|
Revisions To UVC approved 1/11/00:
Section
11-1209 - DELETED
Section
11-1202(a) - DELETED
Section
11-1205 - Add new # 4:
(For
background, click on this file link )
OHIOBIKE99
Section
12-702 -- Add Following language :"Head lamp [and
tail lamp]
required at night
Every bicycle in
use at the times described in 12-201 shall be equipped with
a lamp on the front emitting a white light visible from a
distance of at least 500 feet to the front, [and
a lamp on
the rear emitting a red light visible from a distance of at
least 1000 feet to the rear.]
(Former section 11-1207(a); revised and repositioned, 1975)
(For
background, click on this file link) LABUVC99
Section
1-128 - Hazardous
material
Has
the same meaning as that found in 103 of the Hazardous
Materials Transportation Act (49 App. U.S.C. 1801 et seq.).
(Revised and renumbered, 1992.) 49 U.S.C. ยง5102
(definitions).
Section
12-408 - Footnote 9 to section 12-408 (a) revised as
follows: See Federal Hazardous Materials Regulations in
Parts 107,170,171, 172, 173, 177, 178, 180, and 397 of Title
49, Code of Federal Regulations.
Section
6-211 (b) Amend as follows:
6-211
- Authority of department to suspend or revoke license
(b) For
the purpose of identifying habitually reckless or negligent
drivers and habitual or frequent violators of traffic regulations
governing the movement of vehicles, the department shall adopt
regulations establishing a uniform system assigning demerit
points for convictions of violations of chapter 11 of this
code or of ordinances adopted by local authorities regulating
the operation of motor vehicles. The regulations shall include
a designated level of point accumulation which so identifies
drivers. The department may assess points for convictions
in other states of offenses which, if committed in this State,
would be grounds for such assessment. Notice of each assessment
of points may be given, but notice is required when the point
accumulation reaches ________ percent of the number at which
suspension is authorized. No points shall be assessed for
violating a provision of this code or municipal ordinance
regulating standing, parking, equipment, size or weight. In
case of the conviction of a licensee of two or more traffic
violations committed on a single occasion, such licensee shall
be assessed points for one offense only and if the offenses
involved have different point values, such licensee shall
be assessed for the offense having the greater point value.
The department is authorized to suspend the license of a driver
when such person's driving record identifies driver as an
habitually reckless or negligent driver or as an habitual
or frequent violator under this subsection. The department
may, in accordance with its rules and regulations, order the
licensee to attend a group or private driver improvement interview
regarding such person's driving ability and record.
(For background,
click on this file link ) RevisionstoUVC
The DUI Millenneum
Protection Act, NCUTLO's model law on impaired driving, was
approved in its entirety to be added to the Uniform Vehicle
Code. For that reason, the following revisions in the
UVC have automatically been approved:
DUIUVCRev
PROPOSED
REVISIONS TO THE UVC - 2002 EDITION
NOTE
TO NCUTLO MEMBERS:
The following four changes have been recommended
by the NATIONAL COMMITTEE on UNIFORM TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES
to make the planned changes to the MUTCD consistent with the
UVC.
These changes were
presented by Ray Pusey at the Annual Meeting; because of the
time constraints to get these changes considered before final
rule-making, we are asking that you review and vote on these
changes by the mail ballot which is coming to you shortly.
These changes will
be reviewed and considered, as well as posted to the web page
for 30 days, after which all ballots are due to be returned
to the National Committee. If you are a member in good standing
of the National Committee, you may vote on these suggested
changes, either by returning the form which was mailed to
you, or by sending an email ballot to: ncutloceo@rica.net
NO LATER THAN
FRIDAY,
MARCH 10, 2000
SUGGESTED
CHANGES TO THE UNIFORM VEHICLE CODE
as
recommended by the
NATIONAL
COMMITTEE on UNIFORM TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES
Presented
by Raymond S. Pusey, NCUTLO Delegate
January
11, 2000
The National Committee
on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (NC) has been working on
a rewrite of the 1988 Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices
(WTCD) which is to be published in 2001. In the course of
this rewrite, definitions found in the NWTCD have been reviewed
as have pertinent parts of Chapter 1, Definitions, and Chapter11,
Rules of the Road, of the Uniform Vehicle Code (UVC).
Since the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) has the final
word on the contents of the MUTCD, it is recommended that
a careful review of the differences as found in the December
Federal Register notices be made and that a response to the
Federal Docket be made by NCUTLO.
An effort has been
made by the NC to keep the definitions in harmony, but recent
actions by the FHWA as indicated in the Federal Register Notices
raise strong concerns that the full impact of such differences
may not be apparent to all parties.
The NC is recommending
several items which should be of concern to the UVC. They
are discussed below and include recommendations for possible
revisions to the UVC.
Item 1. Turn on
Red Arrow.
The UVC provides
that a turn on Red may be made during the display of a
circular Red or a Red arrow unless a sign prohibiting
the movement is posted.
[UVC C 1 1-202
(c) 2 & (c) 3 ]
The NC has
adopted language which defines the Red arrow as prohibiting
turns. There is a need to prohibit turns on red at specific
locations for purposes such as protecting pedestrians
and controlling turning traffic where there is no merging
area or where an unexpected conflict exists. In urban
areas, sign clutter and the lack of or limited space to
post any signs are issues. It is felt that having the
signal display convey the "No Turn on Red" message
allows faster recognition by the driver as well as saving
sign space. It also allows the prohibition to be applied
as needed. For example, at a school crossing location,
prohibiting turns on Red when pedestrians are walking
under the control of the pedestrian signal is important,
but the rest of the time, the prohibition is totally unnecessary.
Many factors
alter the crossing times for school children such as weather
delays or early closings and after school activities and
sports practices or games. Providing protection, when
needed, and allowing turns otherwise, is a safe and effective
traffic operating method. It provides an extra level of
safety for the pedestrian without unduly delaying the
vehicles, wasting time and fuel, and altering driver's
moods for no purpose. A simple traffic signal display
with a very low cost of installation and maintenance for
this purpose is highly desirable.
It is recommended
that the language of the UVC C11-202(c)3 be modified as
follows:
"Except when a (sign) traffic
control device is in place prohibiting such a turn,
vehicular traffic facing (any) a
steady circular red signal may cautiously, etc.
The change
of "sign" to "traffic control device"
is recommended to eliminate any arguments concerning electronic
displays being a sign or a signal.
The replacement
of "any" by "circular" defines the
one red display which permits turn on red.
I believe a
further statement which specifically states that turns
on red arrow are prohibited is unnecessary.
Item 2. Pedestrians
at signalized locations.
It was noted
that the UVC provides directives to the pedestrian and
the motorist at signalized intersections, but that a key
operational element is not addressed. There are two conditions
which may exist at the beginning of a vehicular green;
no vehicle is lawfully within the intersection and a vehicle
is lawfully within the intersection (typically, it entered
to turn left on green but was delayed by opposing traffic
until the opposing traffic was stopped by a red.)
Where no vehicle
is lawfully within the intersection, the UVC is clear
as to the respective responsibilities of drivers and pedestrians.
[See C11-202 (a)].
Where a vehicle(s)
is lawfully within the intersection, before the vehicles
or pedestrians just receiving a green begin to move, it
is necessary that the vehicle(s) depart the intersection.
The open question is, "Does the departing driver
yield to pedestrians who are just beginning to cross or
must the pedestrians yield to the departing vehicle?"
As a practical matter, the pedestrians must yield exactly
as the vehicle drivers just receiving the green must yield.
The NC adopted
the following language for inclusion in the MUTCD. "Unless
otherwise directed by a pedestrian signal head, pedestrians
facing any green signal indication, except when the sole
green signal indication is a turn arrow, may proceed across
a roadway within a marked or unmarked crosswalk, but
pedestrians shall yield the right-of-way to vehicles lawfully
within the intersection at the time that signal is first
shown." [In Bold is language not now in C 11-202
(a) 3].
The NC also
adopted the following language for inclusion in the MUTCD.
"A steady WALK signal indication means that a pedestrian
facing the signal indication may start to cross the roadway
in the direction of the signal indication, possibly in
conflict with turning vehicles, but shall yield the right-of-way
to vehicles lawfully within the intersection at the time
that signal is first shown."
The UVC language
concerning the meaning of the WALK and the DON'T WALK
signal is not duplicated in the MUTCD.
It is recommended
that the language of the UVC Cll-202 (c) 3 be modified
as follows:
"Unless
otherwise directed by a pedestrian signal (head)
indication, pedestrians facing any green signal
indication, except when the sole green signal indication
is a turn arrow, may proceed across a roadway within
a marked or unmarked crosswalk, but pedestrians shall
yield the right-of-way to vehicles lawfully within the
intersection at the timer that green signal indication
is first displayed."
[Underlined
language is new. See C11-202 (a) 3].
The change
from "head" to "indication" recognizes
that the visible symbol or word controls, not the signal
head by which it is displayed.
It is recommended
that the language of the UVC C11-203 be modified as follows:
(a) "
Steady WALK or WALKING PERSON - Any pedestrian facing
(the) this signal
indication may proceed across the roadway in
the direction of the signal indication and every driver
shall yield the right-of-way to such pedestrian, but
such pedestrian shall yield the right-of-way to vehicles
lawfully within the intersection at the time that signal
indication is first displayed." [Underlined
language is new. See C11-203 (a).]
The NC has
recommended the elimination of the Flashing WALK display.
Thus, the recommendation to remove it from the UVC is
included.
Item 3. Bicyclist
in crosswalk.
The UVC allows
bicycles in crosswalks and in some jurisdictions, bicyclists
are required to share pedestrian facilities. Since a bicycle
is a "vehicle", does a bicyclist obey the vehicular
traffic signal indications or does the bicyclist obey
the pedestrian indications when operating in a crosswalk
or on a pedestrian facility? While the question arose
concerning bicyclists, it is equally of issue about other
small vehicles such as the several types of motorized
wheel chairs and adult tricycles.
A study of
the UVC as it applies to the many new types of vehicles
which are appearing in the market place is recommended.
It is recommended
that the language of the UVC C11-1210 be modified as follows:
"(d)
No person shall drive or operate a vehicle upon or along
a sidewalk or shared pedestrian facility, or across
a roadway, upon or along a crosswalk, unless vehicles
of that class are authorized by statute or by a posted
traffic control device to be driven or operated upon
or along a sidewalk or shared pedestrian facility or
across a roadway, upon or along a crosswalk.
The driver
or operator of any vehicle so authorized when driving
or operating said vehicle upon or along a sidewalk,
or shared pedestrian facility, or across a roadway,
upon or along a crosswalk, shall first obey all traffic
control devices posted to regulate, warn, or guide drivers
or operators of that class of vehicle and second shall
obey all traffic control devices posted to regulate,
warn, or guide pedestrians, except for those provisions
which by their very nature can have no application."
This is not
currently in the UVC and it is worded broadly to capture
any user of any of the named facilities and every vehicle
of every type or class which may be designated in the
future. The wording is intended to set the order in which
conflicts between traffic control devices are to be resolved.
I specifically
did not recommend modification of the section on pedestrian
signals since I believe that this covers the issue. pusey2/10/00
|
