Skip to Page Content
Delaware.gov  |  Text OnlyGovernor | General Assembly | Courts | Elected Officials | State Agencies
 Photo: Featured Delaware Photo
 
 
 Phone Numbers Mobile Help Size Print Email

Delaware General AssemblyDelaware RegulationsMonthly Register of RegulationsMarch 2018


Regulatory Flexibility Act Form

Authenticated PDF Version

(17 Del.C. §§134, 141 and 21 Del.C. Ch. 41)
2 DE Admin. Code 2402
Under Title 17 of the Delaware Code, Sections 134 and 141, as well as 21 Delaware Code Chapter 41, the Delaware Department of Transportation (DelDOT), adopted a Delaware version of the Federal Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD). The Department has now drafted revisions to the Delaware MUTCD. A description of the proposed changes accompanies this notice.
The following is a summary of the official public comments that were submitted to DelDOT based on the October 2017 revision of the Delaware MUTCD posted as a proposed regulation in the November 2017 edition of the Delaware Register. During the 30-day public comment period, DelDOT received extensive comments from several parties, and therefore we are re-noticing the documents with the comments addressed. The comments and suggestions are listed below, along with the proposed action taken by DelDOT.
Justification: Mixing DE MUTCD and ADA requirements and processes.
Justification: Reduces the number of required sign assemblies at development entrances where DO NOT ENTER signs are required.
Justification: The DE MUTCD provides minimum volume thresholds for major street approach but not minor street approach volumes for the installation of STOP signs. This guidance statement will allow for the omission of STOP signs on very low volume approaches based on engineering judgement.
Justification: The guidance statement is located in the DO NOT ENTER section already (as suggested) and in the first place chronologically that the reader might look.
Justification: While signs with blue backgrounds are typically located in Chapter 2I, it is more appropriate to place the guidance for the supplemental plaque shown in Figure 2B-33 in the same section where the reader would look for this guidance.
Justification: The intent of this sign is for motorists to call with any kind of traffic problem. DelDOT can handle the number of calls.
Justification: DE MUTCD guidance does not account for roadways with on-street parking.
Justification: This guidance statement will allow the center line and edge line to be maintained at low volume driveways based on engineering judgement.
Justification: Provides additional clarification to designers.
Justification: This guidance statement will allow for the omission of stop lines on very low volume approaches based on engineering judgement.
Justification: Consistency with the Traffic Design Manual.
Justification: DelDOT is following current “on request” process until the US Access Board finalizes rulemaking on this topic.
Justification: Locator tone requirements are already included in the Manual.
Justification: This is how crosswalks are measured. No MUTCD changes are required.
Justification: Existing constraints in the built environment precludes DelDOT from making this a standard.
Justification: Existing constraints in the built environment precludes DelDOT from making this a standard.
Justification: An “extension of the level area 18 inches beyond the centerline of the face of the pushbutton” meets the guidance in Section 4E.08, paragraph 04, line H. It should also be noted, Figure 4E-4 is not drawn to scale, and the figure does not depict specific dimensions for the extension of the level area.
Justification: Mixing DE MUTCD and ADA requirements and processes.
Justification: No changes were proposed. Also, specific engineering studies will determine the appropriate TCD’s at crosswalks.
Justification: DelDOT believes this is applicable to this Manual.
Justification: Generally, the smaller sign should be used as shown by the new revisions. The larger sign is being kept in the Manual for the occasional situation where conspicuity of the smaller sign may be limited.
Justification: Individual notes for figures such as the Typical Applications are considered part of the figure and have not been shown as individual revisions.
Justification: There is no evidence that these signs have any impact on road user behavior. DelDOT believes that roadway striping properly and sufficiently conveys the intended traffic control message related to lateral placement of motor vehicles and bicyclists. DelDOT has been reducing the number of these signs with no known negative comments or consequences. Further reduction of the use of this sign will allow other more important signs to be more prominent.
Justification: The requested language (physical constraint, etc.) is already in paragraph 02, but is on the previous page, 9B-11.
Justification: Discussions with FHWA
Justification: Discussions with FHWA.
Justification: There is no evidence that these signs have any impact on road user behavior. DelDOT believes that roadway striping properly and sufficiently conveys the intended traffic control message related to lateral placement of motor vehicles and bicyclists. DelDOT has been reducing the number of these signs with no known negative comments or consequences. Further reduction of the use of this sign will allow other more important signs to be more prominent.
Justification: Clarified approval process for traffic control devices that do not comply with standard statements.
Justification: Concept of bicycle box is being introduced into the DE MUTCD.
Justification: Excessively large ONE WAY signs takes away from the visibility and message of the STOP sign on the minor street approach and other more important sign messages.
Justification: Reduces the number of required sign assemblies at development entrances where DO NOT ENTER signs are required.
Justification: The DE MUTCD provides minimum volume thresholds for major street approach but not minor street approach volumes for the installation of STOP signs. This guidance statement will allow for the omission of STOP signs on very low volume approaches based on engineering judgement.
Justification: Updated text to reflect the FHWA official interpretation of the R1-5 series.
Justification: Numerous instances across the state where DO NOT ENTER AND WRONG WAY signs are being installed too close together.
Justification: Revised to reflect use of educational plaque
Justification: Revised to reduce potential confusion regarding sign designations for the Duck Crossing (originally W11-11-DE) sign and the Golf Cart (W11-11) sign.
Justification: W11-1R and W13-1P signs are often misused based on their depiction in Figure 2C-3d
Justification: Updated to reflect DelDOT’s desire to discontinue the use of the Share the Road plaque.
Justification: FHWA rescinded use of Clearview font.
Justification: Sign provides guidance regarding the distance to Park & Rides serving the DART Beach Bus
Justification: Smaller letter heights are sufficient to convey information to motorists and problems with mounting large signs on signal mast arms and span wires.
Justification: Revised to reflect current practices; TRAFFIC PROBLEMS conveys are more comprehensive message compared to DISABLED VEHICLES.
Justification: Standards for Agricultural Tourism signs have been modified.
Justification: Previous DE MUTCD guidance did not account for roadways with on-street parking.
Justification: This guidance statement will allow the center line and edge line to be maintained at low volume driveways based on engineering judgement.
Justification: Excessive use of RPMs along conventional roadways; clarification needed for usage of RPMs along two-way left-turn lanes.
Justification: This guidance statement will allow for the omission of stop lines on very low volume approaches based on engineering judgement. Adding a minimum volume threshold for the installation of stop lines would reduce the costs to construct intersections with low-volume approaches; for example, at access points to new development or roadside businesses.
Justification: Added Bicycle Boxes based on recommendations from the NCUTCD.
Justification: Text updated to be consistent with the DelDOT Traffic Design Manual.
Justification: Corrected issues with landing areas in Figure 4E-4. Updated for current practice in Delaware for Figure 4E-3.
Justification: Reflects DelDOT’s current standard practice.
Add reference to AASHTO’s Manual for Assessing Safety Hardware (MASH) when referring to NCHRP Report 350
Justification: AASHTO’s MASH is an update to NCHRP Report 350
Justification: Reflects DelDOT’s current standard practice.
Justification: There have been reports that motorists have confused pedestrian / bicycle detour signs for vehicular detour signs. The smaller version of these signs for pedestrians / bicyclists are intended to reduce driver confusion
Justification: Text updated to reflect DelDOT’s current standard practice to discontinue the use of the Share the Road plaque, as discussed in the Bicycle Warning Sign and Share the Road Plaque memorandum.
Justification: Reflects DelDOT’s current standard practice.
Justification: Reflects DelDOT’s current standard practice.
Update text to include reference to Traffic Control Within Intersections memorandum.
Justification: The memorandum describes DelDOT’s current standard practice.
Justification: Reflects DelDOT’s current standard practice.
Create new section based on Interim Guidance – Rolling Road Blocks memorandum.
Justification: The memorandum describes DelDOT’s current standard practice.
Create new section based on Interim Guidance – Installing and Removing TTC Devices memorandum.
Justification: The memorandum describes DelDOT’s current standard practice.
Create new section based on Interim Guidance – Aerial Work memorandum.
Justification: The memorandum describes DelDOT’s current standard practice.
Justification: Modifications to regulatory signs (e.g., new STOP signs and new intersection traffic control types/operations), albeit temporary, require DelDOT Traffic’s formal approval and Traffic Control Device Authorization.
Justification: A right-turn lane closure is a very common MOT application; yet, TA-21 is primarily intended for thru lane applications and TA-23 is a relatively uncommon double left-turn lane closure.
Justification: The former sign dimensions erroneously depicted the stop line as the primary point of measure; however, the beginning of the turn lane closure taper is the appropriate reference point.
Justification: Previously, sign read “School Speed XX Limit When Flashing”. Sign has been updated to read “School Speed Limit XX When Flashing” as described in Interim Guidance – Overhead School Speed Limit XX When Flashing Sign memorandum.
Justification: Flashing beacons on school speed limit sign assembly has been updated to comply with MUTCD standards. Previously, both flashing beacons were located on top of the assembly, an arrangement which should only be used at railroad crossings.
Justification: Updated text to reflect the FHWA official interpretation of the R1-5 series described in FHWA Official Interpretation – R1-5 Sign memorandum.
Justification: Added plaque based on recommendations from the NCUTCD Except Bicycles Plaque and FHWA Interim Approval #18 memorandums.
Justification: New Bicycle IN LANE warning sign added based on DelDOT’s current practice. Text updated to reflect DelDOT’s current standard practice to discontinue the use of the Share the Road plaque, as discussed in the Bicycle Warning Sign and Share the Road Plaque memorandum.
Justification: Reduce overuse of signs.
Justification: Application of both sign messages was confusing.
Justification: Optional signs shown on figures have led to the overuse of optional signs.
Justification: Figure is no longer needed since the use of raised pavement markers is changing in Part 3 and will no longer be used along dotted lines.
Justification: Clarified Guidance statement.
Justification: Text and figures added to depict common practice in Delaware for right-turn lane treatments where space does not exist to provide a dedicated bicycle lane to the left of a right-turn only lane, as described in the Interim Guidance; Part 9, Right-Turn Lane Markings for Bicycles memorandum.
Justification: Added Bicycle Boxes based on recommendations from the NCUTCD Bicycle Box and FHWA Interim Approval #18 memorandums.
*Please Note: Due to the size of the proposed regulation, the Delaware Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices is not being published here. A PDF version is available at the following location:
Last Updated: December 31 1969 19:00:00.
site map   |   about this site   |    contact us   |    translate   |    delaware.gov