This page contains a Flash digital edition of a book.
PT BLOG from Page 60

MUTCD and make changes in appropriate places (width, color and locations of lines, size and requirements for notices and signs, etc. etc. etc.). It was my understanding when I joined the task force in Janu-

ary 2010 that a separate new part to the manual was to be created. Fair enough. So the 15 or so members of the task force spent the next two

years culling, arguing, discussing and writing new rules for parking facilities on private property. Input was taken from large developers and property owners (Walmart had some concerns, for instance, as any mandated change in signage would be extremely costly.) The group of consultants, engineers and related folks worked

through four in-person meetings and an unknowable number of hours forming the final draft of the proposed new “part” to the MUTCD. Mike and I reviewed it and made some changes to make it more user-friendly. We all met last week in DC to edit and review the final draft. When that meeting started, the Vice Chair of the group made a

short presentation. He brought up that he thought that perhaps a separate “part” was not the way to go and that the changes should be integrated into the MUTCD. He then suggested that a separate “guidebook” be created to give non-technical folks help in finding their way through the MUTCD to the myriad parts, chapters, sub- chapters and paragraphs that were specific to private property. He then went around the table and asked for input. Understand what happens at these meetings — every member

has his or her say, and during the process, each attempts to get their personal biases and requirements inserted in the task force’s work, which will become the law of the land. It’s important, because when someone is injured or killed in an

area affected by the MUTCD, lawyers will go back to the law to attempt to affix blame and damages. And the courts ensure that the laws are followed. It was a strange process. Paul Box, who is extremely knowl-

edgeable and wise, is not computer-savvy. He does everything by letter and fax. The rest of the group works through email and a web- site that enable them to communicate. So there’s no question there was some confusion and stress as the process was underway. When I was asked my opinion of what should be done (should

we basically abandon the two years of work and interweave the changes into the base document), I said that if I were a developer, architect or owner wanting to know what to do in my facility, I would prefer a separate “part” so I could go there and get the clear information I needed. I was told that even if there were a separate part, they would

have to refer back to other parts in the entire manual, and since they had to do that anyway, why not just do that and not add the sepa- rate part? That they would also provide a guidebook for those folks who didn’t want to or couldn’t deal with the manual, and all would be right with the world. We voted 8-4 (I was one of the four) to do away with the sepa-

rate “part” we were working on and to begin a process of melding our requirements into the main document. At that point, the Chair- man resigned. And we all were asked who wanted to stay on the task force. I didn’t raise my hand. I received a copy of the time line for getting the new informa-

tion into the main document (it will probably be completed in 2015). The process began in 2009, I joined the task force in 2010. So in the end, assuming that all goes as planned, it will take six years to make the changes required to put these rules in place. They did propose to publish a guideline for developers, owners,

etc., but suggested that this group wouldn’t do it but would recom- mend that some other committee in the chain take on this task. Will they? I don’t know. My guess is that it is doubtful. I have

been told that the MUTCD is online and that all one has to do is search for “private property” and all the sections that apply will pop up. It sounds so simple. But I wonder … JVH

You could have read these entries when they were originally

posted at Parking Today’s Blog – and commented, if you liked – by logging on to and clicking on “blog.” JVH updates the blog almost every day.


See us at the PIE booth #313 70 Parking Today

Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75  |  Page 76  |  Page 77  |  Page 78  |  Page 79  |  Page 80  |  Page 81  |  Page 82  |  Page 83  |  Page 84