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

[SkyPesos]

Another OhioDOT 3-section FYA

New FYA at the I-275 onramp on US 22/OH 3. Interesting that it's a 3-section model with a center bimodal static and flashing yellow, instead of the more common 4-section. Looks like this is the ODOT standard for FYAs, as 3-section FYAs were also installed on OH 747 a couple of years ago.

[Dough4872]

Yeah we have some of them in Pennsylvania, one I can think of is at PA 463 (Horsham Road) and Dresher Road in Horsham.

[Caps81943]

If it is bi-modal, it would be the first VDOT-installed bi-modal signal I've ever seen in my life.

Newport News had them at a couple locations (long gone) and Charlottesville still have them all over the city.

I know I am the one that started this conversation over a year ago, but I can now confirm that VDOT does indeed, seemingly very rarely, install bimodal RA-YA-FYA/GA signals. I was randomly up in the tiny town of Berryville recently and noticed that the signal at US-340 and VA-7 BUS, which has 3-section FYA's, operates those signals bi-modally. I was genuinely shocked, because again, bi-modal is very rare not just in VA (minus Charlottesville), but in this whole general region. Went to confirm that it's a VDOT install on their site and it is. So I am now in the camp that the original light that I linked is also bimodal.

In fact, you can see it in streetview: https://www.google.com/maps/@39.1508782,-77.9833285,3a,54.9y,34.08h,89.58t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1siFag3y6U4zKSfFTJye3yqw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu followed by https://www.google.com/maps/@39.1509588,-77.9832576,3a,21.9y,32.84h,88.33t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sv1kojgZOKLByh15jeybTEQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu

[jeffandnicole]

Another OhioDOT 3-section FYA

New FYA at the I-275 onramp on US 22/OH 3. Interesting that it's a 3-section model with a center bimodal static and flashing yellow, instead of the more common 4-section. Looks like this is the ODOT standard for FYAs, as 3-section FYAs were also installed on OH 747 a couple of years ago.

Is that bimodal, or just a yellow arrow that serves a dual function?

The 3 head assembly was probably chosen over a 4 head due to the clearance needed as a result of the wire span droop in the center of the roadway.

The 4 head has the advantage of alerting motorists that the light either is a FYA, or in states where the bottom section is the green (or bimodal) arrow, a protected/permissive traffic light.  The 3 head assembly will leave motorists unfamiliar with the intersection guessing if it's a protected-only light or a FYA until they see what happens.

[jakeroot]

Another OhioDOT 3-section FYA

New FYA at the I-275 onramp on US 22/OH 3. Interesting that it's a 3-section model with a center bimodal static and flashing yellow, instead of the more common 4-section. Looks like this is the ODOT standard for FYAs, as 3-section FYAs were also installed on OH 747 a couple of years ago.

Is that bimodal, or just a yellow arrow that serves a dual function?

The 3 head assembly was probably chosen over a 4 head due to the clearance needed as a result of the wire span droop in the center of the roadway.

The 4 head has the advantage of alerting motorists that the light either is a FYA, or in states where the bottom section is the green (or bimodal) arrow, a protected/permissive traffic light.  The 3 head assembly will leave motorists unfamiliar with the intersection guessing if it's a protected-only light or a FYA until they see what happens.

Bimodal in his post is clearly referring to a dual-function yellow arrow, I understood what he meant at least. From the gif, it's quite clear that the center arrow is both FYA and SYA.

Not sure if the height was an issue, it doesn't seem like any vehicles should pass beneath it with the median. Though I suppose there are minimums regardless...could also be a weight thing.

While I understand what you're getting at with your last point (4 section FYA being a bit 'clearer'), I've never seen data to show this to actually be true. In fact, I would be willing to bet that if you asked a hundred drivers the difference between 3 and 4 section FYA signals, 99 wouldn't have a clue. And the one leftover is one of us.

[SkyPesos]

Is that bimodal, or just a yellow arrow that serves a dual function?

Dual solid and flashing yellow arrow in the center section.

[fwydriver405]

If an FYA is used for a right turn signal, would it cause yellow trap for the oncoming left turn(s) if the FYA right turn signal(s) continued to flash yellow, while the permissive left turns are terminating? At this intersection, for the right turn overlap, the FYA continues to flash yellow arrow during the yellow change phase, then turns green when the Main St traffic gets their left green arrow.

Weymouth MA, Main and Pond St:

Proper protocol would be to terminate the permissive phases together, and then enable the solid green arrow after the all-red phase. Presently, oncoming traffic would be trapped by traffic turning right, who is not required to yield to them during the FYA phase, and certainly not during the green arrow phase.

The FYA could have multiple meanings.  It generally means a turn requiring a yield, but the big question is yielding to whom.  I agree with jakeroot that in this circumstance it would be far better to terminate the FYA so as to avoid conflict with opposing lefts.  i agree that in this circumstance (and in most cases utilizing the FYA for rights) the FYA can lead drivers to mean that they have a protected turn with respect to traffic, but they need to yield to pedestrians.  It is not wise to change the meaning of the same signal indication within the same intersection.

Given that the change from green orb to yellow orb to all red to cross street green arrow is a short amount of time - there is no real problem to terminate the FYA to red before allowing the green arrow to corresponde with the cross street left.  It is the safest course of action.

***2023 Update***, Went past by this intersection a few days ago after three years and unfortunately the yellow trap conflict with SB Pond St left turns and MA Route 58 right turns continues to exist to this day. I caught a dangerous conflict with the left turners on video while examining this intersection - needless to say MassDOT (who maintains this signal) has been contacted to see if this can be fixed.

For FYA right turn signals, assuming a fairly new TS2 or ATC controller... is the FYA overlap supposed to be tied to the opposing signals for the permissive phases, like with left turn signals to avoid this conflict? Are there any other settings that need to be set as well? I remember when helping to program a few Cobolt controllers, that such permissive and protected phases have to be selected for FYA overlaps (assuming the same for FRA too), but not sure if they also apply to right turn signals too.

Go to 1:20 to see the yellow trap in action.

https://youtu.be/QV5hG_w5h9M?t=80

[mrsman]

If an FYA is used for a right turn signal, would it cause yellow trap for the oncoming left turn(s) if the FYA right turn signal(s) continued to flash yellow, while the permissive left turns are terminating? At this intersection, for the right turn overlap, the FYA continues to flash yellow arrow during the yellow change phase, then turns green when the Main St traffic gets their left green arrow.

Weymouth MA, Main and Pond St:

Proper protocol would be to terminate the permissive phases together, and then enable the solid green arrow after the all-red phase. Presently, oncoming traffic would be trapped by traffic turning right, who is not required to yield to them during the FYA phase, and certainly not during the green arrow phase.

The FYA could have multiple meanings.  It generally means a turn requiring a yield, but the big question is yielding to whom.  I agree with jakeroot that in this circumstance it would be far better to terminate the FYA so as to avoid conflict with opposing lefts.  i agree that in this circumstance (and in most cases utilizing the FYA for rights) the FYA can lead drivers to mean that they have a protected turn with respect to traffic, but they need to yield to pedestrians.  It is not wise to change the meaning of the same signal indication within the same intersection.

Given that the change from green orb to yellow orb to all red to cross street green arrow is a short amount of time - there is no real problem to terminate the FYA to red before allowing the green arrow to corresponde with the cross street left.  It is the safest course of action.

***2023 Update***, Went past by this intersection a few days ago after three years and unfortunately the yellow trap conflict with SB Pond St left turns and MA Route 58 right turns continues to exist to this day. I caught a dangerous conflict with the left turners on video while examining this intersection - needless to say MassDOT (who maintains this signal) has been contacted to see if this can be fixed.

For FYA right turn signals, assuming a fairly new TS2 or ATC controller... is the FYA overlap supposed to be tied to the opposing signals for the permissive phases, like with left turn signals to avoid this conflict? Are there any other settings that need to be set as well? I remember when helping to program a few Cobolt controllers, that such permissive and protected phases have to be selected for FYA overlaps (assuming the same for FRA too), but not sure if they also apply to right turn signals too.

Go to 1:20 to see the yellow trap in action.

https://youtu.be/QV5hG_w5h9M?t=80

The above is quite interesting.

First at 1:20 we see somebody making a dangerous left.  This isn't a yellow trap problem, he basically treated the FYA as a green arrow.

But at the end of the phase there is a problem.  They should give the right turners a brief red arrow or something so that they stop to allow for clearance of the left turners.  It is good that you have this on video, so that the problem can be clearly demonstrated.

[jeffandnicole]

If an FYA is used for a right turn signal, would it cause yellow trap for the oncoming left turn(s) if the FYA right turn signal(s) continued to flash yellow, while the permissive left turns are terminating? At this intersection, for the right turn overlap, the FYA continues to flash yellow arrow during the yellow change phase, then turns green when the Main St traffic gets their left green arrow.

Weymouth MA, Main and Pond St:

Proper protocol would be to terminate the permissive phases together, and then enable the solid green arrow after the all-red phase. Presently, oncoming traffic would be trapped by traffic turning right, who is not required to yield to them during the FYA phase, and certainly not during the green arrow phase.

The FYA could have multiple meanings.  It generally means a turn requiring a yield, but the big question is yielding to whom.  I agree with jakeroot that in this circumstance it would be far better to terminate the FYA so as to avoid conflict with opposing lefts.  i agree that in this circumstance (and in most cases utilizing the FYA for rights) the FYA can lead drivers to mean that they have a protected turn with respect to traffic, but they need to yield to pedestrians.  It is not wise to change the meaning of the same signal indication within the same intersection.

Given that the change from green orb to yellow orb to all red to cross street green arrow is a short amount of time - there is no real problem to terminate the FYA to red before allowing the green arrow to corresponde with the cross street left.  It is the safest course of action.

***2023 Update***, Went past by this intersection a few days ago after three years and unfortunately the yellow trap conflict with SB Pond St left turns and MA Route 58 right turns continues to exist to this day. I caught a dangerous conflict with the left turners on video while examining this intersection - needless to say MassDOT (who maintains this signal) has been contacted to see if this can be fixed.

For FYA right turn signals, assuming a fairly new TS2 or ATC controller... is the FYA overlap supposed to be tied to the opposing signals for the permissive phases, like with left turn signals to avoid this conflict? Are there any other settings that need to be set as well? I remember when helping to program a few Cobolt controllers, that such permissive and protected phases have to be selected for FYA overlaps (assuming the same for FRA too), but not sure if they also apply to right turn signals too.

Go to 1:20 to see the yellow trap in action.

https://youtu.be/QV5hG_w5h9M?t=80

The above is quite interesting.

First at 1:20 we see somebody making a dangerous left.  This isn't a yellow trap problem, he basically treated the FYA as a green arrow.

But at the end of the phase there is a problem.  They should give the right turners a brief red arrow or something so that they stop to allow for clearance of the left turners.  It is good that you have this on video, so that the problem can be clearly demonstrated.

A 'No Turn On Red' would also need to accompany the right arrow light in Mass., as they are permitted to turn right on red at a red arrow.

[jakeroot]

They should give the right turners a brief red arrow or something so that they stop to allow for clearance of the left turners.  It is good that you have this on video, so that the problem can be clearly demonstrated.

A 'No Turn On Red' would also need to accompany the right arrow light in Mass., as they are permitted to turn right on red at a red arrow.

It would only need to be red for a few seconds to clear oncoming traffic, I don't think long enough to totally ban the maneuver.

[jeffandnicole]

They should give the right turners a brief red arrow or something so that they stop to allow for clearance of the left turners.  It is good that you have this on video, so that the problem can be clearly demonstrated.

A 'No Turn On Red' would also need to accompany the right arrow light in Mass., as they are permitted to turn right on red at a red arrow.

It would only need to be red for a few seconds to clear oncoming traffic, I don't think long enough to totally ban the maneuver.

If you have ever seen a few cars turn right on red just after the light turns red, you'll understand the reason why the restriction would be necessary.

[jakeroot]

They should give the right turners a brief red arrow or something so that they stop to allow for clearance of the left turners.  It is good that you have this on video, so that the problem can be clearly demonstrated.

A 'No Turn On Red' would also need to accompany the right arrow light in Mass., as they are permitted to turn right on red at a red arrow.

It would only need to be red for a few seconds to clear oncoming traffic, I don't think long enough to totally ban the maneuver.

If you have ever seen a few cars turn right on red just after the light turns red, you'll understand the reason why the restriction would be necessary.

Yes, I figured that's what you were referring to. I just don't know what makes this intersection unique in deserving a restriction, when most other permissive left turn intersections with right-turn overlap signals don't have them.

Just having it going red for a moment, even if traffic kept coming, would at least give left turning drivers a legal way out of the intersection. The current phasing quite literally traps them, and oncoming traffic effectively has to be bullied into letting oncoming left turning drivers complete their maneuver.

[jeffandnicole]

They should give the right turners a brief red arrow or something so that they stop to allow for clearance of the left turners.  It is good that you have this on video, so that the problem can be clearly demonstrated.

A 'No Turn On Red' would also need to accompany the right arrow light in Mass., as they are permitted to turn right on red at a red arrow.

It would only need to be red for a few seconds to clear oncoming traffic, I don't think long enough to totally ban the maneuver.

If you have ever seen a few cars turn right on red just after the light turns red, you'll understand the reason why the restriction would be necessary.

Yes, I figured that's what you were referring to. I just don't know what makes this intersection unique in deserving a restriction, when most other permissive left turn intersections with right-turn overlap signals don't have them.

Just having it going red for a moment, even if traffic kept coming, would at least give left turning drivers a legal way out of the intersection. The current phasing quite literally traps them, and oncoming traffic effectively has to be bullied into letting oncoming left turning drivers complete their maneuver.

I'm simply responding to someone who may think a red arrow has the legal restriction of no turn on red, when in reality it doesn't.

[SignBridge]

They should give the right turners a brief red arrow or something so that they stop to allow for clearance of the left turners.  It is good that you have this on video, so that the problem can be clearly demonstrated.

A 'No Turn On Red' would also need to accompany the right arrow light in Mass., as they are permitted to turn right on red at a red arrow.

It would only need to be red for a few seconds to clear oncoming traffic, I don't think long enough to totally ban the maneuver.

If you have ever seen a few cars turn right on red just after the light turns red, you'll understand the reason why the restriction would be necessary.

Yes, I figured that's what you were referring to. I just don't know what makes this intersection unique in deserving a restriction, when most other permissive left turn intersections with right-turn overlap signals don't have them.

Just having it going red for a moment, even if traffic kept coming, would at least give left turning drivers a legal way out of the intersection. The current phasing quite literally traps them, and oncoming traffic effectively has to be bullied into letting oncoming left turning drivers complete their maneuver.

I'm simply responding to someone who may think a red arrow has the legal restriction of no turn on red, when in reality it doesn't.

That may vary from state to state. In New York it is illegal to turn right on a red-arrow.  I don't know if Massachusetts is different.

[jeffandnicole]

They should give the right turners a brief red arrow or something so that they stop to allow for clearance of the left turners.  It is good that you have this on video, so that the problem can be clearly demonstrated.

A 'No Turn On Red' would also need to accompany the right arrow light in Mass., as they are permitted to turn right on red at a red arrow.

It would only need to be red for a few seconds to clear oncoming traffic, I don't think long enough to totally ban the maneuver.

If you have ever seen a few cars turn right on red just after the light turns red, you'll understand the reason why the restriction would be necessary.

Yes, I figured that's what you were referring to. I just don't know what makes this intersection unique in deserving a restriction, when most other permissive left turn intersections with right-turn overlap signals don't have them.

Just having it going red for a moment, even if traffic kept coming, would at least give left turning drivers a legal way out of the intersection. The current phasing quite literally traps them, and oncoming traffic effectively has to be bullied into letting oncoming left turning drivers complete their maneuver.

I'm simply responding to someone who may think a red arrow has the legal restriction of no turn on red, when in reality it doesn't.

That may vary from state to state. In New York it is illegal to turn right on a red-arrow.  I don't know if Massachusetts is different.

Yest, you can in Mass, which is why I mentioned it.

[jakeroot]

They should give the right turners a brief red arrow or something so that they stop to allow for clearance of the left turners.  It is good that you have this on video, so that the problem can be clearly demonstrated.

A 'No Turn On Red' would also need to accompany the right arrow light in Mass., as they are permitted to turn right on red at a red arrow.

It would only need to be red for a few seconds to clear oncoming traffic, I don't think long enough to totally ban the maneuver.

If you have ever seen a few cars turn right on red just after the light turns red, you'll understand the reason why the restriction would be necessary.

Yes, I figured that's what you were referring to. I just don't know what makes this intersection unique in deserving a restriction, when most other permissive left turn intersections with right-turn overlap signals don't have them.

Just having it going red for a moment, even if traffic kept coming, would at least give left turning drivers a legal way out of the intersection. The current phasing quite literally traps them, and oncoming traffic effectively has to be bullied into letting oncoming left turning drivers complete their maneuver.

I'm simply responding to someone who may think a red arrow has the legal restriction of no turn on red, when in reality it doesn't.

That's a straw man argument, no one here has said or implied otherwise (at least regarding Massachusetts).

Installing a no-turn-on-red sign doesn't legally achieve anything anyways, as you cannot turn right on red legally unless your movement wouldn't interfere with those who would otherwise have the right of way. Traffic finishing their left turn legally entered on a flashing yellow arrow, and would have right of way over those turning right. Traffic could illegally keep turning right on red in the brief moments after the red light comes up, ignoring traffic trying to finish their turn. But they could do that with a no-turn-on-red sign too.

If your true argument is that drivers are more likely to obey NTOR signage...I would agree with you there. But legally it's not required to achieve the same effect.

[Rothman]

They should give the right turners a brief red arrow or something so that they stop to allow for clearance of the left turners.  It is good that you have this on video, so that the problem can be clearly demonstrated.

A 'No Turn On Red' would also need to accompany the right arrow light in Mass., as they are permitted to turn right on red at a red arrow.

It would only need to be red for a few seconds to clear oncoming traffic, I don't think long enough to totally ban the maneuver.

If you have ever seen a few cars turn right on red just after the light turns red, you'll understand the reason why the restriction would be necessary.

Yes, I figured that's what you were referring to. I just don't know what makes this intersection unique in deserving a restriction, when most other permissive left turn intersections with right-turn overlap signals don't have them.

Just having it going red for a moment, even if traffic kept coming, would at least give left turning drivers a legal way out of the intersection. The current phasing quite literally traps them, and oncoming traffic effectively has to be bullied into letting oncoming left turning drivers complete their maneuver.

I'm simply responding to someone who may think a red arrow has the legal restriction of no turn on red, when in reality it doesn't.

That may vary from state to state. In New York it is illegal to turn right on a red-arrow.  I don't know if Massachusetts is different.

Yest, you can in Mass, which is why I mentioned it.

Holy cow.  Wonder if this changed since I was a kid.  Forgot where along the line I was taught you couldn't turn on red at an arrow.

[PurdueBill]

That may vary from state to state. In New York it is illegal to turn right on a red-arrow.  I don't know if Massachusetts is different.

Yest, you can in Mass, which is why I mentioned it.

Holy cow.  Wonder if this changed since I was a kid.  Forgot where along the line I was taught you couldn't turn on red at an arrow.

Ditto--got learners permit and license in Mass, and do recall that back then I was told in drivers ed that one must not turn on a red arrow.  Somewhere I must have a manual from the Registry from back then, as I am a packrat...wonder if I will ever find it to be sure.

[fwydriver405]

Found another FYA right turn overlap yellow trap, this time in Concord, MA (Route 2 and Sudbury Rd), where oncoming left turners could be trapped by the right turn overlap. It's a single lane approach with a right turn, fully permissive FYA that replaced a 4-section, bimodal right turn overlap signal in 2021 - it was replaced due to conflicts with WB MA Route 2 U-turners.  The phasing is similar to the Weymouth one - the difference is that the fully permissive right turn when phases 4+8 are active and right turn overlap are both shown as a right turn flashing yellow arrow (no green arrow).

Phasing that traps oncoming left turners starts at 0:43 (not my video, sign in below video was replaced with a sign saying "YIELD TO U-TURNS ON FLASHING YELLOW ARROW" as of 11 Sept 23)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8yhxsYxcZBA

[fwydriver405]

Bumping a dormant thread... but observed several new 3-section fully permissive FYAs around Maine with varying results.

With FYAs becoming the new PPLT standard in Maine and therefore, being installed statewide at new/retrofitted locations, I have noticed that in some installations (mostly new ones), the 3-section fully permissive FYA overlap is incorrectly programmed to the adjacent thru green, rather than the oncoming thru green, which can cause yellow trap if there is an opposing protected left turn that gets recycled if the cross streets get skipped (Example: Pg15 of planset, video). It usually gets fixed if someone reports the yellow trap to DOT (or the the appropriate agency).

Some of the new FYAs (2022-present) in Maine, NH, and MA I've seen now have FYA delay (no LPI) - ~3 seconds of red arrow to let oncoming traffic proceed before FYA.

Curious to see if incorrect 3-section fully permissive FYA overlap programming is happening with other states, or if there's still a learning curve for now with signal designers / technicians who may still be used to the old shared signal PPLT setups.



Also, the new 11th edition MUTCD (2023) now allows flashing the centre of the yellow arrow for permissive/protected setups in what's usually a fully protected signal (RA-YA-GA), per Section 4F.08 (Left) and Section 4F.15 (Right). Wonder how common this will be over the standard 4-section FYA signal as time goes on - some parts of New Hampshire and Vermont have already experimented with this new configuration.

[Brandon]

They should give the right turners a brief red arrow or something so that they stop to allow for clearance of the left turners.  It is good that you have this on video, so that the problem can be clearly demonstrated.

A 'No Turn On Red' would also need to accompany the right arrow light in Mass., as they are permitted to turn right on red at a red arrow.

It would only need to be red for a few seconds to clear oncoming traffic, I don't think long enough to totally ban the maneuver.

If you have ever seen a few cars turn right on red just after the light turns red, you'll understand the reason why the restriction would be necessary.

Michigan does this all the time, using a "No Turn On Red" sign that lights up only when the opposing side has a protected arrow.

Beckley Road & Capitol Avenue, Battle Creek: https://maps.app.goo.gl/GEn4MuXiLDdx2UJc7

[Revive 755]

^ There's a similar feature on part of US 275/NE 92 around Omaha.  Streetview at the 84th Street intersection


Asking for a friend:  Are there any flashing yellow arrow installations out there that are signed for a yellow trap with an 'Oncoming Traffic Has/May Have Extended Green' signs, possibly at a railroad crossing?

[fwydriver405]

A newly installed Flashing Yellow Arrow doghouse in San Jose, California was installed at the Stevens Creek Boulevard and Henry Avenue intersection in September 2018.

https://www.mercurynews.com/2018/10/04/san-jose-testing-first-flashing-yellow-left-turn-signals-roadshow/

Street View: https://goo.gl/maps/bfmf1oqxET7Wy2RK9

As far as I can tell, the left turns have to yield to traffic turning right, who is also yielding to the crosswalk (so they're kind of a way off to the right). I guess that's how it should be, but for some reason, it seems like a strange setup. I would have assumed that left turns would have a green orb, with right turns having to yield to everyone (peds & cars), but I guess that's actually more unusual.

OT: really remarkable how conservative some Bay Area cities are with left turn phasing. San Jose is apparently looking at this left turn as a study, to see if it will work anywhere else. Yet, aren't there (probably) hundreds of existing studies from other cities? I don't see why they need to do their own study. There are other cities in CA that have more widely adopted the flashing yellow arrow. They should talk to them about their experiences. IMO, they should install like 10 at various types of intersections, and see how they compare. I feel like a study of one intersection doesn't allow for individual nuances.

Got to take a look at this FYA doghouse 5 years later while in the San Jose area - here's what I noticed:

- All the crosswalks have LPIs upon push button activation only, the one crossing Stevens Creek Blvd has an 8 second LPI, not sure about the Henry Ave crosswalks.
- Dual entry is not enabled for both approaches, on the Henry approaches, if there is only one approach that gets a call, that side will get FYAs but the opposing side will stay red until a call is placed within the min / max green boundaries.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A85LfrUuZg4

[mapman1071]

Haven't seen it in Arizona.

Scottsdale has been using the flashing yellow arrow signals for a while now.
http://www.scottsdaleaz.gov/traffic/yellowarrows.asp

In Texas, the only place I know that uses flashing yellow arrows is in Richardson:
http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/news/localnews/stories/DN-yellowlight_08met.ART0.State.Edition1.4be3cd5.html


[/

Haven't seen it in Arizona.

Scottsdale has been using the flashing yellow arrow signals for a while now.
http://www.scottsdaleaz.gov/traffic/yellowarrows.asp

In Texas, the only place I know that uses flashing yellow arrows is in Richardson:
http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/news/localnews/stories/DN-yellowlight_08met.ART0.State.Edition1.4be3cd5.html

Phoenix, Glendale, Tempe & Mesa also have the flashing yellow

[jakeroot]

A newly installed Flashing Yellow Arrow doghouse in San Jose, California was installed at the Stevens Creek Boulevard and Henry Avenue intersection in September 2018.

https://www.mercurynews.com/2018/10/04/san-jose-testing-first-flashing-yellow-left-turn-signals-roadshow/

Street View: https://goo.gl/maps/bfmf1oqxET7Wy2RK9

As far as I can tell, the left turns have to yield to traffic turning right, who is also yielding to the crosswalk (so they're kind of a way off to the right). I guess that's how it should be, but for some reason, it seems like a strange setup. I would have assumed that left turns would have a green orb, with right turns having to yield to everyone (peds & cars), but I guess that's actually more unusual.

OT: really remarkable how conservative some Bay Area cities are with left turn phasing. San Jose is apparently looking at this left turn as a study, to see if it will work anywhere else. Yet, aren't there (probably) hundreds of existing studies from other cities? I don't see why they need to do their own study. There are other cities in CA that have more widely adopted the flashing yellow arrow. They should talk to them about their experiences. IMO, they should install like 10 at various types of intersections, and see how they compare. I feel like a study of one intersection doesn't allow for individual nuances.

Got to take a look at this FYA doghouse 5 years later while in the San Jose area - here's what I noticed:

- All the crosswalks have LPIs upon push button activation only, the one crossing Stevens Creek Blvd has an 8 second LPI, not sure about the Henry Ave crosswalks.
- Dual entry is not enabled for both approaches, on the Henry approaches, if there is only one approach that gets a call, that side will get FYAs but the opposing side will stay red until a call is placed within the min / max green boundaries.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A85LfrUuZg4

Thank you for sharing this video, I was curious how it operated and your video does a great job demonstrating the operations.

I hate to have to ask/clarify, but if I understand correctly, both approaches can go at the same time if the pedestrian phase is activated? This is pretty unusual, but then it looks like it may be illegal to continue straight? I see the R3-5LR signs for both approaches.