Traffic signal

[jakeroot]

The fact that it's a fully protected left says so much about California's signal practices.

Looks like a good candidate to me, tbh.

I don't think it meets any of the standard guidelines for protected-only signals. Only two oncoming lanes, low turning volume, good visibility, and no oncoming left turn.

[steviep24]

The fact that it's a fully protected left says so much about California's signal practices.

Looks like a good candidate to me, tbh.

I don't think it meets any of the standard guidelines for protected-only signals. Only two oncoming lanes, low turning volume, good visibility, and no oncoming left turn.

You would think a state that cares so much about vehicle emissions would use permissive/protected phasing more.

[Amtrakprod]

The fact that it's a fully protected left says so much about California's signal practices.

Looks like a good candidate to me, tbh.

I don't think it meets any of the standard guidelines for protected-only signals. Only two oncoming lanes, low turning volume, good visibility, and no oncoming left turn.

You would think a state that cares so much about vehicle emissions would use permissive/protected phasing more.

I'd argue that improving pedestrian and bicycle safety with protected arrows would be a more effective than having more permissive signals


iPhone

[jakeroot]

The fact that it's a fully protected left says so much about California's signal practices.

Looks like a good candidate to me, tbh.

I don't think it meets any of the standard guidelines for protected-only signals. Only two oncoming lanes, low turning volume, good visibility, and no oncoming left turn.

You would think a state that cares so much about vehicle emissions would use permissive/protected phasing more.

I'd argue that improving pedestrian and bicycle safety with protected arrows would be a more effective than having more permissive signals

I don't think there's any evidence of improved safety at smaller intersections when using protected-only phasing. Larger intersections are where there's a grey area.

[Amtrakprod]

The fact that it's a fully protected left says so much about California's signal practices.

Looks like a good candidate to me, tbh.

I don't think it meets any of the standard guidelines for protected-only signals. Only two oncoming lanes, low turning volume, good visibility, and no oncoming left turn.

You would think a state that cares so much about vehicle emissions would use permissive/protected phasing more.

I'd argue that improving pedestrian and bicycle safety with protected arrows would be a more effective than having more permissive signals

I don't think there's any evidence of improved safety at smaller intersections when using protected-only phasing. Larger intersections are where there's a grey area.

Maybe it's because I'm from MA, but a median and 2 lanes of oncoming traffic are a lot for drivers to handle, plus a bike lane. Gotta think about the context of the street you're turning over. I'd have to study it more to make a choice, I'd probably allow a TOD FYA


iPhone

[UCFKnights]

I used to walk to school every day for a couple of years. The street I used (Market St in Tacoma, WA) was entirely timed, alongside most of the intersections in the area. Most of the time, I jaywalked. I had no more of an interest in waiting for a walk signal than the car next to me waiting for their green. Market, alongside every other road in the area, was not timed for pedestrians, obviously. Ergo, there was no "WALK"  band afforded to me. Actuated signals with push buttons would've save me lots of time, as I was usually waiting for no one, and I could have changed the signal within a few seconds of arriving.

I have only one issue with pedestrian push buttons: if you arrive too late, you have to wait a whole cycle before getting a walk sign again. This happens for very obvious reasons: if one direction gets a green while someone is already waiting at the cross street, they have the next priority. The controller has already designated them for the next phase, and the current through phase will end as soon as vehicles stop arriving or it times out. There really needs to be a good four to six seconds at the beginning of a through phase to allow pedestrians to hit the button before it stops them from receiving a WALK sign.

Now, this is where automatic WALK is actually very important. Corridors with so much traffic that it's effectively a guarantee that the through phase will last at least as long as the WALK sign...those movements should have automatic WALK.

The programming is often so lazy and poorly done for most pedestrian signals, even in high pedestrian traffic areas. For example, at my university, this intersection has a exit only, narrow driveway on one side of the street, and the other side has more of a real road, with a PPLT to access it. The driveway has like a 9 second flashing don't walk time, and the other side has like 15 seconds, and also can't start until the left turn signal finishes.  This means in every circumstance, there is going to be a ton of extra time on the driveway side, so it should obviously shouldn't switch until don't walk until the crosswalk on the opposite side has 9 seconds left, but they are all programmed to have 5 seconds of walk at the beginning of the cycle on any dynamically programmed light, no matter what. This means the intersection has usually 30 seconds of the don't walk on with no conflicting movements every cycle, sometimes even more. If you're crossing over Gemini Blvd, the parallel traffic has no left turn signals, but the walk signals on each side of the intersection are actuated separately, so if 2 people arrive within a few seconds on each side of the street and press the button, one side will get a walk signal and the full 30 seconds to cross, while the other side will have to wait a full cycle of the light before getting the walk signal. https://www.google.com/maps/@28.6063017,-81.1987529,3a,75y,74.18h,90t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1smn_5DWy8xxtnosM1mFUU6w!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3Dmn_5DWy8xxtnosM1mFUU6w%26cb_client%3Dsearch.revgeo_and_fetch.gps%26w%3D96%26h%3D64%26yaw%3D74.18193%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192

This intersection got an LPI even though the right turn lanes have cross walks prior to the buttons: https://www.google.com/maps/@29.6416312,-82.3395375,3a,75y,64.42h,87.97t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sV7gY21ndG9pGGjhO0S3uhw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

This intersection has an all red pedestrian crossing for 40 seconds. It also allows crossing parallel to 13th St while 13th St has a green light, with a don't walk time of of just 15 seconds. So the same intersection has 2 different crossing times on the same crosswalk, depending on the phase, and even worse then that, the all way stop is always immediately after the 13th timer goes to 0, so its counting down to always give you a walk again.
https://www.google.com/maps/@29.6485676,-82.3392514,3a,75y,231.64h,84.5t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sDPw9wPSq1PJptbr8G9Nmww!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DDPw9wPSq1PJptbr8G9Nmww%26cb_client%3Dsearch.revgeo_and_fetch.gps%26w%3D96%26h%3D64%26yaw%3D155.45415%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i13312!8i6656

This highway interchange has a really weird cycle for pedestrians: when you press the button to cross the highway on ramp, all of the straight traffic in both directions get a red. The off ramp gives the left turn a green, the right turn a red on the opposite side of the street, and lights up the "no straight" blankout sign, when there never is an option to go straight anyways. I cannot figure out why for any of this.
https://www.google.com/maps/@29.6179465,-82.3850794,3a,75y,273.17h,92.17t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sSNSBJYN2h0xLTmX_89T5Zg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

[Amtrakprod]

I used to walk to school every day for a couple of years. The street I used (Market St in Tacoma, WA) was entirely timed, alongside most of the intersections in the area. Most of the time, I jaywalked. I had no more of an interest in waiting for a walk signal than the car next to me waiting for their green. Market, alongside every other road in the area, was not timed for pedestrians, obviously. Ergo, there was no "WALK"  band afforded to me. Actuated signals with push buttons would've save me lots of time, as I was usually waiting for no one, and I could have changed the signal within a few seconds of arriving.

I have only one issue with pedestrian push buttons: if you arrive too late, you have to wait a whole cycle before getting a walk sign again. This happens for very obvious reasons: if one direction gets a green while someone is already waiting at the cross street, they have the next priority. The controller has already designated them for the next phase, and the current through phase will end as soon as vehicles stop arriving or it times out. There really needs to be a good four to six seconds at the beginning of a through phase to allow pedestrians to hit the button before it stops them from receiving a WALK sign.

Now, this is where automatic WALK is actually very important. Corridors with so much traffic that it's effectively a guarantee that the through phase will last at least as long as the WALK sign...those movements should have automatic WALK.

The programming is often so lazy and poorly done for most pedestrian signals, even in high pedestrian traffic areas. For example, at my university, this intersection has a exit only, narrow driveway on one side of the street, and the other side has more of a real road, with a PPLT to access it. The driveway has like a 9 second flashing don't walk time, and the other side has like 15 seconds, and also can't start until the left turn signal finishes.  This means in every circumstance, there is going to be a ton of extra time on the driveway side, so it should obviously shouldn't switch until don't walk until the crosswalk on the opposite side has 9 seconds left, but they are all programmed to have 5 seconds of walk at the beginning of the cycle on any dynamically programmed light, no matter what. This means the intersection has usually 30 seconds of the don't walk on with no conflicting movements every cycle, sometimes even more. If you're crossing over Gemini Blvd, the parallel traffic has no left turn signals, but the walk signals on each side of the intersection are actuated separately, so if 2 people arrive within a few seconds on each side of the street and press the button, one side will get a walk signal and the full 30 seconds to cross, while the other side will have to wait a full cycle of the light before getting the walk signal. https://www.google.com/maps/@28.6063017,-81.1987529,3a,75y,74.18h,90t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1smn_5DWy8xxtnosM1mFUU6w!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3Dmn_5DWy8xxtnosM1mFUU6w%26cb_client%3Dsearch.revgeo_and_fetch.gps%26w%3D96%26h%3D64%26yaw%3D74.18193%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192

This intersection got an LPI even though the right turn lanes have cross walks prior to the buttons: https://www.google.com/maps/@29.6416312,-82.3395375,3a,75y,64.42h,87.97t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sV7gY21ndG9pGGjhO0S3uhw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

This intersection has an all red pedestrian crossing for 40 seconds. It also allows crossing parallel to 13th St while 13th St has a green light, with a don't walk time of of just 15 seconds. So the same intersection has 2 different crossing times on the same crosswalk, depending on the phase, and even worse then that, the all way stop is always immediately after the 13th timer goes to 0, so its counting down to always give you a walk again.
https://www.google.com/maps/@29.6485676,-82.3392514,3a,75y,231.64h,84.5t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sDPw9wPSq1PJptbr8G9Nmww!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DDPw9wPSq1PJptbr8G9Nmww%26cb_client%3Dsearch.revgeo_and_fetch.gps%26w%3D96%26h%3D64%26yaw%3D155.45415%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i13312!8i6656

This highway interchange has a really weird cycle for pedestrians: when you press the button to cross the highway on ramp, all of the straight traffic in both directions get a red. The off ramp gives the left turn a green, the right turn a red on the opposite side of the street, and lights up the "no straight" blankout sign, when there never is an option to go straight anyways. I cannot figure out why for any of this.
https://www.google.com/maps/@29.6179465,-82.3850794,3a,75y,273.17h,92.17t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sSNSBJYN2h0xLTmX_89T5Zg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Would love to see a recording of the last signal


iPhone

[Dirt Roads]

The thread on Pedestrian Countdown Signals is almost 10 years old, so I'm going to post here and see if it needs to migrate to there (or a new post).

Today, at the intersection of Churton Street and Margaret Lane (across from the "new" Orange County Courthouse in downtown Hillsborough, North Carolina), I noticed that the AM band was getting a nasty periodic static that took out the station.  Upon further review, the static appeared to be caused by the pedestrian countdown signal as the numbers flashed during the countdown.  That certainly got my attention (duh, distraction) and as I got up to the signal it became obvious that the static window was during the blankout mode between changing the numbers.  I was too far away from the signal when the countdown stopped.  That pedestrian signal was installed when the new traffic light was installed at the Weaver Street Market (officially referred to as "Nash & Kollock Street").  That particular signal head remained out of service for a number of years (for reasons unknown), and has probably only been working for 3 years or so.  If you've been following my posts on other threads, I've got all sorts of ideas on how to fix and how to avoid electromagnetic interference; however, this one has me stumped.

Ooh, big rabbit hole:  By the way, the name "Nash & Kollock Street" with the ampersand has an unusual history.  The Presbyterian Church in town was historically devoid of any adornments, inside or outside.   Except that there is a marble tablet on the south wall of the sanctuary "In memory of Misses Nash & Kollock", who were children's teachers in town and presumably adored members of the church.  The building was constructed with funds raised in a State Lottery in 1810, completed in 1814 (and purportedly given to the first congregation to call a minister to town - which didn't occur until September 1816).

[Scott5114]

Maybe it's because I'm from MA, but a median and 2 lanes of oncoming traffic are a lot for drivers to handle, plus a bike lane.

Yeah, I'd say it is because you're from MA. Norman would make you crap your pants. This is a perfectly normal intersection here (and as far as I know has had zero incidents since the signal went in).

[Amtrakprod]

Maybe it's because I'm from MA, but a median and 2 lanes of oncoming traffic are a lot for drivers to handle, plus a bike lane.

Yeah, I'd say it is because you're from MA. Norman would make you crap your pants. This is a perfectly normal intersection here (and as far as I know has had zero incidents since the signal went in).

That one doesn't have a tree lined median. I'm good with a FYA there, good visibility


iPhone

[steviep24]

Maybe it's because I'm from MA, but a median and 2 lanes of oncoming traffic are a lot for drivers to handle, plus a bike lane.

Yeah, I'd say it is because you're from MA. Norman would make you crap your pants. This is a perfectly normal intersection here (and as far as I know has had zero incidents since the signal went in).

That one doesn't have a tree lined median. I'm good with a FYA there, good visibility


iPhone

How about here?

[hotdogPi]

I've never understood why so many medians don't go all the way to the crosswalk and instead end early, as shown in the GSV link in the post immediately prior to mine. With a median touching the crosswalk (not in, because wheelchairs), pedestrians only have to cross half the street at a time.

[Big John]

^^ Sometimes there are short medians because of engineering judgment that left-turning traffic (to and from the mainline) can make a proper turn.

[Amtrakprod]

Maybe it's because I'm from MA, but a median and 2 lanes of oncoming traffic are a lot for drivers to handle, plus a bike lane.

Yeah, I'd say it is because you're from MA. Norman would make you crap your pants. This is a perfectly normal intersection here (and as far as I know has had zero incidents since the signal went in).

That one doesn't have a tree lined median. I'm good with a FYA there, good visibility


iPhone

How about here?

Protected left there


iPhone

[steviep24]

Maybe it's because I'm from MA, but a median and 2 lanes of oncoming traffic are a lot for drivers to handle, plus a bike lane.

Yeah, I'd say it is because you're from MA. Norman would make you crap your pants. This is a perfectly normal intersection here (and as far as I know has had zero incidents since the signal went in).

That one doesn't have a tree lined median. I'm good with a FYA there, good visibility


iPhone

How about here?

Protected left there


iPhone

Doghouse signals actually.

[Amtrakprod]

Maybe it's because I'm from MA, but a median and 2 lanes of oncoming traffic are a lot for drivers to handle, plus a bike lane.

Yeah, I'd say it is because you're from MA. Norman would make you crap your pants. This is a perfectly normal intersection here (and as far as I know has had zero incidents since the signal went in).

That one doesn't have a tree lined median. I'm good with a FYA there, good visibility


iPhone

How about here?

Protected left there


iPhone

Doghouse signals actually.

I know,,, I'm saying it should be a protected left


iPhone

[jakeroot]

Maybe it's because I'm from MA, but a median and 2 lanes of oncoming traffic are a lot for drivers to handle, plus a bike lane.

Yeah, I'd say it is because you're from MA. Norman would make you crap your pants. This is a perfectly normal intersection here (and as far as I know has had zero incidents since the signal went in).

That one doesn't have a tree lined median. I'm good with a FYA there, good visibility

How about here?

Protected left there

Doghouse signals actually.

I know,,, I'm saying it should be a protected left

What's the justification? It's a positive-offset left turn with excellent visibility. It was basically designed for permissive operation.

Also, what is it specifically about tree-lined medians that should require protected left turns? Vegetated medians do not inherently block the vision of traffic turning left.

[US 89]

There are literally thousands of intersections in the more open regions of the US with more than one oncoming lane and some amount of traffic that have permissive turns. The Utah signal manual, for example, directs for protected-only turns when there are at least four oncoming lanes (with provision for less when a safety study or a handful of other considerations call for one, of course). There are tons of intersections in urban Salt Lake City that involve a permissive left turn across three oncoming lanes with a large amount of relatively higher-speed 40-45mph traffic (example).

Also, in the case of the protected left in California that brought up this whole discussion, the amount of oncoming traffic there is going to be vanishingly small despite the presence of two lanes. Literally the only thing ahead is the Carmax where the road dead ends. To be honest, that's one of the most low-effort turns I've seen and probably shouldn't need any sort of left turn signal at all.

[roadfro]

The fact that it's a fully protected left says so much about California's signal practices.

Looks like a good candidate to me, tbh.

I don't think it meets any of the standard guidelines for protected-only signals. Only two oncoming lanes, low turning volume, good visibility, and no oncoming left turn.

You would think a state that cares so much about vehicle emissions would use permissive/protected phasing more.

I'd argue that improving pedestrian and bicycle safety with protected arrows would be a more effective than having more permissive signals

I don't think there's any evidence of improved safety at smaller intersections when using protected-only phasing. Larger intersections are where there's a grey area.

Maybe it's because I'm from MA, but a median and 2 lanes of oncoming traffic are a lot for drivers to handle, plus a bike lane. Gotta think about the context of the street you're turning over. I'd have to study it more to make a choice, I'd probably allow a TOD FYA

You're right, context is everything. So here's the overhead satellite map from the OP (OP's street view, for original context). It appears that the signal at the service driveway also acts as a crosswalk signal (the lot across from the service center appears to be owned by the same dealership, and there is median fencing prohibiting crossing). But also that the "street" is really a glorified dead-end driveway to the service center and a Carmax just beyond.

From that context, just the fact that a signal exists here is borderline outrageous to me. But even if a signal is necessary, it seems in no world should that left turn be fully protected.

[Scott5114]

I think the real solution here is that Amtrakprod needs to visit somewhere west of Pennsylvania or south of the Mason-Dixon and see that much of the world does not actually operate according to Massachusetts rules and it's perfectly fine.

One thing I've learned while I've been looking for places I might want to move to is that the Mountain and Pacific time zones are a thoroughly different animal than the Central time zone, which is different than Eastern. The amount of wide open space in the West blows my mind, but obviously Westerners make it work. But at the same time, I've seen people on Reddit from places further east freak the hell out over Texas/Oklahoma speed limits, arguing they must be inherently unsafe, revealing that they have very little actual experience with what this part of the country is actually like.

[jakeroot]

There are tons of intersections in urban Salt Lake City that involve a permissive left turn across three oncoming lanes with a large amount of relatively higher-speed 40-45mph traffic (example).

Off-topic (kind of): that's the first intersection I've seen in Utah, not at a SPUI, that has supplemental left turn signals. Appallingly, the eastbound double left turn has only one left turn signal. WTF.

I think the real solution here is that Amtrakprod needs to visit somewhere west of Pennsylvania or south of the Mason-Dixon and see that much of the world does not actually operate according to Massachusetts rules and it's perfectly fine.

Well, I can attest that he does, in fact, travel beyond New England. But he does have a stronger focus on pedestrian and bike safety than most of us here. Which is perfectly fine, but there is a time and place for all kinds of traffic control.

Many people (not necessarily him) that tend to be "less car-focused" in their preferences find the idea of permissive turns (so-called "concurrent movements") to be akin to two streets receiving a green at the same time; since that's obviously insane, permissive turns must be insane too. Seems like a strawman to me.

[US 89]

There are tons of intersections in urban Salt Lake City that involve a permissive left turn across three oncoming lanes with a large amount of relatively higher-speed 40-45mph traffic (example).

Off-topic (kind of): that's the first intersection I've seen in Utah, not at a SPUI, that has supplemental left turn signals. Appallingly, the eastbound double left turn has only one left turn signal. WTF.

They are certainly rare, but there are a handful of supplemental left signals here and there if you know where to look. They actually added some to the light at 3rd West and North Temple a few years back when they put in flashing yellow arrows there and got rid of the protected-only lefts from North Temple.

Unfortunately, that is far from the only double left with only one signal in Utah. Check out this intersection in West Jordan, which has four approaches of single-signal dual left turns.

[Scott5114]

I think the real solution here is that Amtrakprod needs to visit somewhere west of Pennsylvania or south of the Mason-Dixon and see that much of the world does not actually operate according to Massachusetts rules and it's perfectly fine.

Well, I can attest that he does, in fact, travel beyond New England. But he does have a stronger focus on pedestrian and bike safety than most of us here. Which is perfectly fine, but there is a time and place for all kinds of traffic control.

Many people (not necessarily him) that tend to be "less car-focused" in their preferences find the idea of permissive turns (so-called "concurrent movements") to be akin to two streets receiving a green at the same time; since that's obviously insane, permissive turns must be insane too. Seems like a strawman to me.

I think part of it, too, is that he seems to assume that every crosswalk and bike lane will be in use at all times always. That may well be true in denser parts of Massachusetts, but it's overly optimistic in most other parts of the country. Fretting about pedestrian safety at the Wylie Road/Lindsey Street intersection would be silly, because the odds that a pedestrian and turning traffic are even going to be present at the same time is really, really low.

[Amtrakprod]

I think the real solution here is that Amtrakprod needs to visit somewhere west of Pennsylvania or south of the Mason-Dixon and see that much of the world does not actually operate according to Massachusetts rules and it's perfectly fine.

Well, I can attest that he does, in fact, travel beyond New England. But he does have a stronger focus on pedestrian and bike safety than most of us here. Which is perfectly fine, but there is a time and place for all kinds of traffic control.

Many people (not necessarily him) that tend to be "less car-focused" in their preferences find the idea of permissive turns (so-called "concurrent movements") to be akin to two streets receiving a green at the same time; since that's obviously insane, permissive turns must be insane too. Seems like a strawman to me.

I think part of it, too, is that he seems to assume that every crosswalk and bike lane will be in use at all times always. That may well be true in denser parts of Massachusetts, but it's overly optimistic in most other parts of the country. Fretting about pedestrian safety at the Wylie Road/Lindsey Street intersection would be silly, because the odds that a pedestrian and turning traffic are even going to be present at the same time is really, really low.

So wouldn't you argue that a FYA with ped protect to change the arrow red when the walk sign is activated by a pedestrian push button? That sounds most context appropriate for that location.

I would like to state that I'm not anti car, in any means. I just believe and practice that everyone should have access to safety no matter what method they use to get around. And finding creative solutions to improving safety for everyone is something I'm quite passionate about. I believe it should be a common goal, for all of us.


iPhone

[US 89]

So wouldn’t you argue that a FYA with ped protect to change the arrow red when the walk sign is activated by a pedestrian push button? That sounds most context appropriate for that location.

Until a pedestrian pushes the button, then just walks across on his own against the light after waiting for a few seconds and realizing there is no conflicting traffic anywhere near. Then by the time the walk signal activates and the arrow turns red, a handful of cars have arrived and now have to wait for no reason to make their left turn, which is not only annoying but also increases idling emissions.

This is a problem with HAWKs too, by the way. People push the button, get sick of waiting for the light to change, and jaywalk on their own as soon as a gap in traffic shows up. By the time the light does change, any pedestrians have long since crossed and left the scene.