I was just wondering what folks thought of New Jersey's infamous jughandles. For those of you who don't know, many divided highways not grade seperated and controlled by traffic signals often don't allow left turns from the mainline. Instead, one must exit from the right via a small ramp, aka jughandle and turn left onto the side street to meet the signal to make your u or left turn. These work well in some places. Others a protected left turn signal from the mainline would work better. I've written to NJDOT in the past citing several intersections that I think would work better with a protected left. I never got any response from them, not even negative and decided trying to communicate with the state was futile.
The largest flaw with jughandles is the matter of what's known as "driver expectation". You have to go to the right to make a left turn. A bit counterintuitive. So advance signage for it is necessary.
They find themselves more useful on divided highways where often the place you're looking to get to is on the other ide of the road and will require a U-turn to access. The jughandles permit U-turns, ordinary protected left turn signals really don't. Certainly not as safely, anyway.
If the highway isn't divided, then it starts to become a bit pointless, although there are cases where geometry will dictate it. For instance, High Ridge Road (CT 137) at the Merritt Parkway (CT 15) (http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&ll=41.11238,-73.546313&spn=0.000891,0.002854&t=h&z=19). Traffic from 137 north to 15 south uses a small jughandle to get to the ramp. In this case, the problem is that due to the limited width of the underpass there isn't room to put in a left turn lane. So the state improvises instead. And it's nasty. At rush hour, that jughandle always backs up into the right lane of 137 under the highway, so if you're not looking to get on the parkway you really want to be in the left lane.
Meanwhile, southbound, getting in the left lane will likely get you waiting behind someone looking to make a left onto the parkway north or onto Buxton Farm Road neither of which has a left turn lane, again, due to lack of space.
That overpass was redone in 1994. I remember them redoing it. If CONNDOT was more in touch with the situation, when they replaced it they would have done so with a wider one that permitted a fifth lane underneath for left turns. But alas, they did not. And so here we still have what, as far as I know, is the only jughandle in the state of Connecticut. And a lane in each direction that through traffic will want to avoid.
Oh, I've seen this in Spain, it's quite inventive actually, remember that turning left on an intersection is pretty much the worst one you can get. On non traffic light controlled intersections, it's safer (and better for the flow), if you can stop, and take your time to cross safely. It only works if there's not too much left-turning traffic though, if you have like an office park to the left, one or two left-turn lanes would be better, or even a fly-over.
Quote from: froggie on May 24, 2009, 04:38:04 PM
IMO, the only advantage of jughandles is that it eliminates the left-turn signal phases from the main road, which allows the DOT to allocate more green time to the main road through phase.
It also makes timing those lights easier since they have only one phase. They must be having a positive effect though, as they seem to be spreading to other states.
If an intersection has heavy left turning traffic, a reverse jughandle is usually installed. They have more queuing space, plus it gets traffic out of the center of the road, a problem when a left turn lane "overflows" into the adjoining through lane.
The only two I know of here in the Detroit area, are at US-24 @ Maple Road (http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&ll=41.11238,-73.546313&spn=0.000891,0.002854&t=h&z=19), Bloomfield Hills, and Newburgh Road @ Edward Hines Drive (http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&ll=41.11238,-73.546313&spn=0.000891,0.002854&t=h&z=19), Livonia
QuoteIt also makes timing those lights easier since they have only one phase. They must be having a positive effect though, as they seem to be spreading to other states.
It only makes timing easier on the main road. If the side road has heavy traffic, then you still have the issue of multiple phases. Some of the split-phase signals along US 1 (Edison comes to mind) can take a long while.
Also, in my experience, the only state they've really spread to is Pennsylvania, and most of the jughandles I've seen there are decades old.
QuoteIf an intersection has heavy left turning traffic, a reverse jughandle is usually installed. They have more queuing space, plus it gets traffic out of the center of the road, a problem when a left turn lane "overflows" into the adjoining through lane.
The downside here is this requires left-turning traffic to go through the signal twice, which for the REALLY unlucky motorist means two red lights just to make a left turn. I just can't see where these movements would be any better than LOS E or F.
The jughandles are perfect for New Jersey on a lot of our 4-lane "Jersey freeways." These roads usually are lined with businesses and have no room for more turning lanes. Given Jersey's traffic situation, the jughandles are pretty efficient and necessary for NJ.
ahhh, jughandles - a Jersey visitor's worst nightmare :crazy:
I can guarantee you they have contributed to my getting lost in Jersey at least five times in one night :rolleyes:
PA-18 in Mercer County uses 'exit ramps' to make left turns at at-grade intersections.
http://maps.google.com/maps?q=Greenville,+Pennsylvania&oe=utf-8&client=firefox-a&ie=UTF8&hl=en&cd=1&geocode=FcDRdwIdbnI1-w&split=0&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=23.875,57.630033&ll=41.348875,-80.410459&spn=0.003842,0.009323&t=h&z=17 (http://maps.google.com/maps?q=Greenville,+Pennsylvania&oe=utf-8&client=firefox-a&ie=UTF8&hl=en&cd=1&geocode=FcDRdwIdbnI1-w&split=0&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=23.875,57.630033&ll=41.348875,-80.410459&spn=0.003842,0.009323&t=h&z=17)
Sykotyk
One area of PA that did (does?) have a lot of them is US 202 from the Delaware Line to West Chester and PA 100 from West Chester to the PA Turnpike exit at Downingtown.
Quote from: Chris on May 24, 2009, 03:23:56 PM
Oh, I've seen this in Spain, it's quite inventive actually, remember that turning left on an intersection is pretty much the worst one you can get.
Do you have map links to Spanish examples? I am personally not familiar with any. What I know Spain does use (having downloaded
proyectos de construcción for at least one) is hamburger junctions. These work somewhat similarly to jughandles in that a left turn is converted into a three-quarters maneuver where you leave at the right, go halfway around the roundabout portion of the hamburger, cross the road you just left at a stop- or yield-controlled junction, and then go along the other half of the roundabout until you reach your turning. But jughandles are somewhat different in that each jughandle is a quarter-circle link, not necessarily part of a roundabout, and can also be oriented so that the driver performs two right turns (right off the main road, right onto the side road, across the main road at stop or signal control) instead of one right turn followed by a left turn onto the side road.
PennDOT is using jughandles extensively, notably for the US 22 upgrade in District 3 (many jughandles with a few interchanges).
Some of the jughandle configurations are awful in NJ. You follow the right lane as it bears right to get to the side road so you can make a left, but there's enough traffic backed up at the light and enough turning lanes on the side road that you sit there for 10 minutes staring at your stop sign and waiting to make your left. Or the only lane you can make that left turn into before several traffic signal cycles pass is the left-turning lane of the side road, which isn't where you need to go. So ultimately you give up and make a right onto the side road, then find a place to make a U-turn to come back to the intersection. And now you're 15 minutes late. Granted it's not always this bad, but sometimes it is (US 1 north of Princeton at rush hour).
PA 309 uses them in Montgomeryville, north of Philadelphia. Here are some examples:
http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&q=PA-309+%26+W+Welsh+Rd,+Montgomery,+Pennsylvania+19454&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=48.374125,78.75&ie=UTF8&cd=1&geocode=FYB-ZQId8CmE-w&split=0&ll=40.206164,-75.224622&spn=0.005736,0.01369&t=h&z=17 (http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&q=PA-309+%26+W+Welsh+Rd,+Montgomery,+Pennsylvania+19454&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=48.374125,78.75&ie=UTF8&cd=1&geocode=FYB-ZQId8CmE-w&split=0&ll=40.206164,-75.224622&spn=0.005736,0.01369&t=h&z=17)
http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&q=PA-309+%26+Stump+Rd,+Montgomeryville,+Montgomery,+Pennsylvania+19454&sll=40.206164,-75.224622&sspn=0.005736,0.01369&ie=UTF8&cd=1&geocode=FdPJZQIdIgWE-w&split=0&ll=40.225647,-75.23401&spn=0.011468,0.02738&t=h&z=16 (http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&q=PA-309+%26+Stump+Rd,+Montgomeryville,+Montgomery,+Pennsylvania+19454&sll=40.206164,-75.224622&sspn=0.005736,0.01369&ie=UTF8&cd=1&geocode=FdPJZQIdIgWE-w&split=0&ll=40.225647,-75.23401&spn=0.011468,0.02738&t=h&z=16)
Quote from: treichard on May 26, 2009, 12:09:24 PM
Some of the jughandle configurations are awful in NJ. You follow the right lane as it bears right to get to the side road so you can make a left, but there's enough traffic backed up at the light and enough turning lanes on the side road that you sit there for 10 minutes staring at your stop sign and waiting to make your left. Or the only lane you can make that left turn into before several traffic signal cycles pass is the left-turning lane of the side road, which isn't where you need to go. So ultimately you give up and make a right onto the side road, then find a place to make a U-turn to come back to the intersection. And now you're 15 minutes late. Granted it's not always this bad, but sometimes it is (US 1 north of Princeton at rush hour).
This is true. I commute across US 1 in Middlesex County each day (at New Road, and formerly at Ridge Road). The jug handle ramps meet up with backed up traffic, especially in the evening rush. I always try to keep the lane open when I am the first car in queue that is backed up to to the jughandle (I.e., I avoid gridlock)...and THAT usually helps, except for when jug handle drivers are afraid to come into the space I have obviously left open for them.
Yep, that's called not blocking the intersection. Post signs and enforce it.
As for jughandles, there are at least five in Florida:
http://maps.google.com/maps?ll=28.424718,-81.472222&spn=0.000988,0.002575&t=k&z=20 (U-turn)
http://maps.google.com/maps?ll=25.971966,-80.233939&spn=0.001015,0.002575&t=k&z=20 (U-turn to access a ramp)
http://maps.google.com/maps?sll=28.424718,-81.472222&sspn=0.063255,0.164795&ll=26.232281,-80.186331&spn=0.004052,0.0103&t=k&z=18&layer=c&cbll=26.232281,-80.186331&panoid=65rItsM7UnwlWVie2_hGdA&cbp=12,113.08,,0,-14.03 (two reverse left turns)
http://maps.google.com/maps?ll=26.810355,-80.152291&spn=0.004012,0.008256&t=k&z=18 (reverse left turn)
I'd guess that most states have at least a couple at complicated junctions.
I think Jersey jughandles are the absolute greatest! When a state's roads and highways are as hectic as Jersey's, I don't know of a better traffic configuration than a jughandle. When my out-of-state friends complain about them, I remind them that the purpose of a jughandle is NOT so left turns can be made faster, but rather, it's so the left turn can be made SAFER.
Other states should learn a lesson from Jersey- particularly Florida. (particularly US-19 in the Pasco/Pinellas County area :ded:)
Quote from: Master son on May 26, 2009, 12:05:51 AM
ahhh, jughandles - a Jersey visitor's worst nightmare :crazy:
I can guarantee you they have contributed to my getting lost in Jersey at least five times in one night :rolleyes:
I thought the traffic circle was the visitor's worst nightmare?
Quote from: papaT10932 on December 03, 2010, 09:16:26 AM
I think Jersey jughandles are the absolute greatest! When a state's roads and highways are as hectic as Jersey's, I don't know of a better traffic configuration than a jughandle. When my out-of-state friends complain about them, I remind them that the purpose of a jughandle is NOT so left turns can be made faster, but rather, it's so the left turn can be made SAFER.
Other states should learn a lesson from Jersey- particularly Florida. (particularly US-19 in the Pasco/Pinellas County area :ded:)
I grew up in NJ and i absolutely HATE, DESPISE and LOATHE jughandles. Yeah they say they make the intersections safer. I am not an engineer but I would think that it just moves traffic problems from the intersection to a bit down the side road where the jug handle meets the side road. Especially if the side road is busy ( i.e. Route 37 and 166 in Toms River)
No other state uses them widely because a well designed Left turn lane handles traffic better(IMHO) even with multiple phases at a traffic light
I love the jug handle, i hate being in the left turn lane on a road like US-206 in columbus NJ waiting to turn into columbus market, havign cars zoom by at 50+ MPH shaking my sedan up each time. It scares me sometimes when there is high traffic, knowing that at any given moment someone may have to swerve around a car and possibly ram into my rear end. On smaller roads i can see where it is a disadvantage, but it makes sense on larger roads with higher traffic volume.
Is there any hard data showing that jughandles are really safer than traditional left turns?
I was also under the impression that jughandles exist not necessarily to improve left turns, but are mainly to simplify signal phasing, in that you don't need a left turn phase on the main route.
Quote from: SteveG1988 on December 03, 2010, 02:09:44 PM
I love the jug handle, i hate being in the left turn lane on a road like US-206 in columbus NJ waiting to turn into columbus market, havign cars zoom by at 50+ MPH shaking my sedan up each time. It scares me sometimes when there is high traffic, knowing that at any given moment someone may have to swerve around a car and possibly ram into my rear end. On smaller roads i can see where it is a disadvantage, but it makes sense on larger roads with higher traffic volume.
Again a well designed configured left-turn signal/turning lane would solve the problem. And urban areas such as LA, Phoenix, Atlanta and Miami all have roads with no jughandles. I would like to see some statistics comparing accident data, traffic volume etc. But I am not a traffic engineer, just an interested layman
Quote from: jwolfer on December 03, 2010, 05:25:21 PM
Again a well designed configured left-turn signal/turning lane would solve the problem. And urban areas such as LA, Phoenix, Atlanta and Miami all have roads with no jughandles. I would like to see some statistics comparing accident data, traffic volume etc. But I am not a traffic engineer, just an interested layman
The Miami area has a couple (linked above), not that that invalidates your point. Actually there are a couple on US 27 (Okeechobee) as well, but using local streets to make the turns.
There's a pair on MO 100 a little west of I-270, although left turns onto MO 100 are still allowed from the cross street:
http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&ie=UTF8&ll=38.596682,-90.473801&spn=0.003186,0.0103&t=k&z=18 (http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&ie=UTF8&ll=38.596682,-90.473801&spn=0.003186,0.0103&t=k&z=18)
I would be curious about the various trade off between a jersey jughandle and a Michigan left, other than ROW.
PennDOT has been putting jughandles in where US 22 has been upgraded in Districts 9, 10, and 12 between Murrysville and Ebensburg.
southbound US 11/15 between Selinsgrove and Duncannon has jughandles to allow U-Turns. I've really only seen jughandles in PA and NJ.
IIRC, US 1 has a few jughandles in Narragansett, RI.
PA 100 has some between the turnpike and its southern end.
I think US 202 south of where the freeway ends near West Chester, PA and the Delaware line has them too.
and the US 11/15 ones were adding in the upgrading to a 4 lane "poor man's freeway." The jughandles would be even more useful on the NB side but there usually isn't enough room between the road and the Susquehanna.
There's a few here and there in New York...I recall one on NY 2 at a state park entrance east of Troy.
Quote from: NE2 on December 03, 2010, 07:55:31 PM
Quote from: jwolfer on December 03, 2010, 05:25:21 PM
Again a well designed configured left-turn signal/turning lane would solve the problem. And urban areas such as LA, Phoenix, Atlanta and Miami all have roads with no jughandles. I would like to see some statistics comparing accident data, traffic volume etc. But I am not a traffic engineer, just an interested layman
The Miami area has a couple (linked above), not that that invalidates your point. Actually there are a couple on US 27 (Okeechobee) as well, but using local streets to make the turns.
There is 1 jughandle in Jacksonville. ON Riverside Ave coming off the Acosta Bridge. There is still a left turn lane for traffic coming from downtown and the jughandle is for traffic coming off the bridge so you dont ahve to cross 2 lanes of traffic to make the immediate left
Quote from: PennDOTFan on December 03, 2010, 09:53:20 PM
IIRC, US 1 has a few jughandles in Narragansett, RI.
That is correct. Further to the west it has median U-turns instead. Very smooth ride, but a little too long to be an alternate to I-95. (RI 3 works well enough for that.)
I believe PA 309 has a few in Montgomeryville, definitely at PA 63 and Stump Road, but I can't remember where else.
Penna. also has jughandles on US 13 in the Levittown/Bristol area of Bucks County.
Like most traffic solutions, jughandles have their pros and cons. I agree with the writer who pointed out the problem of long delayed left turns from the jug handle into the side road in the Princeton, NJ area on Route 1. I've been caught up in that situation too in the afternoon rush-hour. Friends of mine used to live in Princeton Jct. but moved to less populated Columbus because of the traffic congestion in the US 1 corridor in the Princeton area.
And BTW, I have been in that general store in the Columbus hamlet. What a throwback to an earlier era! (Chuckle!)
Long Island has a jughandle on NY 347 at NY 111. It's not the greatest, although from what family members told me, it was worse as a regular intersection.
I remember coming across a few in Portland over the summer and thought it was kind of a neat idea. It would take me a while to get used to it, but I do think it has some major advantages when it comes to safety, although whether or not it's truly safer than a protected left turn I suppose is a matter of debate.
^^^
Maybe, maybe not.
Does anyone know of any studies comparing a jughandle to a protected left turn?
The main advantage to a jughandle is having one less signal phase (avoiding mainline lefts), thus affording more green time to everyone but especially the main arterial.
Downside is that jughandles tend to require more right-of-way than a traditional intersection, nevermind the congestion issues where the jughandle meets the side road.
How about US 4 Business in West Rutland, VT? The intersection where it becomes VT 4A and the ramp leading to US 4 Mainline uses one.
Quote from: roadman65 on April 03, 2011, 02:46:58 PM
How about US 4 Business in West Rutland, VT? The intersection where it becomes VT 4A and the ramp leading to US 4 Mainline uses one.
VT 7A had had one at US 7 exit 2, but it's now just a standard left turn (no traffic to warrant a jughandle).
In Vermont, US 2 has some jughandles through the Lake Champlain Islands.
Quote from: Duke87 on May 24, 2009, 03:10:03 PM
And so here we still have what, as far as I know, is the only jughandle in the state of Connecticut. And a lane in each direction that through traffic will want to avoid.
There are a few others in CT - these come off the top of my head:
1. CT 4 (Farmington Ave) in Farmington, just west of I-84 Exit 39
2. CT 71 at I-84 EB ramp at Exit 40
3. Berlin Turnpike at Route 9 SB ramp at Exit 21:
When I used to travel for work in NJ a lot, it took some time to get used to the "jersey jugs", but in the end, they do keep traffic moving and seemed pretty easy to figure out. The ones that were a bit confusing was being on (example): Road A WB wanting to turn onto Road B SB, having to pass through the intersection and cross Road B, then "exit" onto Road B and turn right to enter Road B SB, only to wait at the signal with Road A. I used to joke that you can't make a left turn in the state of NJ!
Sturbridge MA, US 20 EB, jughandle:
http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=route+20+sturbridge+ma&aq=&sll=16.636192,-95.712891&sspn=43.318174,78.662109&ie=UTF8&hq=route+20&hnear=Sturbridge,+Worcester,+Massachusetts&ll=42.11139,-72.092806&spn=0.001005,0.002401&t=h&z=19
MA has several on the MDC (now DCR) parkways around Boston. Soldiers Field Rd. has one I know of.
Quote from: AlpsROADS on April 03, 2011, 02:58:00 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on April 03, 2011, 02:46:58 PM
How about US 4 Business in West Rutland, VT? The intersection where it becomes VT 4A and the ramp leading to US 4 Mainline uses one.
VT 7A had had one at US 7 exit 2, but it's now just a standard left turn (no traffic to warrant a jughandle).
US 4 at VT 4A just east of the state line in Fair Haven used to be a jughandle, but that was taken out sometime in 2009.
US 1 S/B in Greenwich CT uses a jug handle at Indian Field Rd.
There is one in Las Vegas, NV. It is part of the I-15 interchange with Charleston Blvd (SR 159), although the jughandle itself is located off of Grand Central Parkway to facilitate access from Charleston Blvd to I-15 north. This one is interesting in that the intersecting road is only the I-15 ramp and the jughandle itself.
http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=Grand+Central+Parkway+and+Iron+Horse+Drive,+Las+Vegas,+NV&aq=&sll=36.160313,-115.158541&sspn=0.011503,0.022552&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=S+Grand+Central+Pkwy+%26+Iron+Horse+Dr,+Las+Vegas,+Clark,+Nevada+89106&ll=36.16098,-115.158112&spn=0.005752,0.011276&t=h&z=17
This jughandle was originally constructed because a stadium was proposed to be built nearby and the jughandle design was anticipated to be able to handle the traffic best. The stadium plans have long-since been shelved. Currently, the jughandle is anticipated to be removed as part of a greater reconstruction of the Charleston Blvd interchange under NDOT's Project Neon on I-15.
Here's an Arkansas jughandle:
http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=Fayetteville,+AR+72701&aq=0&sll=25.971966,-80.233939&sspn=0.000717,0.001034&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=Fayetteville,+Washington,+Arkansas&ll=36.122689,-94.144104&spn=0.002578,0.004136&t=k&z=18
A couple from Portland, OR:
http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&ll=45.490947,-122.655154&spn=0.002817,0.007789&t=k&z=18
http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&ll=45.438693,-122.753162&spn=0.00141,0.003895&t=k&z=19
I'm not sure if this can be considered one, but M-44 at West River Dr outside of Grand Rapids:
http://maps.google.com/maps?f=d&source=s_d&saddr=&daddr=&geocode=&hl=en&mra=mr&sll=32.71673,-117.16293&sspn=0.007348,0.019891&ie=UTF8&ll=43.064389,-85.57987&spn=0.00319,0.014033&t=k&z=17
M-44 runs south to north, West River Dr runs west to east and changes names to Cannonsburg Rd at M-44.
PA-18 between Greenville and Hermitage has jughandle exits (no lefts on the mainline permitted).
Quote from: shadyjay on April 03, 2011, 06:16:09 PM
There are a few others in CT - these come off the top of my head:
1. CT 4 (Farmington Ave) in Farmington, just west of I-84 Exit 39
2. CT 71 at I-84 EB ramp at Exit 40
3. Berlin Turnpike at Route 9 SB ramp at Exit 21:
There's also a jughandle at SSR 401 and SSR 403 at Bradley International Airport.
Quote from: SignBridge on December 06, 2010, 09:55:21 PM
Penna. also has jughandles on US 13 in the Levittown/Bristol area of Bucks County.
I grew up in Jersey and the ones on 13 rubbed me the wrong way when I first moved to Bristol. I think it's the large ALL TURNS signs. It's not correct at some intersections where you can actually make a right hand turn legally. They really should read as NJ does: "U AND LEFT TURNS" since it's more accurate.
NJ jughandles wouldn't be so bad if they were large enough to handle the queued traffic. What sucks is when they're woefully small and traffic backups up on the mainline road you're trying to cross. Some areas also have this bad habit of inconsistent intersections. Hooper Avenue in Toms River is like this. Some intersections are left turns, some are jug handles and if you don't know which your turn will be, you're kinda screwed.
Hooper Ave also has another fun distinction, the at-grade cloverleaf at Hooper and Bay: http://goo.gl/maps/qqt7 . That's what happens when you go ga-ga for jughandles.
And maybe it's just because I grew up in NJ, but I don't find jug handles nearly as confusing as the Michigan left. I was up near Ann Arbor once and I came to one. I saw the sign, and couldn't make heads or tails of what it was telling me to do. I ended up going straight and turning into a parking lot to turn around. I didn't find out what it was all about until later, after I'd left the state.
After living in Florida for nearly twenty years and traveling Orange Blossom Trail for all of my time, I can see how the jughandles help! Too many slowpokes in the left lane and using the suicide lane as a merge area causes chaos on many highways here.
I do see one jughandle in New Jersey that is not needed. The NJ 94 jughandle in Lafayette, NJ from SB NJ 15 & NB NJ 94 is on a two lane road and has no median. The setup is useless for this type of road.
Why is it useless?
Here's a sort-of "half jughandle" setup (http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=Canyon+Road+and+Cedar+Hills+Blvd&aq=&sll=45.438693,-122.753162&sspn=0.001432,0.002642&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=SW+Canyon+Rd+%26+SW+Cedar+Hills+Blvd,+Beaverton,+Washington,+Oregon+97005&ll=45.488246,-122.810798&spn=0.002023,0.005284&t=k&z=18) in Beaverton, Oregon. Traffic on eastbound OR-8 (Canyon Road) must exit off to access SW Cedar Hills Blvd, and the jughandle also connects into Broadway. There's no jughandle on the other side, and westbound traffic on OR-8 is prohibited from turning left at the intersection.
Quote from: NE2 on April 15, 2011, 01:22:38 AM
Why is it useless?
Because in this particular instance, the jughandle is tiny, and neither NJ 15 or NJ 94 have a median, so left turns could be doable there.
Yes, they could have used a left turn lane. They decided to go with an alternate treatment. That doesn't make it useless.
Quote from: connroadgeek on April 03, 2011, 07:25:28 PM
US 1 S/B in Greenwich CT uses a jug handle at Indian Field Rd.
Eh, sort of. Old Post Rd No 6 is a street in it's own right (and is two-way), but does also function as a jughandle since left turns off of US 1 onto Indian Field Rd are not otherwise permitted.
I know of exactly one Chicagoland jughandle. It's along York Road in oak Brook, between I-88 and the ramp to I-294 south for a local street.
http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&ie=UTF8&ll=41.855454,-87.929828&spn=0.002741,0.006866&t=h&z=18
Quote from: Brandon on April 16, 2011, 11:27:06 AM
I know of exactly one Chicagoland jughandle. It's along York Road in oak Brook, between I-88 and the ramp to I-294 south for a local street.
http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&ie=UTF8&ll=41.855454,-87.929828&spn=0.002741,0.006866&t=h&z=18
Have the ones on IL 43 at 63rd and 65th been removed?
Quote from: NE2 on April 16, 2011, 02:42:34 PM
Quote from: Brandon on April 16, 2011, 11:27:06 AM
I know of exactly one Chicagoland jughandle. It's along York Road in oak Brook, between I-88 and the ramp to I-294 south for a local street.
http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&ie=UTF8&ll=41.855454,-87.929828&spn=0.002741,0.006866&t=h&z=18
Have the ones on IL 43 at 63rd and 65th been removed?
OK, I know of three now. Don't usually use that stretch of Harlem Avenue.
There's one in my area (US-61 and 59th St in Davenport, IA) that's extremely helpful, particularly going southbound. Along both sides of US-61 are hotels, restaurants, etc. and a median blocks all left turns. There used to be two, but now left turns are permitted. I think the exit ramp still exists to permit U-turns, though.
Quote from: NE2 on April 15, 2011, 01:11:54 PM
Yes, they could have used a left turn lane. They decided to go with an alternate treatment. That doesn't make it useless.
I agree considering that left turns are allowed elswhere along NJ 15 and NJ 94! It wastes time waiting for another signal! Jughandles on two lane roads make no sense!
Quote from: NE2 on April 16, 2011, 02:42:34 PM
Quote from: Brandon on April 16, 2011, 11:27:06 AM
I know of exactly one Chicagoland jughandle. It's along York Road in oak Brook, between I-88 and the ramp to I-294 south for a local street.
http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&ie=UTF8&ll=41.855454,-87.929828&spn=0.002741,0.006866&t=h&z=18
Have the ones on IL 43 at 63rd and 65th been removed?
Last I checked in the area, they're still there.
Laurence Harbor, NJ had a jughandle NB on NJ 35, but was converted into a bus stop. Anyone using it other than a bus, will get ticketed. You now have to go through a shopping center and cut through its parking area to make a left onto Laurence Parkway. The same from Laurence Parkway to NB NJ 35 you cannot make a left, even though there is a signal stopping you from crossing the other side of the road. You must go into the plaza across the street and do the same.Plus there is a delay on NJ 35 at the second signals to clear a way for traffic that does not even go there. This is the most dumbest set up around!
Quote from: roadman65 on June 02, 2011, 07:53:53 PM
Laurence Harbor, NJ had a jughandle NB on NJ 35, but was converted into a bus stop. Anyone using it other than a bus, will get ticketed. You now have to go through a shopping center and cut through its parking area to make a left onto Laurence Parkway.
It's pretty obvious you turn right to go left...
QuoteThe same from Laurence Parkway to NB NJ 35 you cannot make a left, even though there is a signal stopping you from crossing the other side of the road. You must go into the plaza across the street and do the same.Plus there is a delay on NJ 35 at the second signals to clear a way for traffic that does not even go there. This is the most dumbest set up around!
And you do a U-turn in this instance to complete the movement.
Similar to a Michigan Left. Exclamation point.
Quote from: roadman65 on June 02, 2011, 07:53:53 PM
Laurence Harbor, NJ had a jughandle NB on NJ 35, but was converted into a bus stop.
I doubt this. It's more likely that the jughandle was where the parking lot is now, to the right of the bus stop.
Quote from: roadman65 on June 02, 2011, 07:53:53 PM
Anyone using it other than a bus, will get ticketed. You now have to go through a shopping center and cut through its parking area to make a left onto Laurence Parkway.
Huh? You turn right on Laurence Parkway and left on Shoreland Circle.
Quote from: roadman65 on June 02, 2011, 07:53:53 PM
The same from Laurence Parkway to NB NJ 35 you cannot make a left, even though there is a signal stopping you from crossing the other side of the road. You must go into the plaza across the street and do the same.Plus there is a delay on NJ 35 at the second signals to clear a way for traffic that does not even go there. This is the most dumbest set up around!
Your posts are the most dumbest!!!
NO NAME CALLING
:banghead:
Quote from: nyratk1 on December 08, 2010, 11:14:59 AM
Long Island has a jughandle on NY 347 at NY 111. It's not the greatest, although from what family members told me, it was worse as a regular intersection.
Yeah odd intersection. All movements between 347 and 111 are dealt through the jughandles and from 347 is signed as "Exit N-S" whatever that means. Actually think it is semi-efficient, that setup would do wonders at 347/Nicolls Road.
Central Park Avenue [NY 100] has several jughandles throughout Yonkers. Most of the locals don't know how to use them, though, so it's pretty ineffective.
Quote from: NE2 on June 02, 2011, 08:38:53 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on June 02, 2011, 07:53:53 PM
Laurence Harbor, NJ had a jughandle NB on NJ 35, but was converted into a bus stop.
I doubt this. It's more likely that the jughandle was where the parking lot is now, to the right of the bus stop.
Quote from: roadman65 on June 02, 2011, 07:53:53 PM
Anyone using it other than a bus, will get ticketed. You now have to go through a shopping center and cut through its parking area to make a left onto Laurence Parkway.
Huh? You turn right on Laurence Parkway and left on Shoreland Circle.
Quote from: roadman65 on June 02, 2011, 07:53:53 PM
The same from Laurence Parkway to NB NJ 35 you cannot make a left, even though there is a signal stopping you from crossing the other side of the road. You must go into the plaza across the street and do the same.Plus there is a delay on NJ 35 at the second signals to clear a way for traffic that does not even go there. This is the most dumbest set up around!
Your posts are the most dumbest!!!
Actually it has merit. The area in between signals is cleared out by a delayed red. If there is no turning traffic into that area, why bother with it, unless it is for the firehouse nearby, but now they have the technoligy to install a transponder to activate the signal to turn green in the direction of the emergency vehicle. Deerfield Boulevard at John Young does this where the light turns green EB on Deerfield and red in all other three movements when Station 58 lets out and the vehicle has to turn to John Young.
No matter what you say about the east side of Route 35, its still a parking lot. I have no problem using them, and at times I have used them to avoid un-necessary turns here in Florida, and on OBT. In Fords, NJ I used the old Druckers Parking Lot to get into the traffic cause the Ford Avenue jughandle was too small. Most everbody, who wanted to make the light there from SB US 1 to Ford Avenue ,did that rather than the jughande itself.
Quote
No matter what you say about the east side of Route 35, its still a parking lot.
Every map service out there disagrees.
I thought it said "Jersey Juggalo" at first.
Quote from: tdindy88 on April 18, 2011, 09:09:32 PM
Quote from: NE2 on April 16, 2011, 02:42:34 PM
Quote from: Brandon on April 16, 2011, 11:27:06 AM
I know of exactly one Chicagoland jughandle. It's along York Road in oak Brook, between I-88 and the ramp to I-294 south for a local street.
http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&ie=UTF8&ll=41.855454,-87.929828&spn=0.002741,0.006866&t=h&z=18
Have the ones on IL 43 at 63rd and 65th been removed?
Last I checked in the area, they're still there.
Half Day Road and Skokie Highway (US-41) in Highland Park has jughandles. The one for northbound Skokie Highway was rebuilt about 15 years ago to swing way farther east due to backups on Half Day. You can see where it used to go based on the tree line. They also put a signal at that intersection as well. It struck me as a somewhat futile effort at the time, and I don't know if it can keep up with volume today. There used to be a similar setup at Clavey Road and Skokie Highway before they grade separated it.
http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=Half+Day+Road,+Highland+Park,+IL&aq=0&sll=41.855454,-87.929828&sspn=0.002737,0.004833&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=Half+Day+Rd,+Highland+Park,+Lake,+Illinois&ll=42.199124,-87.830511&spn=0.005444,0.009667&t=h&z=17
A big thoroughfare in East Brunswick, NJ has these (Exit 9 off NJ Turnpike), and that road moves a monstrous amount of traffic very effectively. If there were protected left turn arrows at the intersections, there would be constant gridlock.
Quote from: architect77 on June 10, 2011, 02:25:58 PM
A big thoroughfare in East Brunswick, NJ has these (Exit 9 off NJ Turnpike), and that road moves a monstrous amount of traffic very effectively. If there were protected left turn arrows at the intersections, there would be constant gridlock.
NJ 18 does not do any of those things. It does come to a standstill during rush hour and weekends due to combinations of shore/recreational, commuting, shopping, Turnpike-New Brunswick, and local (conference center, etc.) traffic. Jughandles do improve the situation by removing a phase, but what you really need is a full freeway, along the lines of the proposed Driscoll Expwy. from years ago.
Quote from: architect77 on June 10, 2011, 02:25:58 PM
A big thoroughfare in East Brunswick, NJ has these (Exit 9 off NJ Turnpike), and that road moves a monstrous amount of traffic very effectively. If there were protected left turn arrows at the intersections, there would be constant gridlock.
There may not be a protected left turn phase but the cross street would need a longer green ( I would think) phase so the time saved may be a wash. Other heavily populated cities such as LA, Atlanta and Miami have large thoroughfares with left turns and the traffic is no worse than on Route 18
Quote from: ftballfan on June 05, 2011, 10:39:21 PM
I thought it said "Jersey Juggalo" at first.
Maybe we need a thread about how fucking magnets work.
Water, fire, air and dirt
National parks, how do they work?
And I don't wanna talk to an engineer
Y'all NIMBYs lying, and keeping me from routing an Interstate through Yellowstone.
Oh well, it worked until the last line :)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ft0.gstatic.com%2Fimages%3Fq%3Dtbn%3AANd9GcQzvhWCO7LjE1NMuVmIfxJP6fASBwJhhgfP981UwdAn22tu8lWj%26amp%3Bt%3D1&hash=2f6557baf8db920d2ae994e353914dc3df7ff53b)
Quote from: jwolfer on June 10, 2011, 05:44:29 PM
Quote from: architect77 on June 10, 2011, 02:25:58 PM
A big thoroughfare in East Brunswick, NJ has these (Exit 9 off NJ Turnpike), and that road moves a monstrous amount of traffic very effectively. If there were protected left turn arrows at the intersections, there would be constant gridlock.
There may not be a protected left turn phase but the cross street would need a longer green ( I would think) phase so the time saved may be a wash. Other heavily populated cities such as LA, Atlanta and Miami have large thoroughfares with left turns and the traffic is no worse than on Route 18
I've been wondering about this for a long time, actually. I assume that most states don't use jughandles simply because of the expense (cost of land+cost of pavement). But if large thoroughfares with protected left turns (three or four signal phases per intersection) handle traffic just as efficiently as large thoroughfares with jughandles (two or three signal phases per intersection), all other things being roughly equal (traffic volume, number of through lanes, spacing of intersections), then how do they do it? Is it a matter of the timing of the traffic signals?
Otherwise, I just assume that most states feel the benefit of fewer signal phases doesn't justify the cost of jughandles and that they rely more on freeways to handle high traffic volumes. Also, New Jersey is different from many of other states in that it has a large network of high-capacity, non-freeway highways, some of which would technically be considered expressways, while many states have a more binary road system, mostly just consisting of freeways and conventional roads. Of course, this is just what I assume from observation, and none of it is based on quantitative research.
Technically I don't think any would be expressways, since they have unrestricted driveway access. What's tightly controlled is access across the median.
Quote from: stridentweasel on June 11, 2011, 01:57:40 AM
Quote from: jwolfer on June 10, 2011, 05:44:29 PM
Quote from: architect77 on June 10, 2011, 02:25:58 PM
A big thoroughfare in East Brunswick, NJ has these (Exit 9 off NJ Turnpike), and that road moves a monstrous amount of traffic very effectively. If there were protected left turn arrows at the intersections, there would be constant gridlock.
There may not be a protected left turn phase but the cross street would need a longer green ( I would think) phase so the time saved may be a wash. Other heavily populated cities such as LA, Atlanta and Miami have large thoroughfares with left turns and the traffic is no worse than on Route 18
I've been wondering about this for a long time, actually. I assume that most states don't use jughandles simply because of the expense (cost of land+cost of pavement). But if large thoroughfares with protected left turns (three or four signal phases per intersection) handle traffic just as efficiently as large thoroughfares with jughandles (two or three signal phases per intersection), all other things being roughly equal (traffic volume, number of through lanes, spacing of intersections), then how do they do it? Is it a matter of the timing of the traffic signals?
Otherwise, I just assume that most states feel the benefit of fewer signal phases doesn't justify the cost of jughandles and that they rely more on freeways to handle high traffic volumes. Also, New Jersey is different from many of other states in that it has a large network of high-capacity, non-freeway highways, some of which would technically be considered expressways, while many states have a more binary road system, mostly just consisting of freeways and conventional roads. Of course, this is just what I assume from observation, and none of it is based on quantitative research.
Oh, another thing: jughandles don't work well for four-way intersections between equal roads. You would either end up with jughandles leading to stop signs where left-turning traffic would have to wait a very long time, reverse jughandles with extremely long queues (from having to go though one traffic signal, a merge, and then another traffic signal), jughandles with traffic signals at the ends (which would certainly slow down traffic for the intersecting road), or the (in)famous cloverleaf intersection (basically a set of four reverse jughandles with outer ramps provided for right turns). The type of highways in New Jersey that use jughandles often use grade-separated interchanges for intersections with equal highways. In most states, where two equal, major arterial roads cross, there is simply an intersection with protected left turns for all four directions, and usually with double left turns.
Quote from: NE2 on June 11, 2011, 02:08:33 AM
Technically I don't think any would be expressways, since they have unrestricted driveway access. What's tightly controlled is access across the median.
Hmm. I see what you mean, considering the close spacing of driveways on many of these highways. At what point do driveways become too closely spaced for a road to be considered an expressway? I can't seem to find a definition that quantifies this.
Each state seems to have its own definition - search for "partial control of access".
I've always considered an "expressway" to be anything where the mainline doesn't have to stop. No stop signs or turn signals. Amount of on and off points to the side is irrelevant.
(California disagrees with me, naming plenty of arterials, with four traffic lights per mile, as "expressway".)
California probably uses the same definition of "expressway" that I do - any road with no or minimal driveway access, but with signalized and unsignalized intersections.
I know San Tomas Expwy in the bay area has plenty of driveway access, while Central Expwy does not. Both are signalized quite heavily.
Quote from: NE2 on June 11, 2011, 05:53:30 AM
Each state seems to have its own definition - search for "partial control of access".
This page from NJDOT defines "partial control of access" and "expressway": http://www.state.nj.us/transportation/eng/documents/RDM/sec3.shtm#generalterms
An expressway, having "full or partial control of access," could allow "some private driveway connections" (terms quoted from website), although it doesn't say how many driveway connections are allowed per a unit of distance. That doesn't seem to exclude a road that has grade-separated interchanges, at-grade intersections, and some driveways from the definition of "expressway."
The only quantitative, rigidly categorical definitions I've found involve "Access Levels," and they don't use the terms "freeway" and "expressway."
http://www.state.nj.us/transportation/business/accessmgt/NJHAMC/pdf/appendixA.pdf
http://www.state.nj.us/transportation/business/accessmgt/NJHAMC/pdf/appendixC.pdf
A freeway would be Access Level 1, an expressway would be at least Access Level 2, and a divided arterial road with driveways (regardless of whether it has grade separations), would be at least Access Level 3.
So, from what I can find, the definition of "expressway" isn't as exclusive as the definition of "freeway." It seems possible that New Jersey only considers Access Level 2 roads to be expressways, but I haven't yet found the term "expressway" defined that way.
The MUTCD definition of an expressway is "a divided highway with partial control of access"
As NE2 indicates, the definition of what makes an expressway often varies by state standards. Some allow driveway access onto expressways, others do not, others limit the number of driveways, etc...
Quote from: roadfro on June 11, 2011, 05:28:56 PM
The MUTCD definition of an expressway is "a divided highway with partial control of access"
wait ... lots of roads have partial control of access. I know one-lane dirt roads with a ditch to either side; that can't possibly be an expressway!
Partial control of access in a legal sense. On those dirt roads, an abutter can put in a driveway at any point.
is there any classification for a road that has all kinds of abutments to the side, but does not have the through traffic stop ever?
I would imagine that is what drivers really care about - they're not busy counting the number of driveways per mile; they care more about how often their progress is impeded.
example: a lot of US-395 north of CA-14. there are a few traffic lights but most of the small towns, you can roll right through, and where you want to get on or off is your own business. I know there's stretches about 60-70 miles long without any stops for through traffic.
That's probably a certain level of access management in some states.
Quote from: NE2 on June 11, 2011, 06:48:32 PM
That's probably a certain level of access management in some states.
I don't think CA calls it anything, but it seems pretty obvious that it is a standard they are striving for. CA will build long lengths of rural expressway specifically without traffic lights, while other states (AZ comes to mind) will not hesitate to put some in. AZ-87 actually is a very nice expressway for most of its length, once it leaves Payson, but there is a set of lights out in the dead middle of nowhere still about 10-15 miles away from metro Phoenix that are true example of the "surprise! traffic light!" scenario that I can't believe isn't a cause of more accidents.
In CA, the only traffic lights I can think of offhand on a four-lane road with 65mph speed limit is some in the Marysville area on CA-99.
See also: US-101, for long stretches of road without traffic lights, but the occasional at-grade crossing. There used to be some until the early 2000s on 101 between LA and SF, but Caltrans actively worked to eliminate them. it is now around mile 430 that you encounter the first traffic light on 101, and if Caltrans had its way it would be maybe mile 660 in Willits or so.
Quote from: agentsteel53 on June 11, 2011, 05:33:52 PM
Quote from: roadfro on June 11, 2011, 05:28:56 PM
The MUTCD definition of an expressway is "a divided highway with partial control of access"
wait ... lots of roads have partial control of access. I know one-lane dirt roads with a ditch to either side; that can't possibly be an expressway!
A one-lane dirt road wouldn't be a divided highway, therefore, it's not an expressway... :sombrero:
Quote from: agentsteel53 on June 11, 2011, 06:45:18 PM
is there any classification for a road that has all kinds of abutments to the side, but does not have the through traffic stop ever?
I would imagine that is what drivers really care about - they're not busy counting the number of driveways per mile; they care more about how often their progress is impeded.
Depends on what you refer to as "abutments". If there are abutting properties with no driveway access thereto, it could possibly be described as an expressway or freeway...
I don't think the typical traffic engineering definition of "expressway" really takes into account the traffic control along the facility and how often it is stopped through signals or other means. Certainly, the traveling public's definition of "expressway" often does consider these factors...
Quote from: roadfro on June 12, 2011, 02:00:04 AM
A one-lane dirt road wouldn't be a divided highway
Unless it's one-way...
Quote from: NE2 on June 11, 2011, 05:53:30 AM
Each state seems to have its own definition - search for "partial control of access".
Quote from: deathtopumpkins on June 11, 2011, 11:57:42 AM
California probably uses the same definition of "expressway" that I do - any road with no or minimal driveway access, but with signalized and unsignalized intersections.
Isn't it true that a small section of I-40 in Western NC has driveways with mailboxes coming up to it?
Quote from: Steve on June 10, 2011, 05:06:32 PM
Quote from: architect77 on June 10, 2011, 02:25:58 PM
A big thoroughfare in East Brunswick, NJ has these (Exit 9 off NJ Turnpike), and that road moves a monstrous amount of traffic very effectively. If there were protected left turn arrows at the intersections, there would be constant gridlock.
NJ 18 does not do any of those things. It does come to a standstill during rush hour and weekends due to combinations of shore/recreational, commuting, shopping, Turnpike-New Brunswick, and local (conference center, etc.) traffic. Jughandles do improve the situation by removing a phase, but what you really need is a full freeway, along the lines of the proposed Driscoll Expwy. from years ago.
There's no doubt that NJ 18 is old and antiquated and far over-capacity. I doubt planners ever thought there would be huge big-box shopping centers lining both sides of the road one after another.
All I meant was that for such a tight and heavily-traveled corridor, the jughandles helped move a lot of thru-traffic.
Quote from: architect77 on June 20, 2011, 08:30:23 PM
Isn't it true that a small section of I-40 in Western NC has driveways with mailboxes coming up to it?
I know from going there in 2009, that there are roads along the westernmost few miles of I-40 in the Smokies. I think they are mainly forest roads. I don't recall seeing any mailboxes, but I've only gone that way once.
Quote from: mightyace on June 21, 2011, 07:50:40 PM
I know from going there in 2009, that there are roads along the westernmost few miles of I-40 in the Smokies. I think they are mainly forest roads. I don't recall seeing any mailboxes, but I've only gone that way once.
that's what I recall as well. there's at least in Tennessee from what I remember.
they also exist in the Grapevine on I-5 in California, but in NC, I definitely remember seeing one street blade, which tends not to be the case elsewhere with forest roads.
Quote from: agentsteel53 on June 21, 2011, 08:12:15 PM
but in NC, I definitely remember seeing one street blade, which tends not to be the case elsewhere with forest roads.
I remember seeing several street blades. I didn't get any pictures because they came up too fast and I was driving and I wanted to keep my eyes on the road in that narrow, twisting stretch of I-40.
I find jughandles to be annoying most of the time for the reason others have mentioned about how backups on the road fed by the jughandle can mess up the whole setup. But there is one thing that I think jughandles do a lot better than regular left-turn lights, and that is improving the flow of U-turning traffic by turning the U-turns into left turns off either the jughandle or the other road. It reduces what can be a serious problem at some intersections where people make a left turn with a green arrow only to encounter a conflict with people who are making right turns on red. Yes, the people going right on red are supposed to stop and yield in this circumstance because the U-turner has a green arrow (or, come to think of it, if the U-turner has a green circle the same would apply because right on red must yield to anyone else who has a green). Problem is, seemingly 95% of drivers don't understand that they have to yield when going right on red and aren't looking for U-turning traffic–instead they're looking for traffic coming from their left, whereas U-turn traffic is often coming from the right of where the right turn begins.
I see near-misses in that kind of situation fairly frequently at one intersection near my house where a lot of people make U-turns to get to a McDonald's. (There used to be no U-turn there, but when the median was rebuilt the restriction was removed.) What makes it even worse is that many of the U-turners stop to yield to the right-on-red crowd, thus preventing other people from making the left turn (there is no permissive green cycle there). I'm quite surprised there haven't been any rear-endings.
The jughandle eliminates that problem by converting the U-turn maneuver into a conventional left turn, and most drivers looking to go right on red normally do look for people turning left from the other direction. Of course the jughandle is hardly an ideal solution to this problem in all circumstances and it also wastes space and land that could better be put to other (possibly tax-generating) uses. I suppose the issue of turns on red getting out of control in a lot of places is an issue best addressed in a separate topic.
Off the top of my head I can think of one jughandle in Northern Virginia, and it was converted into a hybrid partial jughandle arrangement during a recent reconstruction of the area in that there is still a jughandle for some traffic but there are now two median-separated left-turn lanes as well. Froggie would be able to say more about the current design than I would because I normally go through there in the other direction and have little reason ever to use or even notice the jughandle. It's at the intersection of US-1 and Fort Hunt Road just south of Old Town Alexandria. Traffic coming from Alexandria generally uses the new left-turn lanes; traffic coming off the Outer Loop of the Beltway uses the jughandle (bad idea to have them cut across four lanes to try to turn left); traffic coming off the Inner Loop can use either (which is best depends on the traffic at any given time).
Quote from: 1995hoo on July 13, 2011, 01:38:00 PM
people need to learn how to drive
fixed that for ya
Quote from: agentsteel53 on July 13, 2011, 01:40:23 PM
Quote from: 1995hoo on July 13, 2011, 01:38:00 PM
people need to learn how to drive
fixed that for ya
Pretty much. We have a few intersections around here with signs saying "U-Turn Yield to Right Turn" in situations where the U-turners have a green but the right-turners also have a green arrow. In that case, the normal rule that "U-turns always yield" applies by default, but it's enough of a problem that they've put up signs. So I don't see why they won't put up signs at problem intersections saying "Right on Red Yield to U-Turn" under the same theory.
Edited to add: The conflicting U-turn/right on red scenario DOES pose a serious problem for those of us who DO know the rules, though, because of the high probability of getting run into by idiots who don't know the rules and so refuse to yield.
actually, green right arrow without a "U-turn yield to oncoming right turn" is quite a challenging situation, because generally no one thinks to see if the right-turning traffic has a green arrow, or the green arrow is located at such an angle that, due to the shielding of the light, it is impossible to tell from the side which color it is.
around here, there are green right arrows occasionally, and I've never seen a "U-turn yield to oncoming right turn" sign.
the way I tend to do things is, if a right-turning vehicle is stopping before making its right turn, I go. if they clearly show no intention of stopping, I let them go, figuring they have right of way by either having the green arrow, or being a maniac.
Quote from: 1995hoo on July 13, 2011, 02:04:51 PM
Pretty much. We have a few intersections around here with signs saying "U-Turn Yield to Right Turn" in situations where the U-turners have a green but the right-turners also have a green arrow. In that case, the normal rule that "U-turns always yield" applies by default, but it's enough of a problem that they've put up signs. So I don't see why they won't put up signs at problem intersections saying "Right on Red Yield to U-Turn" under the same theory.
Edited to add: The conflicting U-turn/right on red scenario DOES pose a serious problem for those of us who DO know the rules, though, because of the high probability of getting run into by idiots who don't know the rules and so refuse to yield.
I've noticed that different jurisdictions handle U-turn and right turn conflicts differently. Lenexa, Kansas actually does use "Right Turn Yield to U-Turn" signs. I don't have a proper photo, but you can see one on Street View, although it's difficult to make out the text:
http://maps.google.com/maps?q=Lenexa,+KS&hl=en&ll=38.971171,-94.728305&spn=0.009426,0.021136&sll=38.953617,-94.733571&sspn=0.149513,0.338173&z=16&layer=c&cbll=38.971107,-94.728305&panoid=v--S71ccianzCpy2o1_OIw&cbp=12,27.49,,0,-1.49
Neighboring city Overland Park, on the other hand, prohibits U-turns at many intersections on arterial roads, and at intersections where U-turns are permitted, it prohibits conflicting RTORs (with a "No Right Turn on Red [red ball]" sign). I've seen "U-Turn Yield to Right Turn" signs at one intersection in Lawrence, KS where there were protected left turns and (IIRC) green-arrow right turns (US 40 and Wakarusa Dr. for anyone who's wondering), but those signs have since been removed and replaced with U-turn prohibitions.
I think jughandles and Michigan Lefts are some of the most effective approaches to handling U-turns, and I tend to favor the jughandle approach because it keeps the left lanes of the arterial clear for faster through traffic (although I've never actually used a Michigan Left, and the only one I've ever seen was temporary). Of course, both are only practical under a very specific set of circumstances, and in most cases, conventional left turns and U-turns seem to be the norm.
Quote from: stridentweasel on July 13, 2011, 02:40:15 PM
....
Neighboring city Overland Park, on the other hand, prohibits U-turns at many intersections on arterial roads, and at intersections where U-turns are permitted, it prohibits conflicting RTORs (with a "No Right Turn on Red [red ball]" sign). I've seen "U-Turn Yield to Right Turn" signs at one intersection in Lawrence, KS where there were protected left turns and (IIRC) green-arrow right turns (US 40 and Wakarusa Dr. for anyone who's wondering), but those signs have since been removed and replaced with U-turn prohibitions.
I think jughandles and Michigan Lefts are some of the most effective approaches to handling U-turns, and I tend to favor the jughandle approach because it keeps the left lanes of the arterial clear for faster through traffic (although I've never actually used a Michigan Left, and the only one I've ever seen was temporary). Of course, both are only practical under a very specific set of circumstances, and in most cases, conventional left turns and U-turns seem to be the norm.
I generally like the Overland Park solution of prohibiting the right on red, or a variant where the right on red is prohibited during high-traffic hours. We have some intersections around here where turns on red are prohibited from 7 AM to 7 PM but allowed otherwise, and on the whole that's usually a reasonable solution in my view. Obviously the idea of using a jughandle SOLELY for purposes of addressing the U-turn conflict problem would be horrible overkill and I hope nobody read my post as suggesting that they should be more widely adopted in that context–although I must say I can envision situations where something akin to a jughandle-style maneuver might be desirable, say if one road branches off another (like a fork in the road) and another road crosses both of them. In that situation the road that branches off to the right can be used as sort of a "virtual jughandle," if that makes any sense.
Come to think of it, the US-1/Fort Hunt Road jughandle I mentioned is a little bit like a "virtual jughandle" in a sense in that the jughandle also feeds a short street called "Old Richmond Highway" (US-1 is "Richmond Highway"). I assume the original jughandle maneuver there was created when Old Richmond Highway was bypassed by the current route.
(I tend to say "turns on red" in recognition of intersections where left on red is allowed, but U-turns and jughandles would both be irrelevant in those cases because in almost every jurisdiction allowing left on red, both streets are one-way. Most drivers tend not to know it's allowed, either.)
Edited to add: I looked at the Street View link you posted and that sign is more or less what I had in mind. It looks very similar to the "U-Turn Yield to Right Turn" signs posted at a few intersections here.
Quote from: agentsteel53 on July 13, 2011, 02:32:13 PM
....
the way I tend to do things is, if a right-turning vehicle is stopping before making its right turn, I go. if they clearly show no intention of stopping, I let them go, figuring they have right of way by either having the green arrow, or being a maniac.
What makes me wary is that I don't trust anyone. I mentioned before the situation of a U-turn with a green arrow and a right on red. My concern has always been that if I were to make a U-turn and take the right of way, as I'm entitled to do, I risk getting hit by the guy going right on red, but if I yield because the guy is clearly an idiot, I risk getting rear-ended by someone who sees the green light and is in "go" mode. In either situation, I'm the one in the right and the other driver is at fault in the accident (because even if I'm entitled to the right of way on the green arrow, the guy behind me isn't entitled to rear-end me just because of a green light), but in either situation that's small consolation if my car gets damaged in an accident!
The intersection I'm thinking of has two left turn lanes, so as a general rule I use the right-hand one of those when I go left precisely to avoid the issue as much as possible. (I don't think I've ever actually made a U-turn there. I used to use a dry-cleaner located near there and the U-turn was the most direct way home, but I usually went around the block instead because the exit from the car park was so close to the turn lane that it was often hard to get all the way across to make the U-turn.)
I do not get any extra worries for stopping in a U-turn situation vs. just making the U-turn, because I figure that drivers behind me will notice I'm slowing down to make a U-turn.
The difference between making a U-turn at 5mph vs stopping at 0mph to let a right-turner go is much smaller than the difference between that U-turn and making a left turn at 20mph.
In the case of a conflict with a right-turn driver, I tend to be about halfway through my U-turn when I attempt to negotiate "go vs do not go", so left-turning traffic can just go around me as their arc is sufficiently different, and a car behind me also doing a U-turn is sufficiently slow that I doubt they lack the reaction time to avoid rear-ending me.
Some parts of Florida have "U Turn Yield" signs. I've been seeing more and more though where there is a high amount of U-turns, there will be a light-up no right turns sign (arrow with red slash) that lights up during the left turn phase to prevent cars from turning right on red. After the cross traffic protected left phase has ended, the sign turns off allowing RTOR again.
Quote from: agentsteel53 on July 13, 2011, 03:21:51 PM
I do not get any extra worries for stopping in a U-turn situation vs. just making the U-turn, because I figure that drivers behind me will notice I'm slowing down to make a U-turn.
The difference between making a U-turn at 5mph vs stopping at 0mph to let a right-turner go is much smaller than the difference between that U-turn and making a left turn at 20mph.
In the case of a conflict with a right-turn driver, I tend to be about halfway through my U-turn when I attempt to negotiate "go vs do not go", so left-turning traffic can just go around me as their arc is sufficiently different, and a car behind me also doing a U-turn is sufficiently slow that I doubt they lack the reaction time to avoid rear-ending me.
Yeah, I hear you; the intersection I'm thinking of is kind of tight so it's more of a problem. No doubt the presence of the McDonald's, which spurs a LOT of U-turns, contributes to the problem (that and the lazy people who will wait on line with 10 other cars at the drive-thru when there's no line inside, backing up the drive-thru queue into the road, but that's another discussion too.....)
I've never been to California, only seen it from the air en route to Hawaii, but from what I understand the roads there tend to be a bit wider in this respect.
Quote from: realjd on July 13, 2011, 03:22:03 PM
Some parts of Florida have "U Turn Yield" signs. I've been seeing more and more though where there is a high amount of U-turns, there will be a light-up no right turns sign (arrow with red slash) that lights up during the left turn phase to prevent cars from turning right on red. After the cross traffic protected left phase has ended, the sign turns off allowing RTOR again.
This sounds like an excellent idea, though perhaps more expensive than conventional signs.
Quote from: 1995hoo on July 13, 2011, 03:25:19 PM
Yeah, I hear you; the intersection I'm thinking of is kind of tight so it's more of a problem. I've never been to California, only seen it from the air en route to Hawaii, but from what I understand the roads there tend to be a bit wider in this respect.
I think that arterials and boulevards tend to be about the same widths generally across the country, but that width has increased with time. A lot of suburbs were developed in the 60s and 70s, so the roads there are wider than city roads built in the 30s or before. Plenty of narrow boulevards in downtown LA or San Francisco, for example, where you wonder how they squeeze in four lanes and two sidewalks between the buildings.
And plenty of wide boulevards out east as well, I feel like. I definitely remember driving US-360 into the suburbs of Richmond, VA and thinking "this arterial is exactly like so many in CA" - lots of traffic lights, box stores, heavy traffic, remind me why I'm driving this while on vacation??? (I had been looking for cutouts. Good luck with that.)
Quote from: stridentweasel on July 13, 2011, 02:40:15 PM
I've noticed that different jurisdictions handle U-turn and right turn conflicts differently. Lenexa, Kansas actually does use "Right Turn Yield to U-Turn" signs. I don't have a proper photo, but you can see one on Street View, although it's difficult to make out the text:
http://maps.google.com/maps?q=Lenexa,+KS&hl=en&ll=38.971171,-94.728305&spn=0.009426,0.021136&sll=38.953617,-94.733571&sspn=0.149513,0.338173&z=16&layer=c&cbll=38.971107,-94.728305&panoid=v--S71ccianzCpy2o1_OIw&cbp=12,27.49,,0,-1.49
Wait, why the hell is Lenexa posting stoplights parallel to the ground? Nowhere else in Kansas (or even Johnson County for that matter) is this done, to my knowledge.
(Also part of the problem with Lenexa having its own rules for this is that Lenexa is basically indistinguishable from Overland Park or Shawnee or Mission. I know I have a hard time remembering which municipality I'm in, if asked I could usually do no better than "Johnson County". Traffic laws should really be the same across a metro area, or in Kansas City's case, they should be the same on all of the Kansas side and all of the Missouri side.)
Quote from: Scott5114 on July 13, 2011, 07:22:03 PM
Wait, why the hell is Lenexa posting stoplights parallel to the ground? Nowhere else in Kansas (or even Johnson County for that matter) is this done, to my knowledge.
is it becoming generally accepted that "red is on the top, or the left"? if so, I see no problem with horizontal traffic lights, as even color-blind people can identify the signal phase by position.
if some jurisdictions were doing "red is on the right" and others "red is on the left" then I'd see a very grave problem, but all the horizontally mounted traffic signals I've ever seen in my life (including Canada*) have had red on the left.
* Canada has the added feature of assigning a different shape to each color - red circle, yellow square, green diamond, if I recall correctly. this is a very positive feature that would be useful to have, at minimal additional cost, on all traffic lights in the US as well. (yes, the total surface area of light is diminished when you have a square in a circle, as opposed to using the full circle, but since red - the most critical color - is the full circle, I think this is not a problem.)
(also, Lenexa sounds like the name of a company which would manufacture my cable modem.)
"Red on top or left" is what the MUTCD says, yes. However, I have had some colorblind friends remark how difficult a trip to Texas (a horizontal state) is when they're used to the OK method of posting lights vertically. I'm sure colorblind people who live in Texas are used to it, though. The issue with Lenexa is that it's one intersection (or jurisdiction if they've decided to switch the whole city to horizontal) in a sea of vertical, which is pretty jarring to come across.
(This is far from a unique thing, though–there are a few locations in southern OK that prefer the TX method of doing things. Davis, OK has its one signalized intersection posted horizontally, and Lawton has a few horizontal intersections–hell, Lawton tries to split the difference sometimes by posting the left turn signals horizontal and all the other signal heads vertical!)
Quote from: agentsteel53 on July 13, 2011, 07:52:05 PM
* Canada has the added feature of assigning a different shape to each color - red circle, yellow square, green diamond, if I recall correctly. this is a very positive feature that would be useful to have, at minimal additional cost, on all traffic lights in the US as well. (yes, the total surface area of light is diminished when you have a square in a circle, as opposed to using the full circle, but since red - the most critical color - is the full circle, I think this is not a problem.)
Actually, Quebec has recently stopped using the shaped lens signals. I contacted the MTQ and they said said its original purpose was to aid the color blind but found it wasn't really effective plus they weren't seen very well from a distance.
and now I know. I for one liked the shapes, but if the color-blind folks can tell just by position, then using the full available circle is the best idea indeed.
Yeah, those shaped lenses were awesome. Prince Edward Island mostly has signals with the shaped lenses, which makes me wonder if they are still using them or not.
Quote from: Scott5114 on July 13, 2011, 07:22:03 PM
Wait, why the hell is Lenexa posting stoplights parallel to the ground? Nowhere else in Kansas (or even Johnson County for that matter) is this done, to my knowledge.
(Also part of the problem with Lenexa having its own rules for this is that Lenexa is basically indistinguishable from Overland Park or Shawnee or Mission. I know I have a hard time remembering which municipality I'm in, if asked I could usually do no better than "Johnson County". Traffic laws should really be the same across a metro area, or in Kansas City's case, they should be the same on all of the Kansas side and all of the Missouri side.)
As far as I know, Lenexa's only horizontal traffic signals are on the one-mile stretch of 87th Street Parkway between Pflumm Road and Quivira Road. That segment was rebuilt a few years ago, and the project included replacing all of the traffic signals. I don't know whether Lenexa plans to use horizontal traffic signals anywhere else, though. I guess Lenexa just wants to be different.
Quote from: Scott5114 on July 13, 2011, 08:09:09 PM
"Red on top or left" is what the MUTCD says, yes. However, I have had some colorblind friends remark how difficult a trip to Texas (a horizontal state) is when they're used to the OK method of posting lights vertically. I'm sure colorblind people who live in Texas are used to it, though. The issue with Lenexa is that it's one intersection (or jurisdiction if they've decided to switch the whole city to horizontal) in a sea of vertical, which is pretty jarring to come across.
(This is far from a unique thing, though–there are a few locations in southern OK that prefer the TX method of doing things. Davis, OK has its one signalized intersection posted horizontally, and Lawton has a few horizontal intersections–hell, Lawton tries to split the difference sometimes by posting the left turn signals horizontal and all the other signal heads vertical!)
I think the standard for left-driving countries is to have red on the right, in horizontal traffic signals. It makes sense.
Not much for me to add about the Route 1/Fort Hunt Rd jughandle, but there are two more in Alexandria on Duke St, at the signal just east of Telegraph Rd.
Quote from: froggie on July 14, 2011, 07:06:09 AM
Not much for me to add about the Route 1/Fort Hunt Rd jughandle, but there are two more in Alexandria on Duke St, at the signal just east of Telegraph Rd.
Indeed you are right, just outside the mail-sorting facility! Dove and Roberts as the cross-streets, I think? Forgot about that because unless you live on the north side there's little reason to turn there. I turned in once looking for a mailbox because I saw the Postal Service sign. There was no mailbox.
Quote from: stridentweasel on July 13, 2011, 11:14:16 PM
I think the standard for left-driving countries is to have red on the right, in horizontal traffic signals. It makes sense.
The horizontal signals in the Bahamas have red on the left even though they drive on the left. But then again, that part of the world isn't exactly known for strictly following standards of any type.
Quote from: agentsteel53 on July 13, 2011, 07:52:05 PM
is it becoming generally accepted that "red is on the top, or the left"? if so, I see no problem with horizontal traffic lights, as even color-blind people can identify the signal phase by position.
Actually, the MUTCD has two lists of how signal indications appear in standard order in a single signal face. The two lists vary slightly depending on if the signal head is vertically or horizontally aligned--circular red is always top/left followed by red arrows then circular yellow, but circular green and the various green and yellow turn arrows vary slightly in arrangement depending on signal head orientation. (See MUTCD 2009, Sec. 4D.09 & 4D.10.) I believe these standard arrangements are in place for the benefit of color-blind drivers.
I approve of Jughandles and would like to see them expand nationwide. 3 way intersections that see a lot of left turns would be a good place to start.
According to the wiki jughandle article:
QuoteStates that use jughandles prevalently include New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Connecticut, Delaware, the District of Columbia, Illinois, Ohio, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, New York, New Hampshire, and Vermont. Jughandles are particularly associated with New Jersey.
Going through the posts nobody has mentioned jughandles in Ohio, Maryland, Minnesota, New Hampshire, or the District of Columbia... not to say Wiki is always right about everything.
Also i put together a .KMZ file summarizing all the jughandles that have been listed so far on this thread (19 states total) and a few others that i found. Here is the link for anyone interested:
http://www.mediafire.com/?7rrh5ropq4shr1c (http://www.mediafire.com/?7rrh5ropq4shr1c)
"Prevalently" is definitely incorrect for most of those states. Probably only the ones near New Jersey could be said to have any real jughandular prevalence.
DC has a few on New York Avenue that are really just using intersecting streets. For example, to turn left onto North Capitol northbound, you use M Street. There are also a few where a street goes through a circle and you turn right around the circle to turn left. I don't know if they have any "pure" jughandles.
I can think of one example in Ohio, and it's kind of backwards from the New Jersey prototype. On US 20 EB just after I-75, U-turns are permitted. Since the median is narrow and trucks are to be accommodated, there's a lot of extra pavement on the right side of US 20 WB to allow for wide turns. I guess if there were a grass island involved, it would be more of a real jughandle.
Quote from: vtk on November 05, 2011, 12:36:28 AM
I can think of one example in Ohio, and it's kind of backwards from the New Jersey prototype. On US 20 EB just after I-75, U-turns are permitted. Since the median is narrow and trucks are to be accommodated, there's a lot of extra pavement on the right side of US 20 WB to allow for wide turns. I guess if there were a grass island involved, it would be more of a real jughandle.
http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/research/safety/07033/
In particular, see "Location and Design of Loons" about halfway down. (I didn't know the term either until now.)
New Hampshire had one on the NH9 Keene bypass on the north side of town.
They didn't like it, and got rid of it.
http://mapper.acme.com/?ll=42.956144,-72.273023&z=17&t=O
^^
That "jughandle" was so extreme, it looks like a trumpet ramp!
Quote from: Brandon on April 16, 2011, 11:27:06 AM
I know of exactly one Chicagoland jughandle. It's along York Road in oak Brook, between I-88 and the ramp to I-294 south for a local street.
http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&ie=UTF8&ll=41.855454,-87.929828&spn=0.002741,0.006866&t=h&z=18
Here are two more
http://maps.google.com/?ll=41.774872,-87.802155&spn=0.002612,0.005681&t=h&z=18&vpsrc=6
This one might be more of a "logical" jughead
http://maps.google.com/?ll=41.777921,-87.800996&spn=0.002612,0.005681&t=h&z=18&vpsrc=6
Quote from: Jerseyman4 on July 31, 2011, 03:25:52 PM
I approve of Jughandles and would like to see them expand nationwide. 3 way intersections that see a lot of left turns would be a good place to start.
Take that back!! I despise jughandles ( BTW I grew up and learned to drive in NJ) In my mind a good left turn lane with decent signal control works better in almost all situations
Quote from: jwolfer on May 09, 2012, 11:55:08 AM
Quote from: Jerseyman4 on July 31, 2011, 03:25:52 PM
I approve of Jughandles and would like to see them expand nationwide. 3 way intersections that see a lot of left turns would be a good place to start.
Take that back!! I despise jughandles ( BTW I grew up and learned to drive in NJ) In my mind a good left turn lane with decent signal control works better in almost all situations
How so? You've just added an extra phase to the light, which probably backs up your mainline AND side road several miles because now your throughput has passed the point of no return.
Jughandles work great in keeping slow moving traffic in the right lanes at all times. On two lane roads (like US 40 at NJ 47 in Malaga, NJ) it is not feasable though.
Also, for U Turning it works great on divided highways like on US 202 between the Somerville and Flemington Circles where NJDOT uses a backward jughandle instead of the traditional ones. These allow a motorist to swing a wide turn by crossing over the opposing traffic lanes into the jughandle that loops around in the counter-clockwise movement you are turning in and returns to the highway where you can continue straight. MOST OF ALL, if traffic is heavy, it allows you to speed across the two oncoming lanes and seek momentary shelter inside the jughandle until the next gap comes by and while facing the right direction you can accelerate quickly and safely into the flow.
On two lane roads is has no purpose and in the case of US 40 and NJ 47 all NJDOT needs to do is realign the two routes so they continue in the straight path they are in as in both sides of Malaga. The multiplex is useless there and if you look at google satelite you can see that US 40 could be realigned to use an existing roadway to make it a straight path through this community and the same for NJ 47. They both would meet at the current south-west end of the concurrency and have a normal intersection junction.
Quote from: roadman65 on May 12, 2012, 02:34:58 PM
backward jughandle instead of the traditional ones. These allow a motorist to swing a wide turn by crossing over the opposing traffic lanes into the jughandle that loops around in the counter-clockwise movement you are turning in and returns to the highway where you can continue straight. MOST OF ALL, if traffic is heavy, it allows you to speed across the two oncoming lanes and seek momentary shelter inside the jughandle until the next gap comes by and while facing the right direction you can accelerate quickly and safely into the flow.
This is the most common type seen on rural highways in México. Usually they're for U-turning traffic only on four-lane surface highways (often near RIROs), but some areas (Guanajuato comes to mind) employ them for left-turning traffic as well at some intersections.
Quote from: roadman65 on May 12, 2012, 02:34:58 PM
On two lane roads is has no purpose and in the case of US 40 and NJ 47 all NJDOT needs to do is realign the two routes so they continue in the straight path they are in as in both sides of Malaga. The multiplex is useless there and if you look at google satelite you can see that US 40 could be realigned to use an existing roadway to make it a straight path through this community and the same for NJ 47. They both would meet at the current south-west end of the concurrency and have a normal intersection junction.
They would have to build two new rail crossings - the whole reason 40/47 run together is to take advantage of a grade separation. The entire original route of 47 is intact, but it has an at-grade crossing at the northern end. Right now, NJDOT doesn't have the money to build more grade separations...
The only jughandles I really hate are the ones that make you go through the intersection twice (where the jughandle is like a loop ramp). There were two on Ridge Pike in Conshohocken, PA, but one was removed a few years ago. The other one could probably be removed now that a business along the road has been abandoned.
Quote from: Steve on May 11, 2012, 08:24:39 PM
Quote from: jwolfer on May 09, 2012, 11:55:08 AM
Quote from: Jerseyman4 on July 31, 2011, 03:25:52 PM
I approve of Jughandles and would like to see them expand nationwide. 3 way intersections that see a lot of left turns would be a good place to start.
Take that back!! I despise jughandles ( BTW I grew up and learned to drive in NJ) In my mind a good left turn lane with decent signal control works better in almost all situations
How so? You've just added an extra phase to the light, which probably backs up your mainline AND side road several miles because now your throughput has passed the point of no return.
I am no traffic engineer here so its just a preference and an amateur observation Jughandles will increase the time needed for the cross road traffic, there is extra traffic on the side road so the greenlight phases have to be longer. Jugnadlees male more traffic problems on the side road( e.g. Route 37 and 166 or Route 37 and Hooper Ave in Toms River) So an extra phase or a longer green on the side road ends up being the same time wise.
And come on now, both roads backed up for miles... a bit of an exaggeration; if it were so all 49 other states would be nothing but traffic back-ups.
Quote from: jwolfer on May 17, 2012, 08:14:14 AM
Quote from: Steve on May 11, 2012, 08:24:39 PM
Quote from: jwolfer on May 09, 2012, 11:55:08 AM
Quote from: Jerseyman4 on July 31, 2011, 03:25:52 PM
I approve of Jughandles and would like to see them expand nationwide. 3 way intersections that see a lot of left turns would be a good place to start.
Take that back!! I despise jughandles ( BTW I grew up and learned to drive in NJ) In my mind a good left turn lane with decent signal control works better in almost all situations
How so? You've just added an extra phase to the light, which probably backs up your mainline AND side road several miles because now your throughput has passed the point of no return.
I am no traffic engineer here so its just a preference and an amateur observation Jughandles will increase the time needed for the cross road traffic, there is extra traffic on the side road so the greenlight phases have to be longer. Jugnadlees male more traffic problems on the side road( e.g. Route 37 and 166 or Route 37 and Hooper Ave in Toms River) So an extra phase or a longer green on the side road ends up being the same time wise.
And come on now, both roads backed up for miles... a bit of an exaggeration; if it were so all 49 other states would be nothing but traffic back-ups.
NJ is a special case with the amount of congestion we have. Trust me, it's no exaggeration, I've seen it happen. The extra time needed for the side road is less than a separate phase would need because you've cut out an entire yellow-red progression and gone straight to the green.
I just saw one on old PA 291 near Philadelphia International Airport.
Quote from: Steve on May 20, 2012, 10:25:23 PM
NJ is a special case with the amount of congestion we have. Trust me, it's no exaggeration, I've seen it happen. The extra time needed for the side road is less than a separate phase would need because you've cut out an entire yellow-red progression and gone straight to the green.
Traffic does seem to flow more smoothly in New Jersey than in northern Delaware - which does have a few jughandles, in rather odd places.
Quote from: Steve on May 20, 2012, 10:25:23 PM
Quote from: jwolfer on May 17, 2012, 08:14:14 AM
Quote from: Steve on May 11, 2012, 08:24:39 PM
Quote from: jwolfer on May 09, 2012, 11:55:08 AM
Quote from: Jerseyman4 on July 31, 2011, 03:25:52 PM
I approve of Jughandles and would like to see them expand nationwide. 3 way intersections that see a lot of left turns would be a good place to start.
Take that back!! I despise jughandles ( BTW I grew up and learned to drive in NJ) In my mind a good left turn lane with decent signal control works better in almost all situations
How so? You've just added an extra phase to the light, which probably backs up your mainline AND side road several miles because now your throughput has passed the point of no return.
I am no traffic engineer here so its just a preference and an amateur observation Jughandles will increase the time needed for the cross road traffic, there is extra traffic on the side road so the greenlight phases have to be longer. Jugnadlees male more traffic problems on the side road( e.g. Route 37 and 166 or Route 37 and Hooper Ave in Toms River) So an extra phase or a longer green on the side road ends up being the same time wise.
And come on now, both roads backed up for miles... a bit of an exaggeration; if it were so all 49 other states would be nothing but traffic back-ups.
NJ is a special case with the amount of congestion we have. Trust me, it's no exaggeration, I've seen it happen. The extra time needed for the side road is less than a separate phase would need because you've cut out an entire yellow-red progression and gone straight to the green.
Again I grew up in NJ, so I am familiar with jughandles. Other cities and states use left turn signals are not complete gridlock. I dont see Los Angeles, Miami or Atlanta being freed from congestion if only they had jughandles.
New Jersey for the amount of traffic has way too many 2 lane roads. If it were in Florida, US 9 in Lakewood and Toms River would be a 6 lane highway not a 2 lane road built in the 1930s. All of Route 70 would be 4 lanes with 6-8 lanes in Cherry Hill, Brick and Toms River.
The only time I've heard the term
jughandle used for a Massachusetts road was for the one along US 1 in Peabody, just north of the I-95/MA 128 interchange and Dearborn Road.
Other jughandles in the Bay State include:
Revere: MA 1A and Mills Ave.
Sturbridge: US 20 just west of I-84, connector road to the State Police barracks.
Quote from: roadman65 on June 22, 2012, 08:16:28 AM
I just saw one on old PA 291 near Philadelphia International Airport.
It's still there. Prior to 291 being relocated onto Bartram Ave., that jughandle was the main access ramp from then-291 Westbound to the airport.
Quote from: MASTERNC on May 16, 2012, 11:28:59 PM
The only jughandles I really hate are the ones that make you go through the intersection twice (where the jughandle is like a loop ramp). There were two on Ridge Pike in Conshohocken, PA, but one was removed a few years ago. The other one could probably be removed now that a business along the road has been abandoned.
Actually, that one (Allan Wood Road) is more likely to stay because of Ikea now being located just south of that intersection.
Truth be told, I didn't realize the other one (for Chemical Road) was gone until you mentioned it.
Quote from: jwolfer on June 22, 2012, 03:27:49 PM
Quote from: Steve on May 20, 2012, 10:25:23 PM
Quote from: jwolfer on May 17, 2012, 08:14:14 AM
Quote from: Steve on May 11, 2012, 08:24:39 PM
Quote from: jwolfer on May 09, 2012, 11:55:08 AM
Quote from: Jerseyman4 on July 31, 2011, 03:25:52 PM
I approve of Jughandles and would like to see them expand nationwide. 3 way intersections that see a lot of left turns would be a good place to start.
Take that back!! I despise jughandles ( BTW I grew up and learned to drive in NJ) In my mind a good left turn lane with decent signal control works better in almost all situations
How so? You've just added an extra phase to the light, which probably backs up your mainline AND side road several miles because now your throughput has passed the point of no return.
I am no traffic engineer here so its just a preference and an amateur observation Jughandles will increase the time needed for the cross road traffic, there is extra traffic on the side road so the greenlight phases have to be longer. Jugnadlees male more traffic problems on the side road( e.g. Route 37 and 166 or Route 37 and Hooper Ave in Toms River) So an extra phase or a longer green on the side road ends up being the same time wise.
And come on now, both roads backed up for miles... a bit of an exaggeration; if it were so all 49 other states would be nothing but traffic back-ups.
NJ is a special case with the amount of congestion we have. Trust me, it's no exaggeration, I've seen it happen. The extra time needed for the side road is less than a separate phase would need because you've cut out an entire yellow-red progression and gone straight to the green.
Again I grew up in NJ, so I am familiar with jughandles. Other cities and states use left turn signals are not complete gridlock. I dont see Los Angeles, Miami or Atlanta being freed from congestion if only they had jughandles.
New Jersey for the amount of traffic has way too many 2 lane roads. If it were in Florida, US 9 in Lakewood and Toms River would be a 6 lane highway not a 2 lane road built in the 1930s. All of Route 70 would be 4 lanes with 6-8 lanes in Cherry Hill, Brick and Toms River.
I agree with you there, but FL also does not have the state maintain signals either. The cities and counties run the signals and they see all roads whether highway or street the same and that is why you have congestion on FL 436 and OBT.
I have seen OBT turn into an urban boulevard from a rural highway in the last twenty years. If you widened US 9 in Lakewood it would turn into another OBT without the hookers struting down the sidewalk. It would not be a nicer through route than it is now.
True, NJ has way too many 2 lane roads like NJ 31, US 206, and even US 9 like you said. Most of all they need upgrading! However, NJ is broke and cannot afford even to keep some of the roads maintained that they already have. Look at I-287 that needs to be 8-10 lanes from Somerville to the NJ Turnpike to start to handle the traffic of the Central Jersey Business Corridor and why US 206 and NJ 31 have only been widened in small sections.
Heck, the Hillsborough Bypass is on halt and the Flemington Bypass of NJ 31 has been on the table for decades. Originally NJDOT wanted to do what Florida did on NJ 31 in Flemington, but community business owners objected to this and the bypass became a vision.
New Jersey has lots of high property taxes, granted, but that still is never enough. Other alternatives are needed that I will not post cause of our political correct society.
I have a love-hate relationship with them. But they're as much a part of NJ as the "Jersey Freeway".
NY 77 at the entrance to Darien Lake: http://goo.gl/maps/JM1g
A Jersey Jughandle/Michigan left hybrid at M-53 & 15 Mile Road in Metro Detroit. Maybe the jughandle is designed for large 18-wheelers that find it difficult navigating the turnarounds? If you want to make a left you have multiple options at this intersection.
http://maps.google.com/?ll=42.55098,-83.02855&z=17&t=h
A couple small 'jughandle' type intersections in San Francisco:
Oak/Fell @ Stanyan at the entrance to Golden Gate Park: http://goo.gl/maps/zG56d
Portola @ Burnett: http://goo.gl/maps/rupZR
Don't forget the unusual-for-Massachusetts reverse jughandles on the marsh road in Saugus (http://goo.gl/maps/41gCp). Not too many of those in Mass.
Also seen from time to time in that general neck of the woods are pseudo-jughandles that are like a cloverleap ramp--go through the intersection once, then pass through again after taking the ramp. Manchester, NH has specimens like this one for u-turns (http://goo.gl/maps/e5COH) on South Willow St./NH 28 (signed with TO REVERSE DIRECTION ----> at the entrance) with u-turns prohibited at the signal on Willow. A much tighter-radius version is seen in Newark, Del. to turn left (http://goo.gl/maps/OtMrZ) from So. College Ave NB to Chestnut Hill WB. Both styles are not traditional jughandles (of a jughandle shape) but do the same job.
I spied a jughandle via Google Maps on MD 173 (Fort Smallwood Rd.) at Fort Armistead Rd. (http://goo.gl/maps/vgGd2)
Don't know if it was already posted in this thread but there is one on my favorite freeway that also just happens to be my avatar: Business I-376. It is right at what was the entrance to the old Pittsburgh International Airport. I think it works well there because there is very little traffic that needs to go left.