Pennsylvania Consolidated Statutes

75 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 6122 (2026)

  Authority to erect traffic-control devices.

✓ current as of May 2026
Coverage note: this corpus holds the consolidated Pa.C.S. titles only. Unconsolidated P.S. statutes (UTPCPL 73 P.S. § 201-1, Liquor Code, wage payment laws) are not included; a miss here does not mean the statute does not exist. Check palegis.us.
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section PA-LEGpalegis.us JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

§ 6122.  Authority to erect traffic-control devices.

(a)  General rule.--The department on State-designated highways and local authorities on any highway within their boundaries may erect official traffic-control devices, which shall be installed and maintained in conformance with the manual and regulations published by the department upon all highways as required to carry out the provisions of this title or to regulate, restrict, direct, warn, prohibit or guide traffic.

(1)  Local authorities shall obtain approval of the department prior to erecting an official traffic-control device on a State-designated highway except where department regulations provide otherwise.

(2)  Local authorities shall obtain approval of the department prior to erecting any traffic signal except in a municipality with a traffic engineer qualified in accordance with department regulations.

(b)  Standards for department approval.--The department shall promulgate rules and regulations setting forth minimum standards and factors to be considered in determining whether approval shall be given by the department for the installation and maintenance of official traffic-control devices. The factors shall include, but not be limited to, the volume of traffic and the number of accidents that occurred in each of the three preceding years.

(c)  Agreements to waive department approval.--The department may enter into agreements with local authorities transferring to them the authority to install official traffic-control devices without specific State approval provided they conduct traffic and engineering investigations which conform with the rules and regulations promulgated by the department.

(d)  Signals on municipal boundaries.--Whenever the need arises for the installation of a traffic-control signal on or near the boundary of two political subdivisions adjoining each other so as to be beneficial to both, either may petition the department for authority to install the signal. If the political subdivisions cannot amicably agree upon an allocation of the costs of installation and maintenance of the signal, either may petition the court of common pleas of the county in which the traffic-control signal is to be installed within 90 days after receiving the approval of the department and the court shall determine the proper allocation of the expenses to be incurred. The political subdivision that originated the request to the department shall install the traffic-control signal within 90 days of the date of the court order or of an amicable agreement between the political subdivisions.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 28 cases, 1982–2016 · leading case: S. Hoover v. S.A. Stine, PennDOT & the Borough of Waynesboro, 153 A.3d 1145 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2016).
S. Hoover v. S.A. Stine, PennDOT & the Borough of Waynesboro, 153 A.3d 1145 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2016). · cites it 4× “75 Pa.C.S. § 6122(a). Before installing a traffic control device on a state highway, however, a municipality must first obtain approval from PennDOT.”
Mason & Dixon Lines, Inc. v. Mognet, 645 A.2d 1370 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 1994). · cites it 2× “In Bendas II, this Court had held that Sections 6122 and 6124 of the Vehicle Code, 75 Pa.C.S. §§ 6122, 6124, imposed a statutory duty upon the Commonwealth to erect traffic control devices.”
McCalla v. Mura, 649 A.2d 646 (Pa. 1994). · cites it 2× “75 Pa.C.S. §§ 6122, 6124; 67 Pa.Code § 211.”
Starr v. Veneziano, 747 A.2d 867 (Pa. 2000). · cites it 2× “[4] It emphasizes that it was powerless to erect a no-left-turn sign absent PennDOT's approval, see 75 Pa.C.S. § 6122; 67 Pa.Code §§ 201.4, 211.”
Bendas v. Twp. of White Deer, 611 A.2d 1184 (Pa. 1992). “See 75 Pa.C.S. §§ 6122 and 6124. The Commonwealth Court held that these sections not only authorized the Commonwealth *183 Court to place such traffic controls, it implicitly created an affirmative duty upon the Department to use this authority in certain situations.”
Majestic v. Com., Dept. of Transp., 601 A.2d 386 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 1991). · cites it 2× “§ 6122(a), imposes a statutory duty upon the Department to erect traffic control devices and the failure of the Department to erect such controls is a breach of a duty owed to them. Section 6122(a) of the Vehicle Code, provides: (a) General rule.”
Hall v. Acme Markets, Inc., 532 A.2d 894 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 1987). “§6102(a), which charges the Department of Transportation (DOT) with the duty of administering the Vehicle Code; 75 Pa. C. S. §6122, which states DOT may erect traffic control devices and instructs DOT to set up rules and regulations to determine when approval should be given to…”
Wenger v. West Pennsboro Twp., 868 A.2d 638 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2005). “§ 6109(e), states that local authorities may take action regulating traffic only after an engineering and traffic investigation when and in the manner prescribed by DOT; and section 6122(b) of the Vehicle Code, 75 Pa.C.S. § 6122(b), states that DOT shall promulgate rules and…”
Mindala v. Am. Motors Corp., 543 A.2d 520 (Pa. 1988). “81, § 1, 75 Pa.C.S. § 6122, the Commonwealth is given exclusive jurisdiction for the placement of traffic control devices on state-designated highways: § 6122.”
Bendas v. Twp. of White Deer, 569 A.2d 1000 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 1990). “2d 257 (1988), the Township argues that inasmuch as there is no common law duty requiring townships to erect traffic control devices, any such duty would have to be imposed by statute and that neither Sections 6122 or 6124 of the Vehicle Code, 75 Pa.C.S. §§ 6122 or 6124, nor…”
Swank v. Bensalem Twp., 449 A.2d 837 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 1982). “The mere application for a permit to erect these devices as provided by Section 6122 of the Motor Vehicle Code, as amended, 75 Pa. C. S. §6122, was discretionary and created no duty because it was nothing more .”
Mindala v. Am. Motors Corp., 495 A.2d 644 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 1985). “Medma is factually distinguishable from the present ease because it involved potholes, with respect to which the Commonwealth has assumed the duty of care, 75 Pa. C. S. §6122. Act of November 26, 1978, P.”
— 75 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 6122(a) — 7 cases
Majestic v. Com., Dept. of Transp., 601 A.2d 386 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 1991). “§ 6122(a), imposes a statutory duty upon the Department to erect traffic control devices and the failure of the Department to erect such controls is a breach of a duty owed to them. Section 6122(a) of the Vehicle Code, provides: (a) General rule.”
S. Hoover v. S.A. Stine, PennDOT & the Borough of Waynesboro, 153 A.3d 1145 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2016). “75 Pa.C.S. § 6122(a). Before installing a traffic control device on a state highway, however, a municipality must first obtain approval from PennDOT.”
Commonwealth v. Bendas, 570 A.2d 1360 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 1990).
Tate v. Commonwealth, 84 A.3d 762 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2014).
Runkle v. PennDot, 16 Pa. D. & C.4th 284 (1992).
— 75 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 6122(a)(1) — 4 cases
S. Hoover v. S.A. Stine, PennDOT & the Borough of Waynesboro, 153 A.3d 1145 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2016). “75 Pa.C.S. § 6122(a). Before installing a traffic control device on a state highway, however, a municipality must first obtain approval from PennDOT.”
Griffith v. Snader, 795 A.2d 502 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2002).
Tate v. Commonwealth, 84 A.3d 762 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2014).
Gibbons v. Wiseman, 13 Pa. D. & C.4th 187 (1991).
— 75 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 6122(a)(2) — 2 cases
Sippos v. Richards, 541 A.2d 413 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 1988).
Commonwealth v. Bendas, 570 A.2d 1360 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 1990).
— 75 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 6122(b) — 2 cases
S. Hoover v. S.A. Stine, PennDOT & the Borough of Waynesboro, 153 A.3d 1145 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2016). “75 Pa.C.S. § 6122(a). Before installing a traffic control device on a state highway, however, a municipality must first obtain approval from PennDOT.”
Wenger v. West Pennsboro Twp., 868 A.2d 638 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2005). “§ 6109(e), states that local authorities may take action regulating traffic only after an engineering and traffic investigation when and in the manner prescribed by DOT; and section 6122(b) of the Vehicle Code, 75 Pa.C.S. § 6122(b), states that DOT shall promulgate rules and…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.