Now we would have not taken particular note of this view has this been expressed by someone else, say a college visual communication student, a magazine editor or just about anybody who recognizes graphic design in everyday things. In fact, we wouldn’t have cared if a motorist — or even a bunch of motorists — said this. Because none of them would have the capacity to do anything about it except to express their views that they find the signs "corny".
But not when it’s Nacianceno talking. Because you see Nacianceno is the General Manager of the Metropolitan Manila Development Authority, an agency that should take the responsibility of standardizing traffic signage in the Metro. But given the MMDA’s — not to mention its chairman, Bayani Fernando’s — penchant for constantly reinventing traffic laws and signage then "corny" is not to be taken lightly. Unless you’re color-blind, surely you’ve seen those pink MMDA signs around, haven’t you?
Now what’s wrong with concocting new color schemes and designs for traffic signage?
For starters, this flouts international agreements. In September 1949 the Philippines participated in the United Nations Convention on Road Traffic that was held in Geneva, Switzerland. Along with nearly a hundred other countries (including the US, UK and most nations in Europe), the Philippines was a signatory — or contracting party, in the words of the agreement — in the convention, which was "entered into force" in March 1952.
In 1968, two similar UN meetings took place in Vienna, Austria. One was the Convention on Road Traffic, which was entered into force in May 1977, and the other was the Convention on Road Signs and Signals, entered into force June 1978. In both these conventions, the Philippines, through its representative, one Baltazar Aquino, once again signed as a contracting party. Most of the signatory countries of the Geneva meet also signed up, with some more new ones completing the list.
All these conventions are meant to universally establish and standardize traffic laws and protocols, including signage. And as in all legal contracts, the rules are written in a specific manner that leaves little room for other interpretations.
Though there are some slight variations, the road traffic conventions begin with defining what constitutes a "road," "carriageway," "lanes," motor vehicle," "driver" and so forth. The convention on road signs, meanwhile, deals more exclusively on road sign usage and specifications.
The Vienna Convention on Road Signs and Signals groups signs into: Danger Warning Signs, which warn and inform motorists of danger on the road; Regulatory Signs, which inform of special obligations, restrictions or prohibitions that must be complied with and are further classed in four sub-categories; and Informative Signs, which provide road users information on services, directions, facilities and location identifications.
Further reading of the convention clearly states how road signs will be used, where these should be placed, and apparently provided diagrams and illustrations complete with dimensions and color specification for each classification of signs (The diagrams are not included in the electronic copies of the Convention that we have, though certain paragraphs cite these make up Article 2).
Article 3 of the Vienna Convention is where the obligation of contracting parties are stipulated, to wit; that all signatories to the convention accept the system of road signs, signals, symbols and road markings and must use these as a soon as possible. All signatories are also required to replace within 15 years of the date when the convention is entered into force all its territories’ signs, signals, symbols and road markings that do not conform to the system prescribed. The Philippines, then, should have its traffic signage conforming to this international accord by 1993.
But a drive down C-5 or any part of the Metro these days tell another story. The MMDA, for one, uses several color schemes for its signage; dark blue with white lettering, green with white lettering, white with black text and red markings, and Fernando’s signature bright pink with white lettering. Of course, the shades of green and blue in some signage vary as well. Oh, and yellow combined with black text is occasionally used also.
Now don’t tell us the purpose of the assorted color schemes is to differentiate one class of road sign from another. Yes, the white/red/black ones are prohibitive signs and pink are reserved for pedestrians. But blue and green seem to serve the same informational functions. There are instances when a blue/white and a green/white sign are used to mark one of those infamous U-Turn slots. Sometimes, both these signs are used on the same U-Turn slot.
To make matters worse, the signage, including those presumably not put up by the MMDA, have inconsistent lettering styles also. Some use a heavy font, some merely bold, while others are condensed. Typos and bad grammar aside (DON’T CHANGE LANE, WALANG TAWIRAN NAKAMAMATAY ?), the inscriptions on the signs come in either caps and lower case letters or in all caps only. Even the sizes of the signs vary. This when the Vienna convention specifies only four sizes, usage of which depends on the road and traffic conditions.
Again, what’s wrong with inconsistent color schemes and design for traffic signage?
In the words of the convention itself, it’s because, "Recognizing that international uniformity of road signs, signals, symbols and markings is necessary in order to facilitate international road traffic and to increase road safety." A homegenous traffic signage system was formulated and agreed upon in the interest of road safety!
It is quite safe to assume the people who drafted the formula for those road signs are experts in traffic engineering, road safety, visual communication, and most probably even psychology. It is also quite safe to assume the representative of the signatory countries are unanimous in the understanding that a homogenous traffic signage system is for the betterment of everybody concerned, road safety being of utmost importance.
Homogenous signage mean signs are placed where a road user is amply warned of a danger ahead and that he/she is provided the necessary information on the road, whether it be a prohibition, direction or something else that’s pertinent to a motorist or pedestrian. The same homogenous signage system also means chances are a Filipino traveling abroad will be able to recognize a foreign land’s traffic signs, even if some signs would bear inscriptions that are in a foreign language (The convention states visual icons are preferable to text). Uniformity means a Pinoy would recognize a sign with an arrow and bearing an icon of a plane means it points the direction where the airport is, not look up because an airplane is flying overhead. Uniformity means a Pinoy will recognize a "No Entry" sign even if there is a foreign inscription. Conversely, a foreigner will also be accorded the same courtesy in our country. And when one is able to recognize road signs, that makes for improved road safety.
Given the country’s traffic law-enforcement practices, homogenous traffic signage would also serve another vital function, and that is to protect road-users from bum raps from scrupulous traffic enforcers. Homogenous signage systems allow motorists and pedestrians to discern which traffic signs are official or not.Because how many hapless motorists out in the streets have been slapped with traffic violation tickets simply because they disregarded (or even failed to notice because its placement is poor) a makeshift sign with "No Entry" or "No Parking" crudely painted on a shabby cardboard? Also, unauthorized people will not be able to redirect traffic with crude and poorly-placed signs that can cause accidents simply because they want to close up the street for a wake or an inter-baranggay basketball game.
A homegenous road traffic signage system that’s internationally designed, recognized and mandated exists to serve a purpose, foremost of which is to promote road safety. These does not have to appeal to Nacianceno’s — and by extension, the MMDA’s — aesthetic sensibilities.