|
|
 |
PDF Version, 45KB
You will need the Adobe Acrobat Reader to view the PDF on this page.
U.S. Department of Transportation
Federal Highway Administration
1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE.
Washington, D.C. 20590
March 10, 2010
In Reply Refer To: HOTO-1
Mr. Richard M. Campbell
President
Campbell Technology Corporation
6100 Southwest Boulevard, Suite 500
Fort Worth, TX 76108
Dear Mr. Campbell:
Thank you for your January 28 letter requesting an official interpretation regarding the required 2-inch width of the white retroreflective strip that is required on the backs (per Paragraph 15 of Section 8B.04) and fronts (per Paragraph 18 of Section 8B.04) of Crossbuck sign supports at passive grade crossings. Specifically, your question relates to the placement of such strips on Crossbuck sign supports that are round where the white retroreflective strip is applied directly to the round support. This creates a situation where the white retroreflective strip is curved rather than flat.
The answer to your question is that as long as the round support pole has an outside diameter of at least 2 inches, a white retroreflective strip applied to the round support would satisfy this requirement, because it would have a surface area facing the motorist that is at least 2 inches in width. The requirements in Section 8B.04 do not state that the retroreflective strip needs to be flat.
For recordkeeping purposes, we have assigned the following official interpretation number and title: "8(09)-001(I) - Width of retroreflective strip on round support." Please refer to this number in any future correspondence regarding this topic.
Thank you for your interest in improving the clarity of the provisions contained in the MUTCD.
Sincerely yours,
Original signed by:
Mark R. Kehrli
Director, Office of Transportation Operations
 |
||
 |
United States Department of Transportation - Federal Highway Administration |
|