MID-BLOCK CROSSING SIGNS & MARKINGS Signs directed towards the roadway: Trail crossing warning (W11-15) with downward arrow (W16-7P), advance crossing warning signs (W11-15), No Parking symbol (R8-3) Signs directed towards trail users: Standard: Yield sign Optional: Stop sign, to be installed depending on volume and cross section of the intersection road or when there are poor sight lines for trail users Markings: Zebra-style crosswalks Crosswalk Dimensions: 2 wide by 6-10 tall (height should match trail width). Crosswalk blocks shall be placed 3 apart. If the trail is wider than 10, the crosswalk should be centered to follow the trail alignment. PAVEMENT MARKINGS A zebra-style crosswalk shall be installed at mid-block trail crossings. 22

24 Example signs and pavement markings at a mid-block trail crossing 23

25 Trail Right of Way Assignment at Streets/Driveways MPRB follows the City of Minneapolis Public Works guidelines for right of way assignment of trail crossings at streets and driveways. The city s guidelines are detailed on pages in the city s Guidelines for the Installation of Traffic Control Devices at Intersections of At-Grade Shared-Use Path and Public Streets (2009). The following is a summary of the city s guidance. STOP CONTROLLED INTERSECTIONS Right of way for trail users shall be governed by the right of way assigned to the parallel street. If the parallel street is not stop controlled, the trail shall not be stop controlled. Stop signs on the parallel street shall be placed in advance of the trail crossing to indicate to roadway users that they must stop before the trail crossing. If the parallel street is stop controlled, the trail shall be stop controlled. MID-BLOCK CROSSINGS Assignment of priority should be determined based on relative importance of the roadway, relative volumes of trail and roadway, and relative speeds of trail and roadway users. On Community Connector, Neighborhood Connector, Industrial Connector, Parkway, or Residential Streets, the trail could be given priority over the roadway if the total volume of trail users is greater than the average daily traffic on the intersecting roadway and a site investigation does not find any characteristics that would cause a safety hazard by stopping or yielding the roadway traffic. Yield signs should be used on the lower priority approach when appropriate. 24

26 MATERIALS Standards described in this chapter apply to sign and pavement marking material types for use on trails and at trail crossings and are based on the MN MUTCD. Consult the MN MUTCD for the most up-todate guidance prior to installing or maintaining signs or markings. MATERIALS FOR TRAIL AND ROADWAY SIGNS As described in the MN MUTCD, regulatory, warning, and guide signs and object markers shall be retroreflective to show the same type and similar color by both day and night. The table below details the retroreflectivity requirements to be applied to all signs. Mode-specific guide signs shall be installed on 6 x6 square wood posts. All other signs should be installed on standard metal sign posts. Source: MN MUTCD 25

27 MATERIALS FOR PAVEMENT MARKINGS The MN MUTCD requires that all markings be retroreflective. All permanent trail striping, symbols, pavement messages, and crosswalks marked by MPRB shall be marked with epoxy. Glass beads shall be applied to epoxy for retroreflectivity. In temporary or emergency situations, latex is an acceptable pavement marking material provided that markings will be refreshed with epoxy within two years. Any interim latex markings should be refreshed annually until epoxy markings are installed. Minneapolis Public Works forces maintain many crosswalk markings at trail crossings. It is recommended Minneapolis Public Works install durable crosswalk markings: epoxy or poly preform/thermoplastic. The provisions of MnDOT 2582 from the 2014 edition of the Minnesota Department of Transportation Standard Specifications For Construction and the 2014 edition of the Material Lab Supplemental Specifications for Construction shall be used for permanent pavement markings. Epoxy pavement markings shall be applied with a wet film thickness of at least 20 mil [508 µm] on pavement surfaces. Apply a wet film thickness of at least 25 mil [635 µm] for SUPERPAVE wearing courses in accordance with MnDOT 2360, Plant Mixed Asphalt Pavement. The roundness of glass beads shall be at least 80 percent. For 20 mil [508 µm] epoxy resin pavement marking applications, apply the glass beads at a rate of at least 25 pounds per gallon [3.0 kg/l]. Apply beads at a greater rate as recommended by the material manufacturer to meet the minimum levels of retroreflectivity in accordance with 2582, Permanent Pavement Markings. Dry time is weather-dependent for epoxy pavement markings. Typical dry time is 3 hours; however, markings take longer to dry in cool weather. 26

28 ITEMS FOR FUTURE INCLUSION Bicycle and pedestrian facility design is evolving, resulting in new traffic control devices and treatments. As new traffic control devices are evaluated for their effectiveness on trails and at trail crossings, MPRB will consider their inclusion in this document. The Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacon (RRFB) is a traffic control device that has received interim approval from FHWA and is becoming more commonly used in Minnesota. RRFBs are pedestrian or bicyclist-activated amber LED lights that supplement crossing warning signs at unsignalized intersections or mid-block crosswalks. RRFBs use an irregular flash pattern that is similar to flashers on emergency vehicles. MPRB is planning to install an RRFB in a pilot location on West River Parkway. MPRB may consider including RRFBs in this document based on an evaluation of the effectiveness of the pilot site. Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacon (RRFB) 27

29 REFERENCES Guide for the Development of Bicycle Facilities, American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, Guidelines for the Installation of Traffic Control Devices at Intersections of At-Grade Shared-Use Path and Public Streets, City of Minneapolis Department of Public Works, June Best Practices Synthesis and Guidance in At-Grade Trail Crossing Treatments, Minnesota Department of Transportation, September Minnesota Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices, Minnesota Department of Transportation, MnDOT Bikeway Facilitiy Design Manual, Minnesota Department of Transportation, March Urban Bikeway Design Guide, National Association of City Transportation Officials, April Guidance for Three Rivers Park District Trail Crossings, Three Rivers Park District, December Safety Effects of Marked versus Unmarked Crosswalks at Uncontrolled Locations: Final Report and Recommended Guidelines, August 2005, UNC Highway Safety Research Center and Federal Highway Administration Office of Research & Development. 28

30 APPENDIX: TO BE INCLUDED IN FINAL TRAIL STANDARDS Practitioner s guide: dimensions and illustrations for each type of sign/marking recommended in the Trail Design Standards Template for updating trail standards based on new guidance 29

City of Albert Lea Policy and Procedure Manual 4.10 ALBERT LEA CROSSWALK POLICY

City of Albert Lea Policy and Procedure Manual 4.10 ALBERT LEA CROSSWALK POLICY 4.10 ALBERT LEA CROSSWALK POLICY PURPOSE: Pedestrian crosswalks are an integral part of our transportation infrastructure. To be effective and promote safety, marked crosswalks must be installed after

More information

MEMORANDUM. Date: 9/13/2016. Citywide Crosswalk Policy

MEMORANDUM. Date: 9/13/2016. Citywide Crosswalk Policy MEMORANDUM Date: 9/13/2016 Re: Citywide Crosswalk Policy Foreword Through the s Circulation Element and Complete Streets Policy, it is the City s goal to promote walking trips and provide safe facilities

More information

Pavement Markings (1 of 3)

Pavement Markings (1 of 3) Pavement Markings (1 of 3) DESCRIPTION AND DEFINITION Disadvantages Relatively high cost (over typical Crash reduction as yet unknown painted edge line) No tactile effect The STOP AHEAD pavement marking

More information

The 2009 Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) (Brief) Highlights for Arizona Practitioners. Arizona Department of Transportation

The 2009 Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) (Brief) Highlights for Arizona Practitioners. Arizona Department of Transportation The 2009 Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) (Brief) Highlights for Arizona Practitioners Arizona Department of Transportation New 2009 MUTCD 9 Parts (down from 10 in 2003) 816 pages (up

More information

ATTACHMENT NO. 11. RRLRT No. 2. Railroad / Light Rail Transit Technical Committee TECHNICAL COMMITTEE: Busway Grade Crossings STATUS/DATE OF ACTION

ATTACHMENT NO. 11. RRLRT No. 2. Railroad / Light Rail Transit Technical Committee TECHNICAL COMMITTEE: Busway Grade Crossings STATUS/DATE OF ACTION ATTACHMENT NO. 11 RRLRT No. 2 TECHNICAL COMMITTEE: TOPIC: Railroad / Light Rail Transit Technical Committee Busway Grade Crossings STATUS/DATE OF ACTION RRLRT TC Draft: 06/23/2011 RRLRT TC Approval: 06/27/2014

More information

Figure 3B-1. Examples of Two-Lane, Two-Way Marking Applications

Figure 3B-1. Examples of Two-Lane, Two-Way Marking Applications Figure 3B-1. Examples of Two-Lane, Two-Way Marking Applications A - Typical two-lane, two-way marking with passing permitted in both directions B - Typical two-lane, two-way marking with no-passing zones

More information

Section 9A.07 Meaning of Standard, Guidance, Option, and Support

Section 9A.07 Meaning of Standard, Guidance, Option, and Support 2012 Edition Page 895 PART 9. TRAFFIC CONTROLS FOR BICYCLE FACILITIES CHAPTER 9A. GENERAL Section 9A.01 Requirements for Bicyclist Traffic Control Devices 01 General information and definitions concerning

More information

PART 9. TRAFFIC CONTROLS FOR BICYCLE FACILITIES TABLE OF CONTENTS

PART 9. TRAFFIC CONTROLS FOR BICYCLE FACILITIES TABLE OF CONTENTS 2006 Edition Page TC9-1 PART 9. TRAFFIC CONTROLS FOR BICYCLE FACILITIES TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTIONS CHAPTER 9A. Section 9A.01 Section 9A.02 Section 9A.03 Section 9A.04 Section 9A.05 Section 9A.06 Section

More information

Appendix A. Knoxville TPO Greenway Signage Guidelines. Appendix A: Knoxville TPO Greenway Signage Guidelines Knox to Oak Ridge Greenway Master Plan

Appendix A. Knoxville TPO Greenway Signage Guidelines. Appendix A: Knoxville TPO Greenway Signage Guidelines Knox to Oak Ridge Greenway Master Plan Appendix A Knoxville TPO Greenway Signage Guidelines 75 Overview: Adequate signing and marking are essential on shared-use paths, especially to alert bicyclists to potential conflicts and to convey regulatory

More information

CHAPTER 1 STANDARD PRACTICES

CHAPTER 1 STANDARD PRACTICES CHAPTER 1 STANDARD PRACTICES OBJECTIVES 1) Functions and Limitations 2) Standardization of Application 3) Materials 4) Colors 5) Widths and Patterns of Longitudinal Pavement Marking Lines 6) General Principles

More information

Appendix C. Bicycle Route Signage

Appendix C. Bicycle Route Signage Appendix C Bicycle Route Signage This page intentionally left blank. APPENDIX C - BICYCLE ROUTE AND WAYFINDING SIGNAGE Bicycle route signs are wayfinding signs that guide bicyclists along preferred, designated

More information

Off-road Trails. Guidance

Off-road Trails. Guidance Off-road Trails Off-road trails are shared use paths located on an independent alignment that provide two-way travel for people walking, bicycling, and other non-motorized users. Trails specifically along

More information

National Committee on Uniform Traffic Control Devices RWSTC RECOMMENDATION FOLLOWING SPONSOR COMMENTS

National Committee on Uniform Traffic Control Devices RWSTC RECOMMENDATION FOLLOWING SPONSOR COMMENTS 1 2 3 ATTACHMENT NO. 1 RW No. 1, Jan 2012 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 National Committee on Uniform Traffic Control Devices

More information

Fundamentals of Traffic Control Devices

Fundamentals of Traffic Control Devices Fundamentals of Traffic Control Devices Traffic Engineering & Operations October 8, 2014 Raj Ponnaluri, Angela Wilhelm, and Christopher Lewis Agenda Agenda Signs Pavement Markings Signals Traffic Operations

More information

Appendix F: Wayfinding Protocol and Best Practices

Appendix F: Wayfinding Protocol and Best Practices Appendix F: Wayfinding Protocol and Best Practices Table of Contents Introduction... 259 Current Practice... 259 Policy and Regulatory Framework... 260 Best Practices... 262 Chicago, IL... 262 Seattle,

More information

Appendix T CCMP TRAIL TRAFFIC & TRANSPORTATION DESIGN STANDARD

Appendix T CCMP TRAIL TRAFFIC & TRANSPORTATION DESIGN STANDARD Appendix T CCMP 3.3.4 TRAIL TRAFFIC & TRANSPORTATION DESIGN STANDARD 3.3.4 Trail Traffic and Transportation Design Multi-use trails have certain design standards, which vary depending on the agency that

More information

Oregon Supplement to the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices. Adopted July 2005 by OAR

Oregon Supplement to the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices. Adopted July 2005 by OAR Oregon Supplement to the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices Adopted July 2005 by OAR 734-020-0005 2003 Edition Oregon Supplement to the MUTCD Page 2 INTRODUCTION Traffic control devices installed

More information

TRAFFIC CONTROLS FOR BICYCLE FACILITIES

TRAFFIC CONTROLS FOR BICYCLE FACILITIES Part 9. TRAFFIC CONTROLS FOR BICYCLE FACILITIES TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter 9A. GENERAL Page Section 9A.1 Requirements for Bicyclist Traffic Control Devices............................. 9A-1 9A.2 Scope.................................................................

More information

Crosswalk Policy Revisions & Pedestrian & Bicycle Connection Plans. Presentation to Sanibel City Council July 16, 2013

Crosswalk Policy Revisions & Pedestrian & Bicycle Connection Plans. Presentation to Sanibel City Council July 16, 2013 Crosswalk Policy Revisions & Pedestrian & Bicycle Connection Plans Presentation to Sanibel City Council July 16, 2013 Outline Crosswalk Policy Revisions Minimum Standards Goals and Objectives Pedestrian

More information

(This page left intentionally blank)

(This page left intentionally blank) (This page left intentionally blank) 2011 Edition- Revision 2 Page 813 CHAPTER 9A. GENERAL Section 9A.01 Requirements for Bicyclist Traffic Control Devices 01 General information and definitions concerning

More information

Attachment No. 13. National Committee on Uniform Traffic Control Devices RWSTC RECOMMENDATION FOLLOWING SPONSOR COMMENTS

Attachment No. 13. National Committee on Uniform Traffic Control Devices RWSTC RECOMMENDATION FOLLOWING SPONSOR COMMENTS 1 2 3 4 Attachment No. 13 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 RWSTC agenda item IV. 2 June 2011 National Committee on Uniform

More information

MANUAL ON UNIFORM TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES INTRODUCTION

MANUAL ON UNIFORM TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES INTRODUCTION 2011 Edition Page I-1 MANUAL ON UNIFORM TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES INTRODUCTION 01 Traffic control devices shall be defined as all signs, signals, markings, and other devices used to regulate, warn, or guide

More information

Town of Mooresville, North Carolina Neighborhood Traffic Calming and Control Device Policy

Town of Mooresville, North Carolina Neighborhood Traffic Calming and Control Device Policy Town of Mooresville, North Carolina Neighborhood Traffic Calming and Control Device Policy Adopted January 6, 2014 Town of Mooresville Development Services Department TOWN OF MOORESVILLE NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC

More information

UNCONTROLLED PEDESTRIAN CROSSING GUIDELINES

UNCONTROLLED PEDESTRIAN CROSSING GUIDELINES City and County of Denver UNCONTROLLED PEDESTRIAN CROSSING GUIDELINES Prepared for: Prepared by: Adopted September 2016 This page is intentionally left blank. Contents for Denver Uncontrolled Pedestrian

More information

Attachment No. 4 Approved by National Committee Council

Attachment No. 4 Approved by National Committee Council Attachment No. 4 Approved by National Committee Council The Signals Technical Committee distributed a technical committee recommendation to sponsors concerning pedestrian hybrid beacons following the January

More information

California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices

California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices FHWA s MUTCD 2009 Edition as amended for use in California 2012 Edition State of California Business, Transportation and Housing Agency Department of

More information

Addendum to SDDCTEA Pamphlet 55 17: Better Military Traffic Engineering Revision 1 Effective: 24 Aug Crosswalk Guidelines

Addendum to SDDCTEA Pamphlet 55 17: Better Military Traffic Engineering Revision 1 Effective: 24 Aug Crosswalk Guidelines Addendum to SDDCTEA Pamphlet 55 17: Better Military Traffic Engineering Revision 1 Effective: 24 Aug 2017 Crosswalk Guidelines Warrants for Uncontrolled Crosswalk Locations Crosswalks at Midblock Locations

More information

Chapter 2: Standards for Access, Non-Motorized, and Transit

Chapter 2: Standards for Access, Non-Motorized, and Transit Standards for Access, Non-Motorized, and Transit Chapter 2: Standards for Access, Non-Motorized, and Transit The Washtenaw County Access Management Plan was developed based on the analysis of existing

More information

2003 Edition Page 2B-1

2003 Edition Page 2B-1 2003 Edition Page 2B-1 CHAPTER 2B. REGULATORY SIGNS Section 2B.01 Application of Regulatory Signs Regulatory signs shall be used to inform road users of selected traffic laws or regulations and indicate

More information

Active Transportation Facility Glossary

Active Transportation Facility Glossary Active Transportation Facility Glossary This document defines different active transportation facilities and suggests appropriate corridor types. Click on a facility type to jump to its definition. Bike

More information

C/CAG. Sunnybrae Elementary School Walking and Bicycling Audit. San Mateo-Foster City School District JUNE 2013

C/CAG. Sunnybrae Elementary School Walking and Bicycling Audit. San Mateo-Foster City School District JUNE 2013 Sunnybrae Elementary School Walking and Bicycling Audit JUNE 2013 San Mateo-Foster City School District C/CAG City/County Association of Governments of San Mateo County SUNNYBRAE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL WALKING

More information

Proposed changes to Massachusetts MUTCD Supplement

Proposed changes to Massachusetts MUTCD Supplement Proposed changes to Massachusetts MUTCD Supplement John F. Carr National Motorists Association October 24, 2002 This document contains recommendations as to the contents of the Massachusetts MUTCD supplement

More information

Markings Technical Committee Chapter 3H: Roundabout Markings APPROVED IN NCUTCD COUNCIL ON JANUARY 20, 2006

Markings Technical Committee Chapter 3H: Roundabout Markings APPROVED IN NCUTCD COUNCIL ON JANUARY 20, 2006 ATTACHMENT NO. 30 Markings Technical Committee Chapter 3H: Roundabout Markings APPROVED IN NCUTCD COUNCIL ON JANUARY 20, 2006 Roundabouts are becoming an increasingly utilized form of intersection design

More information

CHAPTER 2G. PREFERENTIAL AND MANAGED LANE SIGNS

CHAPTER 2G. PREFERENTIAL AND MANAGED LANE SIGNS 2011 Edition - Revision 2 Page 275 Section 2G.01 Scope CHAPTER 2G. PREFERENTIAL AND MANAGED LANE SIGNS 01 Preferential lanes are lanes designated for special traffic uses such as high-occupancy vehicles

More information

CHAPTER 3A. GENERAL PAGE CHAPTER 3B. PAVEMENT AND CURB MARKINGS PAGE

CHAPTER 3A. GENERAL PAGE CHAPTER 3B. PAVEMENT AND CURB MARKINGS PAGE Virginia Supplement to the 2009 MUTCD Revision 1 Page TC-3-1 PART 3. MARKINGS CHAPTER 3A. GENERAL PAGE Section 3A.01 Functions and Limitations Section 3A.02 Standardization of Application Section 3A.03

More information

Pedestrians and Bicyclists. Bruce Friedman and Scott Wainwright FHWA MUTCD Team

Pedestrians and Bicyclists. Bruce Friedman and Scott Wainwright FHWA MUTCD Team Impact of the New MUTCD on Pedestrians and Bicyclists Bruce Friedman and Scott Wainwright FHWA MUTCD Team Development of the 2009 MUTCD NPA published in the Federal Register on January 2, 2008 Received

More information

ADDENDUM NUMBER ONE (1) For

ADDENDUM NUMBER ONE (1) For ADDENDUM NUMBER ONE (1) For OCCOQUAN REGIONAL PARK MULTIPURPOSE TRAIL Recreation Trails Program (RTP) Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) CFDA Number: 20.219 State Project Number: VRT-301 In Lorton,

More information

PEDESTRIAN SAFETY IMPROVEMENT EVALUATION GUIDELINE FOR UNCONTROLLED CROSSINGS

PEDESTRIAN SAFETY IMPROVEMENT EVALUATION GUIDELINE FOR UNCONTROLLED CROSSINGS PEDESTRIAN SAFETY IMPROVEMENT EVALUATION GUIDELINE FOR UNCONTROLLED CROSSINGS Traffic Safety Engineering Division Updated: April 2018 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY NDOT Traffic Safety Engineering Division developed

More information

TRAFFIC CONTROLS FOR BICYCLE FACILITIES

TRAFFIC CONTROLS FOR BICYCLE FACILITIES PART IX. TRAFFIC CONTROLS FOR BICYCLE FACILITIES A. GENERAL 9A-1 Requirements for Bicyclist Traffic Control Devices Traffic control devices, whether they are intended for motorists or bicyclists, must

More information

(This page left intentionally blank)

(This page left intentionally blank) (This page left intentionally blank) 2011 Edition - Revision 1 Page 553 Section 5A.01 Function CHAPTER 5A. GENERAL 01 A low-volume road shall be defined for this Part of the Manual as follows: A. A low-volume

More information

Minnesota Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices

Minnesota Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices Minnesota Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices MN MUTCD January 2014 MINNESOTA MANUAL ON UNIFORM TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES MN MUTCD January 2014 Minnesota Department of Transportation Office of Traffic,

More information

Appendix A: Crosswalk Policy

Appendix A: Crosswalk Policy Appendix A: Crosswalk Policy Appendix A: Crosswalk Policy Introduction This citywide Crosswalk Policy is aimed at improving pedestrian safety and enhancing pedestrian mobility by providing a framework

More information

Developed by: The American Traffic Safety Services Association (ATSSA) 15 Riverside Parkway, Suite 100 Fredericksburg, VA

Developed by: The American Traffic Safety Services Association (ATSSA) 15 Riverside Parkway, Suite 100 Fredericksburg, VA Addendum Developed by: The American Traffic Safety Services Association (ATSSA) 15 Riverside Parkway, Suite 100 Fredericksburg, VA 22406-1022 800-272-8772 This material is based upon work supported by

More information

Dakota County Transportation Department Roadway Guidance Signing

Dakota County Transportation Department Roadway Guidance Signing Dakota County Transportation Department Roadway Guidance Signing Background There are three types of permanent traffic signs. Regulatory (stop, do not enter, and speed limit) signs are signs that direct

More information

IMPROVING PEDESTRIAN SAFETY AT UNCONTROLLED CROSSINGS. Guidelines for Marked Crosswalks

IMPROVING PEDESTRIAN SAFETY AT UNCONTROLLED CROSSINGS. Guidelines for Marked Crosswalks IMPROVING PEDESTRIAN SAFETY AT UNCONTROLLED CROSSINGS Presented by Nazir Lalani P.E. Traffex Engineers Inc. N_lalani@hotmail.com Guidelines for Marked Crosswalks Source: FHWA, Safety Effects of Marked

More information

CHAPTER 2B. REGULATORY SIGNS

CHAPTER 2B. REGULATORY SIGNS CHAPTER 2B. REGULATORY SIGNS Section 2B.01 Application of Regulatory Signs Regulatory signs shall be used to inform road users of selected traffic laws or regulations and indicate the applicability of

More information

Task 4 Wayfinding Elements, Placement and Technical Guidance 4.1 Wayfinding Elements

Task 4 Wayfinding Elements, Placement and Technical Guidance 4.1 Wayfinding Elements 1836 Blake Street Denver, CO 80202 720.524.7831 ww.altaplanning.com MEMO 3 Task 4 Wayfinding Elements, Placement and Technical Guidance 4.1 Wayfinding Elements Based on field reconnaissance, best practices

More information

City of Dallas Standards and Guidelines for Traffic Control and Safety Treatments at Trail-Road Crossings

City of Dallas Standards and Guidelines for Traffic Control and Safety Treatments at Trail-Road Crossings City of Dallas Standards and Guidelines for Traffic Control and Safety Treatments at Trail-Road Crossings Prepared by Max Kalhammer Senior Planner (Bicycle Coordinator) Strategic Planning Division Department

More information

CROSSING GUARD PLACEMENT CONSIDERATIONS AND GAP ASSESSMENT

CROSSING GUARD PLACEMENT CONSIDERATIONS AND GAP ASSESSMENT CROSSING GUARD PLACEMENT CONSIDERATIONS AND GAP ASSESSMENT Many factors contribute to the need for a Crossing Guard. General federal guidance, provided by the FHWA MUTCD, states that adult crossing guards

More information

What's in the 2012 California MUTCD for Pedestrians, Bicyclists, and School Areas?

What's in the 2012 California MUTCD for Pedestrians, Bicyclists, and School Areas? What's in the 2012 California MUTCD for Pedestrians, Bicyclists, and School Areas? CA MUTCD 2012 edits by John Ciccarelli Member, California Traffic Control Devices Committee Member, NCUTCD Bicycle Technical

More information

CITY OF SARATOGA SPRINGS PEDESTRIAN CROSSING TOOLBOX

CITY OF SARATOGA SPRINGS PEDESTRIAN CROSSING TOOLBOX CITY OF SARATOGA SPRINGS PEDESTRIAN CROSSING TOOLBOX This toolbox is to be used to guide pedestrian crossing improvements within the City of Saratoga Springs. Details for each crossing type are provided.

More information

Transportation Planning Division

Transportation Planning Division Transportation Planning Division Presentation Outline Study Tasks Recap of Previous Meetings Data Collected Focus Areas within Study Limits Design Principles Tool Box Recommended Concepts Schedule Moving

More information

TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES FOR LOW VOLUME ROADS

TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES FOR LOW VOLUME ROADS PART 5. TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES FOR LOW VOLUME ROADS TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter 5A. GENERAL Page Section 5A.1 Function............................................................... 5A-1 5A.2 Application............................................................

More information

Traffic Control Devices

Traffic Control Devices 533372 Highway Engineering Traffic Control Devices Traffic Control Devices o The media by which traffic engineers communicate with drivers o Every traffic law, regulation, or operating instruction must

More information

Who is Toole Design Group?

Who is Toole Design Group? 2018 AASHTO Bike Guide Status Update NCHRP 15 60 Amalia Leighton Cody, PE, AICP & Kenneth Loen, PE Washington APWA October 4, 2018 Who is Toole Design Group? TDG is a full service engineering, planning

More information

CHAPTER 2B. REGULATORY SIGNS, BARRICADES, AND GATES Section 2B.01 Application of Regulatory Signs Standard:

CHAPTER 2B. REGULATORY SIGNS, BARRICADES, AND GATES Section 2B.01 Application of Regulatory Signs Standard: 2011 Edition Page 45 CHAPTER 2B. REGULATORY SIGNS, BARRICADES, AND GATES Section 2B.01 Application of Regulatory Signs 01 Regulatory signs shall be used to inform road users of selected traffic laws or

More information

2009 Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices

2009 Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices 2009 Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices Tori Brinkly, PE Highway Safety Engineer WFL-FHWA April 20, 2010 Paragraphs are numbered. Standard Statements are bolded. Guidance statements are italicized.

More information

PART 7. TRAFFIC CONTROLS FOR SCHOOL AREAS CHAPTER 7A. GENERAL

PART 7. TRAFFIC CONTROLS FOR SCHOOL AREAS CHAPTER 7A. GENERAL 2012 Edition Page 825 Section 7A.01 Need for Standards January 13, 2012 PART 7. TRAFFIC CONTROLS FOR SCHOOL AREAS CHAPTER 7A. GENERAL 01 Regardless of the school location, the best way to achieve effective

More information

TRAFFIC LINE MANUAL Edition Revision 1 June 2012 TRAFFIC-ROADWAY SECTION

TRAFFIC LINE MANUAL Edition Revision 1 June 2012 TRAFFIC-ROADWAY SECTION TRAFFIC LINE MANUAL 2011 Edition Revision 1 June 2012 TRAFFIC-ROADWAY SECTION TABLE OF CONTENTS Foreword...iv Section A: General Principles A-1 Functions and Limitations... 1 A-2 Colors... 1 A-3 Colored

More information

TRAFFIC LINE MANUAL. June 2011 TRAFFIC-ROADWAY SECTION

TRAFFIC LINE MANUAL. June 2011 TRAFFIC-ROADWAY SECTION TRAFFIC LINE MANUAL TRAFFIC-ROADWAY SECTION TABLE OF CONTENTS Foreword...iv Section A: General Principles A-1 Functions and Limitations... 1 A-2 Colors... 1 A-3 Colored Pavements... 1 A-4 Functions, Widths,

More information

Crossing Treatments Methodology Page 1 of 22

Crossing Treatments Methodology Page 1 of 22 Crossing Treatments Methodology Page 1 of 22 Shared Use Path Roadway Intersections Guidelines for Assigning Priority and Determining Traffic Control at Shared Use Path/Roadway Intersections Pinellas County,

More information

Appendix C. City of Fort Collins Recommended Bicycle Design Guidelines. Appendix C: Recommended Bicycle Design Guidelines 1

Appendix C. City of Fort Collins Recommended Bicycle Design Guidelines. Appendix C: Recommended Bicycle Design Guidelines 1 Appendix C City of Fort Collins Recommended Bicycle Design Guidelines Appendix C: Recommended Bicycle Design Guidelines 1 This appendix provides general design considerations for implementation of bicycle

More information

Document 2 - City of Ottawa Pedestrian Crossover (PXO) Program

Document 2 - City of Ottawa Pedestrian Crossover (PXO) Program 40 Document 2 - City of Ottawa Pedestrian Crossover (PXO) Program OVERVIEW The City of Ottawa Pedestrian Crossover (PXO) Program provides the basis for PXO implementation in Ottawa. The program s processes

More information

PART 4 HIGHWAY TRAFFIC SIGNALS

PART 4 HIGHWAY TRAFFIC SIGNALS 2016 Edition Page 111 PART 4 HIGHWAY TRAFFIC SIGNALS CHAPTER 4A. GENERAL [This is a new section. There is no corresponding section in the MUTCD.] Section 4A.100 Traffic Control Device Alternatives for

More information

City of Wayzata Comprehensive Plan 2030 Transportation Chapter: Appendix A

City of Wayzata Comprehensive Plan 2030 Transportation Chapter: Appendix A A1. Functional Classification Table A-1 illustrates the Metropolitan Council s detailed criteria established for the functional classification of roadways within the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area. Table

More information

Traffic Signs and Signals

Traffic Signs and Signals CHAPTER FOUR Traffic Signs and Signals Traffic signs control traffic flow, making streets and highways safer for drivers, bicyclists and pedestrians. These signs, which are posted by the Indiana Department

More information

Appendix B Warrants, Standards, and Guidelines for Traffic Control Devices used at Senior Citizen and Disabled Person Crossings

Appendix B Warrants, Standards, and Guidelines for Traffic Control Devices used at Senior Citizen and Disabled Person Crossings Appendix B Warrants, Standards, and Guidelines for Traffic Control Devices used at Senior Citizen and Disabled Person Crossings B.1 General Minnesota Statute 169.215 and Highway Traffic Regulation 169.222

More information

MUNICIPALITY OF ANCHORAGE TRAFFIC CODE UPDATE MASTER RECOMMENDATION REPORT: 9.14, 9.16, 9.18

MUNICIPALITY OF ANCHORAGE TRAFFIC CODE UPDATE MASTER RECOMMENDATION REPORT: 9.14, 9.16, 9.18 MUNICIPALITY OF ANCHORAGE TRAFFIC CODE UPDATE MASTER RECOMMENDATION REPORT: 9.14, 9.16, 9.18 Report Date: Please send all recommendations for update to Shane Locke (343-8413, lockesr@muni.org) 8-Apr-09

More information

CITY OF KASSON TRANSPORTATION ALTERNATIVES KASSON SAFE ROUTES TO SCHOOL

CITY OF KASSON TRANSPORTATION ALTERNATIVES KASSON SAFE ROUTES TO SCHOOL ve ha 8t G B A Mantorville Ave N 240th Ave 16th St NE 11th Ave NE K-M HIGH SCHOOL SUNRISE TRAIL TO MANTORVILLE MNTH 57 SUNSET TRAIL TO MANTORVILLE NE PARK 16TH ST NE TRAIL K-M ELEMENTARY SCHOOL K-M MIDDLE

More information

Guidance for Installation of Pedestrian Crosswalks on Michigan State Trunkline Highways

Guidance for Installation of Pedestrian Crosswalks on Michigan State Trunkline Highways Guidance for Installation of Pedestrian Crosswalks on Michigan State Trunkline Highways Michigan Department of Transportation July 7, 2014 Engineering Manual Preamble This manual provides guidance to administrative,

More information

Designing for Pedestrian Safety. Alabama Department of Transportation Pre-Construction Conference May 2016

Designing for Pedestrian Safety. Alabama Department of Transportation Pre-Construction Conference May 2016 Designing for Pedestrian Safety Alabama Department of Transportation Pre-Construction Conference May 2016 1 Designing for Pedestrians Marking Crosswalks at Signalized intersections High Visibility Markings

More information

STEP. Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons. Safe Transportation for Every Pedestrian

STEP. Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons. Safe Transportation for Every Pedestrian STEP Safe Transportation for Every Pedestrian Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons Duane Thomas, Federal Highway Administration Megan McCarty Graham, Toole Design October 30, 2018 Housekeeping Problems with

More information

Chapter 2B. REGULATORY SIGNS

Chapter 2B. REGULATORY SIGNS Chapter 2B. REGULATORY SIGNS TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter 2B. Regulatory Signs Page Section 2B.1 Application of Regulatory Signs............................................ 2B-1 2B.2 Design of Regulatory

More information

November 2012: The following Traffic and Safety Notes were revised:

November 2012: The following Traffic and Safety Notes were revised: CHANGE LIST for MDOT Traffic and Safety, TRAFFIC AND SAFETY NOTES Located at http://mdotcf.state.mi.us/public/tands/plans.cfm JANUARY 2014: The following Traffic and Safety Note was added: Note 705A Angled

More information

PART 5. TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES FOR LOW-VOLUME ROADS TABLE OF CONTENTS

PART 5. TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES FOR LOW-VOLUME ROADS TABLE OF CONTENTS 2005 Edition Page TC5-1 PART 5. TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES FOR LOW-VOLUME ROADS TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER 5A. Section 5A.01 Section 5A.02 Section 5A.03 Section 5A.04 CHAPTER 5B. GENERAL Page Function...5A-1

More information

Chapter 5: Crossing the Street

Chapter 5: Crossing the Street Chapter 5: Crossing the Street Whether walking or bicycling, a student s journey to school will more than likely require crossing one or more streets. Per the Safe Routes to School Guide, maintained by

More information

1 To provide direction to Administration when determining the appropriate Pedestrian Crossing Control Device for a particular location.

1 To provide direction to Administration when determining the appropriate Pedestrian Crossing Control Device for a particular location. Purpose: 1 To provide direction to Administration when determining the appropriate Pedestrian Crossing Control Device for a particular location. Policy Statement(s): 2 The City installs Pedestrian Crossing

More information

CITY OF SASKATOON COUNCIL POLICY

CITY OF SASKATOON COUNCIL POLICY ORIGIN/AUTHORITY Clause 1, Report No. 1-1980 and Clause 4, Report No. 22-1990 of the Works and Utilities Committee; Clause 6, Report No. 17-2004 of the Planning and Operations Committee; and Clause D5,

More information

Town of Windsor Pedestrian Crossing Guidelines

Town of Windsor Pedestrian Crossing Guidelines Town of Windsor Pedestrian Crossing Guidelines Prepared for: Town of Windsor Engineering Department 301 Walnut Street Windsor, Colorado 80550 For More Information, please contact: Engineering Department

More information

PART 10. TRAFFIC CONTROLS FOR HIGHWAY-LIGHT RAIL TRANSIT GRADE CROSSINGS TABLE OF CONTENTS

PART 10. TRAFFIC CONTROLS FOR HIGHWAY-LIGHT RAIL TRANSIT GRADE CROSSINGS TABLE OF CONTENTS Part 10. Traffic Controls for Highway-Light Rail Transit Grade Crossings Page 10TC-1 PART 10. TRAFFIC CONTROLS FOR HIGHWAY-LIGHT RAIL TRANSIT GRADE CROSSINGS TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER 10A. GENERAL..........................................

More information

Pedestrian Crosswalk Audit

Pedestrian Crosswalk Audit 1200, Scotia Place, Tower 1 10060 Jasper Avenue Edmonton, Alberta T5J 3R8 edmonton.ca/auditor Pedestrian Crosswalk Audit June 19, 2017 The conducted this project in accordance with the International Standards

More information

TOWN OF PORTLAND, CONNECTICUT COMPLETE STREETS POLICY

TOWN OF PORTLAND, CONNECTICUT COMPLETE STREETS POLICY TOWN OF PORTLAND, CONNECTICUT COMPLETE STREETS POLICY I. VISION, GOALS & PRINCIPLES VISION To improve the streets of Portland making them safer and more accessible for all users including pedestrians,

More information

City of Vallejo Traffic Calming Toolbox

City of Vallejo Traffic Calming Toolbox City of Vallejo Traffic Calming Toolbox June 1, 2013 Final Table of Contents Introduction... 1 Non-Physical Devices... 3 High-Visibility Crosswalk... 3 In Pavement Lighted Crosswalk... 4 Rapid Flashing

More information

Draft North Industrial Area-Wide Traffic Plan

Draft North Industrial Area-Wide Traffic Plan Summary of North Industrial and Hudson Bay Industrial Recommended Improvements Table 1. Summary of s Item Location 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Millar Ave north of 51st St Super 8 Motel back lane 400 Block

More information

TOWN OF CHAPEL HILL POLICY AND PROCEDURES FOR TRAFFIC CALMING MEASURES

TOWN OF CHAPEL HILL POLICY AND PROCEDURES FOR TRAFFIC CALMING MEASURES TOWN OF CHAPEL HILL POLICY AND PROCEDURES FOR TRAFFIC CALMING MEASURES (Adopted by the Town Council on June 30, 2004) (Revised December 6, 2010) (Revised February 8, 2016) POLICY AND PROCEDURES FOR TRAFFIC

More information

CHAPTER 6H. TYPICAL APPLICATIONS

CHAPTER 6H. TYPICAL APPLICATIONS Section 6H.01 Typical Applications Support: CHAPTER 6H. TYPICAL APPLICATIONS Chapter 6G contains discussions of typical temporary traffic control activities. Chapter 6H presents typical applications for

More information

4. TRAIL DESIGN GUIDELINES

4. TRAIL DESIGN GUIDELINES Trail Design Guidelines 4. TRAIL DESIGN GUIDELINES This chapter provides specific design guidelines for the Humboldt Bay Trail that are consistent with the guidelines currently observed in California and

More information

The Corporation of the City of Sarnia. School Crossing Guard Warrant Policy

The Corporation of the City of Sarnia. School Crossing Guard Warrant Policy The Corporation of the City of Sarnia School Crossing Guard Warrant Policy Table of Contents Overview And Description... 2 Role of the School Crossing Guard... 2 Definition of a Designated School Crossing...

More information

Bases, Ballasts, and Paving

Bases, Ballasts, and Paving Sections Included In This Standard: 1.1 Paving and Surfacing 1.2 Protection of the Work 1.3 Repair of Pavement 1.4 Pavement Marking 1.1 PAVING AND SURFACING A. DESIGN REQUIREMENTS 1. Applicable Design

More information

TRAFFIC STUDY. Birch Bluff Road / Pleasant Avenue 01/15/2018. City of Tonka Bay 4901 Manitou Road Tonka Bay, MN WSB PROJECT NO.

TRAFFIC STUDY. Birch Bluff Road / Pleasant Avenue 01/15/2018. City of Tonka Bay 4901 Manitou Road Tonka Bay, MN WSB PROJECT NO. TRAFFIC STUDY Birch Bluff Road / Pleasant Avenue 01/15/2018 City of Tonka Bay 4901 Manitou Road Tonka Bay, MN 55331 WSB PROJECT NO. 10805-000 Birch Bluff Road/ Pleasant Avenue Traffic Study For: City of

More information

Chapter 4 On-Road Bikeways

Chapter 4 On-Road Bikeways Chapter 4: 4-1.0 Introduction On-Road Bikeways This chapter provides guidelines to help select and design safe on-road bikeways. On-road bikeways include bicycle lanes, shared lanes, shoulders, and wide

More information

Ohio Department of Transportation Edition of the OMUTCD It s Here!

Ohio Department of Transportation Edition of the OMUTCD It s Here! Ohio Department of Transportation John R. Kasich, Governor Jerry Wray, Director 2012 Edition of the OMUTCD It s Here! June 6, 2012 Here are reasons why we have a Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices

More information

On Road Bikeways Part 1: Bicycle Lane Design

On Road Bikeways Part 1: Bicycle Lane Design On Road Bikeways Part 1: Bicycle Lane Design Presentation by: Nick Jackson Bill Schultheiss, P.E. September 04, 2012 FOLLOW THE CONVERSATION ON TWITTER Toole Design Group is live tweeting this webinar

More information

Access Management Regulations and Standards for Minor Arterials, Collectors, Local Streets

Access Management Regulations and Standards for Minor Arterials, Collectors, Local Streets Access Management Regulations and Standards for Minor Arterials, Collectors, Local Streets September 2009 Paul Grasewicz Access Management Administrator Concept of Access Management The way to manage access

More information

MUTCD, 2003 Edition. FHWA, US DOT March R

MUTCD, 2003 Edition. FHWA, US DOT   March R MUTCD, 2003 Edition FHWA, US DOT http://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/index.htm March 2008 962R561200 1 Overview The traffic control devices (TCD) are very critical for the safe and efficient transportation of people

More information

Off-Road Facilities Part 1: Shared Use Path Design

Off-Road Facilities Part 1: Shared Use Path Design Off-Road Facilities Part 1: Shared Use Path Design Presentation by: Eric Mongelli, P.E. Tom Huber October 9, 2012 FOLLOW THE CONVERSATION ON TWITTER Toole Design Group is live tweeting this webinar @tooledesign

More information

Hennepin County Pedestrian Plan Public Comment Report

Hennepin County Pedestrian Plan Public Comment Report Hennepin County Pedestrian Plan Public Comment Report On May 31, 2013, the draft Hennepin County Pedestrian Plan was released for a 45-day public comment period ending July 15, 2013. The county received

More information

SCOPE Application, Design, Operations,

SCOPE Application, Design, Operations, SCOPE Application, Design, Operations, Maintenance, etc.: Typical Traffic Control Signals Pedestrian Hybrid Beacons Emergency Vehicle One-Lane/Two-Way Facilities, Freeway Entrance Ramps, and Movable Bridges

More information

NJDOT Complete Streets Checklist

NJDOT Complete Streets Checklist Background The New Jersey Department of Transportation s Complete Streets Policy promotes a comprehensive, integrated, connected multi-modal network by providing connections to bicycling and walking trip

More information

MUTCD Part 6: Temporary Traffic Control

MUTCD Part 6: Temporary Traffic Control MUTCD Part 6: Temporary Traffic Control OMUTCD English units are preferred. OHIO MANUAL OF UNIFORM TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES TABLE OF CONTENTS PREFACE INTRODUCTION TABLE OF CONTENTS PART 1. GENERAL Chapter

More information