Traffic signal

[CoreySamson]

The dropped left turn signal head.

img snipped...

Oregon has a lot of these where many states just keep them all aligned at one level. 

Am I to guess its done to distinguish it from the normal straight through signal heads?

Texas used to do something like this on their older mast-arms except with horizontal signals:
https://www.google.com/maps/@29.7699436,-94.9776264,3a,24y,175.23h,93.61t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s5OJv5hqPfwobVwiYkcN9LA!2e0!5s20130601T000000!7i13312!8i6656

[jay8g]

That's very interesting! I looked at the intersection on Street View to try and figure out when the signals were installed, but neglected to notice the original signal modules. Then again, I'm not good at spotting those things...yet.

It is interesting that the old indications were also symbols. That would tell me that these may have been installed in the 1990s? Or thereabouts. Not sure when symbolized pedestrian signals came into play.

I believe Seattle started using those neon symbolic ped heads in the 80s (a bit before most places, though it sounds like symbolic pedestrian signals were introduced in the 70s). I have no clue whether these strange ones would have been before the neon ones, between the neon and LED eras, or just some weird one-off thing.

[US 89]

The dropped left turn signal head.


Oregon has a lot of these where many states just keep them all aligned at one level. 

Am I to guess its done to distinguish it from the normal straight through signal heads?

We had a thread on this not too long ago...

https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=29580.0

[Kasey]

Curious what people know about this Econolite pedestrian signal I found in Seattle the other day.

Album: https://flic.kr/s/aHsmWnx79t (there is a video in here showing operation including countdown timer)

I've never seen another one like it. It's very square with short visors around the edge.


Southwest corner by Jacob Root, on Flickr


Northwest corner by Jacob Root, on Flickr

Those are actually pretty rare, if my memory serves me right.

[bcroadguy]

Curious what people know about this Econolite pedestrian signal I found in Seattle the other day.

Album: https://flic.kr/s/aHsmWnx79t (there is a video in here showing operation including countdown timer)

I've never seen another one like it. It's very square with short visors around the edge.


Southwest corner by Jacob Root, on Flickr


Northwest corner by Jacob Root, on Flickr

They've been gone for a few years now, but there used to be some very similar looking square pedestrian signals (no visor though), in Coquitlam, BC.

I'm pretty sure there's another set of these in Surrey somewhere, but I'm not sure where.
Edit: Found some.

[jakeroot]

Those are actually pretty rare, if my memory serves me right.

Very cool. I know for sure they are rare around here. Like one of a kind.

They've been gone for a few years now, but there used to be some very similar looking square pedestrian signals (no visor though), in Coquitlam, BC.

I'm pretty sure there's another set of these in Surrey somewhere, but I'm not sure where.
Edit: Found some.

Woah, neat! I'm so used to intersections in parts of BC (outside of Vancouver, at least) using regular vehicular signals as pedestrian heads that I never would have thought to look north for any more examples.

I'll be back in Vancouver Sunday, so I'll make sure to grab a photo of that remaining example in Surrey.

[Michael]

While looking for the location of a Reddit post from Lowell, MA this week, I came across this signal just down the street.  I was trying to figure out where the signal heads were for this direction until I noticed the red signal on the far left corner.  From what I've seen on the forum, I know MA has some weird signals, but this is dangerous in my opinion.

[SkyPesos]

While looking for the location of a Reddit post from Lowell, MA this week, I came across this signal just down the street.  I was trying to figure out where the signal heads were for this direction until I noticed the red signal on the far left corner.  From what I've seen on the forum, I know MA has some weird signals, but this is dangerous in my opinion.

There's a signal in the far right corner too, except it's blocked by the utility pole until you get really close to it. But yea, the view is dangerous there, would be nice if there's a signal overhead facing that direction.

[Lukeisroads]

Bakersfield is obssedd about drop left turn lights its a thing




Examples:
Near my location https://www.google.com/maps/@35.4411034,-119.0390073,3a,75y,105.58h,85.87t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1shxZJNKDTmFsJMR4sIQmoAg!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DhxZJNKDTmFsJMR4sIQmoAg%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D215.84656%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192




Another one  https://www.google.com/maps/@35.441167,-119.0480692,3a,31.2y,97.48h,93.02t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sRF1gvBD6J3wAz4aYiJoSDQ!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DRF1gvBD6J3wAz4aYiJoSDQ%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D116.57876%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192


A few blocks up https://www.google.com/maps/@35.441256,-119.0520176,3a,47.5y,281.27h,87.4t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s5ySXkEk24XidAizPOLrbMw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

too much?   https://www.google.com/maps/@35.4412846,-119.0724073,3a,15.7y,285.8h,93.65t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sasa7lv00yyTfTguxURFYfw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Dj kalhed says another one  https://www.google.com/maps/@35.4412778,-119.0740811,3a,15y,278.19h,92.69t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sx7zmezBXzG0igsj48iMcmw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

And here comes the others https://www.google.com/maps/@35.4412778,-119.0740811,3a,15y,278.19h,92.69t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sx7zmezBXzG0igsj48iMcmw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

https://www.google.com/maps/@35.4414158,-119.0784324,3a,17y,275.65h,98.65t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s6CovbMiJvRUgod9zIqZO8Q!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

https://www.google.com/maps/@35.4413352,-119.082102,3a,15.3y,89.86h,93.76t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sG0u0yXPxJafXj5aDU4Ow3Q!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

https://www.google.com/maps/@35.4412535,-119.0863487,3a,75y,268.68h,92.43t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1svMAVKoYFO8FrLHqv9NKoCQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

https://www.google.com/maps/@35.4413,-119.0914538,3a,32.9y,280.15h,84.45t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sQnzTqJkRYKKJyVak8IC6Bw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

https://www.google.com/maps/@35.441285,-119.1095907,3a,36y,282.95h,91.89t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sOkAlJlaL2Qg_aCG86NHrUA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

https://www.google.com/maps/@35.4414393,-119.1191863,3a,15.9y,96h,93.9t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sQyJvKWNvq2yLV9NqtvMAmQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Last one:
https://www.google.com/maps/@35.4415058,-119.1541269,3a,75y,292.73h,90t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sw5UDUgqUbWhGp1EP7l5jWw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

[SkyPesos]

I found this HAWK setup near my residence hall at Purdue. Interesting setup with the two HAWK signals for State St, and stop signs for MacArthur. I would've thought a standard traffic signal setup for both streets would be used, considering how many people I've seen use the crosswalks, and the traffic on both streets.

[roadfro]

I found this HAWK setup near my residence hall at Purdue. Interesting setup with the two HAWK signals for State St, and stop signs for MacArthur. I would've thought a standard traffic signal setup for both streets would be used, considering how many people I've seen use the crosswalks, and the traffic on both streets.

An interesting choice, given that HAWKs are only supposed to be used at mid-block locations. They should have used a standard signal.

[US 89]

I recently encountered what I believe is the only traffic signal in the state of Utah with zero mast arms of any kind. There are a handful of T intersections where the ending road just has a couple post mounted signals, but those all have mast arms on the through road signals. This one is at a pedestrian crossing on the Utah State campus in Logan:

[mrsman]

I found this HAWK setup near my residence hall at Purdue. Interesting setup with the two HAWK signals for State St, and stop signs for MacArthur. I would've thought a standard traffic signal setup for both streets would be used, considering how many people I've seen use the crosswalks, and the traffic on both streets.

An interesting choice, given that HAWKs are only supposed to be used at mid-block locations. They should have used a standard signal.

Agreed.  Unfortunately, HAWKs at regular intersections are unfortunately common in certain parts of the country.

Here's one in DC:

https://www.google.com/maps/@38.9842968,-77.036263,3a,75y,179.45h,90.44t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1su4CKkuqMs8QDh1ZjpjCfpw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

I can tell you, that my own observations of the way these work is that cars on the side streets will take advantage of the pedestrian crossing to go through the intersection or turn left while the main street traffic has either a solid or flashing red.  This could be somewhat dangerous as the cars on the main street are only required to yield to the pedestrians, not the side street traffic.  The only traffic control device that is supposed to regulate side street traffic is the stop sign.

Half-signals common in WA and OR have similar problems.

IMO, this signal (and others like it) should either be converted to a regular signal, or the crosswalk should move half a block down to a mid-block location.

[roadfro]

Agreed.  Unfortunately, HAWKs at regular intersections are unfortunately common in certain parts of the country.

This is really unfortunate, especially given the already ambiguous nature of a HAWK signal–why put more ambiguity by introducing an intersection to the mix?

I gotta imagine that agencies do this either (1) because a HAWK for just the main road and no control on the side street is cheaper to install/maintain, and/or (2) because the signal warrants for a signalized intersections based on pedestrian activity are different from (higher than) warrants to install a HAWK (if such warrants actually exist in the first place).

[SignBridge]

The Manual doesn't seem to specifically prohibit a Hawk signal at an intersection but it discourages the practice in the Guidance. Sec. 4F.02.04 states "The pedestrian hybrid beacon should be installed at least 100 feet from side streets or driveways that are controlled by stop or yield signs".

And as we know from experience, engineers will not necessarily follow the guidance in the Manual. That's especially true in cases where they feel that engineering judgement resulting in an installation that is contrary to the guidance will provide adequate service.

[SignBridge]

I recently encountered what I believe is the only traffic signal in the state of Utah with zero mast arms of any kind. There are a handful of T intersections where the ending road just has a couple post mounted signals, but those all have mast arms on the through road signals. This one is at a pedestrian crossing on the Utah State campus in Logan:

This is actually a decent installation except that the signals seem to be mounted a little too high on the poles.

[jakeroot]

I recently encountered what I believe is the only traffic signal in the state of Utah with zero mast arms of any kind. There are a handful of T intersections where the ending road just has a couple post mounted signals, but those all have mast arms on the through road signals. This one is at a pedestrian crossing on the Utah State campus in Logan:

Thank you for sharing. Honestly, kind of a breath of fresh air. Not saying only post-mounted is better than only overhead (although I think in situations like this, it is), but I do wish Utah would use more post-mounted signals. Compared to literally every neighboring state, apart from Oregon, they are miserably behind.

This is actually a decent installation except that the signals seem to be mounted a little too high on the poles.

Agreed, they could stand to come down.

The painted "STOP" is also a little alarming.

[jakeroot]

I can tell you, that my own observations of the way these work is that cars on the side streets will take advantage of the pedestrian crossing to go through the intersection or turn left while the main street traffic has either a solid or flashing red.  This could be somewhat dangerous as the cars on the main street are only required to yield to the pedestrians, not the side street traffic.  The only traffic control device that is supposed to regulate side street traffic is the stop sign.

Half-signals common in WA and OR have similar problems.

Also British Columbia (the infamous flashing green orb). In BC, half signals are never used at mid-block crossings; if you see a flashing green, it's guaranteed that there's a side-street. Mid-block crossings are regular "yield" conditions with flashing yellow signals (including RRFBs).

Visibility of the "walk" or FDW signal is basically unwritten permission to ignore the stop condition, yielding only to pedestrians as necessary.

One thing not noted is that half-signals (what we are describing, HAWK or not) at intersections are almost always (if not always) designed so that traffic stops outside the intersection, so everyone and everything can pass through the intersection without conflicting with traffic stopped by a red light. When the light turns green, practice is to yield to everyone already in the intersection and then proceed.

[ErmineNotyours]

When walking along busy BC 1A near New Westminster, a motorist on a side street asked me to activate the pedestrian signal so she could get a break in traffic, and I obliged.

[Caps81943]

IMHO, ideally (and of course this is fairly unrealistic), HAWK signals midblock/in areas where there's no conflicting traffic, should be converted to normal, RYG signals. HAWKs in areas where there IS conflicting traffic should be converted to flashing green to indicate to drivers that vehicles may be entering or exiting. They'd go yellow then red when the pedestrian light is activated. Then, on the side road(s), have small VMS's display instructions on what to do (i.e "NO LEFT TURN" across crosswalk, "RIGHT/STRAIGHT OK AFTER STOP"). Then, after the pedestrian phase, have the main road on solid green for maybe 10 seconds to clear out the traffic jam before returning to flashing green. VMS could then display "DO NOT PROCEED" or "WAIT" or something.

Another mini-fantasy I've had is on traffic lights solely for pedestrian control (ie no conflicting car movement--like the Utah example we've been discussing), have them turn from solid to flashing red after the equivalent time of the FDW phase has been completed. For example, if a crosswalk has a 20-second FDW phase, the main road should turn to flashing red 20 seconds after the WALK signal appears. This prevents traffic from having to wait longer than necessary if just one pedestrian triggered the light, which happens often from my experience. Again, unlikely and unreasonable to ever happen, but if I were president, that's what would happen.

[hotdogPi]

HAWKs in areas where there IS conflicting traffic should be converted to flashing green to indicate to drivers that vehicles may be entering or exiting.

All flashing greens with conflicting traffic in Massachusetts have flashing red on the cross street. Is this what you want?

[US 89]

The painted "STOP" is also a little alarming.

I wonder if that light used to be just a dedicated stop sign for that crosswalk, and that painted STOP is just a holdover from then. Unfortunately, I'm not sure how to check that as I don't remember exactly where it was and a lot of that road's configuration has been changed a bit since GSV went through last...

[mrsman]

IMHO, ideally (and of course this is fairly unrealistic), HAWK signals midblock/in areas where there's no conflicting traffic, should be converted to normal, RYG signals.

Agreed.  I probably mentioned earlier in this thread, or a thread that was specific to signals dealing with peds, what Los Angeles does in mid-block ped crossings in Downtown and along certain other corridors like Fairfax Ave:

RYG signal, but the red is a flashing red.  This means that traffic can proceed after coming to a full stop if there are no peds present.  This is especially useful for situations where the one ped who may push the button crosses the street a lot faster than 3.5 ft/sec, so that there are no longer any peds crossing even though drivers still have a red signal. 

here is an example location, Olive between 5th and 6th across from Pershing Square.  If you follow the GSV, it appears that the camera took pictures while the red was flashing since the signal was off.  It also appears to show the GSV vehicle crossing through on red - that's OK since it was a flashing red.

Unfortunately, I don't know where to link to a movie to actually show the signal in operation.  Even more unfortuantely, new installs of mid-block crossings are utilizing HAWKs, which in my opinion is a major step backward.

https://www.google.com/maps/@34.0486509,-118.2536791,3a,75y,25.84h,76.32t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s03OYFK914Hey9V0gmI1ySg!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3D03OYFK914Hey9V0gmI1ySg%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D294.83127%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192


I would personally vary this only slightly by having a solid red at the beginning of the pedestrian phase, so that cars stop and wait initially for a few seconds.  I would say, generally, that when peds have the WALK signal, drivers should have a solid red, and when peds have FDW, drivers should have a flashing red.

But the important point is that the RYG signals are common and easily understood and we are only making a slight change to it by intorducing the flashing red for the later half of the pedestrain phase, when we assume that most pedestrians (unless they walk slow) are probably out of the way.

HAWKs in areas where there IS conflicting traffic should be converted to flashing green to indicate to drivers that vehicles may be entering or exiting. They'd go yellow then red when the pedestrian light is activated. Then, on the side road(s), have small VMS's display instructions on what to do (i.e "NO LEFT TURN" across crosswalk, "RIGHT/STRAIGHT OK AFTER STOP"). Then, after the pedestrian phase, have the main road on solid green for maybe 10 seconds to clear out the traffic jam before returning to flashing green. VMS could then display "DO NOT PROCEED" or "WAIT" or something.

Montgomery county Maryland does something similar to this.  They use a modified firehouse signal (12-12-8 RYY) for the main street and a red signal for the side street.  Main street will have a flashing yellow during normal times and sides street gets a flashing red and a stop sign.  After the button is pushed, main street flashing yellow goes faster to warn of the upcoming change.  Then solid yellow, then solid red.  During the solid red, peds may cross: WALK, FDW, solid DW.  Meanwhile while main street gets red, side street also gets red, thereby prohibiting side street traffic from turning left or going straight, even though main street traffic is stopped.  At the end of the ped phase, it reverts to flahsing yellow for main and flashing red for side street.

I understand that these are implemented in places where there is a need for a ped crossing, but the county does not want to induce more traffic on the side streets.  (When a new signal begins operation, the side street with the signal will likely get more traffic than parallel streets, as drivers will know that the side street with the signal is easier to cross or make a left on the main street.)  So this operation basically (legally) provides no advantage to a regular side street with a stop sign, since you aren't allowed to turn left or go straight during the WALK time.  [Many do anyway, so yes traffic is induced to the side street, leaving them in an unsafe situation to turn left.]  Further, there is no sensors for side street traffic, so the signal will never change unless a ped pushes the button.  I don't like this at all.  IMO, the signal should either be converted to a regular signal or the ped signal should be moved half a block away to allow for a mid-block crossing.

University and Reedie in Silver Spring, MD. 

https://www.google.com/maps/@39.0398739,-77.0428639,3a,75y,288.22h,74.43t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1shr9MGP5YGfLHDqcsN1knAw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Another mini-fantasy I've had is on traffic lights solely for pedestrian control (ie no conflicting car movement--like the Utah example we've been discussing), have them turn from solid to flashing red after the equivalent time of the FDW phase has been completed. For example, if a crosswalk has a 20-second FDW phase, the main road should turn to flashing red 20 seconds after the WALK signal appears. This prevents traffic from having to wait longer than necessary if just one pedestrian triggered the light, which happens often from my experience. Again, unlikely and unreasonable to ever happen, but if I were president, that's what would happen.

Interesting.  So if we are at an intersection of a major and a minor street and no cars are detected on the minor street, but a ped pushes the button to cross the major street, then the signal should be activated in a similar manner to what I described earlier as my modification to the L.A. mid-block crossing.  The only difference is that vehicles on the side street (likely none unless someone came late or the sensors are broken) will still see a red signal.  So it's a regular interesection, but only actuated for the benefit of side-street peds and therefore should operate as a ped signal.  Interesting.

[Caps81943]

Another mini-fantasy I've had is on traffic lights solely for pedestrian control (ie no conflicting car movement--like the Utah example we've been discussing), have them turn from solid to flashing red after the equivalent time of the FDW phase has been completed. For example, if a crosswalk has a 20-second FDW phase, the main road should turn to flashing red 20 seconds after the WALK signal appears. This prevents traffic from having to wait longer than necessary if just one pedestrian triggered the light, which happens often from my experience. Again, unlikely and unreasonable to ever happen, but if I were president, that's what would happen.

Interesting.  So if we are at an intersection of a major and a minor street and no cars are detected on the minor street, but a ped pushes the button to cross the major street, then the signal should be activated in a similar manner to what I described earlier as my modification to the L.A. mid-block crossing.  The only difference is that vehicles on the side street (likely none unless someone came late or the sensors are broken) will still see a red signal.  So it's a regular interesection, but only actuated for the benefit of side-street peds and therefore should operate as a ped signal.  Interesting.

Not necessarily what I had in mind...basically what you described for the LA example is exactly what I was thinking, no cross street needed. I believe that if a side street has an opportunity to be green during a pedestrian phase, it should be, because why not. This would allow any car that shows up during the pedestrian phase to conveniently and safely go. This system would solely be implemented in areas where the ONLY signalized movement across the "main" street or lane is for pedestrians. So basically, any HAWK or non-intersection crosswalk traffic light, and I suppose the half-intersections common in the PNW as well.

[SkyPesos]

FYA signal for a parking garage entrance