Has the flashing yellow left turn signal made it to your state?

[Declan127]

Woodhaven Blvd, NY

Could you possibly expand a little on this? Such as which intersections?

Thanks

81st drive and i believe 103rd ave sb

[RestrictOnTheHanger]

I stand corrected. Traditional FYAs are not commom in NYC.

Woodhaven Blvd has undergone bus lane and other safety projects in the past few years, with a lot of new traffic patterns and signals implemented. Heck it didnt even have 12" signals until a few years ago.

Woodhaven and 81st Rd

https://maps.app.goo.gl/YZTcm9mGdayud3nv5

Woodhaven and 103rd Ave southbound. Note the FYA looks similar to the side-by-side doghouses found on Long Island, but with only one light to the side. I believe this is done for vertical clearance.

https://maps.app.goo.gl/SZFpMsJ8RC92EbeZ7

The green arrow is to the left of the FYA on bottom.

[fwydriver405]

Then there's this signal on the Revere Beach Parkway (MA-16) which has heads that are set up for FYA on Webster and Garfield Dr, but all of the indications are circular indications... right now it is operating in split-phase (or permissive only operation). Possible conversion to FYA once left-turn lanes are added?

Here's an example of a post-mounted FYA+thru/right signals... apparently they were adding left-turn lanes on Garfield/Webster here from the last time I posted the quote above. Any other examples of post mounted FYA installs like the one in Chelsea MA?

[Amtrakprod]

Then there's this signal on the Revere Beach Parkway (MA-16) which has heads that are set up for FYA on Webster and Garfield Dr, but all of the indications are circular indications... right now it is operating in split-phase (or permissive only operation). Possible conversion to FYA once left-turn lanes are added?

Here's an example of a post-mounted FYA+thru/right signals... apparently they were adding left-turn lanes on Garfield/Webster here from the last time I posted the quote above. Any other examples of post mounted FYA installs like the one in Chelsea MA?

I can name a ton since CA uses them and they use post mounting:
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4342789,-71.241564,3a,15y,268.99h,93.14t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sCnuQWeHtTKsNLob2HAbzVA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
https://www.google.com/maps/@40.7048608,-89.5940184,3a,15y,337.83h,92.2t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sehSnl-u60R2KZx5bj_oCxw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
https://www.google.com/maps/@33.0463189,-117.2925884,3a,27.3y,167.47h,92.5t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1stXHdVY7dfRjJ1hmuTy_yCQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
https://www.google.com/maps/@33.9803541,-117.3771273,3a,22.1y,17.94h,91.22t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1scC80c_xXFrKowUP4h9POKg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
https://www.google.com/maps/@33.9873896,-117.3724203,3a,15y,186.45h,92.06t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s21R1vu-hUBE_e1lr52z7CQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

[Big John]

^^ They are very common in Wisconsin.

[jakeroot]

I'm sure he means when there are only post-mounted signals? Because there are thousands of pole-mounted FYA signals across the country, in states, cities, or counties where they are required. But they are always in addition to an overhead signal.

[Amtrakprod]

Then there's this signal on the Revere Beach Parkway (MA-16) which has heads that are set up for FYA on Webster and Garfield Dr, but all of the indications are circular indications... right now it is operating in split-phase (or permissive only operation). Possible conversion to FYA once left-turn lanes are added?

Here's an example of a post-mounted FYA+thru/right signals... apparently they were adding left-turn lanes on Garfield/Webster here from the last time I posted the quote above. Any other examples of post mounted FYA installs like the one in Chelsea MA?

Ooh! I found one!
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4766359,-71.2520185,3a,75y,49.81h,84.37t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sby8fVxaJa6Coaggqg71I2w!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
There is a video too I filmed:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kNvR_sIJc_E

[Mdcastle]

Three section FYA permissive only heads: these were initially allowed by MnDOT, then banned before any were actually erected (AFAIK), on the basis of consistancy and future operational flexibility. In fact even three section protected only heads are discouraged unless the intersection can never, ever, not in a million years operate in permissive mode due to some engineering reason like a site distance problem or overlapping turn lanes.

MnDOT now discourages allowing a left turn from a turn or option lane on a green ball. The 5 section head is left into the Minnesota MUTCD to cater to Minneapolis which is still installing brand new ones but only Minneapolis uses it. Dedicated lanes get a four section FYA and option lanes get a FYA doghouse.

Metro will sill allow left turns on a green ball if the road only has two lanes, but some outlaying districts are even installing doghouses in those situations. It's  work item to make sure that use isn't stretching the FHWA approval for FYA doghouses too far (the original approval was for a split phase / permissive scenario, not protected / permissive or permissive only), and to get some statewide consistency.

https://www.google.com/maps/@45.5859466,-95.9141035,3a,45y,26.75h,95.15t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s_JsV3amO1SuXSmbyYYyRug!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

[jakeroot]

^^^
Sounds like Minnesota is a very unique state with their FYA adoption. Those doghouses (with the FYA, which I've seen before) were never something I expected to catch on, but they look to be common now.

Honestly, I think they're a great addition to intersections where there is lots of pedestrian activity, but where there is no dedicated left turn lane. Activate the FYA when the crosswalk is on (assuming the corridor is timed, that would be anytime the green ball is lit), to encourage drivers to give extra caution when turning. Brilliant idea.

I'm still waiting for a state to adopt a six-head signal**, with three arrows and three orbs, where there is a bimodal green/yellow arrow, but where the top arrow is red. This could be used for intersections without turn lanes, but where the municipality would like to give pedestrians a head start without immediately activating the FYA. Australia sort of does this, but they simply extinguish the red arrow when the permissive phase activates, instead of flashing the yellow arrow. They also use this as the standard head for when there is a dedicated lane, when the US would use a dedicated FYA.

** I understand it is not formally permitted, but that doesn't mean we can't experiment with the concept, nor does it mean that cities haven't done it already.

[Amtrakprod]

Three-section FYA permissive only heads: these were initially allowed by MnDOT, then banned before any were actually erected (AFAIK), on the basis of consistency and future operational flexibility. In fact, even three-section protected only heads are discouraged unless the intersection can never, ever, not in a million years operate in permissive mode due to some engineering reason like a sight distance problem or overlapping turn lanes.

MnDOT now discourages allowing a left turn from a turn or option lane on a green ball. The 5 section head is left into the Minnesota MUTCD to cater to Minneapolis which is still installing brand new ones but only Minneapolis uses it. Dedicated lanes get a four-section FYA and option lanes get an FYA doghouse.

Metro will sill allow left turns on a green ball if the road only has two lanes, but some outlying districts are even installing doghouses in those situations. It's work item to make sure that use isn't stretching the FHWA approval for FYA doghouses too far (the original approval was for a split-phase / permissive scenario, not protected / permissive or permissive only), and to get some statewide consistency.

https://www.google.com/maps/@45.5859466,-95.9141035,3a,45y,26.75h,95.15t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s_JsV3amO1SuXSmbyYYyRug!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

Wow, those FYA Doghouses are so cool! I wish we had them here!

Here are some MassDOT left turn protocols:

For a reason, I have no idea of if there is a left turn lane and a protected left isn't needed, MassDOT will use a 3 section FYA, even if the opposing direction never gets a protected left. It's still kinda cool: https://www.google.com/maps/@42.403855,-71.0359208,3a,28.1y,209.7h,90.73t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s0hpYkBCYtWT39pZIf3gQvQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

MassDOT still uses doghouses (Non-FYA) for option lanes: https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4488352,-71.1474868,3a,29.9y,63.23h,96.65t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sV3CVlUcYWYXzgeJFMH7f5w!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

MassDOT is all the way FYA for left turns that are permissive:
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.3646517,-71.1759596,3a,34.3y,104.55h,98.36t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sUey5cCQuOoSb8X7bKiL1og!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Local towns are installing FYAs slowly, but my town, of course, is slow to that. I could rant about my town for hours, about how we got a HAWK, and then people complained, and made the town change it to a 3-section signal, after only 4 months. And how we don't use FYAs, even on new lights. But that is for another thread.

[SignBridge]

Interesting that the HAWK didn't catch on and that public pressure caused the local authorities to convert it to a standard type traffic signal. Way to go. I've always thought HAWK was a bad idea. Can't imagine what those people at FHWA were smoking when they approved that design.

[Amtrakprod]

Interesting that the HAWK didn't catch on and that public pressure caused the local authorities to convert it to a standard type traffic signal. Way to go. I've always thought HAWK was a bad idea. Can't imagine what those people at FHWA were smoking when they approved that design.

I'm only mad because of where they chose to install it. They choose a 3 way intersection on the busiest road in the busiest area of town. They should've tried it at a normal 2 way ped xing.


iPhone

[mrsman]

Interesting that the HAWK didn't catch on and that public pressure caused the local authorities to convert it to a standard type traffic signal. Way to go. I've always thought HAWK was a bad idea. Can't imagine what those people at FHWA were smoking when they approved that design.

I'm only mad because of where they chose to install it. They choose a 3 way intersection on the busiest road in the busiest area of town. They should've tried it at a normal 2 way ped xing.


iPhone

Agreed, where there is a cross street, the traffic interactions are more complicated.

I'm not a fan of HAWKs, but L.A. has great signals for mid-block pedestrian crossings* that you see all over Downtown (and in a few other pedestrian heavy areas like Fairfax Avenue).  RYG signals, but the red is a flashing red.  Basically, the green allows the driver expectation to anticipate a possibility of a yellow and red light.  But the red flashes, so if a ped crosses faster than the allotted time, a car can make a full stop and then proceed without needing to wait for the green.  An even better alternative has a brief solid red at the beginning of the pedestrian crossing time (aligned with the WALK phase for crossing peds), to make sure that cars actually come to a full stop first and wait a little before proceeding.  flashing red at the same time as FDW.

These are useful where there is no cross traffic to deal with.  These are also useful where the warrants don't allow for a full signal (because it is too close to other signals), but there is a safety need to have a full stop to allow for a ped crossing.

Here's an example:

https://www.google.com/maps/@34.0480197,-118.2525659,3a,75y,33.78h,87.27t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sUIPoFya023exayOs6OuvbQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656


*Unfortunately, L.A. has recently installed some HAWKs.  I believe it is a HUGE step backward:

https://laist.com/2019/09/25/hawk_pedestrian_crossing_beacon.php

[Amtrakprod]

Interesting that the HAWK didn't catch on and that public pressure caused the local authorities to convert it to a standard type traffic signal. Way to go. I've always thought HAWK was a bad idea. Can't imagine what those people at FHWA were smoking when they approved that design.

I'm only mad because of where they chose to install it. They choose a 3 way intersection on the busiest road in the busiest area of town. They should've tried it at a normal 2 way ped xing.


iPhone

Agreed, where there is a cross street, the traffic interactions are more complicated.

I'm not a fan of HAWKs, but L.A. has great signals for mid-block pedestrian crossings* that you see all over Downtown (and in a few other pedestrian heavy areas like Fairfax Avenue).  RYG signals, but the red is a flashing red.  Basically, the green allows the driver expectation to anticipate a possibility of a yellow and red light.  But the red flashes, so if a ped crosses faster than the allotted time, a car can make a full stop and then proceed without needing to wait for the green.  An even better alternative has a brief solid red at the beginning of the pedestrian crossing time (aligned with the WALK phase for crossing peds), to make sure that cars actually come to a full stop first and wait a little before proceeding.  flashing red at the same time as FDW.

These are useful where there is no cross traffic to deal with.  These are also useful where the warrants don't allow for a full signal (because it is too close to other signals), but there is a safety need to have a full stop to allow for a ped crossing.

Here's an example:

https://www.google.com/maps/@34.0480197,-118.2525659,3a,75y,33.78h,87.27t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sUIPoFya023exayOs6OuvbQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656


*Unfortunately, L.A. has recently installed some HAWKs.  I believe it is a HUGE step backward:

https://laist.com/2019/09/25/hawk_pedestrian_crossing_beacon.php

those seem really cool actually! I still kinda like HAWKs tho.


iPhone

[thenetwork]

Do most HAWK signals have a required minimum "rest" time before they can be fully activated again?  I know woth at theast the activated strobing yellow crosswalks here, as soon as someone hits the crossing button again, the timer instantly recycles back to the maximum strobe flash countdown time.

[jakeroot]

*Unfortunately, L.A. has recently installed some HAWKs.  I believe it is a HUGE step backward:

https://laist.com/2019/09/25/hawk_pedestrian_crossing_beacon.php

This doesn't make any sense to me. LA's current pedestrian signals are basically HAWK signals with more familiar RYG displays (and without the "no movement" phase, at least at some). How exactly is the HAWK improving on this at all?

We've all questioned engineers at one point or another, but sometimes I wonder if the engineers consider at all what they already have? How has the LADOT not recognized that their current ped crossings are nearly identical to HAWK signals? They've basically just put up some unfamiliar signal displays and proclaimed it as safer. Just moronic.

[Amtrakprod]

Do most HAWK signals have a required minimum "rest" time before they can be fully activated again?  I know woth at theast the activated strobing yellow crosswalks here, as soon as someone hits the crossing button again, the timer instantly recycles back to the maximum strobe flash countdown time.

They did here, in fact they would always activate at one certain time in the cycle since there were two other lights right next to HAWK.

[mrsman]

*Unfortunately, L.A. has recently installed some HAWKs.  I believe it is a HUGE step backward:

https://laist.com/2019/09/25/hawk_pedestrian_crossing_beacon.php

This doesn't make any sense to me. LA's current pedestrian signals are basically HAWK signals with more familiar RYG displays (and without the "no movement" phase, at least at some). How exactly is the HAWK improving on this at all?

We've all questioned engineers at one point or another, but sometimes I wonder if the engineers consider at all what they already have? How has the LADOT not recognized that their current ped crossings are nearly identical to HAWK signals? They've basically just put up some unfamiliar signal displays and proclaimed it as safer. Just moronic.

I made similar arguments on LADOT's twitter feed when they first introduced this new HAWK signal.  HAWK are not needed in L.A. for any mid-block crossing.  Ideally, L.A.'s model signal should be used in place of HAWKs in other cities and states that they are put in place.

[jakeroot]

*Unfortunately, L.A. has recently installed some HAWKs.  I believe it is a HUGE step backward:

https://laist.com/2019/09/25/hawk_pedestrian_crossing_beacon.php

This doesn't make any sense to me. LA's current pedestrian signals are basically HAWK signals with more familiar RYG displays (and without the "no movement" phase, at least at some). How exactly is the HAWK improving on this at all?

We've all questioned engineers at one point or another, but sometimes I wonder if the engineers consider at all what they already have? How has the LADOT not recognized that their current ped crossings are nearly identical to HAWK signals? They've basically just put up some unfamiliar signal displays and proclaimed it as safer. Just moronic.

I made similar arguments on LADOT's twitter feed when they first introduced this new HAWK signal.  HAWK are not needed in L.A. for any mid-block crossing.  Ideally, L.A.'s model signal should be used in place of HAWKs in other cities and states that they are put in place.

Yeah, that's a very good point. Have they not studied their current signals at all**? They've been on to something good for decades. It's a familiar set of signals and I'm sure the obedience rate is much higher than HAWKs.

** My only guess (and it's a massive stretch...I hope) is that they've never studied their current crossing signals. To avoid legal suits, they're just adopting what is now the nationwide "standard" for part-time protected crossings.

[mrsman]

*Unfortunately, L.A. has recently installed some HAWKs.  I believe it is a HUGE step backward:

https://laist.com/2019/09/25/hawk_pedestrian_crossing_beacon.php

This doesn't make any sense to me. LA's current pedestrian signals are basically HAWK signals with more familiar RYG displays (and without the "no movement" phase, at least at some). How exactly is the HAWK improving on this at all?

We've all questioned engineers at one point or another, but sometimes I wonder if the engineers consider at all what they already have? How has the LADOT not recognized that their current ped crossings are nearly identical to HAWK signals? They've basically just put up some unfamiliar signal displays and proclaimed it as safer. Just moronic.

I made similar arguments on LADOT's twitter feed when they first introduced this new HAWK signal.  HAWK are not needed in L.A. for any mid-block crossing.  Ideally, L.A.'s model signal should be used in place of HAWKs in other cities and states that they are put in place.

Yeah, that's a very good point. Have they not studied their current signals at all**? They've been on to something good for decades. It's a familiar set of signals and I'm sure the obedience rate is much higher than HAWKs.

** My only guess (and it's a massive stretch...I hope) is that they've never studied their current crossing signals. To avoid legal suits, they're just adopting what is now the nationwide "standard" for part-time protected crossings.

I believe that is their line of thinking.

I was able to find my twitter comments:

ME:  The hawk is a step backwards for Los Angeles.  they should really implement mid-block crossing signal like exists on Fairfax near Beverly.

LADOT Official:  Happy you are a fan of our mid-block crossings too! The characteristics on 6th street were best for this HAWK pilot though.

So their answer doesn't really address the issue, but it is likely that any new installation of a mid-block crossing will be a HAWK, since it has federal approval.  Let's hope they don't replace all the existing mid-block signals with HAWKs as it would be a terrible move.

[Amtrakprod]

Then there's this signal on the Revere Beach Parkway (MA-16) which has heads that are set up for FYA on Webster and Garfield Dr, but all of the indications are circular indications... right now it is operating in split-phase (or permissive only operation). Possible conversion to FYA once left-turn lanes are added?

Here's an example of a post-mounted FYA+thru/right signals... apparently they were adding left-turn lanes on Garfield/Webster here from the last time I posted the quote above. Any other examples of post mounted FYA installs like the one in Chelsea MA?

and here in revere: https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4251819,-71.011148,3a,28.8y,232.29h,89.17t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sNKO0bi_QTHT8CO7Xw4cqAg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

[SignBridge]

Jakeroot and mrsman, I think there is another factor you're overlooking as to why Los Angeles is using HAWKs. The cost factor. Wasn't the original idea for the HAWK signal concept supposed to be cost savings as compared to the cost of installing conventional signals? When in doubt follow the money. Cost is almost always the issue.

[jakeroot]

Jakeroot and mrsman, I think there is another factor you're overlooking as to why Los Angeles is using HAWKs. The cost factor. Wasn't the original idea for the HAWK signal concept supposed to be cost savings as compared to the cost of installing conventional signals? When in doubt follow the money. Cost is almost always the issue.

I've never seen cost touted as a reason to install a HAWK. Usually if money is an issue, you go for RRFBs.

[SignBridge]

RRFB's?

[Amtrakprod]

RRFB's?

Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons  . I despise these signals, here's an example: https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4183696,-71.1574578,3a,32.4y,33.21h,91.34t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1smkmDu6kNqdDRCed_76_YEw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192