Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 12:54, 9 July 2025

Revision as of 20:00, 14 July 2025

Line 33:

Government action to begin resolving the wide variety of signage that had cropped up did not occur until the late 1910s and early 1920s when groups from Indiana, Minnesota, and Wisconsin began surveying existing road signs in order to develop road signage standards. They reported their findings to the Mississippi Valley Association of Highway Departments, which adopted their suggestions in 1922 for the shapes to be used for road signs. These suggestions included the familiar circular railroad crossing sign and octagonal stop sign.<ref name="Johnson">{{cite magazine |last1 = Johnson |first1 = A.E. |editor1-last = Johnson |editor1-first = A.E. |title = A Story of Road Signing |magazine = American Association of State Highway Officials: A Story of the Beginning, Purposes, Growth, Activities, and Achievements of AASHO |date = 1965 |pages = 129–138 |publisher = American Association of State Highway Officials |___location = Washington, DC }}</ref>

In January 1925, [[Thomas Harris MacDonald]], chief of the federal [[Bureau of Public Roads]], published an article in which he argued that developing highway transportation in the United States to the "highest degree" would require five major innovations. Among them were "uniform markings and signs" and a "uniform [[color code]]".<ref name="MacDonald">{{cite journal |last1=MacDonald |first1=Thomas H. |title=The Urgent Necessity for Uniform Traffic Laws and Public Safety Devices |journal=American Highways |date=January 1925 |volume=4 |issue=1 |pages=5-75–7 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=Z933iSTZIUUC&pg=RA7-PA7}} (At p. 7.)</ref> MacDonald argued that "drastic enforcement of uniform rules" as to "all those matters of law, regulation and safety devices which involve the human attributes in the operation of the vehicle" would improve safety on American highways, because in emergency situations, a driver and his vehicle must react as one on the basis of "reflex" and there is no time to think.<ref name="MacDonald" />

In January 1927, the [[American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials|American Association of State Highway Officials]] (AASHO) published the ''Manual and Specifications for the Manufacture, Display, and Erection of U.S. Standard Road Markers and Signs'' to set standards for traffic control devices used on rural roads.<ref name="NCHRPReport484">{{cite book |last1 = Hawkins |first1 = H. Gene |last2 = Parham |first2 = Angelia H. |last3 = Womack |first3 = Katie N. |title = NCHRP Report 484: Feasibility Study for an All-White Pavement Marking System |date = 2002 |publisher = Transportation Research Board |___location = Washington, DC |pages = A-1—A-7 |url = http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/nchrp/nchrp_rpt_484.pdf |access-date = August 10, 2020 |chapter = Appendix A: Evolution of U.S. Pavement Marking System }}</ref> Despite the title, this manual did not have any guidance on pavement markings.<ref name="NCHRPReport484"/> In the archaic [[American English]] of the 1920s, the term "road marker" was sometimes used to describe traffic control devices which modern speakers would now call "signs."<ref name="NCHRPReport484" /> In 1930, the National Conference on Street and Highway Safety (NCSHS) published the ''Manual on Street Traffic Signs, Signals, and Markings'', which set similar standards for urban settings, but also added specific guidance on traffic signals, pavement markings, and safety zones.<ref name="NCHRPReport484" /> Although the two manuals were quite similar, both organizations immediately recognized that the existence of two slightly different manuals was unnecessarily awkward, and in 1931 AASHO and NCSHS formed a Joint Committee to develop a uniform standard for both urban streets and rural roads. This standard was the MUTCD.<ref name="Johnson" />

Line 50:

In 1960, the National Joint Committee on Uniform Traffic Control Devices was again reorganized to include representatives of the [[National Association of Counties]] and the [[National League of Cities]], then known as the American Municipal Association.<ref name="Johnson" /> In 1961, the MUTCD was again revised to make yellow center lines mandatory for the two exceptions where they had previously been recommended.<ref name="NCHRPReport484" /> The 1961 edition was the first edition to provide for uniform signs and barricades to direct traffic around [[Roadworks|road construction]] and maintenance operations.<ref name="Johnson" />

During the 1960s, one of the most energetic traffic safety advocates in the United States was Connecticut politician [[Abraham Ribicoff]], who had previously served as governor of his state and then went on to represent his state in the [[United States Senate]].<ref name="RibicoffObituary">{{cite news |title=Ribicoff of Connecticut Dies; Governor and Senator Was 87 |url=https://www.nytimes.com/1998/02/23/nyregion/ribicoff-of-connecticut-dies-governor-and-senator-was-87.html |work=[[The New York Times]] |date=February 23, 1998 |page=A1}}</ref> In an essay published in the July 1965 edition of ''[[The Atlantic|The Atlantic Monthly]]'', Senator Ribicoff sarcastically mocked a variety of idiotic traffic rules, signs, and markings in order to persuade Americans why all these things must be made uniform across the land.<ref name="Ribicoff">{{cite news |last1=Ribicoff |first1=Abraham |title=Harmony on the Highways |url=https://cdn.theatlantic.com/media/archives/1965/07/216-1/132561816.pdf |work=The Atlantic Monthly |date=July 1965 |pages=80-8380–83}}</ref> For example, two of the worst deviations from the majority rule that no passing should be marked with a solid center line were Pennsylvania, which marked no-passing zones only with signs and not center lines, and Georgia, which marked them only with a yellow line on the shoulder.<ref name="Ribicoff" /> Like MacDonald several decades earlier, Ribicoff's point was that uniformity saves lives by leaving no ambiguity in traffic situations where drivers' split-second decisions often mean the difference between life or death.<ref name="Ribicoff" />

In 1966, Congress passed the [[National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act|Highway Safety Act]], {{USPL|89|564}}, {{USStat|72|885}}, which is now codified at {{UnitedStatesCode|23|401}} ''et seq.'' It required all states to create a highway safety program by December 31, 1968, and to adhere to uniform standards promulgated by the U.S. Department of Transportation as a condition of receiving federal highway-aid funds.<ref>{{cite book |first = Edward C. |last = Fisher |title = Vehicle Traffic Law |___location = Evanston, Illinois |publisher = Traffic Institute, Northwestern University |year = 1961 |edition = 1967 supp. |page = 11 }}</ref> The penalty for non-compliance was a 10% reduction in funding. In turn, taking advantage of broad rulemaking powers granted in {{UnitedStatesCode|23|402}}, the Department simply adopted the entire MUTCD by reference at {{CodeFedReg|23|655|603}}. ({{UnitedStatesCode|5|552}}(a)(1), also enacted in 1966, authorizes federal agencies to incorporate by reference technical standards published elsewhere, which means the agency may merely cite the standard and need not republish its entire text as part of the appropriate regulation.) Thus, what was formerly a quasi-official project became an official one. States are allowed to supplement the MUTCD but must remain in "substantial conformance" with the national MUTCD and adopt changes within two years after they are adopted by FHWA.