TRAFFIC SIGN REPLACEMENT DESCRIPTION: Under a new Federal rule that went into effect in January 2008, agencies have until January 2012 to establish and implement a sign assessment or management method that will maintain minimum levels of sign retroreflectivity. The intent of the rule, that has been incorporated into the 2009 version of the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD), implements retroflectivity standards for signs to improve nighttime visibility to motorists. The compliance date for meeting the minimum retroreflectivity requirements for regulatory, warning, and ground-mounted guide signs is January 2015. Overhead guide signs and street name signs must be in compliance by January 2018. It is estimated there are approximately 8,000 signs throughout the City including street name signs. Implementing the new sign retroreflectivity standards requires a plan with the first step being a sign inventory. This inventory would be best managed if it stored graphically on the City’s Geographic Information System (GIS). Creation of a GIS layer incorporating a sign inventory is estimated to cost approximately $50,000. Replacement costs of non-complying signs can be estimated after the inventory and retrorelfectivity evaluation of existing signs is completed. The first priority for sign replacement will be non-complying regulatory signs such as STOP and Speed Limit signs, which number about 2,000. Such signs cost approximately $100 each, not including installation labor. It is recommended that initial funding conduct the condition, location, and sign-type inventory. Following completion, another Capital Project description will be prepared to identify a phased approach to bring the City into compliance with the MUTCD sign retroreflectivity requirements. COST SUMMARY: Design $ 50,000 POTENTIAL FUNDING SOURCES: Capital Projects Fund $ 50,000 IMPACT ON ANNUAL MAINTENANCE AND OPERATION COSTS: Out year sign replacement costs are expected to increase after initial sign installation because retroreflective signs are approximately 25% more expensive than existing signs. ALTERNATIVES: There may be grant funding opportunities available for sign replacement, but they have not been identified yet.