Traffic signal

[interstatefan990]

Forgive me if this is a dumb question, but what the heck are these for?

[SignBridge]

I spent two years looking at intersections in eastern Massachusetts. There is no split second. When a light appears to be off in GSV, it's almost always a flashing yellow/red (whether it's that way naturally or because of a power outage).

I can't figure out this one, though.

Probably because it's dangerous for signals to be completely dark. I've seen it happen, but it's only for emergencies, and it's never meant to function that way.

Crossing a 4 lane DCR road at a Ped signal where the signal is dark is, extremely scary.

A lot of pedestrians are so reckless when they cross that they wouldn't know the difference...........

Typical victim blaming.

Pedestrians are the vulnerable road user, and have the right of way even if they're crossing not at a crosswalk or against a don't walk sign if they're in the roadway. I've never seen a pedestrian cross against the light at this location.

I spent two years looking at intersections in eastern Massachusetts. There is no split second. When a light appears to be off in GSV, it's almost always a flashing yellow/red (whether it's that way naturally or because of a power outage).

I can't figure out this one, though.

Probably because it's dangerous for signals to be completely dark. I've seen it happen, but it's only for emergencies, and it's never meant to function that way.

Crossing a 4 lane DCR road at a Ped signal where the signal is dark is, extremely scary.

A lot of pedestrians are so reckless when they cross that they wouldn't know the difference...........

Typical victim blaming.

Pedestrians are the vulnerable road user, and have the right of way even if they're crossing not at a crosswalk or against a don't walk sign if they're in the roadway. I've never seen a pedestrian cross against the light at this location.

Amtrakprod, you're a young guy and there is a lot you don't know and haven't seen yet. Are you even a licensed driver?

I don't know how the laws read in Massachusetts, but in New York at least, pedestrians do not legally have the right-of-way if facing a red light or don't walk signal. And are also prohibited from crossing even in a marked crosswalk if an approaching vehicle is so close as to be reasonably unable to stop before reaching the crosswalk.

Looking at the larger picture of pedestrian fatalities, the tendency in the media is to usually blame drivers and road design. In fact, I have personally witnessed many pedestrians including mothers with kids in strollers crossing recklessly and illegally. Like crossing a five-lane county road in mid-block when there was a signalized intersection less than a hundred feet away. Or crossing the very wide Queens Blvd. in NYC (dubbed in the media as the boulevard of death) against the traffic signal as I was approaching a green light.

So don't tell me about pedestrians being so vulnerable when they are at fault at least as often as drivers are.

[fwydriver405]

Forgive me if this is a dumb question, but what the heck are these for?

Do these signals go on overnight flash at all? The top coloured signal is a circular yellow, which makes me think that in either emergency or overnight flash, insteady of a steady circular green, it would go to a flashing yellow ball in flash operation. I think there's a few other examples in New York State, like this one in Tuxedo Park NY (from the "Stangest Traffic Lights" thread):

The only (to my knowledge) two-phase lights in CT.  Always found it unique.
https://www.google.com/maps/@41.658349,-72.8668603,3a,75y,16.09h,80.75t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sWgb9u0JkerFxI_OF4EbfxA!2e0!5s20121001T000000!7i13312!8i6656

When would it ever turn to the other color, if ever?

Probably when the intersection is on flash mode, and when it is, the top section will flash yellow. Here's a similar set up along NY 17 at NY 17A in Tuxedo Park:

Honestly, since that direction doesn't have any conflicting traffic at all, the signals in that direction should just be removed completely.

[jeffandnicole]

I spent two years looking at intersections in eastern Massachusetts. There is no split second. When a light appears to be off in GSV, it's almost always a flashing yellow/red (whether it's that way naturally or because of a power outage).

I can't figure out this one, though.

Probably because it's dangerous for signals to be completely dark. I've seen it happen, but it's only for emergencies, and it's never meant to function that way.

Crossing a 4 lane DCR road at a Ped signal where the signal is dark is, extremely scary.

A lot of pedestrians are so reckless when they cross that they wouldn't know the difference...........

Typical victim blaming.

Pedestrians are the vulnerable road user, and have the right of way even if they're crossing not at a crosswalk or against a don't walk sign if they're in the roadway. I've never seen a pedestrian cross against the light at this location.

While vehicle drivers do have to exercise caution, pedestrians certainly do not have the right of way just because they jump into the road whenever they damn well please.

[Amtrakprod]

I spent two years looking at intersections in eastern Massachusetts. There is no split second. When a light appears to be off in GSV, it's almost always a flashing yellow/red (whether it's that way naturally or because of a power outage).

I can't figure out this one, though.

Probably because it's dangerous for signals to be completely dark. I've seen it happen, but it's only for emergencies, and it's never meant to function that way.

Crossing a 4 lane DCR road at a Ped signal where the signal is dark is, extremely scary.

A lot of pedestrians are so reckless when they cross that they wouldn't know the difference...........

Typical victim blaming.

Pedestrians are the vulnerable road user, and have the right of way even if they're crossing not at a crosswalk or against a don't walk sign if they're in the roadway. I've never seen a pedestrian cross against the light at this location.

I spent two years looking at intersections in eastern Massachusetts. There is no split second. When a light appears to be off in GSV, it's almost always a flashing yellow/red (whether it's that way naturally or because of a power outage).

I can't figure out this one, though.

Probably because it's dangerous for signals to be completely dark. I've seen it happen, but it's only for emergencies, and it's never meant to function that way.

Crossing a 4 lane DCR road at a Ped signal where the signal is dark is, extremely scary.

A lot of pedestrians are so reckless when they cross that they wouldn't know the difference...........

Typical victim blaming.

Pedestrians are the vulnerable road user, and have the right of way even if they're crossing not at a crosswalk or against a don't walk sign if they're in the roadway. I've never seen a pedestrian cross against the light at this location.

Amtrakprod, you're a young guy and there is a lot you don't know and haven't seen yet. Are you even a licensed driver?

I don't know how the laws read in Massachusetts, but in New York at least, pedestrians do not legally have the right-of-way if facing a red light or don't walk signal. And are also prohibited from crossing even in a marked crosswalk if an approaching vehicle is so close as to be reasonably unable to stop before reaching the crosswalk.

Looking at the larger picture of pedestrian fatalities, the tendency in the media is to usually blame drivers and road design. In fact, I have personally witnessed many pedestrians including mothers with kids in strollers crossing recklessly and illegally. Like crossing a five-lane county road in mid-block when there was a signalized intersection less than a hundred feet away. Or crossing the very wide Queens Blvd. in NYC (dubbed in the media as the boulevard of death) against the traffic signal as I was approaching a green light.

So don't tell me about pedestrians being so vulnerable when they are at fault at least as often as drivers are.

That's typical ageism. I in-fact do have a license, and drive, walk, take transit, and drive. Just because I'm younger, doesn't mean my viewpoint is less valid. I have a lot of experience in roadway design, and my opinions should be valued, rather than dismissed.

It's also typical of this form to have a windshield's perspective, which is very frustrating. This isn't a driver's form, it's a roadgeek form.

In MA, if a pedestrian is in the roadway they have the right of way, and you are at fault for hitting them. It's still jaywalking, but you can't just hit them.

Furthermore, if you look at any article of a crash, they say "car hits pedestrian", instead of the driver. I find it extremely ironic that you assume the media is biased against car drivers. It's not only ironic, it's idiotic.

Pedestrians existed before cars. They should be able to cross where they want, and if drivers are not expecting that, then they are bad drivers.

Honestly, maybe I'm done with this form. It's impossible to deal with so many of you with these terrible perspectives, and your close-mindedness.  Very frustrating. Thanks.

[hotdogPi]

I'm very familiar with crossing as a pedestrian in Massachusetts. While I don't always wait for the signal to change, I always cross when it's clear. I don't walk in front of cars and force them to stop. However, at locations not at an intersection, sometimes I'll step into the bike lane and wait for them to stop if there's clearly not going to be a gap soon.

Not everyone is like this. Some people cross in front of cars, forcing them to slam on their brakes.

[US 89]

In MA, if a pedestrian is in the roadway they have the right of way, and you are at fault for hitting them. It's still jaywalking, but you can't just hit them.

It's illegal to hit a pedestrian. Duh. Don't kill people. That doesn't mean the pedestrian is allowed or supposed to be there in the first place.

Pedestrians existed before cars. They should be able to cross where they want, and if drivers are not expecting that, then they are bad drivers.

Cars existed before airplanes. Cars should therefore be allowed to cross taxiways and runways whenever they want, and if pilots are not expecting that, then they are bad pilots.

It's impossible to deal with so many of you with these terrible perspectives, and your close-mindedness.  Very frustrating. Thanks.

Might do you well to look in the mirror. Just because you don't agree with it doesn't make it a terrible perspective. I'd actually bet the vast majority of people on this forum, myself included, are open to hearing about ways we can maybe make our roads safer for modes of transportation that aren't cars. But when you come at it in such a condescending manner, it isn't going to win you any favors. If you want people to be open-minded, they generally are going to expect some in return.

[JoePCool14]

Interesting that the individual arguing peds should be able to cross wherever, whenever has a train-themed name and profile picture. Should peds be able to cross on train tracks wherever they please and trains must stop? I know it's not a 1-to-1 analogy, but there are some places peds just shouldn't be crossing.

[fwydriver405]

Relatively new signal at LaGuardia airport, left lane is option right lane is right turn only. 4 section ball and right arrow signal to the left of a standard RYG signal, with another 4 section behind the camera, move back to see the intersection. Sleek but sloppy and not MUTCD compliant

https://maps.app.goo.gl/pc1SNuzHWswkoK9K9

I completely understand what they were going for here, but indeed, not compliant. "Easy" fix though, just swap the signals.

Alternatively, they could keep the signal as-is, change the right signal to all arrows, and add a third all-orb RYG signal on the far left pole.

The second option would be more in line with MUTCD standards and recommendations. There shouldn't be a ball over the rightmost lane on this approach because it's a dedicated turn lane.

Worth noting here is that the Port Authority's traffic signals at JFK and LGA Airports are New Jersey style signals even though they're in New York State. Same type mast-arms and configurations that exist in most of New Jersey. Not sure if that's relevant to this case, but still an interesting point of info.

The signals are split phase on all sides so second option makes the most sense. And yes its a PANYNJ setup, but they're not always consistent. Case in point next signal over has curved mast arms, one NYC guy wire, and NYC style right turn FYA

https://maps.app.goo.gl/eXkPMSTC2LNGHYX76

In NYC, when a four section FYA is used in a cluster in that setup, is it common for the single segment to have a steady green arrow or a flashing yellow arrow?

[jeffandnicole]

In MA, if a pedestrian is in the roadway they have the right of way, and you are at fault for hitting them. It's still jaywalking, but you can't just hit them.

I'm not sure where you're getting your facts from.  There is absolutely nothing within the state statutes that say pedestrians in the roadway always have the right of way.

https://www.mass.gov/doc/720-cmr-9-driving-on-state-highways/download . See Page 15, Section 9.09 (4) and (5), among others.

Motorists have a duty to avoid hitting a pedestrian in the roadway, whether they should be there or not, but pedestrians certainly do not always have the right of way. 

[roadfro]

Traffic signals mounted on a building in New Orleans.

https://maps.app.goo.gl/6KS2oz9NTZzB7MVbA

I'm really curious the story behind these, because there appears to be perfectly good light poles to mount those signals on such that those signal heads could be mounted in almost the exact same locations.

[jakeroot]

In MA, if a pedestrian is in the roadway they have the right of way, and you are at fault for hitting them. It's still jaywalking, but you can't just hit them.

I'm not sure where you're getting your facts from.  There is absolutely nothing within the state statutes that say pedestrians in the roadway always have the right of way.

https://www.mass.gov/doc/720-cmr-9-driving-on-state-highways/download . See Page 15, Section 9.09 (4) and (5), among others.

Motorists have a duty to avoid hitting a pedestrian in the roadway, whether they should be there or not, but pedestrians certainly do not always have the right of way.

I think those laws are just to help determine fault for legal reasons. Practically speaking, since hitting a pedestrian on purpose is obviously illegal, pedestrians effectively have the right of way at all times. If you see a pedestrian in the road and intentionally run them down, more than likely you'll be the one charged.

Pedestrians existed before cars. They should be able to cross where they want, and if drivers are not expecting that, then they are bad drivers.

Cars existed before airplanes. Cars should therefore be allowed to cross taxiways and runways whenever they want, and if pilots are not expecting that, then they are bad pilots.

Isn't that a strawman argument? Cars versus planes is clearly a different situation than pedestrians versus cars.

[RestrictOnTheHanger]

Relatively new signal at LaGuardia airport, left lane is option right lane is right turn only. 4 section ball and right arrow signal to the left of a standard RYG signal, with another 4 section behind the camera, move back to see the intersection. Sleek but sloppy and not MUTCD compliant

https://maps.app.goo.gl/pc1SNuzHWswkoK9K9

I completely understand what they were going for here, but indeed, not compliant. "Easy" fix though, just swap the signals.

Alternatively, they could keep the signal as-is, change the right signal to all arrows, and add a third all-orb RYG signal on the far left pole.

The second option would be more in line with MUTCD standards and recommendations. There shouldn't be a ball over the rightmost lane on this approach because it's a dedicated turn lane.

Worth noting here is that the Port Authority's traffic signals at JFK and LGA Airports are New Jersey style signals even though they're in New York State. Same type mast-arms and configurations that exist in most of New Jersey. Not sure if that's relevant to this case, but still an interesting point of info.

The signals are split phase on all sides so second option makes the most sense. And yes its a PANYNJ setup, but they're not always consistent. Case in point next signal over has curved mast arms, one NYC guy wire, and NYC style right turn FYA

https://maps.app.goo.gl/eXkPMSTC2LNGHYX76

In NYC, when a four section FYA is used in a cluster in that setup, is it common for the single segment to have a steady green arrow or a flashing yellow arrow?

The single segment is usually a green arrow.

[roadman65]

https://goo.gl/maps/tniB52SsTDx4r8U46
Use of 8 inch arrows in Hillside, NJ.  Also, using a left and right arrow to denote one way street beyond intersection.

It's a good idea to alert motorists of the one way configuration, but the green left arrow can be confused for a protected left turn and therefore forget to yield to oncoming traffic.

[paulthemapguy]

Forgive me if this is a dumb question, but what the heck are these for?

There is a signal in the opposite direction with the onramp that merges in, so maybe they thought a permanent green light would remove confusion for those traveling in the opposite direction. I see that the top section is yellow; I am assuming that's for a flashing yellow?  What would make them choose flashing yellow instead of a steady green? EVP or battery backup, maybe?

[Big John]

https://goo.gl/maps/tniB52SsTDx4r8U46
Use of 8 inch arrows in Hillside, NJ.  Also, using a left and right arrow to denote one way street beyond intersection.

It's a good idea to alert motorists of the one way configuration, but the green left arrow can be confused for a protected left turn and therefore forget to yield to oncoming traffic.

I've seen a solid green right arrow and a flashing yellow left arrow in that situation.

[roadfro]

https://goo.gl/maps/tniB52SsTDx4r8U46
Use of 8 inch arrows in Hillside, NJ.  Also, using a left and right arrow to denote one way street beyond intersection.

It's a good idea to alert motorists of the one way configuration, but the green left arrow can be confused for a protected left turn and therefore forget to yield to oncoming traffic.

I've seen a solid green right arrow and a flashing yellow left arrow in that situation.

Those should probably be flashing arrows, due to potential conflicts with both the oncoming traffic and pedestrian crossings.

Also interesting is the far side signal has the left arrow below the right arrow, but the signal in the foreground has left arrow above the right arrow (the latter being the correct orientation).

[royo6022]

I spent two years looking at intersections in eastern Massachusetts. There is no split second. When a light appears to be off in GSV, it's almost always a flashing yellow/red (whether it's that way naturally or because of a power outage).

I can't figure out this one, though.

Probably because it's dangerous for signals to be completely dark. I've seen it happen, but it's only for emergencies, and it's never meant to function that way.

Crossing a 4 lane DCR road at a Ped signal where the signal is dark is, extremely scary.

A lot of pedestrians are so reckless when they cross that they wouldn't know the difference...........

Typical victim blaming.

Pedestrians are the vulnerable road user, and have the right of way even if they're crossing not at a crosswalk or against a don't walk sign if they're in the roadway. I've never seen a pedestrian cross against the light at this location.

I spent two years looking at intersections in eastern Massachusetts. There is no split second. When a light appears to be off in GSV, it's almost always a flashing yellow/red (whether it's that way naturally or because of a power outage).

I can't figure out this one, though.

Probably because it's dangerous for signals to be completely dark. I've seen it happen, but it's only for emergencies, and it's never meant to function that way.

Crossing a 4 lane DCR road at a Ped signal where the signal is dark is, extremely scary.

A lot of pedestrians are so reckless when they cross that they wouldn't know the difference...........

Typical victim blaming.

Pedestrians are the vulnerable road user, and have the right of way even if they're crossing not at a crosswalk or against a don't walk sign if they're in the roadway. I've never seen a pedestrian cross against the light at this location.

Amtrakprod, you're a young guy and there is a lot you don't know and haven't seen yet. Are you even a licensed driver?

I don't know how the laws read in Massachusetts, but in New York at least, pedestrians do not legally have the right-of-way if facing a red light or don't walk signal. And are also prohibited from crossing even in a marked crosswalk if an approaching vehicle is so close as to be reasonably unable to stop before reaching the crosswalk.

Looking at the larger picture of pedestrian fatalities, the tendency in the media is to usually blame drivers and road design. In fact, I have personally witnessed many pedestrians including mothers with kids in strollers crossing recklessly and illegally. Like crossing a five-lane county road in mid-block when there was a signalized intersection less than a hundred feet away. Or crossing the very wide Queens Blvd. in NYC (dubbed in the media as the boulevard of death) against the traffic signal as I was approaching a green light.

So don't tell me about pedestrians being so vulnerable when they are at fault at least as often as drivers are.

That's typical ageism. I in-fact do have a license, and drive, walk, take transit, and drive. Just because I'm younger, doesn't mean my viewpoint is less valid. I have a lot of experience in roadway design, and my opinions should be valued, rather than dismissed.

It's also typical of this form to have a windshield's perspective, which is very frustrating. This isn't a driver's form, it's a roadgeek form.

In MA, if a pedestrian is in the roadway they have the right of way, and you are at fault for hitting them. It's still jaywalking, but you can't just hit them.

Furthermore, if you look at any article of a crash, they say "car hits pedestrian", instead of the driver. I find it extremely ironic that you assume the media is biased against car drivers. It's not only ironic, it's idiotic.

Pedestrians existed before cars. They should be able to cross where they want, and if drivers are not expecting that, then they are bad drivers.

Honestly, maybe I'm done with this form. It's impossible to deal with so many of you with these terrible perspectives, and your close-mindedness.  Very frustrating. Thanks.

Did you mean to say forum* ?

[interstatefan990]

Forgive me if this is a dumb question, but what the heck are these for?

Do these signals go on overnight flash at all? The top coloured signal is a circular yellow, which makes me think that in either emergency or overnight flash, insteady of a steady circular green, it would go to a flashing yellow ball in flash operation. I think there's a few other examples in New York State, like this one in Tuxedo Park NY (from the "Stangest Traffic Lights" thread):

They've been green every time I've drove past them. Also I wonder why the Tuxedo Park example has green arrows, while this has a green ball, assuming it was a choice.

There is a signal in the opposite direction with the onramp that merges in, so maybe they thought a permanent green light would remove confusion for those traveling in the opposite direction. I see that the top section is yellow; I am assuming that's for a flashing yellow?  What would make them choose flashing yellow instead of a steady green? EVP or battery backup, maybe?

There's a built-up median barrier with trees, so there shouldn't be any confusion, but I'd maybe be able to understand the signal if there were a smaller median or just paint. You're right though, maybe there's a remote possibility that a driver would see stopped traffic in the opposing direction and get confused, but at that point it's on them.

[jakeroot]

Honestly, maybe I'm done with this form.

Did you mean to say forum* ?

Honestly, dealing with some of the people on this forum is about as fun as filling out forms.

[roadman65]

https://goo.gl/maps/G7CwmgwawQMubic49

Speaking of the post referring to LaGuardia Airport's odd signals being in NYC, the land of double guy masts, here is one in North Merrick, NY with the same mast arms as the airport signals.

[SignBridge]

That's a Nassau County DPW installed signal. They have been using those style mast-arms for about fifty years and now use longer ones also. More recently New York State DOT has been using longer versions of that style mast-arm too. The State's installations are clumsy looking compared to the County's, the result of using different mounting hardware.

[roadman65]

https://goo.gl/maps/bGBZakzVVXpxFhje7
Yeah I seen more of them on NY 106 in Nassau as I did a virtual drive through North Merrick.

[jakeroot]

At the southbound off-ramp from WA-3 to Kitsap Way in Bremerton, the original 12-8-12-12 signal was replaced by a 12-8-8-8 signal sometime in early 2018. Yes, an 8-inch green arrow replaced a 12-inch green arrow:

Before: https://goo.gl/maps/GPfm3VQWb5PBoW6F7

After: https://goo.gl/maps/KgsTX7dL5hDuGxH28

The entire intersection was resignalized in the last year.

[Scott5114]

I have a lot of experience in roadway design

Not until your signature and PE seal appear in the chopblocks of a plan sheet, you don't.

I literally get paid to draw road signs for a living and I wouldn't say "I have a lot of experience in traffic sign design" because mine aren't meant to be used as official traffic control devices. There's a big difference between coming up with ideas at home and actually having lives on the line and being the one that will be held accountable if something goes wrong.