iii

CHAPTER ONE

Intersections and Interchanges

CHAPTER TWO

Curves

CHAPTER THREE

Temporary Traffic Control Zones

U.S. Department of

Transportation

Federal Highway

Administration

400 7th Street, SW

Washington, DC 20590

FHWA-OP-03-098
I

am pleased to present to you Travel Better, Travel Longer:

A Pocket Guide to Improve Traffic Control and Mobility for Our

Older Population. The Federal Highway Administration’s Office of

Operations prepared this pocket guide to assist transportation professionals in making decisions about the use of traffic control devices,

taking into account the unique needs of our Nation’s increasingly elderly

population. This guide is intended for use by engineers, technicians,

construction contractors, researchers, educators, and others involved

in traffic control, roadway design and construction, and transportation.

As people age, vision declines, physical fitness and flexibility diminish,

the ability to focus attention decreases, and the time necessary to react

to unexpected circumstances increases. Each of these changes affects

one’s ability to drive safely. For our older population to maintain their

mobility without compromising safety, transportation professionals

must consider these changes when applying traffic control devices.

The goal of this pocket guide is to provide transportation professionals

with information on the proper use of traffic control devices with the

needs of older roadway users in mind. 

This guide highlights specific traffic situations that are particularly 

troublesome for older roadway users, such as left turns and temporary

traffic control zones, and provides information on the use of traffic

control devices to maximize safety in these circumstances. It is divided

into three chapters:

Chapter One. Intersections and Interchanges

Chapter Two. Curves

Chapter Three. Temporary Traffic Control Zones

I hope that you find this pocket guide useful, and that you refer 

to it often when making decisions about the application of traffic 

control devices. 

Thank you,

Associate Administrator for Operations

Federal Highway Administration

2003 

Preface

Dear Reader,
Introduction

Chapter One. Intersections and Interchanges

Section A. Signs

Design Element 1. Signing for Left Turns on Green Lights . . . . . . .1

Design Element 2. Sign Sizes for Offset Left-Turn Lanes . . . . . . . . .2

Design Element 3. NO TURN ON RED Signs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3

Design Element 4. Letter Size for Post-Mounted

Street Name Signs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4

Design Element 5. Letter Size for Overhead Street Name Signs . . .5

Design Element 6. Redundant and Advance Street 

Name Signs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6

Design Element 7. Advance Notice of Cross Street . . . . . . . . . . . .7

Design Element 8. Street Name Signs for Streets That

Change Names . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .8

Design Element 9. CROSS TRAFFIC DOES NOT STOP Sign . . . . .9

Design Element 10. Advance Traffic Control Signs . . . . . . . . . . . . . .10

Design Element 11. Intersection Lane Control Signs . . . . . . . . . . . .11

Design Element 12. Educational Plaques for Pedestrians . . . . . . . . .12

Section B. Pavement Markings

Design Element 13. Pavement Markings for Left-Turn Lanes . . . . . .13

Design Element 14. Raised Pavement Markings for Curbs in 

Medians and Islands . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .15

Design Element 15. Delineators at Passive Highway-Rail 

Grade Crossings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .16

Design Element 16. Wrong-Way Arrows on Ramps . . . . . . . . . . . . .18

Design Element 17. Turning Path Pavement Markings . . . . . . . . . . .20

Section C. Signals

Design Element 18. Backplate for Signals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .23

Design Element 19. Leading Pedestrian Interval . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .24

Chapter Two. Curves

Design Element 1. Raised Pavement Markings for

Centerlines of Tight Curves . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .27

Design Element 2. HILL BLOCKS VIEW Warning Sign on

Vertical Curves . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .28

Design Element 3. Advance Warning for Signal Obscured 

by Curve . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .29

Chapter Three. Temporary Traffic Control Zones

Section A. Lane Closure/Lane Transition Practices

Design Element 1. Use of Flashing Arrow Panel . . . . . . . . . . . . . .31

Design Element 2. Sign Conspicuity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .32 

Section B. Portable Changeable Message Signs

Design Element 3. Content of Portable Changeable 

Message Signs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .33

Design Element 4. Phases of Portable Changeable 

Message Signs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .34

Design Element 5. Timing of Phases of Portable 

Changeable Message Signs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .35

Section C. Channelization and Path Guidance Practices

Design Element 6. Retroreflection for Cones . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .36

Design Element 7. Retroreflection for Tubular Markers . . . . . . . . .37

Design Element 8. Retroreflection for Vertical Panels . . . . . . . . . . .38

Design Element 9. Traffic Control Devices for Temporary 

Traffic Barriers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .39

Design Element 10. Separating Opposing Traffic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .40 

Design Element 11. Spacing for Channelizing Devices . . . . . . . . . .41

Design Element 12. Glare Control Devices for Transition 

and Crossover Areas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .42 

Section D. Temporary Pavement Markings

Design Element 13. Retroreflective Markers for Pavement

Markings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .43

1

31

33

36

43

13

23

Table of Contents
Introduction

America’s older population wants to travel better and travel longer.

The negative effects of aging on mobility can be lessened with careful

deployment of traffic control devices—the signs, signals, markings, and

other devices used to regulate, warn, or guide traffic. This pocket guide

provides information about how to maintain the safety and efficiency

of roadways by taking into account the special needs of older roadway

users when making decisions about which traffic control devices to use.

While this pocket guide focuses on accommodating older drivers, the

applications described here will benefit all road users. 

This pocket guide is intended for use by state and local transportation

officials, manufacturing and engineering organizations, university

transportation professionals, and others responsible for the design,

selection, installation, and maintenance of traffic control devices, as

well as those who conduct training in their use.

Pocket Guide Content

This pocket guide is divided into three chapters:

Chapter 1. Intersections and Interchanges

Chapter 2. Curves

Chapter 3. Temporary Traffic Control Zones

Each chapter contains design elements that present traffic situations

where older drivers may face limitations. Each design element contains

specific information on the application of traffic control devices as

contained in the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD).

The MUTCD, published by the Federal Highway Administration

(FHWA) Office of Transportation Operations, is the national standard

for the design and application of signs, signals, pavement markings,

and other traffic control devices. The references at the end of each

design element refer to sections of the MUTCD to which the reader

can refer for more details. Currently, both the 2000 and 2003 Editions

of the Manual are appropriate for use in applying traffic control devices,

depending on the status of adoption of the 2003 Edition in individual

States. The references refer to the applicable sections in both versions

of the Manual. 

The Standard Highway Signs Book, also published by the FHWA

Office of Transportation Operations, contains design specifications for

roadway signs, pavement markings, and standard alphabets for traffic

control devices.

Travel Better, Travel Longer: A Pocket Guide 

to Improve Traffic Control and Mobility for Our

Older Population

The elderly population in the United States is growing dramatically.

According to the U.S. Census Bureau, the number of Americans

over age 65 will increase by more than 50 percent between

2002 and 2020.* During this time, the overall U.S. population will

increase by only about 16 percent. In 2002, about 16 percent of the

driving age population was over 65. By 2020, this figure will be about

21 percent. A key component in maintaining a productive and independent lifestyle for our senior population is ensuring that they can

safely use our Nation’s roadways. As transportation professionals, we

must take into account the special needs of senior citizens when making decisions about our transportation systems. 

Older people bring with them years of experience as roadway users.

Elderly people safely use America’s roadways every day. However, as

people grow older, changes to their physical health may make driving

and walking more difficult. These changes include:

• Declining vision: roadway signs, pavement markings, pedestrians, 

and other drivers are difficult to see. This is particularly problematic at night, when low lighting and glare from headlights interfere 

with vision.

• Decreased physical fitness and flexibility: drivers have difficulties turning their heads to look left and right at intersections and over their shoulders for lane changes. Older people 

may also have trouble with activities that require quick physical 

movements such as abrupt turns. Additionally, elderly pedestrians 

may need more time to cross a roadway.

• Decreased ability to focus attention: older drivers may find it 

difficult to sort through the large amount of information encountered during roadway use. This can be especially problematic in 

new or complicated situations, such as when navigating through 

a temporary traffic control zone or in an unfamiliar area.

• Increased reaction time: older drivers are slower to respond

to traffic control devices and unexpected changes in traffic

or roadway conditions. 

* See Census Bureau estimates, http://www.census.gov/population/www/projections/natsum-T3.html
The applications described in this pocket guide are related to 

recommendations presented in the Highway Design Handbook

for Older Drivers and Pedestrians (hereafter referred to as the

Handbook), published by the FHWA Office of Safety, Research, and

Development. In some cases, the recommendations in the Handbook

are more prescriptive than the provisions in the MUTCD. These

instances are highlighted in the pocket guide. While this pocket guide

focuses on accommodating older drivers and pedestrians, the applications described here will benefit all road users. 

Further Information

For further information on the design and use of traffic control devices,

consult the following documents:

• The Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices, 2000 

and 2003 Editions – available online at http://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov

• The Standard Highway Signs Book – available online at 

http://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov

• Highway Design Handbook for Older Drivers and Pedestrians –

available online at http://www.tfhrc.gov/humanfac/01103/cover

front.htm
1

Intersections and Interchanges

INTERSECTIONS 

AND INTERCHANGES

CHAPTER ONE

Section A. Signs

Section B. Pavement Markings

Section C. Signals 

Section A. Signs

Design Element 1.

Signing for Left Turns on Green Lights

Problem: 

Older drivers experience inordinate difficulties when making

left turns and may need extra guidance to know when a left

turn is permissible.

Application: 

The LEFT TURN YIELD ON GREEN (R10-12) sign may be

used to remind drivers of the right-of-way rule for left turns at

signalized intersections. The preferred location for this sign is

overhead, where it is most likely to be seen and read. It is

placed adjacent to the signal face that controls the protectedpermissive left turn. To provide additional emphasis at problem locations, an advance LEFT TURN YIELD ON GREEN

(R10-12) sign with a supplemental AT SIGNAL plaque can be

considered for installation at a 3-second preview distance

before the intersection or at the start of the left-turn lane.

I

ntersections and interchanges are potentially dangerous for all roadway users.

However, they pose a particular safety problem for older drivers because of the

need for rapid decision making, quick reactions, and accurate judgments of

speed-distance relationships, all of which are generally more difficult for older

people than for younger people. Research shows that 37 percent of traffic-related

fatalities in drivers age 65 and over occur at intersections. In contrast, for drivers

age 26-64, only 18 percent of fatalities occur at intersections.* The numbers for

pedestrian fatalities are similar. These figures call for special attention to the 

needs and limitations of older drivers when choosing traffic control devices 

for intersections. 

There are specific difficulties that older roadway users experience when maneuvering through intersections:

• Slower response to traffic signal changes and unexpected conditions.

• Reading or interpreting pavement markings incorrectly.

• Difficulty reading roadway signs.

• Difficulties in making left turns, such as incorrect positioning in the 

turn lane and inability to accurately judge the distance of oncoming 

vehicles.

• Slower gait, shorter steps, and slower reaction time requiring longer 

time for pedestrian crossing.

The following design elements contain information about the application of traffic

control devices to make intersections and interchanges safer for all roadway users,

with special attention to the needs of older drivers and pedestrians. This chapter is

divided into three sections: 

* Hauer, E. 1988. “The Safety of Older Persons at Intersections.” Transportation in an Aging Society, 

Volumes 1 and 2, Special Reports 218. Transportation Research Board, Washington, DC. 

References: MUTCD 2000 Edition Sections 2B.40, 4D.06; MUTCD 2003 Edition 

Sections 2B.45, 4D.06; Handbook Recommendations I-H-3, I-H-4

♦

▲
2 3

References: MUTCD 2000 Edition Section 2B.40; MUTCD 2003 Edition Section 2B.45;

Handbook Recommendations I-A-3, I-I-2, I-I-4

References: MUTCD 2000 Edition Sections 2B.28-2B.30, 2B.32, 2B.33; MUTCD 2003 Edition 

Sections 2B.33-2B.35, 2B.37, 2B.38; Handbook Recommendation I-E-4a

Design Element 2.

Sign Sizes for Offset Left-Turn Lanes

Problem: 

Confusion and vision problems increase the potential for

wrong-way maneuvers on left turns. Small or inconspicuous

signs related to wrong-way travel may not provide sufficient

guidance. 

Application: 

At intersections with wide medians or offset left-turn lanes,

large signs should be used for greater legibility and emphasis

for messages warning against wrong-way traffic movements.

The signs and recommended minimum sizes are shown

below. This does not preclude the use of larger sizes if needed.

600x750 mm

(24x30 in)

R4-7 R4-7a R4-7b R5-1

R6-1

R6-2

R6-3 R6-3a

R5-1a

Note: These are minimum sign sizes. Larger signsshould be considered (see the Standard HighwaySigns Book).

900x300 mm

(36x12 in)

600x750 mm

(24x30 in)

750x600 mm

(30x24 in)

750x600 mm

(30x24 in)

600x750 mm

(24x30 in)

600x750 mm

(24x30 in)

750x750 mm

(30x30 in)

900x600 mm

(36x24 in)

Note: The R10-11 and R10-15 signs were added to theMUTCD in Section 2B.45 of the 2003 Edition of the Manual.

TURNING

TRAFFIC

YIELD TO

PEDESTRIANS

MUST

♦

▲

♦

▲

Design Element 3.

NO TURN ON RED Signs

Problem: 

Older drivers may have physical conditions that make it 

difficult for them to turn their heads enough to see around 

corners. In addition, heavy pedestrian traffic may make 

right-turn/pedestrian conflicts dangerous, especially for 

older pedestrians who may walk slowly. 

Application: 

The NO TURN ON RED signs (R10-11 series) should be 

considered when an engineering study finds that geometric 

or operational characteristics of the intersection might result 

in unexpected conflicts. An example is a skewed intersection

where the approach legs intersect at an angle less than 

75 degrees. The TURNING TRAFFIC MUST YIELD TO 

PEDESTRIANS (R10-15) sign may also be used if pedestrian

crosswalks are marked. 

R10-11 R10-11a R10-15

Intersections and Interchanges
5

References: MUTCD 2000 and 2003 Editions Section 2D.38; Handbook Recommendation I-J-1 References: MUTCD 2000 and 2003 Editions Section 2D.38; Handbook Recommendation I-J-2 Note: The use of 300 mm (12 in) and 225 (9 in) letters on overhead street name signs is a change to Section 2D.38 of the MUTCD introduced in the 2003 Edition of the Manual.

Design Element 5.

Letter Size for Overhead Street Name Signs

Problem: 

Poor eyesight can make it difficult for older drivers to read

small lettering on overhead street name signs, particularly in

complex driving environments.

Application: 

The use of overhead-mounted street name signs should be

considered in urban or suburban areas where advance street

name signs are not used. If overhead street name signs are

used, the letter height should be at least 300 mm (12 in) 

in capital letters, or 300 mm (12 in) upper-case letters with 

225 mm (9 in) lower-case letters.

Design Element 4.

Letter Size for Post-Mounted Street Name Signs

Problem: 

Poor eyesight may make it difficult for older drivers to read

small lettering on post-mounted signs.

Application: 

On multi-lane streets with speed limits greater than 65 km/h

(40 mi/h), the lettering on ground-mounted street name signs

should be at least 200 mm (8 in) high in capital letters, or 

200 mm (8 in), upper-case letters with 150 mm (6 in) 

lower-case letters.

Note: The use of 200 mm (8 in) letters for post-mounted street name signs is a change to Section 2D.38 of the MUTCD introduced in the 2003 Edition of the Manual.

♦

▲

♦

▲

4

Intersections and Interchanges
7

References: MUTCD 2000 Edition Sections 2C.04, 2C.34, 2C.45; 2D.38; MUTCD 2003

Edition Sections 2C.04,2C.37, 2C.49; Handbook Recommendation I-J-4

References: MUTCD 2003 Edition Section 2D.39; Handbook Recommendation I-J-5

Note: Discussion of advance street name signs wasintroduced in the MUTCD in Section 2D.39 of the 2003Edition of the Manual.

Design Element 7.

Advance Notice of Cross Street

Problem: 

Slow reaction time and decreased ability to process 

a large amount of information can result in older drivers

being unable to react in a safe and timely manner when

reaching a destination cross street.

Application: 

Where advance intersection warning signs are 

installed (W2-1 through W2-6), a plaque with an advance

notice of the name of the cross street (W16-8) may be

installed on the same post underneath the intersection warning sign. The minimum sign sizes for W16-8 and other supplemental warning plaques are shown in Table 2C.3 of the

2000 and 2003 Editions of the MUTCD.

Design Element 6.

Redundant and Advance Street Name Signs

Problem: 

Because of slowed reaction time and potential difficulties 

processing the large amount of information at an intersection,

older drivers can benefit from advanced warning of upcoming

cross streets. 

Application: 

Redundant street name signs are recommended for major

intersections. Advance street name signs (D3-2) placed

upstream of the intersection at mid-block locations are also

recommended. The letter heights on advance street name

signs should be the same as those used for post-mounted

street name signs (see Design Element 4 on page 4). 

♦

▲

♦

▲

W2-1 and W16-8

6

Intersections and Interchanges
9

References: MUTCD 2000 Edition Section 2C.27; MUTCD 2003 Edition Section 2C.50;

Handbook Recommendation I-L-3

References: MUTCD 2000 and 2003 Editions Section 2D.38; Handbook Recommendation I-J-6

Note: Sign W4-4p was redesigned and included in Section2C.50 in the 2003 Edition of the Manual.

Design Element 9.

CROSS TRAFFIC DOES NOT STOP Sign

Problem: 

Slower reaction time may make it difficult for older 

drivers to react quickly to unexpected conflicting traffic 

at stop-controlled intersections.

Application: 

The CROSS TRAFFIC DOES NOT STOP (W4-4p) sign may 

be used for stop-controlled intersections that are not all-way

stops. The sign may be installed based on crash experience,

sight distance restrictions, or where a four-way stop has been

converted to two-way stop operation.

Design Element 8.

Street Name Signs for Streets That Change Names

Problem: 

Older drivers may become confused or disoriented when

looking for streets in unfamiliar areas. A street with two 

different names can be especially confusing. 

Application: 

Where different street names are used for different directions

of travel on a crossroad, the names should be separated and

accompanied by directional arrows on both mid-block

advance street name signs and intersection street name signs.

CROSS TRAFFIC

DOES NOT STOP

♦

▲

♦

▲

R1-1 and W4-4p

8

Intersections and Interchanges
11

References: MUTCD 2000 Edition Sections 2B.18-2B.21; MUTCD 2003 Edition Sections 2B.20-2B.23;

Handbook Recommendation I-M-1

References: MUTCD 2000 Edition Sections 2C.26, 2C.45; MUTCD 2003 

Edition Sections 2C.29, 2C.49; Handbook Recommendation I-L-4

Design Element 11.

Intersection Lane Control Signs

Problem: 

Older drivers may have trouble processing large amounts of

information and may become confused about which lane to

use at unfamiliar or complicated intersections.

Application: 

At intersections where drivers might have trouble positioning

themselves in the correct lane, intersection lane control signs

(R3-5 through R3-8) should be mounted overhead on a signal

mast arm or span wire and each sign should be placed over

the lane (or a projection of the lane) to which it applies.

Ground-mounted lane-use control signs and additional

advance overhead signs should also be considered.

Design Element 10.

Advance Traffic Control Signs

Problem: 

Because of slower reaction time, older drivers may not be

able to respond quickly and safely when approaching unexpected traffic conditions at an intersection.

Application: 

The STOP AHEAD, YIELD AHEAD, and SIGNAL AHEAD signs

shall be installed on an approach to a primary traffic control

device that is not visible at a distance sufficient to permit the

driver to respond to the device. In addition, a plaque with

advance notice of the name of the cross street (W16-8, see

Design Element 7 on page 7) may be installed on the same

post underneath these advance traffic control signs.

♦

▲

♦

▲

2000 Edition W3-1a

2003 Edition W3-1

2000 Edition W3-2a

2003 Edition W3-2

2000 Edition W3-3

2003 Edition W3-3

10

Intersections and Interchanges
13Intersections and Interchanges

References: MUTCD 2000 Edition Section 2B-40; MUTCD 2003 Edition Section 2B.45;

Handbook Recommendations I-P-3, I-P-4

Note: Signs R10-3d and R10-3e are additions to the MUTCDintroduced in Section 2B.45 of the 2003 Edition of the Manual.

Section B. Pavement Markings

Design Element 13.

Pavement Markings for Left-Turn Lanes

Problem: 

Older drivers may not position themselves within the intersection when waiting to make a left turn. This can block the sight

line to oncoming traffic for drivers waiting to make left turns

from the opposite direction. 

Application: 

Positive offset of opposing left-turn lanes should be used

wherever possible to minimize the obstruction of sight distance. On undivided highways where pavement width allows,

this positive offset can be provided by the use of solid channelizing lines to form a parallel or tapered island between the

left-turn lane and the adjacent through lane, as shown in the

diagram on the following page. In some cases, this treatment

can be made feasible by the use of reduced-width lanes 

at the intersection. 

Design Element 12.

Educational Plaques for Pedestrians

Problem: 

Older pedestrians may not understand when it is safe to cross

the roadway at signalized intersections.

Application: 

Educational plaques can be installed at signalized intersections to help explain the traffic signal operation and present 

a warning to watch for turning vehicles. The following four

educational plaques may be installed at signal push-button

unit locations: 

(R10-3d)

START CROSSING A O

DON'T START O

WATCH FOR

VEHICLES

DON'T CROSS O

TOCROSS

PUSH BUTTON

FINISH CROSSING

IF STARTED

STEADY

FLASHING

(R10-3b)

START CROSSING A O

DON'T START O

WATCH FOR VEHICLES

DON'T CROSS O

TO CROSS

PUSH BUTTON

FINISH CROSSING IF STARTED

STEADY

FLASHING

TIME REMAINING

T O FINISH CROSSING TIMER

(R10-3e)

START CROSSING A O

DON'T START O

WATCH FOR

VEHICLES

DON'T CROSS O

TO CROSS

PUSH BUTTON

FINISH CROSSING

FLASHING IF STARTED

(R10-3c)

WALK

DON'T

WALK

DON'T

WALK

START CROSSING A O

DON'T START O

WATCH FOR

VEHICLES

DON'T CROSS O

TO CROSS

PUSH BUTTON

FINISH CROSSING

IF STARTED

STEADY

FLASHING

TOMEDIAN

♦

▲

♦

▲

R10-3b R10-3c R10-3d R10-3e

See next page for illustration

12

Intersections and Interchanges
15

References: MUTCD 2000 and 2003 Editions Sections 3B.11, 3B.21;

Handbook Recommendation I-F-2

Design Element 14.

Raised Pavement Markings for Curbs in Medians and Islands

Problem: 

Raised curbs without conspicuous markings are difficult to

see, especially for older drivers who may have diminished

vision. This increases the chances a driver will hit the curb,

especially at night or during inclement weather.

Application: 

To improve the conspicuity of medians and island curbs at

intersections, enhanced delineation may be used. In addition

to edge lines on the road surface alongside the medians and

island curbs, the vertical face of these curbs can be provided

with painted curb markings and the top surface of the curbs

can be marked with retroreflectorized raised pavement 

markers, object markers, signs, or delineators.

♦

▲

References: MUTCD 2000 and 2003 Editions Section 3B.05;

Handbook Recommendations I-E-1, I-E-2, I-E-3

POSITIVE OFFSET

14

Not to Scale

Intersections and Interchanges Intersections and Interchanges

Positive Offset for Left-Turn Lanes
17

Post-Mounted

Delineators

LOOK 

LOOK 

References: MUTCD 2000 and 2003 Editions Sections 3D.1-3D.4, Part 8;

Handbook Recommendation V-3

See next page for illustration

Design Element 15.

Delineators at Passive Highway-Rail Grade Crossings

Problem: 

Passive railroad crossings—crossings without lights or gates—

are a particular safety problem for older drivers. Older drivers

with decreased vision may not see the upcoming railroad

crossing or the signs and pavement markings warning of its

presence. Further, older drivers may have more trouble understanding and reacting to warnings contained in traffic control

devices at railroad crossings. 

Application: 

Where engineering study or judgment indicates the need to

improve the conspicuity of passive railroad crossings, postmounted delineators may be used in combination with at

least the minimum signing requirement described in Part 8 of

the MUTCD. This enhancement will be particularly useful for

crossings located near temporary traffic control zones, in

areas prone to inclement weather, for crossings narrower than

the approach pavement, and for isolated crossings.

Delineators may also be considered as an alternative to 

illumination. The color of the delineators should be the 

same as the color of the pavement markings they supplement.

♦

▲

16

Drawing adapted from Handbook, p.65

Intersections and Interchanges Intersections and Interchanges

Not to Scale

Post-Mounted Delineators and Other Traffic Control 

Devices for Passive Highway-Rail Grade Crossings
18 19

References: MUTCD 2000 and 2003 Editions Section 3B.19; Handbook Recommendation II-D-5

WRONG-WAY

ARROW

WRONG-WAY

ARROW

LANE USE 

ARROWS

Design Element 16.

Wrong-Way Arrows on Ramps

Problem: 

Older drivers can become confused in complex driving 

situations. They may need extra warnings to avoid driving 

the wrong way onto a freeway ramp. 

Application: 

To conspicuously indicate the correct direction of traffic flow

and discourage wrong-way movements, a wrong-way arrow

marking may be used near the terminus of all ramps that do

not have lane-use arrows already in place near the terminus.

♦

▲

See next page for illustration

18

Intersections and Interchanges

Not to Scale

Wrong-Way Arrows and Other Traffic Control Devices to Prevent 

Wrong-Way Movements on Freeway Exit and Entrance Ramps
21

Design Element 17.

Turning Path Pavement Markings

Problem: 

Many older drivers experience significant problems negotiating

turning movements at intersections. Limited head mobility

and confusion about the intended travel path leave them 

vulnerable to angle collisions and wrong-way movements.

Application: 

To enhance safety at intersections for older drivers, turn path

markings should be installed. Critical situations for installation

include: single and dual left-turn lanes at intersections; 

intersections with acute angle turns, particularly left turns;

side by side entrance and exit ramps at partial cloverleaf 

interchanges; acute angle entrance ramps at diamond 

interchanges; and other locations where crash experience or

operational observations suggest that older drivers may 

experience difficulties negotiating turning movements. 

♦

▲

20

Lane-Use 

Arrows

Yellow Turn

Path Marking

White Turn

Path Marking Stop 

Lines

See next pages for illustrations

Intersections and Interchanges

Not to Scale

Turn Path Markings at Intersection with Dual Left-Turn Lanes
22 23

References: MUTCD 2000 and 2003 Editions Section 4D.17; Handbook Recommendation I-N-3

Section C. Signals

Design Element 18.

Backplate for Signals

Problem: 

Because of diminished vision, older drivers may have trouble

seeing which bulb is lit on a traffic signal, especially when

sun glare is a problem.

Application: 

To enhance the target value of signal indications and reduce

the potential for sun glare problems, a backplate should be

used on signal faces viewed against a bright sky or a bright or

confusing background. On roads with operating speeds of 

65 km/h (40 mi/h) or higher, the use of a backplate can be

particularly helpful in making the signals more visible to

older drivers.

References: MUTCD 2000 and 2003 Editions Section 3B.08; Handbook Recommendation I-E-4d

♦

▲

Intersections and Interchanges

Not to Scale

Turn Path Markings at Partial Cloverleaf Interchange
25 24 References: MUTCD 2000 Edition Section 4E.9; MUTCD 2003 Edition Section 4E.10;

Handbook Recommendation I-P-6

Design Element 19.

Leading Pedestrian Interval

Problem: 

Older pedestrians may need additional time to cross a street

because of shorter stride, slower gait, and slower reaction time.

Application: 

At intersections with high pedestrian volume and high turning vehicle volume, a leading pedestrian interval of three seconds

or more can be helpful because it allows slower walkers to

cross at least one roadway lane before conflicting turning vehicles are released. Blank-out or changeable message 

“no right turn” (symbolic) or NO TURN ON RED (text) 

signs can be used in conjunction with the leading pedestrian

interval to restrict turns across the crosswalk during certain

portions of the signal cycle.

Blank-out (symbolic)

no turn on red

sign

Leading pedestrian 

interval—walk signal

allows pedestrians to

start crossing while vehicle signal is

still red

♦▲
27

References: MUTCD 2000 and 2003 Editions Section 3B.13; Handbook Recommendation III-A-2

CURVES

CHAPTER TWO

♦

▲

R

Curves

oadway curves represent a considerable safety concern. Research shows

that crash rates are between one and a half and four times higher on curves

than on straightaways. Curves present a particular problem for older drivers,

especially when drivers are not aware of the upcoming curvature or approach it at

an unsafe speed. 

Older drivers may have more trouble negotiating curves than their younger counterparts because:

• Declining vision changes their ability to see the roadway and judge 

speed-distance relationships.

• Declining strength makes it more difficult for them to abruptly change 

directions and shift gears.

• Increased reaction time makes it more difficult for them to safely 

adjust their driving when approaching unexpected changes in roadway curvature.

• Decreased ability to process large amounts of information makes it 

more likely that an older driver will miss important warnings about 

curves ahead.

The following design elements contain information about the application of traffic

control devices to make curves safer for all roadway users, with special attention

to the needs of older drivers and pedestrians. 

Design Element 1.

Raised Pavement Markings for Centerlines of Tight Curves

Problem:

Older drivers with slow reaction times and diminished cognitive abilities might approach curves at excessive speeds.

These drivers need more conspicuous and redundant warnings of upcoming curves. 

Application: 

For curves with a radius of less than 1000 m (3280 ft), 

standard centerline markings may be supplemented with

retroreflective raised pavement markers at a spacing of 

12 m (40 ft) apart, starting at a point that is 5 seconds travel

time (at the 85th percentile speed) in advance of the curve

and continuing through the curve. 
29

References: MUTCD 2000 Edition Sections 2C.26, 4K.01, 4K.03; MUTCD 2003 Edition 

Sections 2C.29, 4K.01, 4K.03; Handbook Recommendation III-C-3

Reference: MUTCD 2000 Edition Section 2C.42; MUTCD 2003 Edition Sections 2C.14, 2C.46;

Handbook Recommendation III-C-2

Note: Sign W7-6 is an addition to the MUTCD introduced inSection 2C.14 of the 2003 Edition of the Manual.

HILL

BLOCKS

VIEW

♦

▲

♦

▲

W7-6 and W13-1

28

Design Element 2.

HILL BLOCKS VIEW Warning Sign on Vertical Curves

Problem: 

Older drivers may need more time to react to traffic changes

and can benefit from extra warnings about unexpected conditions ahead.

Application: 

Where the need exists to warn motorists that sight distance is

restricted by a crest vertical curve, the HILL BLOCKS VIEW

(W7-6) warning sign may be used. If used, it should be supplemented with an advisory speed sign (W13-1).

Design Element 3.

Advance Warning for Signal Obscured by Curve

Problem: 

Slow reaction time and diminished vision can make it difficult for older drivers to see and react safely to an unexpected 

signal, such as one obscured by a curve.

Application: 

If a signalized intersection is obscured by vertical or horizontal curvature, the BE PREPARED TO STOP (W3-4) or SIGNAL

AHEAD (W3-3a) warning signs may be used. A flashing 

yellow beacon interconnected with a traffic signal controller

assembly may be used with this traffic signal warning sign,

supplemented with a WHEN FLASHING plaque.

Curves
31

References: MUTCD 2000 Edition Section 6F.53; MUTCD 2003 Edition Section 6F.56;

Handbook Recommendation IV-A-1

TEMPORARY TRAFFIC 

CONTROL ZONES

CHAPTER THREE

♦

▲

T

emporary traffic control zones pose a particular safety problem because

they are frequently unexpected and may involve complicated driving

maneuvers. To navigate safely through a temporary traffic control area, 

drivers must be aware of the conditions ahead and they must understand the necessary changes in driving behavior. This is particularly important for older drivers,

who may have functional deficits that make it difficult for them to read and interpret

traffic control devices and to react quickly and safely to changing roadway 

conditions. These deficits might include:

• Decreased ability to focus attention on important messages in 

the face of a variety of stimuli.

• Increased time necessary to process information from traffic 

control devices.

• Impaired vision, which makes it difficult to see and read traffic 

control devices.

• Increased reaction time, which makes it difficult to react safely 

when coming upon unexpected traffic conditions.

These deficits necessitate that traffic control devices in temporary traffic control

areas be conspicuous—easily seen by people with diminished vision—and unambiguous—clear about the recommended driving action or changes in traffic conditions. The following design elements contain information about the application of

traffic control devices to make temporary traffic control zones safer for all roadway

users, with special attention to the needs of older drivers and pedestrians. This

chapter is divided into four sections: 

Section A. Lane Closure/Lane Transition Practices

Section B. Portable Changeable Message Signs

Section C. Channelization and Path Guidance Practices

Section D. Temporary Pavement Markings

Section A. Lane Closure/Lane Transition Practices

Design Element 1.

Use of Flashing Arrow Panel

Problem: 

Older drivers may need extra time to react safely to an unexpected lane closure.

Application: 

In temporary traffic control zones on high-speed and divided

highways, the consistent use of a flashing arrow panel located

at the taper for each lane closure is recommended. 

Temporary Traffic Control Zones
33

References: MUTCD 2000 Edition Section 6F.52; MUTCD 2003 Edition Section 6F.55;

Handbook Recommendations IV-B-3, IV-B-6a

References: MUTCD 2000 Edition Sections 6F.15, 6F.69, 6F.71; MUTCD 2003 Edition Sections 

6F.15, 6F.75, 6F.77; Handbook Recommendation IV-A-2

♦

▲

♦

▲

32

W20-1 with flashing warning light

Design Element 2.

Sign Conspicuity 

Problem: 

Diminished cognitive skills may cause older drivers to have

trouble focusing on important information when driving. In

addition, vision problems may affect their ability to see and

read roadway signs. 

Application: 

In order to increase the conspicuity of the first and second

upstream static warning signs encountered by drivers (e.g.,

W20-1, W20-5), these signs may be equipped with flashing

warning lights that operate through the entire time period of

the lane closure. They may also have fluorescent orange

reflective sheeting that provides high retroreflectivity at the

widest available observation angle, and have a minimum 

letter height of 200 mm (8 in). 

Section B. Portable Changeable Message Signs

Design Element 3.

Content of Portable Changeable Message Signs

Problem: 

Some older drivers can become easily confused by unexpected

and complex driving conditions. Signs that contain complicated or unfamiliar messages may be difficult for them to read

and understand. 

Application: 

It is recommended that no more than one unit of information

be displayed on a single line and no more than three lines be

displayed for any single phase of a portable changeable message sign (PCMS). The top line should present the problem,

the center line should present the location or distance ahead,

and the bottom line should present the recommended driver

action. A phase should consist of no more than three lines of

a maximum of eight characters per line. The pixel matrix of

each character module shall be at least 125 mm (5 in) wide

and 175 mm (7 in) high.

Temporary Traffic Control Zones
35

References: MUTCD 2000 Edition Section 6F.52; MUTCD 2003 Edition Section 6F.55;

Handbook Recommendation IV-B-2

Note: The minimum 3-second phase display time is an additionto the MUTCD introduced in Section 6F.55 of the 2003 Editionof the Manual.

References: MUTCD 2000 Edition Section 6F.52; MUTCD 2003 Edition Section 6F.55;

Handbook Recommendations IV-B-1; IV-B-4; IV-B-5

Phase 1

Operator's Visual Approach

Vehicle Speed =

85th percentile 

speed prior

to work starting, 

or anticipated

operating speed

Time 1 Time 2 Time 3 Time 4

3 Seconds 3 Seconds 3 Seconds 3 Seconds

Phase 2 Phase 1 Phase 2

Driver sees complete

message once

Driver sees complete

message twice

♦

▲

♦

▲

34

Design Element 4.

Phases of Portable Changeable Message Signs

Problem: 

Older drivers may not be able to process large amounts of

information as efficiently as younger drivers. Signs that contain too much information may confuse them. 

Application: 

It is recommended that no more than two phases be used on

a PCMS. If a message cannot be conveyed in two phases,

additional PCMSs should be used.

Design Element 5.

Timing of Phases of Portable Changeable Message Signs

Problem: 

Older drivers may process information more slowly and

require extra time to read and understand information on

PCMS. 

Application: 

It is recommended that each phase of a PCMS be displayed

for a minimum of 3 seconds. This recommendation is made so

that the entire message can be read at least twice at the posted speed, the off-peak 85th percentile speed prior to work

starting, or the anticipated operating speed. 

Temporary Traffic Control Zones

Not to Scale

Minimum Display Time for Phases of 

Portable Changeable Message Signs 
37

References: MUTCD 2000 Edition Section 6F.57; MUTCD 2003 Edition Section 6F.60;

Handbook Recommendation IV-C-1b

References: MUTCD 2000 Edition Section 6F.56; MUTCD 2003 Edition Section 6F.59;

Handbook Recommendation IV-C-1a

700-900 mm

(28-36 in)

♦

▲

♦

▲

36

Section C. Channelization and Path Guidance Practices

Design Element 6.

Retroreflection for Cones

Problem: 

Because of decreased vision and difficulty processing large

amounts of information, especially in potentially complicated

and unfamiliar situations such as temporary traffic control

zones, older drivers may benefit from traffic control devices

with extra conspicuity.

Application: 

Retroreflection of cones that are 700 to 900 mm (28 to 36 in)

in height shall be provided by a 150 mm (6 in) wide white

band located 75 to 100 mm (3 to 4 in) from the top of the

cone and an additional 100 mm (4 in) wide white band located approximately 50 mm (2 in) below the 150 mm (6 in)

band. These are the minimum dimensions required in the

MUTCD. This does not preclude the use of wider bands.

Design Element 7.

Retroreflection for Tubular Markers

Problem: 

Older drivers with decreased vision may need extra conspicuity

on traffic control devices, especially in unexpected or complicated situations such as temporary traffic control zones.

Application: 

Retroreflection of 700 mm (28 in) or larger tubular markers

shall be provided by two 75 mm (3 in) wide white bands

placed a maximum of 50 mm (2 in) from the top with a maximum of 150 mm (6 in) between the bands. These are minimum dimensions as required by the MUTCD. This does not

preclude the use of wider bands.

Temporary Traffic Control Zones
39

References: MUTCD 2000 Edition Sections 6F.62, 6F.75, 6G.11;

MUTCD 2003 Edition Sections 6F.65, 6F.81, 6G.12

References: MUTCD 2000 Edition Section 6F.58; MUTCD 2003 Edition Section 6F.61;

Handbook Recommendation IV-C-1c

♦

▲

♦

▲

38

Photo courtesy of AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety

Design Element 8.

Retroreflection for Vertical Panels

Problem: 

Older drivers with decreased vision may need large and conspicuous traffic control devices to guide them through temporary traffic control zones. 

Application: 

Vertical panels shall be 200 to 300 mm (8 to 12 in) in width

and be mounted with the top a minimum of 900 mm (36 in)

above the roadway. The height of the panel itself shall be at

least 600 mm (24 in). Markings for verticle panels shall be

alternating orange and white retroreflective stripes, sloping

downward at an angle of 45 degrees in the direction vehicular traffic is to pass. Where the height of the panel itself is less

than 900 mm (36 in), a panel stripe width of 100 mm (4 in)

may be used. Vertical panels used on freeways, expressways,

and other high-speed roadways shall have a minimum of

174,000 mm2 (270 in2) retroreflective area facing vehicular

traffic.

Design Element 9.

Traffic Control Devices for Temporary Traffic Barriers

Problem: 

Older drivers with decreased capacity to process large

amounts of information and decreased physical capacity to

perform abrupt driving maneuvers need conspicuous and

unambiguous traffic control devices when traveling through

temporary traffic control zones.

Application: 

When temporary traffic barriers are placed immediately adjacent to the traveled way, they shall be equipped with appropriate channelizing traffic control devices, delineation, and/or

other temporary traffic control devices to provide guidance

and warning both day and night. Screens may be mounted on

top of temporary traffic barriers that separate two-way traffic. 

Temporary Traffic Control Zones
41

References: MUTCD 2000 Edition Sections 6F.55-6F.58, 6F.64, 6F.75, 6G.11, and Figure 6H.39; MUTCD 2003 References: MUTCD 2000 and 2003 Editions Section 6C.08; Handbook Recommendation IV-C-2

Edition Sections 6F.58-6F.61, 6F.70, 6F.81, Figure 6H.39; Handbook Recommendation IV-D-1

♦

▲

♦

▲

THE MAXIMUM DISTANCE IN

METERS (FEET) BETWEEN DEVICES

IN A TAPER SHOULD NOT EXCEED

0.2 TIMES THE SPEED LIMIT IN

KM/H (1.0 TIMES THE SPEED LIMIT

IN MI/H)

= TRAFFIC CONTROL

 DEVICE

40

Design Element 10.

Separating Opposing Traffic

Problem: 

Older drivers may need conspicuous and unambiguous traffic

control devices to compensate for declining vision and cognitive skills.

Application: 

Channelizing devices or temporary barriers shall be used to

separate opposing traffic. 

Design Element 11.

Spacing for Channelizing Devices

Problem: 

Older drivers may have vision and cognitive deficiencies that

make it difficult for them to safely navigate through temporary

traffic control zones.

Application: 

For channelizing devices (other than concrete barriers) the

maximum distance in meters (feet) between devices in a taper

should not exceed 0.2 times the speed limit in km/h (1.0 times

the speed limit in mi/h). 

Temporary Traffic Control Zones

Not to Scale

Distance Between Traffic Control 

Devices in a Taper
43

References: MUTCD 2000 Edition Section 6F.79; MUTCD 2003 Edition Section 6F.85;

Handbook Recommendation IV-D-4

♦

▲

♦

▲

GLARE DEVICE

MOUNTED TO

TRAFFIC BARRIER

GLARE FROM

HEADLIGHTS

OF OPPOSING

TRAFFIC

CAN IMPAIR VISION

See next page for illustration

42

Design Element 12.

Glare Control Devices for Transition and Crossover Areas

Problem: 

Glare from the headlights of opposing traffic in temporary 

traffic control zones can impair vision. This glare is particularly

troublesome for older people with decreased vision.

Application: 

In transition and crossover areas, glare control devices may 

be mounted on top of temporary traffic barriers that separate

two-way traffic. 

Section D. Temporary Pavement Markings

Design Element 13.

Retroreflective Markers for Pavement Markings

Problem: 

Older drivers with declining vision may have difficulty seeing

pavement markings. 

Application: 

Raised retroreflective pavement markers (RPMs) should be

considered for use along detours, temporary roadways, and

other changed or new travel-lane alignments. The raised pavement markers can supplement other temporary line markings

or they can substitute for other temporary line markings to

enhance visibility of the lines at night, especially in the rain.

Where the temporary line is a broken line with segments

longer than 1.5 m (5 ft):

• For RPMs supplementing other markings, one 

retroreflective RPM every N is recommended for curved 

temporary alignments, or every 2N for tangent temporary 

alignments;

• For RPMs substituting for other markings, a group of at 

least three retroreflective RPMs shall be equally spaced 

at no greater than N/8. 

[Note: The value of N for a broken or dotted line shall equal the

length of one line segment plus one gap.]

Temporary Traffic Control Zones

Not to Scale

Application of Glare Control Device in 

Temporary Traffic Control Zone
45

References: MUTCD 2000 Edition Sections 3B.13, 6F.67; MUTCD 2003 Edition Sections 

3B.13, 6F.73; Handbook Recommendation IV-E-1

15 ft

10 ft

10 ft

5 ft

30 ft

30 ft

CLOSED

FOR 

ROAD

WORK

OR

WHITE REFLECTIVE

LINE SEGMENTS

SUPPLEMENTED

BY WHITE RAISED

PAVEMENT MARKERS

WHITE RAISED

PAVEMENT

MARKERS ON

DETOUR 

ROADWAY

WHITE REFLECTIVE

RAISED PAVEMENT 

MARKERS

SUBSTITUTING FOR

LINE SEGMENT

44

Not to Scale

Use of Raised Pavement Markings to Supplement and 

Substitute for Temporary Pavement Markings