PRACTICES TO MANAGE

TRAFFIC SIGN RETROREFLECTIVITYNCHRP Project 20-05Synthesis Topic 42-12

Paul CarlsonJune 21, 2011

Synthesis Objective

•Document the state-of-the-practice

•Provide examples of effective strategies

•Show how other agencies can remain in compliance

•Determine needs and areas of future research

Report Status

•Draft Final Report complete

•Panel meeting June 28, 2011 Irvine, California

•Report published before end of the year

Report Outline• Background

• Description of MUTCD Maintenance Methods

• Range of Practices

• Case Studies

• Best Practices

• Research in Progress and Research Needs

• Conclusions

• Appendices – Policies, Practices, Guidelines, Documentation / Reporting

MUTCD: Section 2A.08 Maintaining Minimum Retroreflectivity

Standard:

Public agencies or officials having jurisdiction shall use an assessment or management method that is designed to maintain sign retroreflectivity at or above the minimum levels in Table 2A-3.

MUTCD Methods

•Visual assessment

•Measured retroreflectivity

•Expected sign life

•Blanket replacement

•Control signs

•Future methods

•Combination of methods

Current Compliance Dates

•Jan 2012 Implementation and continued use of an

assessment or management method

•Jan 2015 Replacement of noncompliant regulatory, warning,

and post-mounted guide signs

•Jan 2018 Replacement of noncompliant street name signs

and overhead guide signs

Survey Participants16 states, 9 cities, 15 counties, and 9 others

Methods Being Used

MUTCD MethodsPrimary Sign

Replacement MethodSecondary or

Support Method

Nighttime Inspection 13 2

Measured Retro. 2 0

Expected Sign Life 17 16

Blanket Replacement 7 4

Control Signs 2 10

Case Studies

•St. Louis County, Minnesota

•City of Phoenix, Arizona

•Missouri Department of Transportation

MUTCD maintenance methods

MUTCD maintenance methods

FHWA-HRT-08-026FHWA-SA-07-020

Discussions and

Questions