This country's greatest traffic minds have given us more than 1,200 pages of traffic control devices.  They had no clue of what they were up against in Massachusetts!

THE CHALLENGE  I’m only guessing, but my money says that most major rotaries in Massachusetts are festooned with no fewer than 233 signs appended to poles, lamps, guardrails, buildings, trees, sticks, and—often--people. There is a small number of route numbers and street name signs, but they are inconsistent, at best, so as to leave room for the visual clutter of parking restrictions and street cleaning notices, singles meetings and Kiwanis meetings, future and historical sites, and the like. Regular commuters, of course, can ignore every one of them, as they do other visual obstructions such as traffic lights and yield signs. But those unfamiliar with the area will soon realize that even if they COULD get there from here, there is no way they will be able to figure that out in the 47 seconds it takes them to move half way around the intersection, during which time they will have seen more 100 signs. Averaging about .47 seconds per sign, the pathetically dumbfounded motorists choose the roadway of least resistance which gives them odds in the neighborhood of 145:1 of making the right choice—which they don’t. So, they drive for the next three blocks at about 7 mph before making a U-turn and, remarkably, head back to give it one more try… all the while driving like ass.

Aren’t signs supposed to help us poor lost nincompoops? Sure, they are…but they’re about as much help as a state trooper at a road work site. Here’s why.

HISTORY: THE DOT TAKES CONTROL
When it comes to signage, the law of the land is unequivocally spelled out in the DOT’s “Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) 2003 Edition Revision 1” which replaced the 2000 “Millennium Edition!”, italics and exclamation mine.

First printed in 1935, the MUTCD has blossomed to more than 1200 pages—plus several hundred pages of updates and errata—and dictates shapes, sizes, colors, fonts, placement, reflectivity, and the like. The MUTCD isn’t just signs: it is about “control devices” including signals, pedestrian and bicycle sign, railroad crossings, and pavement marking, etc.

Driving is a dynamic force so, of course, the MUTCD is a living document: revisions, supplements, and provisional approvals abound: the groundbreaking 1935 edition was followed by a “wartime” edition in 1942, (rules for “blackout” situations), a “peacetime” edition in 1948 (reflective beads on pavement markings), a “cold war” edition in 1961 (Interstate Highway System regulations), and several others alone the way.

NOT TO BE LEFT OUT, THE STATE ADDS ITS TWO BITS
But, while the MUTCD is the national “standard” for traffic control devices, not all signage is in the grip of the MUTCD. Individual states are permitted to adopt a supplement to the MUTCD, which the Massachusetts Highway Department has done. Our Supplemental Sign Policy ensures scofflaws don’t just post signs willy-nilly. In order for the Shut-I B&B to include its name under the “LODGING” sign off I-90 somewhere, it must be: 1) no further than 3 miles from the sign, 2) have at least 24 rooms (with private baths), 3) be open 24 hours Rules are just as stringent for colleges (enrollment must be at least 2500 in urban areas, 1,500 in rural), farms (must have prior approval of the Dept, of Food and Agriculture in order to apply for a sign), water parks (can’t have any other outdoor advertising…but they can be up to 10 miles away), and tourist information centers (must provide an “illuminated, weather-protected Mass Highway which may be no smaller than 22” high by 31” wide.” Could I make this up?

I will not go in to the role played by local municipalities in this system. Suffice it to say, three heads are never better than one.

But, despite the MUTCD’s noble objectives—to “regulate, warn, and guide traffic on streets and highways”—the fact is that good signage on poorly designed roadways is like lipstick on a pig: the results will always be more frightening than ameliorating.

WE DON”T NEED NO STINKING SIGNAGE: THE EMPIRCAL BASIS
A case in point is the Newton Corner intersection. Unlike some rotaries that provide continuous flow for 360°, the Newton Corner intersection sits atop the Mass Pike and is segmented by at least six, generally asynchronous, traffic signals. Now, no one has ever been able to calculate the precise number of lanes that comprise the various segments of this paved snarl, but a known postulate of Massachusetts driving theory states that the number of lanes preceding any given intersection is less than or more than—but never equal to—the number immediately following. This construct insures that, at any time, most drivers want to be in a lane other than the one in which they find themselves and, because they are generally stopped at a traffic signal, success will be achieved only by traversing one or more lanes before reaching the next signal in order to take advantage of the fewer or greater number of lanes. Good signage be damned: getting there before everyone else is a given. And, if you have to get there before anyone else, then driving like ass is also a given.

So, you see, the DOT’s greatest minds and MUTCD think tanks are piteous match our state’s drivers, drivers who neither possess great minds nor do their tanks think terribly often. They are, simply, emboldened by the congenital capacity to drive like ass.