Page 2 of 2

Re: Proposed changes to the 2009 MUTCD

Posted: Sat Jun 06, 2009 9:57 am
by cabman701
They have to do it to protect those "idiots"... or their families... from suing them.

Just like now when you get a cup of coffee they have to put "Warning: Hot liquid" on it because some lady spilled it in her lap and then sued McDonald's for selling her hot coffee.

Re: Proposed changes to the 2009 MUTCD

Posted: Sat Jun 06, 2009 12:13 pm
by luke
Mu opinion on pedestrian signals is as follows.

Scale signals are prone to vandalism, and shouldn't be used.

Ped crossings should always have a bell or other audible warning device.

Lightly used pedestrian crossings with good track visibility; they need just a bell or two, but they should be mechanical,
so people don't destroy then trying to get annoying e-bells to shut up. :Curse1:

More heavily used ones should add 8" lights on shortened masts.

Very heavily used pedestrian paths, along with ones for bicycles and other wheeled things, as well as all ped crossings with
poor visibility, should add pedestrian gates that cover the whole width of the path.

Re: Proposed changes to the 2009 MUTCD

Posted: Wed Dec 16, 2009 5:39 pm
by Smjh1979
The MUTCD 2009 has been released. This topic will be closed, and a new one started.

:closed2: