Traffic Control

The Federal Highway Administration regulates all traffic control per the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices, current edition 2003. It is per the guidelines of the MUTCD that the City of Wetumpka regulates traffic. The MUTCD provides three (3) directives by which traffic control is regulated, these are; Shall, Should, and May. Regulations directed by a “May” condition that affects our local streets within the corporate limits may be altered by the Mayor and City Council through ordinances.

The City of Wetumpka regulates traffic, and maintains traffic control devices within the corporate city limits. Citizens are prohibited from placing a sign on City Rights of Way which is intended to regulate traffic in any way, even in front of your home.

Traffic control on U.S and State routes within Wetumpka’s corporate city limits are regulated and maintained by the State of Alabama Department of Transportation 6th division, under the direction of 1st District Engineer, Mr. Tim Wright, Mr. Wright may be reached at 567-4379, between 8:00 a.m and 5:00 p.m.

Traffic signals in our area are maintained and controlled by the 6th Division of the Alabama Department of Transportation.

Vandalism and theft of traffic control devices is illegal, and cost taxpayers hundreds of dollars each year. Theft of a traffic control device is classified as ‘Theft of Property 3rd’ and is punishable by a maximum of $500.00 fine and or six (6) months in jail, pursuant to State of Alabama Code 13A-8-5. Vandalism of a traffic control device is also punishable by a maximum fine of $500.00 and or six (6) months in jail pursuant to State of Alabama Code 13- 8-71.

DO NOT ATTACH, advertisements, or any other message to a sign or sign post. Lost dog or cat notices, rabies clinic notices, balloons, party ribbons, banners, or any other kind of notice, are prohibited by the Federal Highway Administration Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Device standards. “The purpose of traffic control devices, as well as the principals for their use, is to promote highway safety and efficiency by providing for the orderly movement of all road users on streets and highways throughout the Nation. Traffic control devices notify users of regulations and provide warning and guidance needed for the reasonably safe, uniform and efficient operation of all elements of the traffic stream.” Chapter 1A. Section 1A-01of the MUTCD. No traffic control device or its support shall bear any advertising or commercial message, or any other message that is not essential to traffic control.
Chapter 1A.1A-3.1 of the MUTCD.

If you have concerns about traffic, or road hazards along the following state routes in Wetumpka ; US Hwy 231, AL Hwy 9, AL Hwy 14, AL Hwy 212, AL Hwy 14 Bypass, AL Hwy 111, AL Hwy 170. You may click on the following link to alert the Alabama Department of Transportation in Montgomery. http://www.dot.state.al.us/frm/RoadConcern.pdf

If you would like to download a copy of the current State of Alabama highway map you may click on this link.

FRONT PAGE :  http://www.dot.state.al.us/moweb/img/AL2009MapFront.pdf

BACK PAGE:  http://www.dot.state.al.us/moweb/img/AL2009MapBack.pdf

Going on vacation? You may click on this link to get information on;

Weather Alerts

Emergency Road Closures and Advisories

Alabama Welcome Centers & Rest Areas

Hurricane Information (including Evacuation Routes)

Alabama Tourism Department

http://www.dot.state.al.us/TravelInformation.html

Road Construction Bulletins

Click the following link to get information about the work currently taking place on US Hwy 231 here in Wetumpka
http://aldotapps.dot.state.al.us/ConstructionBulletin/

The Case Against “Speed Bumps”

“Why can’t we use speed bumps on our block?” I have been ask this question quite a few times recently. The following is some information I typically give to municipalities in response.

The speed bump is an increased hazard to the unwary …. A challenge to the daredevil …. A disruption of movement for emergency vehicles …. And the cause of an undesirable increase in noise.

Courts have held public agencies liable for injuries resulting from faulty speed bump design. Because speed bumps have  considerable potential for liability suits, many official have rejected them as a standard traffic control device on public streets.

In addition, test of various experimental designs have demonstrated the physical inability of a speed bump to successfully control all types of light-weight and heavy-weight vehicles. The drivers of luxury cars, actually increased their speed to smooth out the bumps, on the other hand trucks or SUV’s with a higher center of gravity could lose control at higher speeds.

The control of speeding in residential neighborhoods is a widespread concern which requires persistent law enforcement efforts …. not speed bumps.

***Excerpt from the Alabama Transportation Newsletter Volume 10 Number 1***
(Prepared by Steven L. Koser, RTAP Traffic /Safety Engineer)
Credit to the Institute of Transportation Engineers
www.alabamat2.org

“Children at Play Signs” are occasionally requested by citizens. The pros and cons of posting these signs has received much discussion.

The following points are useful in considering the intended purpose of the “Children at Play” sign. This sign gives no instruction to the motorist of an unusual condition ahead. Children playing in a residential area is normal, expected, condition and thus the sign will provide no information or safety benefit. Warning signs are most effective when used sparingly. Since children live on nearly every residential block, there would have to be signs on each street. Blocks with no signs could have the effect of suggesting no children live in that neighborhood. The presence of children in a residential area is ample warning for prudent drivers to exercise caution.

In the case of a less prudent driver, it is unlikely a sign will be as useful as parental supervision in safeguarding children. If signs encourage parents and children to believe they have an added degree of protection, which the signs do not and cannot provide, a great disservice results. Children should be taught to play safely, away from streets. children should be taught to safely cross streets. Specific warnings for schools, parks, and crosswalks are available for use where indicated by policy. If there are safety concerns with other roadway features such as a curve, hill or lack of sidewalks, a traffic safety investigation can be conducted to verify and possible mitigate these concerns.

“Children at Play” signs were specifically removed from the Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) years ago after review and discussion by the MUTCD committee. The MUTCD is the traffic engineers “bible” of practices and warrants, and is the stated reference in our State, County, and Municipal Codes. Whereas the MUTCD is described as the only guideline, it is the de facto reference used in all jurisdictions, thereby promoting consistency within the profession. While it does give some latitude to use and or create signs “outside” of the manual, engineers strive to stay within its bounds.

One reason the “Children at Play” signs were dropped from use by the MUTCD committee was there was no clear language suggesting when and to use it. Practically speaking, children are everywhere. Should any driver not expect that kids might be present in residential subdivisions or near built-up areas? Given the presumption that every house having children, or every residential street, or every section of homes on a country lane coud conceivably warrant such a sign, how many “SLOW, CHILDREN AT PLAY” signs do you think could dot or landscape?

Signs intended to alert drivers that children are present in an area such as “CHILDREN AT PLAY”, or, “WATCH FOR CHILDREN,” have not shown to have discernable benefit to traffic safety, but still remain popular with the public. No factual evidence has been presented to document the success of this type of sign in reducing pedestrian accidents, operating speeds or legal liability. Studies have shown that many types of signs attempting to warn of normal conditions in residential areas, or conditions that are not always present, have failed to achieve the desired safety benefits.

****Excerpt from the Alabama Transportation Newsletter Volume 25 Number 1****
(prepared by Don Neary for “Interchange” Nebraska LTAP, Fall 2006.)
Alabama Technology Transfer Center Business & Engineering Continuing Education
217 Ramsay Hall Auburn Alabama 36849
Phone 334-844-4370 Fax 334-844-5715
www.alabamat2.org