States Ranked by Traffic Signal Quality

[Amtrakprod]

After seeing the road signs forum I decided this would be a good idea. Here are some examples as things to rate signals on. In good condition, MUTCD requirements met, and maybe set ups warranted (if protected left installed on residential street, *cough California *cough). Feel free to add more if you'd like.


iPhone

[ilpt4u]

I rank IL #1

If there is a criticism, it is the failure to embrace the Flashing Yellow, keeping 5 Section Towers, outside of the IDOT Peoria District (D4)

But since IL signals typically do not utilize Dallas Phasing, 5 Section Towers work

[roadfro]

I will rank Nevada pretty high. Most installs are well above minimums for MUTCD compliance and incorporate many best practices (at least two signal heads for every movement not just where required, one signal per lane, auxiliary far side pole mounted heads, etc) and generally installations are nice and clean. Also an early adopter of FYA (it was invented here after all) and has been gradually replacing doghouses and traditional protected lefts with FYAs.

[Amtrakprod]

I rank IL #1

If there is a criticism, it is the failure to embrace the Flashing Yellow, keeping 5 Section Towers, outside of the IDOT Peoria District (D4)

But since IL signals typically do not utilize Dallas Phasing, 5 Section Towers work

I agree


iPhone

[Amtrakprod]

I'd rank Massachusetts in the bad category, it's not good at all, but it's not poor, they have lots of FYAs and they are good on deciding which is permissible and which is protected.


iPhone

[Amtrakprod]

I would rank DC in the bad category as well, the timing is too long and there are lots of errors.


iPhone

[jeffandnicole]

I'd go middle-of-the-pack with NJDOT.  They've gotten a lot better over the past several years complying with the signal-per-lane guideline.  Most of their lights are now of the 12" lens variety (they often over-used 8" lenses in the past). They continue to use the fairly unique trombone arms, and transitioned over to monopoles when needed that usually look fairly sleek.  They don't use the FYA which I'm fine with.   Their stop-line definition provides signal assistance for those further back from the stop line.  Some engineers refer to the Walk/Don't Walk signs as Man/Hand signs.  They have a pretty good signal replacement program that keeps the lights looking fresh. 

Their faults are a continued lack of advanced green arrows and visual detection systems (Image/presence detection) that seem to constantly need repairs, much more so than the older in-ground loop detectors.  NJDOT seemed to prefer short signal timings - they've done a better job during rush hours of longer timings that work for all directions, and many of these timings should be applied all day, especially with an increase in non-rush hour traffic.

[Amtrakprod]

I'd go middle-of-the-pack with NJDOT.  They've gotten a lot better over the past several years complying with the signal-per-lane guideline.  Most of their lights are now of the 12" lens variety (they often over-used 8" lenses in the past). They continue to use the fairly unique trombone arms, and transitioned over to monopoles when needed that usually look fairly sleek.  They don't use the FYA which I'm fine with.   Their stop-line definition provides signal assistance for those further back from the stop line.  Some engineers refer to the Walk/Don't Walk signs as Man/Hand signs.  They have a pretty good signal replacement program that keeps the lights looking fresh. 

Their faults are a continued lack of advanced green arrows and visual detection systems (Image/presence detection) that seem to constantly need repairs, much more so than the older in-ground loop detectors.  NJDOT seemed to prefer short signal timings - they've done a better job during rush hours of longer timings that work for all directions, and many of these timings should be applied all day, especially with an increase in non-rush hour traffic.

Due to the lack of FYAs, I'd put it in a bad category, like MA.

[jeffandnicole]

I'd go middle-of-the-pack with NJDOT.  They've gotten a lot better over the past several years complying with the signal-per-lane guideline.  Most of their lights are now of the 12" lens variety (they often over-used 8" lenses in the past). They continue to use the fairly unique trombone arms, and transitioned over to monopoles when needed that usually look fairly sleek.  They don't use the FYA which I'm fine with.   Their stop-line definition provides signal assistance for those further back from the stop line.  Some engineers refer to the Walk/Don't Walk signs as Man/Hand signs.  They have a pretty good signal replacement program that keeps the lights looking fresh. 

Their faults are a continued lack of advanced green arrows and visual detection systems (Image/presence detection) that seem to constantly need repairs, much more so than the older in-ground loop detectors.  NJDOT seemed to prefer short signal timings - they've done a better job during rush hours of longer timings that work for all directions, and many of these timings should be applied all day, especially with an increase in non-rush hour traffic.

Due to the lack of FYAs, I'd put it in a bad category, like MA.

Don't need them.  Whatever the issue the rest of the country has with them, NJ doesn't have.  We don't have yellow traps and the like; the lights are programmed to avoid them.

[RobbieL2415]

Of the states I've been to, here's how they rank IMO, best to worst.  NYC and DC are included as states because they maintain all lights within their limits.

NC
VA
FL
VT
NH
PA
MD
NY
CT
MA
NJ
RI
DC
NYC
DE

[TheHighwayMan3561]

MN generally has clean, modern looking, visible signals. It looks like a lot of people here would speak unfavorably at FYA being a slow rollout; a lot of 5-section towers remain.

[plain]

Of the states I've been to, here's how they rank IMO, best to worst.  NYC and DC are included as states because they maintain all lights within their limits.

NC
VA
FL
VT
NH
PA
MD
NY
CT
MA
NJ
RI
DC
NYC
DE

I wouldn't put VA anywhere near the top, maybe somewhere the middle or below. While an  interesting concept, the fact that so many cities here maintain their own signals makes the state non-uniform. And some cities do a better job at maintaining signals than others..

VDOT themselves also have issues. While their installations are generally crisp and clean,
there are some older intersections where they installed FYA's.. the FYA has those yellow reflective strips on the backplate but they don't bother with adding the strips to the existing signals' backplates at the intersection. Makes the whole setup look weird, especially at night. Also, the timing at many VDOT controlled intersections is way off.



Also I wouldn't have NYC separate from NY just because they maintain their own signals.

[Amtrakprod]

Of the states I've been to, here's how they rank IMO, best to worst.  NYC and DC are included as states because they maintain all lights within their limits.

NC
VA
FL
VT
NH
PA
MD
NY
CT
MA
NJ
RI
DC
NYC
DE

I would lower Florida, some of there set ups I've had there have been confusing due to the lights being far away. Also they are very behind in vehicular detection. I would rank Florida maybe under MD or MA


iPhone

[signalman]

I'd go middle-of-the-pack with NJDOT.  They've gotten a lot better over the past several years complying with the signal-per-lane guideline.  Most of their lights are now of the 12" lens variety (they often over-used 8" lenses in the past). They continue to use the fairly unique trombone arms, and transitioned over to monopoles when needed that usually look fairly sleek.  They don't use the FYA which I'm fine with.   Their stop-line definition provides signal assistance for those further back from the stop line.  Some engineers refer to the Walk/Don't Walk signs as Man/Hand signs.  They have a pretty good signal replacement program that keeps the lights looking fresh. 

Their faults are a continued lack of advanced green arrows and visual detection systems (Image/presence detection) that seem to constantly need repairs, much more so than the older in-ground loop detectors.  NJDOT seemed to prefer short signal timings - they've done a better job during rush hours of longer timings that work for all directions, and many of these timings should be applied all day, especially with an increase in non-rush hour traffic.

Due to the lack of FYAs, I'd put it in a bad category, like MA.

I wouldn't necessarily say that a lack of FYAs is a bad thing.  I can think of instances and set-ups where it would allow additional flexibility.  For example,. protected only during peak hours and protected/permissive during off-peak.  But as Jeff noted, even off-peak times are seeing an uptick in traffic. IMO, if an agency isn't going to get creative with a FYA, and instead use it like a normal PPLT signal, then just install a 5 section tower or doghouse and call it a day. I will take away points for NJDOT's insistence on using bimodal arrows, as opposed to 5 section towers or doghouses (both quite rare in NJ).  While the bimodal arrows are kinda a Jersey thing, I can see where they can be troublesome for certain people.

[roadman65]

I'd go middle-of-the-pack with NJDOT.  They've gotten a lot better over the past several years complying with the signal-per-lane guideline.  Most of their lights are now of the 12" lens variety (they often over-used 8" lenses in the past). They continue to use the fairly unique trombone arms, and transitioned over to monopoles when needed that usually look fairly sleek.  They don't use the FYA which I'm fine with.   Their stop-line definition provides signal assistance for those further back from the stop line.  Some engineers refer to the Walk/Don't Walk signs as Man/Hand signs.  They have a pretty good signal replacement program that keeps the lights looking fresh. 

Their faults are a continued lack of advanced green arrows and visual detection systems (Image/presence detection) that seem to constantly need repairs, much more so than the older in-ground loop detectors.  NJDOT seemed to prefer short signal timings - they've done a better job during rush hours of longer timings that work for all directions, and many of these timings should be applied all day, especially with an increase in non-rush hour traffic.

Due to the lack of FYAs, I'd put it in a bad category, like MA.

NJ at least uses 2 left turn signal heads for one lane turns. 

IL, CA, NYC (not NYS), and I think DE are the only ones to use far left corner protected left signal heads with DE using two side by side overheads.

NJ on divided highways used to have signal heads over the opposing side of traffic (PA is now using that technique) along with side mounts so you can see around that semi that is blocking the MUTCD placement of heads.  Like Jeff said, they have gotten better with the installations with one head per lane and typical monotube arms.

I am sad that Newark is starting to phase out the horizontal mounts that made that city pretty different than the others.  True some other towns and cities have used the horizontal mounts, but you always knew you were in Newark when  you seen them more frequently.

[MNHighwayMan]

NJ at least uses 2 left turn signal heads for one lane turns. 

IL, CA, NYC (not NYS), and I think DE are the only ones to use far left corner protected left signal heads with DE using two side by side overheads.

You can add Minnesota to that list. All lefts have at least two signal heads, and double lefts usually have three.

It looks like a lot of people here would speak unfavorably at FYA being a slow rollout; a lot of 5-section towers remain.

I'm not sure why people would complain about that. It seems perfectly fine to me to replace five sections with FYAs as construction happens, or on a slow-but-affordable pace. Expecting an agency to replace thousands of signal heads quickly just isn't reasonable.

[Revive 755]

I rank IL #1

If there is a criticism, it is the failure to embrace the Flashing Yellow, keeping 5 Section Towers, outside of the IDOT Peoria District (D4)

Didn't know Rockford and Springfield were merged into the Peoria District.

[roadman65]

I think I know why NJ won't use the flashing left arrow.  It might have to do with the left side signals as it would create an issue with that one.  On permissive turns the Garden State likes to have one on the left and one on the right.

They do sacrifice the one on the left for protected lefts, I imagine they could copy the placement format for that one.

[jakeroot]

In terms of placement, my favorites (in no order) would be thus...

* CA (usually #1)
* MN
* NV
* AZ
* CO (minus a few municipalities)
* SD
* NJ (only because they're miles ahead of any other Northeast state)
* DC
** BC (if Canada counts)

All have relatively consistent signal design, and feature regular use of both primary and secondary signal heads.

Honorable mentions (issues in parentheses):

* WI (newer per-lane design not as comprehensive as before)
* NM (good in some parts of the state, not in others)
* IL (normally good placement but inconsistent from region to region -- Springfield gets top honors)
* WA (typically abysmal in many areas, but has massively improved lately (especially outside Seattle))



In terms of operation? Not sure I could give top honors to any state. I usually give top honors to whoever has the most number of permissive left turns. I hate waiting for a green arrow. With that in mind, CA is certainly dead-last, with very few permissive lefts outside LA (along relatively major reads). Tucson has both excellent placement and excellent operation (any other city use dual permissive lagging left turns?)...probably my favorite city in the US for signal design and operation.

[US 89]

In terms of aesthetics alone Utah is pretty good in my opinion. Probably 98% of all signals in the state are mast arms, which usually look pretty neat. They also tend to follow the one-signal-per-lane guidance, at least on newer installs.

But the state loses significant points on redundancy. Additional near-side signal heads are somewhat rare, and far-side pole mounted signal heads are extremely rare. But worst of all, the default for signalized left turns is to provide only one arrow. This is even the case at a fair amount of dual left turns, which normally result in two arrows on the mast arm.

[ilpt4u]

I rank IL #1

If there is a criticism, it is the failure to embrace the Flashing Yellow, keeping 5 Section Towers, outside of the IDOT Peoria District (D4)

Didn't know Rockford and Springfield were merged into the Peoria District.

Hey, they both border D4! (D2 and D6). Maybe they liked it

I believe Kane County has done some FYA Installations on Randall Rd as well

Still far and away NOT the IL norm

[jeffandnicole]

I'd put PA at the bottom.  Everything about their lights is ugly, from the poles and arm masts to the signal heads that are kept around much longer than they should be (although for someone like trafficlightguy, that's the beauty in those old signals). 

DE used to string their lights across the roadway, and while I'm not a fan of it, they tended to just use one guidewire to hold the lights at the top rather than a top and bottom guidewire.  They were somewhat unique about that which I liked.  Their switchover to mast arms though have brought some rather unattractive structures and some really thick poles as if they're designed to ward off an army tank attack.

[index]

Of the states I've been to, here's how they rank IMO, best to worst.  NYC and DC are included as states because they maintain all lights within their limits.

NC
VA
FL
VT
NH
PA
MD
NY
CT
MA
NJ
RI
DC
NYC
DE

I wouldn't put VA anywhere near the top, maybe somewhere the middle or below. While an  interesting concept, the fact that so many cities here maintain their own signals makes the state non-uniform. And some cities do a better job at maintaining signals than others..

https://maps.app.goo.gl/JpZZQ78o8F3AzSgz7

As a testament to that, VDOT permitting cities to maintain their own signals resulted in these European styled backplates in Culpeper.



(That small text is a link, I can't get the site to stop making the text microscopic whenever I try and edit this, just gets worse every time)






In terms of age, West Virginia's signals look older than normal. A lot of the signals there look dirty and aged, so when it comes to keeping things up to date, I'd imagine WV ranks poorly.

[jakeroot]

I'd put PA at the bottom.  Everything about their lights is ugly, from the poles and arm masts to the signal heads that are kept around much longer than they should be (although for someone like trafficlightguy, that's the beauty in those old signals). 

PA used to have excellent setups, back when they used vehicle displays for pedestrian crossings. Now, I'd totally agree that they are terrible.

[Mark68]

Having grown up in CA, I am partial to the standard setup there (side mounts are standard, on newer installations on more heavily-trafficked roads, there are advanced side mounts). Nevada, with a few exceptions, does the same, as does MN (haven't been there, but I've seen their setups), WY, the Dakotas, and much of CO (Denver metro especially, as well as newer CDOT installations statewide--not so much in Colorado Springs). NM is up there too, except the difference there is the horizontal signal mounts.


Other states seem to be all over the place. OR, TX, and the rest of the South seem to have no standards whatsoever--other than one signal per lane.

FYAs seem to be the norm on new installs in CO, but there are still lots of doghouses (and on the older, wire-strung installs the 12-8-8 signals have two 12" signals for the left turn movements installed to the left of the through signals--mainly in Denver).