As a traffic safety engineer, I’m driven by a profound purpose: every improvement we make has the power to save lives. There’s no greater reward than knowing our work prevents families from experiencing the heartbreak of losing someone to a traffic crash. It’s more than just a job—it’s a commitment to protecting what matters most.
To truly understand crashes and prevent the resulting devastation requires an assessment of the entire system (vehicles, roadway, drivers, emergency response, etc.) using an approach driven by analytics and the application of the correct tools. Many of the tools impacting the safety of the roadway environment are traffic control devices within the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD). In December 2023, the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) released the 11th Edition of the MUTCD, the long-awaited update to the document containing standards and guidance for the design and operation of traffic control devices. As part of a series of blogs over the coming months, Mead & Hunt engineers will be sharing some of the key takeaways and changes with the 11th edition of the manual.
Read more: What’s Changed in the MUTCD’s 11th Edition? Part I: Bicycle Signals »
In part two of the MUTCD 11th Edition blog series, I want to share two significant changes to Part 3 of the 11th Edition: one notable area of interest that did not change and one area within the pavement markings arena that shows significant promise.
Safety Is Pavement Markings’ Hidden Superpower
While not a safety manual per se, the potential impact of applying these devices to address high-risk crash sites and corridors in a uniform and sometimes innovative (with permission to experiment) way is significant. When attending the National Committee on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (NCUTCD) meetings, highway signing and traffic signals draw much of the practitioner interest, but pavement markings have a major role in safety.
Although they may sometimes appear overlooked, markings effectively convey information to roadway users. Markings have a superpower where users, particularly drivers, never have to take their eyes off the roadway geometry to absorb traffic markings relay. These devices, like others, speak to us in a language of color, spacing, and shape. As the conversation has progressed surrounding needed infrastructure to support automated vehicles, many of the technology-based solutions for automated driving navigation have been abandoned while emphasis moves back to pavement markings.
What’s changed in MUTCD 11th Edition Part 3 – Pavement Markings?
Colored Pavement Chapter
In the 11th Edition, the chapter on colored pavement has expanded from simply white and yellow to include:
- Green for bicycle facilities
- Red for public transit systems
- Purple for electronic toll collection (ETC) account only (preferential) lanes
Previously, interim approvals had been issued for green and red colored pavements in 2011 and 2019 respectively, so there is extensive experience throughout the country on this application. While colored pavements can be expensive, they do send a clear message that a portion of the roadway is reserved for specific users and are a great tool to delineate space for bicyclists—some of the most vulnerable roadway users. The Colored Pavement chapter also includes a new section on aesthetic surface treatments, giving specific examples how aesthetic treatments can be used within the boundaries of a transverse crosswalk demonstrating choices are available that can blend within the context of a community’s environment and preserve the safety component of the traffic control device (such as crosswalk markings).
Crosswalks Chapter
As vulnerable road users move into focus, crosswalks have graduated to their own chapter in the 11th Edition. Practitioners should note that crosswalk markings are now required at legally established crosswalks and non-intersection locations. The 11th Edition establishes that transverse crosswalk markings should be limited to locations controlled by signals or approaches controlled by STOP or YEILD signs. It further provides specific examples of high-visibility crosswalk markings such as the longitudinal bar, ladder, and bar pair configurations and suggests that they should be installed at all non-intersection crosswalk locations but can be (and in my opinion should be) used at any location where added conspicuity is desirable. See the image below.
What Didn’t Change?
Normal Line Width
The 11th Edition retained a minimum longitudinal marking width of 4 inches. Although 6-in. width longitudinal markings were originally proposed in the Notice of Proposed Amendment (NPA), under some conditions, ultimately the language reverted back to the 10th Edition verbiage. While it can be asserted that requiring a wider line is more costly, at least from a material standpoint, from a safety standpoint there was a massive, missed opportunity. Requiring wider markings, particularly edge lines on two lane roadways, is supported by research that has shown reductions in fatal and injury crashes anywhere from 15-35%. Research has also shown that automated driving systems such as lane departure warning and lane keep assist have the potential of reducing roadway departure crashes by nearly 50%.
In this case what the human needs and what the cameras (as part of the automated vehicle system) need are the same: wider, well-maintained lines. The Markings Committee of the NCUTCD is passionate about this issue and continues to recommend pavement marking changes consistent with research that clearly shows lifesaving potential.
The good news is there is nothing within the MUTCD that precludes the use of 6-inch-wide longitudinal lines and many facility owners, including my home state of West Virginia, have elected to use a wider line. With the significant crash reduction potential, it is suggested that where supported by research, wider lines should be required. The goal is zero fatalities, and this step would firmly move the needle in that direction.
What to Watch?
Orange Markings
Driving on the highway, we’ve all struggled to navigate a new alignment between temporary work zone markings and the old permanent markings that were removed (many times only partially). Add sun glare, a little rain or some fog, and you have a recipe for disaster. In at least seven states, there are ongoing orange pavement marking experiments. Driver surveys are part of these experiments, and the positive response to orange markings has been overwhelming.
Drivers typically prefer the orange markings to white or yellow, want to see more of them, and indicate these make them more aware of the work zone. Research is needed to see what impacts the markings may have on speeds within the work zone and determining what the crash modification factors are. Work zone markings, particularly the removal of conflicting markings, is an age-old problem. Yet the use of orange markings appears to have great promise in making our work areas more easily understood and safer. As an added bonus, orange markings will benefit automated vehicles/driving systems, where in the past work zones have always been a significant concern.
FHWA has been open to experimentation with orange markings. Given that every year around 900 people are killed in work zone crashes, I would encourage any agency to consider joining those states currently working to bolster our collective knowledge on this application. There is exciting potential here for making work zones safer. Our team at Mead & Hunt is ready to assist if you need help moving in that direction.
In Conclusion
It is exciting to see the 11th Edition finally come to fruition and now being implemented through practice nationally. While safety has always been an element of the manual, safety has now become a tenet, woven through the tapestry of every change considered. Work has already begun on the 12th Edition and transportation professionals were generally pleased to see more flexibility given to FHWA for a minor update process and a statutory four-year MUTCD revision cycle. This adds predictability and ensures that needed changes can be implemented into the manual faster and ultimately make it to the field sooner.
Isn’t that the whole point? The work for safer systems never ends—and the sooner we can get to zero fatalities, the more lives we can save. We all have a role. Whether what we are working on is initially driven by safety or not, we can add that value.
And that’s exactly what we do at the NCUTCD. If you have an interest in traffic control devices and a passion for safety, please join us.
