Traffic signal

[hobsini2]

But back to signals...
I actually quite like Oregon's new installs. They're very similar to Missouri.

Edit: Even newer Oregon with signals aligned to be the same height, yellow reflectors, and large street signs.

And see, both of those to me are spectacularly ... unspectacular. Those are both literally base-MUTCD. The second signal is much worse to me, since the signals look crooked (even though they are "aligned"), and the mast arm is way too long.

This approach in Chicago is exactly up my alley. No far-right signal but it has everything else; the spacing is good, the signalization is good, the markings are good. Really has it all. Very clean install, and I really like all the pole-mounted signals. Especially without the backplates. I think they look much cleaner.

Jake, the median signals are a rare occasion in Chicago with the exception of Michigan Ave downtown.
Michigan Ave: https://www.google.com/maps/@41.8729568,-87.6241183,3a,75y,1.09h,88.64t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sLf1P5e6Rpz5pSudjDmMhMA!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo1.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DLf1P5e6Rpz5pSudjDmMhMA%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D112.15043%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en
More typical newish (2000) signal in Chicago. Clark & Fullerton:
https://www.google.com/maps/@41.9255266,-87.6403574,3a,75y,339.63h,89.2t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sLfbvn1yfJbA_XlSEFp6fLg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en
Older signal setup. (1980s) 63rd & Austin:
https://www.google.com/maps/@41.7778904,-87.7716237,3a,75y,85.39h,87.64t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sPHH1fCcDQzw9JaJ5xk_lLg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en

I can't think of an example off hand but it used to be common that the far left signal would have a small 3 foot mast arm off of the main signal of the cross street instead of being a stand alone. If I come across one, I will post it.

[jakeroot]

But back to signals...
I actually quite like Oregon's new installs. They're very similar to Missouri.

Edit: Even newer Oregon with signals aligned to be the same height, yellow reflectors, and large street signs.

And see, both of those to me are spectacularly ... unspectacular. Those are both literally base-MUTCD. The second signal is much worse to me, since the signals look crooked (even though they are "aligned"), and the mast arm is way too long.

This approach in Chicago is exactly up my alley. No far-right signal but it has everything else; the spacing is good, the signalization is good, the markings are good. Really has it all. Very clean install, and I really like all the pole-mounted signals. Especially without the backplates. I think they look much cleaner.

Jake, the median signals are a rare occasion in Chicago with the exception of Michigan Ave downtown.
Michigan Ave: https://www.google.com/maps/@41.8729568,-87.6241183,3a,75y,1.09h,88.64t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sLf1P5e6Rpz5pSudjDmMhMA!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo1.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DLf1P5e6Rpz5pSudjDmMhMA%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D112.15043%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en
More typical newish (2000) signal in Chicago. Clark & Fullerton:
https://www.google.com/maps/@41.9255266,-87.6403574,3a,75y,339.63h,89.2t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sLfbvn1yfJbA_XlSEFp6fLg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en
Older signal setup. (1980s) 63rd & Austin:
https://www.google.com/maps/@41.7778904,-87.7716237,3a,75y,85.39h,87.64t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sPHH1fCcDQzw9JaJ5xk_lLg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en

I can't think of an example off hand but it used to be common that the far left signal would have a small 3 foot mast arm off of the main signal of the cross street instead of being a stand alone. If I come across one, I will post it.

Oh it's good. I'm well aware of Illinois' vast level of variance in standards; not just from district to district, but also over time. The median signals I could take or leave, but I'm glad they are used when there is a median.

From what I've seen, Chicago-proper and the surrounding D1 have the cleanest signals (good example here -- the far left signal, even at a T-intersection, really seals the deal for me). D6 also has really comprehensive installs (good example here -- all corners must have signals apart from near-left), although I don't love their over-use of backplates.

What personally makes me happiest with most of Illinois (especially District 1) is that backplates are not overused. It's common to see them overhead, but they're really not as helpful for post-mounted signals, but they do end up "crowding" the post and adding to visual clutter. Other states have similar philosophies, but their installs are not always as clean. Most of Illinois has exceptionally clean signal installs, very reminiscent (to me) of European post-mounted installs. They're just pleasant to look at, frankly, and are less industrial feeling than places that only use overhead signals, for example, or places that use a lot of backplates.

As for the far-left signal being installed on a mast arm, I assume you mean something like this? I'm definitely not a fan of these installs.

[mrsman]

But back to signals...
I actually quite like Oregon's new installs. They're very similar to Missouri.

Edit: Even newer Oregon with signals aligned to be the same height, yellow reflectors, and large street signs.

And see, both of those to me are spectacularly ... unspectacular. Those are both literally base-MUTCD. The second signal is much worse to me, since the signals look crooked (even though they are "aligned"), and the mast arm is way too long.

This approach in Chicago is exactly up my alley. No far-right signal but it has everything else; the spacing is good, the signalization is good, the markings are good. Really has it all. Very clean install, and I really like all the pole-mounted signals. Especially without the backplates. I think they look much cleaner.

Jake, the median signals are a rare occasion in Chicago with the exception of Michigan Ave downtown.
Michigan Ave: https://www.google.com/maps/@41.8729568,-87.6241183,3a,75y,1.09h,88.64t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sLf1P5e6Rpz5pSudjDmMhMA!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo1.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DLf1P5e6Rpz5pSudjDmMhMA%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D112.15043%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en
More typical newish (2000) signal in Chicago. Clark & Fullerton:
https://www.google.com/maps/@41.9255266,-87.6403574,3a,75y,339.63h,89.2t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sLfbvn1yfJbA_XlSEFp6fLg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en
Older signal setup. (1980s) 63rd & Austin:
https://www.google.com/maps/@41.7778904,-87.7716237,3a,75y,85.39h,87.64t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sPHH1fCcDQzw9JaJ5xk_lLg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en

I can't think of an example off hand but it used to be common that the far left signal would have a small 3 foot mast arm off of the main signal of the cross street instead of being a stand alone. If I come across one, I will post it.

Oh it's good. I'm well aware of Illinois' vast level of variance in standards; not just from district to district, but also over time. The median signals I could take or leave, but I'm glad they are used when there is a median.

From what I've seen, Chicago-proper and the surrounding D1 have the cleanest signals (good example here -- the far left signal, even at a T-intersection, really seals the deal for me). D6 also has really comprehensive installs (good example here -- all corners must have signals apart from near-left), although I don't love their over-use of backplates.

What personally makes me happiest with most of Illinois (especially District 1) is that backplates are not overused. It's common to see them overhead, but they're really not as helpful for post-mounted signals, but they do end up "crowding" the post and adding to visual clutter. Other states have similar philosophies, but their installs are not always as clean. Most of Illinois has exceptionally clean signal installs, very reminiscent (to me) of European post-mounted installs. They're just pleasant to look at, frankly, and are less industrial feeling than places that only use overhead signals, for example, or places that use a lot of backplates.

As for the far-left signal being installed on a mast arm, I assume you mean something like this? I'm definitely not a fan of these installs.

It is sort of interesting at the Clark/Fullerton signal posted that the signals facing NB Clark have both right side signals on the mast arm, but the signals facing the other directions  have one side mount and one signal on the mast arm.  (All directions have sidemounts on the left.)  It seems that the left sidemount facing EB Fullerton, being on the same pole as the mast arm facing NB Clark, displaces the possibility of a right sidemount on NB Clark.

The signals are indeed varied in Illinois.  While many signals mirror the signals in CA (left sidemount, mast arm, right sidemount), there are many that would replace the right sidemount with an additional signal on the mast arm.

[kphoger]

Jake, the median signals are a rare occasion in Chicago with the exception of Michigan Ave downtown.

Don't forget Congress Pkwy.

[hobsini2]

But back to signals...
I actually quite like Oregon's new installs. They're very similar to Missouri.

Edit: Even newer Oregon with signals aligned to be the same height, yellow reflectors, and large street signs.

And see, both of those to me are spectacularly ... unspectacular. Those are both literally base-MUTCD. The second signal is much worse to me, since the signals look crooked (even though they are "aligned"), and the mast arm is way too long.

This approach in Chicago is exactly up my alley. No far-right signal but it has everything else; the spacing is good, the signalization is good, the markings are good. Really has it all. Very clean install, and I really like all the pole-mounted signals. Especially without the backplates. I think they look much cleaner.

Jake, the median signals are a rare occasion in Chicago with the exception of Michigan Ave downtown.
Michigan Ave: https://www.google.com/maps/@41.8729568,-87.6241183,3a,75y,1.09h,88.64t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sLf1P5e6Rpz5pSudjDmMhMA!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo1.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DLf1P5e6Rpz5pSudjDmMhMA%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D112.15043%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en
More typical newish (2000) signal in Chicago. Clark & Fullerton:
https://www.google.com/maps/@41.9255266,-87.6403574,3a,75y,339.63h,89.2t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sLfbvn1yfJbA_XlSEFp6fLg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en
Older signal setup. (1980s) 63rd & Austin:
https://www.google.com/maps/@41.7778904,-87.7716237,3a,75y,85.39h,87.64t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sPHH1fCcDQzw9JaJ5xk_lLg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en

I can't think of an example off hand but it used to be common that the far left signal would have a small 3 foot mast arm off of the main signal of the cross street instead of being a stand alone. If I come across one, I will post it.

As for the far-left signal being installed on a mast arm, I assume you mean something like this? I'm definitely not a fan of these installs.

No Jake. That's not the kind I was talking about. And it was a Chicago only thing. If I find one, I will post it.

[hobsini2]

Jake, I finally found one. Touhy Ave & Ashland Ave. It is on all 4 corners.
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.0126983,-87.6702003,3a,75y,342.18h,82.44t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sH2YBFadsYtAn_UbvTYR93Q!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en

[Amtrakprod]

Jake, I finally found one. Touhy Ave & Ashland Ave. It is on all 4 corners.
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.0126983,-87.6702003,3a,75y,342.18h,82.44t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sH2YBFadsYtAn_UbvTYR93Q!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en

Why? Just why? 

[jeffandnicole]

Jake, I finally found one. Touhy Ave & Ashland Ave. It is on all 4 corners.
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.0126983,-87.6702003,3a,75y,342.18h,82.44t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sH2YBFadsYtAn_UbvTYR93Q!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en

Why? Just why? 

Certainly helps with visibility, but also certainly not really needed in an area like this.

[STLmapboy]

Jake, I finally found one. Touhy Ave & Ashland Ave. It is on all 4 corners.
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.0126983,-87.6702003,3a,75y,342.18h,82.44t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sH2YBFadsYtAn_UbvTYR93Q!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en

I could climb up the pole and knock down that spindly thing with a sledgehammer. Rather than just a thickest mast arm thread (go check it out) we should have a thinnest arm thread too.

[hobsini2]

Jake, I finally found one. Touhy Ave & Ashland Ave. It is on all 4 corners.
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.0126983,-87.6702003,3a,75y,342.18h,82.44t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sH2YBFadsYtAn_UbvTYR93Q!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en

Why? Just why? 

Certainly helps with visibility, but also certainly not really needed in an area like this.

Most of these were built in the 1980s in areas that needed it for visibility. I can't tell you why at this intersection. These are extremely rare in the field now. When Chicago updates their signals, they just put the far left signal on either a stand alone pole or on the vertical of the cross street signal or as part of a light pole.

[mrsman]

Jake, I finally found one. Touhy Ave & Ashland Ave. It is on all 4 corners.
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.0126983,-87.6702003,3a,75y,342.18h,82.44t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sH2YBFadsYtAn_UbvTYR93Q!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en

Why? Just why? 

Certainly helps with visibility, but also certainly not really needed in an area like this.

Most of these were built in the 1980s in areas that needed it for visibility. I can't tell you why at this intersection. These are extremely rare in the field now. When Chicago updates their signals, they just put the far left signal on either a stand alone pole or on the vertical of the cross street signal or as part of a light pole.

In some ways they are reminiscent of signals in Toronto, where this short mast arm on the left is quite common.

https://www.google.com/maps/@43.6479054,-79.383594,3a,75y,13.91h,83.4t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s_N5KWyVl17GvqoRnpWnI3g!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo0.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3D_N5KWyVl17GvqoRnpWnI3g%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D37.111134%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192

While I agree that the signal placement is ugly, it is still better than having no left sidemount at all. I imagine that given how few of these are left in Chicago, that most will be eliminated with upcoming signal modernization.

[STLmapboy]

Do these look a tad bulky to anyone?

I mean, if WI is going to make masts this bulky, at least do them at interchanges like this.

[Revive 755]

What personally makes me happiest with most of Illinois (especially District 1) is that backplates are not overused. It's common to see them overhead, but they're really not as helpful for post-mounted signals, but they do end up "crowding" the post and adding to visual clutter.

Backplates on post mounted signals are very helpful IMHO when the sun is at the wrong angle in the mornings and evenings.

[EpicRoadways]

This might be a little bit of a newbie question, so my apologies in advance. I often drive through this intersection, but it seems odd to me that one of the left turn signals is protected-only (typical three-section arrow arrangement) while the signal controlling opposing traffic is permissive (four-section RYG ball+Y/G arrow). How common is an arrangement like this?

[Amtrakprod]

This might be a little bit of a newbie question, so my apologies in advance. I often drive through this intersection, but it seems odd to me that one of the left turn signals is protected-only (typical three-section arrow arrangement) while the signal controlling opposing traffic is permissive (four-section RYG ball+Y/G arrow). How common is an arrangement like this?

This exists a lot but it's a bit weird. With signals set up like this it is important to have left turn yield on green and no turn on red arrow signs.


iPhone

[Amtrakprod]

huh?

https://www.google.com/maps/@39.7296324,-75.5844454,3a,31.3y,10.78h,99.67t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s6QyrB_uprAECVt8gWZOVtA!2e0!7i3328!8i1664

[mrsman]

This might be a little bit of a newbie question, so my apologies in advance. I often drive through this intersection, but it seems odd to me that one of the left turn signals is protected-only (typical three-section arrow arrangement) while the signal controlling opposing traffic is permissive (four-section RYG ball+Y/G arrow). How common is an arrangement like this?

This exists a lot but it's a bit weird. With signals set up like this it is important to have left turn yield on green and no turn on red arrow signs.


iPhone

An arrangement like this is common where the engineers decide that the permissive side should be a lagging left.  The opposing (leading) side needs to have a restricted turn (protected only) to avoid a yellow trap situation.

Of course with FYA signals, the opposing (leading) side could be permissive, since a well coordinated FYA signal can avoid the yellow trap problem.  The leading signal could be 4 aspect (just add a FYA between yellow and green arrows) and the lagging signal can remain as is.

On another note, I notice that the singal a block away does not have left sidemounts.  To my knowledge most signals in the Twin Cities (although I can't speak to the state as a whole) have the left sidemounts, so St Cloud must be a little different.

https://www.google.com/maps/@45.5587513,-94.1637281,3a,75y,263.73h,88.4t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s-krF622ar95Z2k7FXHWUjw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

[STLmapboy]

A reminder that mrsman started this great thread. If you have a few minutes, you can share examples of typical lights/installs in your state and really go in depth. It's a fun one.

[EpicRoadways]

On another note, I notice that the singal a block away does not have left sidemounts.  To my knowledge most signals in the Twin Cities (although I can't speak to the state as a whole) have the left sidemounts, so St Cloud must be a little different.
https://www.google.com/maps/@45.5587513,-94.1637281,3a,75y,263.73h,88.4t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s-krF622ar95Z2k7FXHWUjw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

That signal is actually quite a bit older than the one that I linked (by like 20 or 30 years ). Newer installations in the area since the mid-2000s or so have all had the standard left sidemounts, but older installations aren't always updated until the entire signal is upgraded.

[Amtrakprod]

Well my town is finally installing its first FYA left turn signal. And they plan to use TOD phasing!!




iPhone

[jakeroot]

Well my town is finally installing its first FYA left turn signal. And they plan to use TOD phasing!!

How can you be sure? If there's a giveaway, I'm not seeing it.

Jake, I finally found one. Touhy Ave & Ashland Ave. It is on all 4 corners.
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.0126983,-87.6702003,3a,75y,342.18h,82.44t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sH2YBFadsYtAn_UbvTYR93Q!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en

Why? Just why? 

Certainly helps with visibility, but also certainly not really needed in an area like this.

Most of these were built in the 1980s in areas that needed it for visibility. I can't tell you why at this intersection. These are extremely rare in the field now. When Chicago updates their signals, they just put the far left signal on either a stand alone pole or on the vertical of the cross street signal or as part of a light pole.

In some ways they are reminiscent of signals in Toronto, where this short mast arm on the left is quite common.

https://www.google.com/maps/@43.6479054,-79.383594,3a,75y,13.91h,83.4t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s_N5KWyVl17GvqoRnpWnI3g!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo0.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3D_N5KWyVl17GvqoRnpWnI3g%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D37.111134%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192

While I agree that the signal placement is ugly, it is still better than having no left sidemount at all. I imagine that given how few of these are left in Chicago, that most will be eliminated with upcoming signal modernization.

Not just Toronto, but all of Ontario. Post-mounted signals are quite rare in Ontario, apart from those necessary for visibility. The short overhang style is basically ubiquitous.

As to the style: it's not my favorite. Seems pretty flimsy, and I think I'd prefer them being mounted on an independent post or the mast arm. Those in Ontario and the few remaining examples in Chicago are too high up for my taste.

I suppose there's some local bias here, but my vote for best signals in Canada is British Columbia. Always a post-mounted signal on the left, and at least three signals for protected left turns unless absolutely not possible. Very thorough and very clean installs, and none of those flimsy Ontario-style mast arms, although most are quite thin (STLmapboy: be warned!)

[STLmapboy]

Very thorough and very clean installs, and none of those flimsy Ontario-style mast arms, although most are quite thin (STLmapboy: be warned!)

Haha thanks for the heads up.

[jakeroot]

Anyone have any idea what's going on here? Right outside Nakatomi Plaza in Century City, Los Angeles:

Right-facing green arrow in bottom left of doghouse

The bottom right lens is a green orb.

Are the two mixed up? Or is this correct?

There's also this funny situation (same intersection) where, even though no through movement exists here, the red orb is always lit because of the adjacent pedestrian crossing. Only when that is activated, is the red orb extinguished.

[jeffandnicole]

Anyone have any idea what's going on here? Right outside Nakatomi Plaza in Century City, Los Angeles:

Right-facing green arrow in bottom left of doghouse

The bottom right lens is a green orb.

Are the two mixed up? Or is this correct?

There's also this funny situation (same intersection) where, even though no through movement exists here, the red orb is always lit because of the adjacent pedestrian crossing. Only when that is activated, is the red orb extinguished.

As far as the green arrow goes, I imagine it should be facing to the left, since the lane it's over turns left.

[jakeroot]

As far as the green arrow goes, I imagine it should be facing to the left, since the lane it's over turns left.

California doesn't really roll with the "place the signal over the 'proper' lane" style of signalization, and instead prefers placement strategies that are meant to more generally indicate what is permitted. So you might have four approach lanes but only a single overhead doghouse (and it won't be over the left turn lane). There are other signals off to the left and right, but overhead, there's a lot of freedom.

Point being, the doghouse is for the right turn lane, even if it's over the left turn lane. I only know this because (A) California requires two primary signals for each movement (the near-side tower wouldn't count), and (B) the first link shows that arrow activated simultaneous with the other right turn green arrow, indicating that they are meant to be for the same turn. I doubt they'd not only install the arrow in the wrong direction, but then also program it to display at the wrong time, if it was indeed meant for the left turn.