Since there's threads ranking states on their signage and state route shield design already, let's do traffic signal layouts. Note that I'm not going to do a full ranking list right away, but with enough replies on this thread, hopefully, we can get close to one. And most of these in this initial post are solely my opinion, and what I think is ideal.
To start of, I'll put all the mostly span wire states in the bottom half of the list. Generally, from what I see, span wire states pretty much rely entirely on overhead signals, including on the few mast arm setups there. I prefer a few side signals spread out on some corners as well, and less overhead clutter.
Off my top states, I'll put Wisconsin in the first or second spot. Really like the post mounted signal placement with two at the stop line, then another two in opposite corners past the intersecting road, and a single horizontal overhead signal (yes, I prefer horizontal overhead to vertical ones by a bit, but only if they're not all cluttered overhead).
I think that California and Minnesota are roughly equal, and go in the top 5. Illinois, Kansas and Missouri a level below those two, and go in top 10.
Some states I'm interested in/want to know more about their signal layouts, and could potentially make the top 10 for me: WA (saw a mix of span wire and mast arms on my visits to Seattle, so I'm holding off placement on the list for now), OR, UT, CO, AZ, TX.
Well, if you love horizontal signals, then you'll love Texas. To me, Texas ranks a solid top 10-15, maybe higher, but I can't vouch for DFW, Austin, or San Antonio. Regardless, I have a pretty good understanding of SE Texan signal practices, so here's a rundown.
Most new signal setups look somewhat like this:
https://www.google.com/maps/@29.5549516,-95.4173863,3a,20.4y,354.31h,94.36t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1so-5SvTkKlTT4ElBXfN4crQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Most often there'll be two horizontal thru signals and as many left turn signals as there are turn lanes. 90% of the time those left turn signals only have a protected phase, though FYAs make up the other 10% and are growing in popularity. I'd say all new setups I've seen are mast-arm, though quite a few span wires still exist. You might notice the left turn signal has four faces and a double red arrow. The only purpose of the double red from what I've seen is to differentiate the left turn signals from the thru signals.
Most new signals are black with black backplates or yellow with black backplates. TxDOT doesn't seem to have a preference, and sometimes they don't care to match colors on older setups. Side signals are somewhat common in urban areas, rare in rural areas.
Some of my favorite setups:
US-59 @ TX-49, Jefferson, TX:
https://www.google.com/maps/@32.7612556,-94.3550401,3a,25.1y,14.72h,94.15t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sq4wvljv7R3IzqLTe1vkitA!2e0!5s20130601T000000!7i13312!8i6656
This FYA has a slick light up plaque that says "LEFT TURN YIELD" when the FYA is active. I think it looks dope.
TX-288 @ FM-518, Pearland, TX:
https://www.google.com/maps/@29.5558154,-95.3886354,3a,30.3y,86.37h,91.5t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sTT9u2bAgwRlXWx0SY-iy1w!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
This brand-new signal was put up just last year. I like the black mast-arm and the side signal placement (and the clean street blade helps things out, too!)
And here's some head-scratchers:
https://www.google.com/maps/@29.0977783,-95.6906228,3a,25.1y,52.38h,94.27t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1siD2jQvpbdCygumznNdckQw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
https://www.google.com/maps/@29.0410671,-95.413336,3a,71.3y,29.82h,87.97t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sVcOYrRTDUuK0HTeZXHvW9A!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
https://www.google.com/maps/@29.7403583,-95.4670289,3a,29.1y,76.03h,95.95t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sK46uvv3XE4YVO05MY-eYMQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Quote from: CoreySamson on August 07, 2021, 08:50:53 PM
Well, if you love horizontal signals, then you'll love Texas. To me, Texas ranks a solid top 10-15, maybe higher, but I can't vouch for DFW, Austin, or San Antonio. Regardless, I have a pretty good understanding of SE Texan signal practices, so here's a rundown.
...
Some things that knock Texas down for me after some browsing, and they may be a bit nitpicky.
- Lack of side mounted signals. Clutters the overhead mast arm, considering horizontal signals take up more mast arm space than vertical signals. Also, I read the reason why double red lights are needed for left turns in TX is because there's only one left turn signal for a single lane, and in case the single red section burns out, but side signals solve the same issue.
- Fat mast arms. Though I think there are better examples for mast arm size, like I really like the ones on Post Oak in Uptown Houston (https://www.google.com/maps/@29.7406694,-95.4607098,3a,43.4y,324.75h,89.24t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s1JkBmPLkcrnNtidQOD4XSQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) along the BRT line (goes with the side signal placement too for the Uptown examples).
- This one is more specific to Dallas, but could apply to signals in other states too: I don't really see a point dangling signals below a mast arm, and it looks out of place too.
Overall, Texas is definitely in the top 20 for me, maybe top 15, considering how many states use span wire extensively.
I see no reason that a span wire state should automatically be at the bottom. GDOT even specifies that span wire is preferred to mast arm because with span wire it is more likely that the signals will be placed in the correct locations without depending on a pole that could possibly be within or too close to the clear zone.
GDOT quote: "Span wire allows for the placement of signal heads in the near-optimal viewing position without overly restricting the placement of strain poles. A span wire configuration also allows for pole placement outside of the clear zone." Source - page 4-1 of https://www.dot.ga.gov/partnersmart/designmanuals/signaldesignmanual/traffic%20signal%20design%20guidelines-2016.pdf
Quote from: SkyPesos on August 07, 2021, 07:59:30 PM
Off my top states, I'll put Wisconsin in the first or second spot. Really like the post mounted signal placement with two at the stop line, then another two in opposite corners past the intersecting road, and a single horizontal overhead signal (yes, I prefer horizontal overhead to vertical ones by a bit, but only if they're not all cluttered overhead).
FYI. WisDOT has been steadily converting and replacing horizontal signals with vertical ones since around 2010'ish. However, local DPWs can still use horizontally mounted lights.
Quote from: ran4sh on August 08, 2021, 03:11:02 AM
I see no reason that a span wire state should automatically be at the bottom. GDOT even specifies that span wire is preferred to mast arm because with span wire it is more likely that the signals will be placed in the correct locations without depending on a pole that could possibly be within or too close to the clear zone.
GDOT quote: "Span wire allows for the placement of signal heads in the near-optimal viewing position without overly restricting the placement of strain poles. A span wire configuration also allows for pole placement outside of the clear zone." Source - page 4-1 of https://www.dot.ga.gov/partnersmart/designmanuals/signaldesignmanual/traffic%20signal%20design%20guidelines-2016.pdf
Mostly a personal preference, similar to Highway Gothic vs Clearview. Though I mentioned in the OP that most span wire setups lack side signals and are heavily reliant on overhead ones. I guess this is why it's used for optimal overhead placement, like what the linked GDOT manual suggested?
Quote from: on_wisconsin on August 08, 2021, 05:20:55 AM
Quote from: SkyPesos on August 07, 2021, 07:59:30 PM
Off my top states, I'll put Wisconsin in the first or second spot. Really like the post mounted signal placement with two at the stop line, then another two in opposite corners past the intersecting road, and a single horizontal overhead signal (yes, I prefer horizontal overhead to vertical ones by a bit, but only if they're not all cluttered overhead).
FYI. WisDOT has been steadily converting and replacing horizontal signals with vertical ones since around 2010'ish. However, local DPWs can still use horizontally mounted lights.
Does Wisconsin still use the side signals placement I mentioned in the OP, and only one or two signals overhead? That is the main reason why I like Wisconsin's setup, and the horizontal overhead signals are a bonus. As long as the general layout is still there in newer installations, it's still on the top of the list imo, even with vertical overheads.
Quote from: SkyPesos on August 08, 2021, 01:24:06 PM
Quote from: on_wisconsin on August 08, 2021, 05:20:55 AM
Quote from: SkyPesos on August 07, 2021, 07:59:30 PM
Off my top states, I'll put Wisconsin in the first or second spot. Really like the post mounted signal placement with two at the stop line, then another two in opposite corners past the intersecting road, and a single horizontal overhead signal (yes, I prefer horizontal overhead to vertical ones by a bit, but only if they're not all cluttered overhead).
FYI. WisDOT has been steadily converting and replacing horizontal signals with vertical ones since around 2010'ish. However, local DPWs can still use horizontally mounted lights.
Does Wisconsin still use the side signals placement I mentioned in the OP, and only one or two signals overhead? That is the main reason why I like Wisconsin's setup, and the horizontal overhead signals are a bonus. As long as the general layout is still there in newer installations, it's still on the top of the list imo, even with vertical overheads.
They still use side signals, but not as much as before. The mast-arm signals can remove some of them.
I don't think it's necessarily fair to rank all majority span wire states in the bottom half. Although, the rankings may be too close to each other to allow for much flexibility, so...
I'll discuss three of the states near me.
Wisconsin is still pretty good. I'm not as much of a fan of their newer installs as the classic ones. The mast arms are generally unnecessarily thick, the backplates are very flimsy, and the signage labeling the cross street is hit-or-miss with quality. Sometimes they are so bad, they're unreadable at high speeds. However, they use lots of signals and place them well, including in the medians when needed. They have embraced FYA signals. And of course, there's still a plethora of classic horizontal installs scattered around the state. So yeah, they're very good.
An extra note on Wisconsin: They're good at keeping themselves controlled with where they place signals. They don't spam them along arterials, which helps keep traffic flowing better.
Illinois* signals is something I think the state does well. New installs have plenty of signals, though I'd actually argue sometimes they have too many. The newest signals use very study backplates, and even the old ones hold up nicely. IDOT has replaced every pedestrian signal with a modern countdown timer. Almost every IDOT signal (at least in my area) has been modernized in some form. Right-turn lanes with right-turn arrows are a-plenty which is awesome!
Some gripes I have though are that every new install uses black signal backs, which is just so stupid. It's not necessary to do that on open roads away from downtowns. It reduces visibility of the signal and I just personally don't like the look. As I mentioned, they also don't use yellow backplates either. Signage for cross streets is good when it's there, but many intersections are missing them. IDOT never uses FYA signals, though some of the collar counties do. Overall, Illinois is good. Wisconsin probably gets the edge on them though.
Also, Illinois has too many signals. IDOT is not selective enough with where they allow them. See US-12 north of Lake-Cook Rd for a road that has way too many signals.
* I am only focusing on IDOT District 1 (Chicagoland). Downstate deserves an opinion from someone else that's more familiar.
Finally, I'll touch on Michigan. The state as far as I can tell, is very much moving away from span wires. Many of you will see that as a positive, but I'm personally disappointed. I loved the classic diagonal wire setups with the flashing red ball back in the day, and I think their installs now are just generic. The mast arms are again unnecessarily thick and seem to always be painted a dark color (green or black). However, Michigan's signals look sturdy, they embrace FYA, have clear and consistent cross-street signage, even if it is in Clearview. I love that Michigan uses signals on their U-turns for bigger arterials. I always thought that was cool as a child.
I might come back to this thread later to talk about Indiana or Iowa, but I don't think I feel qualified enough to talk about those states.
What I will add is this: I think Texas signals are awful, inconsistent messes and don't deserve to be in the top half in the country. Messy wiring, horizontal versus vertical is inconsistent, among other issues. Maybe new installs are better, but I'm not sure. I am sure that the Uptown Houston signals are abominations and should be set on fire.
How'd you rate Ontario?
I'll comment on Indiana's signals. I think the state fits firmly in the middle in terms of traffic signals. The state has more span-wire signals than mast-arm, but there's actually quite a lot of mast-arm signals throughout the state. In fact the distribution between the two might almost be 50/50. Most of the mast-arm signals are in more urban locations but they can be found in town centers as well. Most of the mast-arm signals are of a standard design but there's some newer varieties sprinkled about.
Here's a typical mast-arm signal from around Indianapolis: https://goo.gl/maps/wmBzMk2iuvkBhQjU7
A more newer looking mast-arm signal from the northern suburbs of Indy: https://goo.gl/maps/kuNnhbgd3JTQ8vaGA
And a mast-arm signal from a smaller town: https://goo.gl/maps/ANraqYNmZNDFk6Tp8
Span-wire signals are naturally more common in more suburban and rural locales. But these Indiana actually do pretty well. The signals are supported from both the top and bottom of the signal and it makes a world of difference compared to other states where the signals droop. It's still span-wire but it looks so much more organized than it should be. In addition there are more flashing yellow lights and black back plates being added throughout the state.
Here's an example of the span-wire design from Avon: https://goo.gl/maps/ycjkEZ42PMhBPgNd8
And this example is pretty universal throughout the state. Not the greatest looking signal setup in the country but not really bad either.
To add onto Indiana, here's an interesting small-scale span-wire just west on US-36 in Danville. To me, this still looks nice and also has a charm to it that big mast arms can't compete with. :nod:
https://goo.gl/maps/LcDe4h7yuvBwUR5W6
Quote from: tdindy88 on August 08, 2021, 09:26:11 PM
I'll comment on Indiana's signals. I think the state fits firmly in the middle in terms of traffic signals. The state has more span-wire signals than mast-arm, but there's actually quite a lot of mast-arm signals throughout the state. In fact the distribution between the two might almost be 50/50. Most of the mast-arm signals are in more urban locations but they can be found in town centers as well. Most of the mast-arm signals are of a standard design but there's some newer varieties sprinkled about.
Here's a typical mast-arm signal from around Indianapolis: https://goo.gl/maps/wmBzMk2iuvkBhQjU7
A more newer looking mast-arm signal from the northern suburbs of Indy: https://goo.gl/maps/kuNnhbgd3JTQ8vaGA
And a mast-arm signal from a smaller town: https://goo.gl/maps/ANraqYNmZNDFk6Tp8
Span-wire signals are naturally more common in more suburban and rural locales. But these Indiana actually do pretty well. The signals are supported from both the top and bottom of the signal and it makes a world of difference compared to other states where the signals droop. It's still span-wire but it looks so much more organized than it should be. In addition there are more flashing yellow lights and black back plates being added throughout the state.
Here's an example of the span-wire design from Avon: https://goo.gl/maps/ycjkEZ42PMhBPgNd8
And this example is pretty universal throughout the state. Not the greatest looking signal setup in the country but not really bad either.
I'll rank Ohio roughly same with Indiana based on what you wrote about IN. I think Ohio's span wire is pretty good for a span wire setup, and there's no shortage of good mast arm setups in the state either. Dublin have some of my favorites, as they use side placed signals too (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.0990547,-83.1253016,3a,47.9y,85.16h,86.54t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sBsp0oR8wlo3lizvzyDeleA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) (and unrelated to this thread, there's a 4 section protected-permissive right turn signal on the far right, something that's very rare in the state).
It would be hard for me to not put California first. Super-consistent across the state, all corners covered, very clean design overall.
I would also highly rank Chicago's signals (city of Chicago): all black signals, no backplates, most corners covered at many intersections, great operations too with many permissive lefts, unlike California (though minus a few for the non-compliant signals along Michigan Ave). The signals fit in very well to the urban environment, an unappreciated quality IMO.
I might also rank British Columbia up pretty highly. Always a signal on the left (I prefer left-side supplemental signals first over right-side supplemental signals), great operations, usually pretty clean installs. They also used 8-inch signals pretty commonly, which I always found to be sufficient for certain situations, but they've since moved to 12-inch faces for all new signals.
Utah is probably middle of the pack. Very clean mast arm designs and almost no span wire left by now, but loses a lot of points on lack of redundancy.
Quote from: jakeroot on August 09, 2021, 04:19:09 PM
I would also highly rank Chicago's signals (city of Chicago): all black signals, no backplates, most corners covered at many intersections, great operations too with many permissive lefts, unlike California (though minus a few for the non-compliant signals along Michigan Ave). The signals fit in very well to the urban environment, an unappreciated quality IMO.
Are there not still a whole host of Chicago intersections that don't have left turn signals but could really use them?
I know a lot have been installed in the last twenty years, though...
Quote from: kphoger on August 09, 2021, 04:43:31 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on August 09, 2021, 04:19:09 PM
I would also highly rank Chicago's signals (city of Chicago): all black signals, no backplates, most corners covered at many intersections, great operations too with many permissive lefts, unlike California (though minus a few for the non-compliant signals along Michigan Ave). The signals fit in very well to the urban environment, an unappreciated quality IMO.
Are there not still a whole host of Chicago intersections that don't have left turn signals but could really use them?
I know a lot have been installed in the last twenty years, though...
Reminds me of a certain thread!
I'm not really keen on protected-permissive phasing unless it's absolutely necessary; I find the addition of a green arrow sometimes causes drivers to be not aggressive enough. I'm not sure they're as widely warranted as some insist.
Fully-protected, I can't get behind at all without absolute certainty of it being necessary.
Quote from: jakeroot on August 09, 2021, 05:49:23 PM
Fully-protected, I can't get behind at all without absolute certainty of it being necessary.
Can we just put you in charge of everything everywhere? I hate fully protected signals too.
Quote from: kphoger on August 09, 2021, 06:09:25 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on August 09, 2021, 05:49:23 PM
Fully-protected, I can't get behind at all without absolute certainty of it being necessary.
Can we just put you in charge of everything everywhere? I hate fully protected signals too.
They are useful in some situations, for example, where sightlines are completely obstructed. Such as having an LRT or BRT in the middle, and therefore the stations obstructing sightlines.
Quote from: andrepoiy on August 09, 2021, 07:50:31 PM
Quote from: kphoger on August 09, 2021, 06:09:25 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on August 09, 2021, 05:49:23 PM
Fully-protected, I can't get behind at all without absolute certainty of it being necessary.
Can we just put you in charge of everything everywhere? I hate fully protected signals too.
They are useful in some situations, for example, where sightlines are completely obstructed. Such as having an LRT or BRT in the middle, and therefore the stations obstructing sightlines.
Even without stations, I feel like any sort of permissive left across a train track or any sort of transit is just asking for trouble. Mostly because you're guaranteed to lose if you guess wrong.
Quote from: US 89 on August 09, 2021, 08:26:29 PM
Quote from: andrepoiy on August 09, 2021, 07:50:31 PM
Quote from: kphoger on August 09, 2021, 06:09:25 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on August 09, 2021, 05:49:23 PM
Fully-protected, I can't get behind at all without absolute certainty of it being necessary.
Can we just put you in charge of everything everywhere? I hate fully protected signals too.
They are useful in some situations, for example, where sightlines are completely obstructed. Such as having an LRT or BRT in the middle, and therefore the stations obstructing sightlines.
Even without stations, I feel like any sort of permissive left across a train track or any sort of transit is just asking for trouble. Mostly because you're guaranteed to lose if you guess wrong.
Just to make it plain: I'm fine with necessary uses, like across a median BRT or tram. It's the regular left turns where I feel like they shouldn't be used without serious certainty of it being necessary (way too many crashes, way too many pedestrians, etc).
^ Are there any left turns that switch between fully protected and protected-permissive depending on time of day and/or traffic level. Could be done with an FYA signal; go to solid red instead of going to flashing yellow mode if you want it to be permissive only, then enable flashing yellow mode when traffic isn't as heavy.
Quote from: SkyPesos on August 09, 2021, 09:05:27 PM
^ Are there any left turns that switch between fully protected and protected-permissive depending on time of day and/or traffic level. Could be done with an FYA signal; go to solid red instead of going to flashing yellow mode if you want it to be permissive only, then enable flashing yellow mode when traffic isn't as heavy.
Oh, absolutely. That's very common in some areas. Time-of-day phasing (TOD), it's usually called. When used just at the beginning, it's a leading pedestrian interval (LPI).
Definitely a huge advantage of the FYA signal.
Quote from: andrepoiy on August 09, 2021, 07:50:31 PM
Quote from: kphoger on August 09, 2021, 06:09:25 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on August 09, 2021, 05:49:23 PM
Fully-protected, I can't get behind at all without absolute certainty of it being necessary.
Can we just put you in charge of everything everywhere? I hate fully protected signals too.
They are useful in some situations, for example, where sightlines are completely obstructed. Such as having an LRT or BRT in the middle, and therefore the stations obstructing sightlines.
Or when the oncoming traffic count is so high that you'll have no throughput without a protected phase. There's an intersection by my house that has a permissive signal to turn left from a road with a AADT of 27,000. It would have been cheaper to just put up a No Left Turn sign, since they're functionally equivalent.
Does any discussion about traffic signals not become a discussion of flashing yellow arrows anymore?
Quote from: jeffandnicole on August 09, 2021, 10:29:40 PM
Does any discussion about traffic signals not become a discussion of flashing yellow arrows anymore?
Oh yea, thanks for reminding me to move Ohio down a few spots on this rankings list for still actively installing lots of doghouses instead of FYAs in 2021 :-D.
Quote from: jakeroot on August 09, 2021, 09:28:59 PM
Quote from: SkyPesos on August 09, 2021, 09:05:27 PM
^ Are there any left turns that switch between fully protected and protected-permissive depending on time of day and/or traffic level. Could be done with an FYA signal; go to solid red instead of going to flashing yellow mode if you want it to be permissive only, then enable flashing yellow mode when traffic isn't as heavy.
Oh, absolutely. That's very common in some areas. Time-of-day phasing (TOD), it's usually called. When used just at the beginning, it's a leading pedestrian interval (LPI).
Definitely a huge advantage of the FYA signal.
I wish we had some of these here. Some areas need a protected signal during peak hours, but on weekends or late at night, it's simply a grand waste of time.
Quote from: Scott5114 on August 09, 2021, 10:21:03 PM
Quote from: andrepoiy on August 09, 2021, 07:50:31 PM
Quote from: kphoger on August 09, 2021, 06:09:25 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on August 09, 2021, 05:49:23 PM
Fully-protected, I can't get behind at all without absolute certainty of it being necessary.
Can we just put you in charge of everything everywhere? I hate fully protected signals too.
They are useful in some situations, for example, where sightlines are completely obstructed. Such as having an LRT or BRT in the middle, and therefore the stations obstructing sightlines.
Or when the oncoming traffic count is so high that you'll have no throughput without a protected phase. There's an intersection by my house that has a permissive signal to turn left from a road with a AADT of 27,000. It would have been cheaper to just put up a No Left Turn sign, since they're functionally equivalent.
But isn't there a difference between "fully protected" and "protected phase"?
Nobody is suggesting that all left turn arrows should disappear–just that the great majority of
dedicated left turn arrow assemblies should disappear (except as modifiable to FYA).
Quote from: kphoger on August 10, 2021, 09:38:42 AM
Quote from: Scott5114 on August 09, 2021, 10:21:03 PM
Or when the oncoming traffic count is so high that you'll have no throughput without a protected phase. There's an intersection by my house that has a permissive signal to turn left from a road with a AADT of 27,000. It would have been cheaper to just put up a No Left Turn sign, since they're functionally equivalent.
But isn't there a difference between "fully protected" and "protected phase"?
Nobody is suggesting that all left turn arrows should disappear–just that the great majority of dedicated left turn arrow assemblies should disappear (except as modifiable to FYA).
Bingo. Even the busiest roads have times of day where there is no need to wait for a green arrow. During absolutely peak hours, sure. But then even during peak hours, a two-secone all-red should allow at least two cars to turn at the end. Assuming you live in an area where drivers do that.
Quote from: andrepoiy on August 09, 2021, 11:21:24 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on August 09, 2021, 09:28:59 PM
Quote from: SkyPesos on August 09, 2021, 09:05:27 PM
^ Are there any left turns that switch between fully protected and protected-permissive depending on time of day and/or traffic level. Could be done with an FYA signal; go to solid red instead of going to flashing yellow mode if you want it to be permissive only, then enable flashing yellow mode when traffic isn't as heavy.
Oh, absolutely. That's very common in some areas. Time-of-day phasing (TOD), it's usually called. When used just at the beginning, it's a leading pedestrian interval (LPI).
Definitely a huge advantage of the FYA signal.
I wish we had some of these here. Some areas need a protected signal during peak hours, but on weekends or late at night, it's simply a grand waste of time.
I can't recall where exactly, but I believe somewhere in the Vancouver area (maybe Richmond?) there is a left turn signal that is protected-permissive that operates separately from through traffic. Effectively allowing time of day phasing. But as far as I know, it doesn't have any special phasing like that. But it is capable of it.
We have been getting lots more protected only lefts on major roads here, even when they are not justifiable for any reason. It's most annoying during off times in the late evening or early morning. But sometimes they are unnecessary even in "peak times". IDOT D1's dislike of FYAs is the problem, because they would allow a solution to the problem.
Ironically, one of the roads that I feel actually needs protected only lefts gets permissive-protected with short deceleration lanes and awful sight lines.
Quote from: JoePCool14 on August 10, 2021, 06:23:29 PM
We have been getting lots more protected only lefts on major roads here, even when they are not justifiable for any reason. It's most annoying during off times in the late evening or early morning. But sometimes they are unnecessary even in "peak times". IDOT D1's dislike of FYAs is the problem, because they would allow a solution to the problem.
Ironically, one of the roads that I feel actually needs protected only lefts gets permissive-protected with short deceleration lanes and awful sight lines.
Bit heartbreaking to hear, since I've long held the opinion that the Chicago area has some of the best signalization. Can you post some streetview examples of the needless protected-only signals?
Tier list based on what I see here so far:
A Tier
- California
- Minnesota
- Wisconsin
B Tier
- Illinois
- Kansas
- Missouri
C Tier
- Indiana
- Ohio
- Texas
- Utah
D Tier
F Tier
Ive already made a thread like this, but I'm happy to continue.
For new signals the best is obviously Massachusetts. The placement is unique to each intersection; and it's vast and clear
iPhone
Quote from: SkyPesos on August 11, 2021, 12:00:07 AM
Tier list based on what I see here so far:
S Tier
- California
- Minnesota
- Wisconsin
A Tier
- Illinois
- Kansas
- Missouri
B Tier
- Indiana
- Ohio
- Texas
- Utah
C Tier
D Tier
F Tier
I've never gotten an S in any of my classes in school. Just because some Japanese video games have it doesn't mean it needs to exist here.
Quote from: 1 on August 11, 2021, 06:30:26 AM
I've never gotten an S in any of my classes in school. Just because some Japanese video games have it doesn't mean it needs to exist here.
In early elementary school, I got S's a lot, as the grading was S for satisfactory or U for unsatisfactory.
Quote from: 1 on August 11, 2021, 06:30:26 AM
I've never gotten an S in any of my classes in school. Just because some Japanese video games have it doesn't mean it needs to exist here.
It's common at this point for tier lists to use S tier as the top tier. Meaning, it's really special, better than just an A. It means special (?), not satisfactory.
First time I've ever seen it.
I have also never seen it. There's also not enough variation country-wide for more than 5 or 6 categories (A-F is fine).
Also: I'd put Wisconsin in B, alongside New Jersey. Nearside signals and occasional farside supplemental signals do not qualify one for a special god tier.
Quote from: jakeroot on August 11, 2021, 11:34:11 AM
I have also never seen it. There's also not enough variation country-wide for more than 5 or 6 categories (A-F is fine).
Also: I'd put Wisconsin in B, alongside New Jersey. Nearside signals and occasional farside supplemental signals do not qualify one for a special god tier.
Removed the S tier. Though I'm keeping Wisconsin in A tier for now, as a lot of the above replies (including me) were very positive about Wisconsin's signals, and you praised Chicago's signals, which are similar to Wisconsin's layout except without FYAs.
Also, for your home state (Washington), I'll place it in B tier based on your examples of signals in the state, and from my personal experience there, though let me know if it should go up or down a tier.
Quote from: SkyPesos on August 11, 2021, 12:00:07 AM
Tier list based on what I see here so far:
A Tier
- California
- Minnesota
- Wisconsin
B Tier
- Illinois
- Kansas
- Missouri
- Washington
C Tier
- Indiana
- Ohio
- Texas
- Utah
D Tier
F Tier
New York State should be D or debatably F. NYC could be B or C.
Quote from: 1 on August 11, 2021, 06:30:26 AM
I've never gotten an S in any of my classes in school. Just because some Japanese video games have it doesn't mean it needs to exist here.
Japanese video games have it because Japanese schools have it. It is an apparently rarely-given grade above A.
Here's my personal ranking, with explanations, without taking into account how intersections are operated (that would be another list entirely):
Tier 0: Phenomenal: California, Minnesota, Arizona, South Dakota, Idaho, Nevada, New Mexico
* these states are extremely consistent, with many supplemental signals at almost all intersections in the far left and far right corners, and mast arms are the norm for almost all intersections. Near-side signals are also quite common in these states, even when not necessarily required per the MUTCD (California primarily, but elsewhere as well). NV and ID are the newest additions to this level. NM as well.
Tier 1: Superb: Wisconsin, Illinois, New Jersey, Colorado, Hawaii, New Mexico
* Two supplemental signals and mast arms are common, if not standard, but there is some inconsistencies throughout the state in terms of placement strategies.
Tier 2: Great: Kansas, Iowa, Nebraska, Montana, North Dakota
* At least one supplemental signal per intersection is common throughout the state, and mast arms are common as well.
Tier 3: Satisfactory with honors: Washington, Missouri, Tennessee, Louisiana, Massachusetts, New York
* State-wide, pretty bog-standard, but there are individual municipalities that go above and beyond statewide requirements.
Tier 4: Satisfactory: Indiana, Ohio, Oregon, Texas, Utah
* Clean installations overall, but virtually no supplemental signals are to be found anywhere apart from when absolutely required. FHWA standard, if you will.
Tier 5: Ehhhh: Georgia
* There are some issues. Supplemental signals, even when ostensibly required, seem rare, and existing practices make the placement of supplemental signals difficult.
I'd rank New Mexico in the top 10, possibly in the top 5. Very similar in my experience to Minnesota with the only notable difference being their use of horizontal overheads. Granted, I haven't been to New Mexico since 2005 so it's possible things have changed.
Like Jake, I'd put Massachusetts in the middle of the pack. Considerable use of both overhead and side mounted, but their design standards seem all over the place.
Vermont would be below normal, but not in the bottom tier. The newer statewide standards are pretty decent but there's too much variability within the cities and most areas (including VTrans) make minimal use of side-mounted signals.
New Hampshire, to me, ranks higher than Vermont but still middle-of-the-pack at best. Fairly consistent statewide and more side-mounted than Vermont but still not very many. They also, almost exclusively, go protected-only for left turn signals, with very few protected-permitted locations.
New York State would be similar to New Hampshire in ranking. While signal design is fairly consistent, there are very few side-mounted signals and a number of locations still make use of span wire.
Is anyone else a little disconcerted to see people praising New Mexico for anything road-related? :-P
Quote from: froggie on August 11, 2021, 02:18:48 PM
New York State would be similar to New Hampshire in ranking. While signal design is fairly consistent, there are very few side-mounted signals and a number of locations still make use of span wire.
With regards to span wire, is that considered a bad thing? Sure, the signal heads can bob around a bit when it's windy, but it's otherwise a very efficient; I might even call it clever.
Quote from: froggie on August 11, 2021, 02:18:48 PM
I'd rank New Mexico in the top 10, possibly in the top 5. Very similar in my experience to Minnesota with the only notable difference being their use of horizontal overheads. Granted, I haven't been to New Mexico since 2005 so it's possible things have changed.
I only kept it out of my "Tier 0" ranking because there seemed to be quite a few municipalities around New Mexico that weren't as consistent (not always a signal on the left, for instance). But I am moving it to Tier 0 now because, upon further inspection, the newest signals (last ten years or so) seem to be very good about placement and redundancy (
this 2014 era intersection (https://goo.gl/maps/YZ7j7xeAXpZWfuAG7), for instance).
Quote from: kphoger on August 11, 2021, 02:29:44 PM
Is anyone else a little disconcerted to see people praising New Mexico for anything road-related? :-P
They really are good at signalization. Are they known for being bad at stuff? Don't know a lot about NM.
Quote from: webny99 on August 11, 2021, 03:01:44 PM
Quote from: froggie on August 11, 2021, 02:18:48 PM
New York State would be similar to New Hampshire in ranking. While signal design is fairly consistent, there are very few side-mounted signals and a number of locations still make use of span wire.
With regards to span wire, is that considered a bad thing? Sure, the signal heads can bob around a bit when it's windy, but it's otherwise a very efficient; I might even call it clever.
Span wire signals are not necessarily bad, but I think mast arm signals tend to win favor as they are sturdier, more reliable, and just appear a bit more modern. There's a certain cheapness to wire span that even the cleanest box-span intersection cannot escape.
Quote from: jakeroot on August 11, 2021, 03:18:38 PM
They really are good at signalization. Are they known for being bad at stuff? Don't know a lot about NM.
This forum knows very little about New Mexico. However, they have bad pavement quality and hard-to-follow signage, even worse than the states we like to complain about.
Quote from: jakeroot on August 11, 2021, 03:18:38 PM
Quote from: kphoger on August 11, 2021, 02:29:44 PM
Is anyone else a little disconcerted to see people praising New Mexico for anything road-related? :-P
They really are good at signalization. Are they known for being bad at stuff? Don't know a lot about NM.
From what I see on this forum, they're in the same tier as Oklahoma for worst signage quality.
Quote from: webny99 on August 11, 2021, 03:01:44 PM
Quote from: froggie on August 11, 2021, 02:18:48 PM
New York State would be similar to New Hampshire in ranking. While signal design is fairly consistent, there are very few side-mounted signals and a number of locations still make use of span wire.
With regards to span wire, is that considered a bad thing? Sure, the signal heads can bob around a bit when it's windy, but it's otherwise a very efficient; I might even call it clever.
It's definitely beauty in the eye of the beholder.
Quote from: SkyPesos on August 11, 2021, 03:35:29 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on August 11, 2021, 03:18:38 PM
Quote from: kphoger on August 11, 2021, 02:29:44 PM
Is anyone else a little disconcerted to see people praising New Mexico for anything road-related? :-P
They really are good at signalization. Are they known for being bad at stuff? Don't know a lot about NM.
From what I see on this forum, they're in the same tier as Oklahoma for worst signage quality.
The post below nicely captures the difference between OK and NM signage:
Quote from: Scott5114 on June 09, 2021, 01:20:07 PM
ODOT signage is æsthetically garbage, violates norms of both graphic design and traffic control, and hurts your eyes to look at. But it's almost always there, and it's usually complete and mostly correct. ODOT signage sucks, but you can at least navigate with it. NMDOT sometimes can't even manage to clear that simple bar, to the point that it starts to negatively impact navigability. So there's a pretty good argument that NMDOT is worse than ODOT.
Quote from: SkyPesos on August 08, 2021, 01:24:06 PM
Quote from: on_wisconsin on August 08, 2021, 05:20:55 AM
Quote from: SkyPesos on August 07, 2021, 07:59:30 PM
Off my top states, I'll put Wisconsin in the first or second spot. Really like the post mounted signal placement with two at the stop line, then another two in opposite corners past the intersecting road, and a single horizontal overhead signal (yes, I prefer horizontal overhead to vertical ones by a bit, but only if they're not all cluttered overhead).
FYI. WisDOT has been steadily converting and replacing horizontal signals with vertical ones since around 2010'ish. However, local DPWs can still use horizontally mounted lights.
Does Wisconsin still use the side signals placement I mentioned in the OP, and only one or two signals overhead? That is the main reason why I like Wisconsin's setup, and the horizontal overhead signals are a bonus. As long as the general layout is still there in newer installations, it's still on the top of the list imo, even with vertical overheads.
It seems to be up to the jurisdiction. When Eau Claire (City) started replacing signals as part of road projects around 2012-2013, they included the near side stop signals, however they were mounted to the mast arm poles, which were not always at optimal viewing angles and were often a ways away from the stop bar/travel lane. They since ditched this feature on more recent installs.
The standard has for the most part, been signal head per lane, vertically mounted on monotube mast arm from the right side or the median. Fill in post mounted signals as needed for stop line & median. Typically the desired faces showing an approach are a signal head per lane for the overhead, a near right stop line signal, a near left stop line signal if a median is present for the turn lane only, and a far left corner left turn signal. Some parts of the state you may also see a far right corner signal mounted on the vertical member of the mast arm structure. In certain regions, where offset left turn lanes are present, you will see post mounted turn signals in the median with no overhead component, since this would require the mast arm to be unusually long, and likely expensive.
At least from a state standard, it seems that signal head per lane is only being used for multi-lane approaches, and/or roads with speeds of 45+mph. Most single (thru) lane approaches still get the horizontal trombone truss arm overhead installation, though even these seem to be dropping out of favor when features like protected/permissive left turn signals are desired. The 5 section signal head design seems to be not preferred anymore.
I have also seen a modified standard appearing for two thru lane approaches where a trombone truss arm will be mounted on the right side for the right lane, and in the median to extend over the left lane, with vertically mounted signals, as a cheaper alternative to mast arms.
All my statements above are based purely on personal observation.
I'd say Nevada is the best. I prefer signal per lane and side-mounted.
I know we have a lot of pole traffic lights here in North Carolina, but wires are still being installed.
Going back upthread a bit to what was said about wire spans and side signals:
One place where there's a lot of span wire but still has side signals (usually on the left) to compliment the overheads is Shelby County, TN (and of course this includes Memphis). This is especially true when there's any type of left turn signals involved.
https://maps.app.goo.gl/J9azHB6d8QBkFMFP7
https://maps.app.goo.gl/eP8Pee2sSMtbTHZHA
Even newer mast-arm mounted signals have signals on the side
https://maps.app.goo.gl/8PAT1qASfHDQGpph8
8-8-8-12-12 side by sides hung overhead in Memphis. Maryland usually use these as supplements
https://maps.app.goo.gl/ELWcKCsVpqeC87166
Though there are some pretty messed up installations too
https://maps.app.goo.gl/RfkUvWsu2NEkdH2Z8
This one could use some side signals
https://maps.app.goo.gl/uVN8W8ugy6bYg8WRA
I agree with Tennessee being somewhere in the middle, maybe the lower middle, and I would add Virginia there also. While VDOT is pretty uniform statewide (with some very minor differences), the cities are anything but. Some cities are great with signaling while others... not so much.