https://www.google.com/maps/place/WI-29+BUS+%26+Chippewa+Crossing+Blvd,+Chippewa+Falls,+WI+54729/@44.920174,-91.37293,3a,66.8y,82.43h,87.19t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1s3Mzc2vjV_i7SiuIc-6o66w!2e0!4m2!3m1!1s0x87f8a606effa14c7:0xd48b3292737b49d8
Chippewa Crossing Blvd and WI 29 in Chippewa Falls Wi. Chippewa Crossing Blvd is a planned future development, with basically no existing buildings, little traffic.
What is ridiculous, is the streetlights, all on at night when there is zero traffic in the development, and no reason for any car to be back there.
And then there is the intersection.
First thing I notice is the lack of standard keep right signs, instead they use worded keep right signs.
Second, is the practice I hate, 5 Stack permissive/protected signal to the left of a thru green arrow signal.
The pedestrian signals all have boarders/backplates I have no idea why.
The side streets each have their own protected thru/left turn signal phase.
The right turn lanes from the side street have full 5 stacks rather than a 3 Section Red Ball/yellow arrow/green arrow. To be honest, a stop sign would have sufficed.
Is this just a case of they needed to spend their money on something, or lose it? What do you think?
If the state paid for it, it was probably a case of use the money or lose it. If the developer paid for it, he or she must be anticipating a lot of cars coming through after construction is finished.
Backplates on pedestrian signals :ded:
Other parts of Wisconsin would just erect the signal hardware except for the signal heads, or just the wiring, and put in stop signs until the signal was actually warranted.
I have a few for you. Both are in Gary, IN.
This first signal was a fully working install, but was put into flash when google drove through. As of today, the signals are fully functional again. There is no need for a fully operational signal here (or any signal at all really) at this intersection. There really isn't even enough traffic to warrant a 4-way stop here, but the signals are still maintained and kept in working order.
https://www.google.com/maps/@41.6143546,-87.2518512,3a,75y,109.46h,76.54t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s3OzrTyRK-tCnhBJkMSXCAg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1
Here's another...
This one is in an area that was never all that busy. There are no businesses around, and the road serves as an access road to Lake Station from Gary.
https://www.google.com/maps/place/Gary,+IN/@41.5872639,-87.2784902,3a,75y,285.67h,82.97t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sdbhncmQFmNLyLx3eDsyRFA!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo2.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DdbhncmQFmNLyLx3eDsyRFA%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D340.41925%26pitch%3D0!7i13312!8i6656!4m2!3m1!1s0x8811c26949eba4df:0x3ec3739841d01645!6m1!1e1
If you want more useless signals, I can show you more around Lake County, Indiana.
Quote from: JMAN12343610 on October 16, 2015, 08:57:13 PM
https://www.google.com/maps/place/WI-29+BUS+%26+Chippewa+Crossing+Blvd,+Chippewa+Falls,+WI+54729/@44.920174,-91.37293,3a,66.8y,82.43h,87.19t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1s3Mzc2vjV_i7SiuIc-6o66w!2e0!4m2!3m1!1s0x87f8a606effa14c7:0xd48b3292737b49d8
Chippewa Crossing Blvd and WI 29 in Chippewa Falls Wi. Chippewa Crossing Blvd is a planned future development, with basically no existing buildings, little traffic.
Based on my recollection from living in Wisconsin 8 years ago, looks like a standard Wisconsin installation to me. Maybe it shouldn't have been wired yet, but doesn't seem that odd to me.
Quote from: Big John on October 16, 2015, 09:57:12 PM
Backplates on pedestrian signals :ded:
Also, signal poles in the median. While kinda visually cool for its retro aspect, this practice is frowned upon today because those poles represent a safety hazard (fixed objects that can be crashed into).
The signal at Forts Ferry Rd and Elinor Pl (near the school) fits this perfectly. The side street and the school get somewhere between 1/3 - 1/2 of the green time even though 99% of the traffic is on Forts Ferry. I drive through it twice per day, get stopped at it often, and have only seen cars on the side street/school so rarely that I can still count them on my fingers (don't think I've ever seen anyone use the crosswalks at all, even when I must be near the school start time judging by all the busses in the lot). It operates on a fixed time cycle, never mind that the Town of Colonie is perfectly capable of installing fully actuated signals (and has on every other signalized intersection on Forts Ferry). I'm convinced the signal exists only for speed control and am tempted to report it as a MUTCD violation.
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.7636505,-73.7785222,299m/data=!3m1!1e3
Quote from: vdeane on October 17, 2015, 08:00:04 PM
The signal at Forts Ferry Rd and Elinor Pl (near the school) fits this perfectly. The side street and the school get somewhere between 1/3 - 1/2 of the green time even though 99% of the traffic is on Forts Ferry. I drive through it twice per day, get stopped at it often, and have only seen cars on the side street/school so rarely that I can still count them on my fingers (don't think I've ever seen anyone use the crosswalks at all, even when I must be near the school start time judging by all the busses in the lot). It operates on a fixed time cycle, never mind that the Town of Colonie is perfectly capable of installing fully actuated signals (and has on every other signalized intersection on Forts Ferry). I'm convinced the signal exists only for speed control and am tempted to report it as a MUTCD violation.
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.7636505,-73.7785222,299m/data=!3m1!1e3
Looks like they used a school warrant though your description makes that even questionable. And there should be an push-button pedestrian signals at that crosswalk
2009 MUTCD:
Section 4C.06 Warrant 5, School Crossing
Support:
The School Crossing signal warrant is intended for application where the fact that school children cross the major street is the principal reason to consider installing a traffic control signal.
Standard:
The need for a traffic control signal shall be considered when an engineering study of the frequency and adequacy of gaps in the vehicular traffic stream as related to the number and size of groups of school children at an established school crossing across the major street shows that the number of adequate gaps in the traffic stream during the period when the children are using the crossing is less than the number of minutes in the same period (see Section 7A.03) and there are a minimum of 20 students during the highest crossing hour.
Before a decision is made to install a traffic control signal, consideration shall be given to the implementation of other remedial measures, such as warning signs and flashers, school speed zones, school crossing guards, or a grade-separated crossing.
The School Crossing signal warrant shall not be applied at locations where the distance to the nearest traffic control signal along the major street is less than 90 m (300 ft), unless the proposed traffic control signal will not restrict the progressive movement of traffic.
Guidance:
If this warrant is met and a traffic control signal is justified by an engineering study, then:
If at an intersection, the traffic control signal should be traffic-actuated and should include pedestrian detectors.
If at a nonintersection crossing, the traffic control signal should be pedestrian-actuated, parking and other sight obstructions should be prohibited for at least 30 m (100 ft) in advance of and at least 6.1 m (20 ft) beyond the crosswalk, and the installation should include suitable standard signs and pavement markings.
Furthermore, if installed within a signal system, the traffic control signal should be coordinated.
It operates 24/7 fixed time, even at midnight on the weekends. There's not even a school speed limit on the road.
Quote from: Mohkfry on October 16, 2015, 10:00:03 PM
I have a few for you. Both are in Gary, IN.
This first signal was a fully working install, but was put into flash when google drove through. As of today, the signals are fully functional again. There is no need for a fully operational signal here (or any signal at all really) at this intersection. There really isn't even enough traffic to warrant a 4-way stop here, but the signals are still maintained and kept in working order.
https://www.google.com/maps/@41.6143546,-87.2518512,3a,75y,109.46h,76.54t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s3OzrTyRK-tCnhBJkMSXCAg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1
Here's another...
This one is in an area that was never all that busy. There are no businesses around, and the road serves as an access road to Lake Station from Gary.
https://www.google.com/maps/place/Gary,+IN/@41.5872639,-87.2784902,3a,75y,285.67h,82.97t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sdbhncmQFmNLyLx3eDsyRFA!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo2.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DdbhncmQFmNLyLx3eDsyRFA%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D340.41925%26pitch%3D0!7i13312!8i6656!4m2!3m1!1s0x8811c26949eba4df:0x3ec3739841d01645!6m1!1e1
If you want more useless signals, I can show you more around Lake County, Indiana.
I'm guessing that they were to handle the heavy traffic from when Gary was in its heyday with the steel mills and that INDOT hasn't bothered taking them down.
Gary and Portage did seem to be sleepy towns when I passed through a year ago.
Quote from: Buffaboy on October 17, 2015, 09:21:25 PM
I'm guessing that they were to handle the heavy traffic from when Gary was in its heyday with the steel mills and that INDOT hasn't bothered taking them down.
Gary and Portage did seem to be sleepy towns when I passed through a year ago.
Both of these installs haven't been needed since at least the early 2000's. Both installs are maintained by the City of Gary and not INDOT. INDOT actually just removed some 7 signals from Broadway (SR 53) earlier this year due to population decline. A city that once had nearly 200,000 people now has less than 80,000 people, and that adds up to a lot of useless signals around the city (some neighborhoods that are 90% empty still have working signals). It's odd because some signals that are needed don't work or have missing signals, but signals that aren't needed still work normally. I don't understand why they don't remove the unneeded signals and use them to fix damaged intersections like this one.
https://www.google.com/maps/@41.5510972,-87.3180877,3a,75y,294.6h,74.97t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s64sOfYgBB6CAk5_EpE-EsQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1
This intersection is extremely busy during rush hour even though it may not look like it in the link. It was supposed to be fixed back in December of 2013, but it still looks like this today.
However if you go farther down the road, you have this unnecessary install that stops traffic for no reason at all.
https://www.google.com/maps/@41.5487474,-87.3508402,3a,75y,278.18h,78.34t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sQfHx3i_-ehC1B7UwUf6yRw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
That cross street is not any busier than your typical residential street, and even though there is a school crossing sign, the school has been closed for years now. I really don't understand it. Both of those intersections are maintained by the City of Gary.
Gary is essentially a small scale Detroit.
Edit: Forgot to mention that the signal in my second link is a fixed time setup. It changes even if there is no one around.
Quote from: vdeane on October 17, 2015, 08:00:04 PM
I'm convinced the signal exists only for speed control and am tempted to report it as a MUTCD violation.
Who do you report MUTCD violations to and how?
Quote from: Duke87 on October 18, 2015, 05:12:12 PM
Quote from: vdeane on October 17, 2015, 08:00:04 PM
I'm convinced the signal exists only for speed control and am tempted to report it as a MUTCD violation.
Who do you report MUTCD violations to and how?
There is not an authority like an "MUTCD Police" that actively monitors such things. The likely course of action is to point out the issue to the jurisdiction in charge of the roadway, and it would be their prerogative whether the issue is corrected.
Yep, unless state law specifically adopts the MUTCD and requires municipalities to comply with it - in which case you could report to the state prosecutor (?) for the local jurisdiction violating state law, in which case they'd say "oh, that's nice" and put it in the back of the drawer of things they'll never get around to following up on.
You could also report it to the City's insurance company/insurance division depending on how they are insured (in Montana, they're all insured through the Montana Municipal Interlocal Authority). That actually might be the most effective court of action- if you can demonstrate why it is potentially a legal/safety risk to the city.
Here is a similar setup in Eau Claire with only some minor signalling differences. This intersection is actually quite busy, handling a lot of downtown bound traffic coming from US 53. https://www.google.com/maps/place/Birch+St+%26+Galloway+St,+Eau+Claire,+WI+54703/@44.821363,-91.466513,3a,66.8y,179.22h,95.16t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sqWm7HDsfTm8Oyj016Cg9RQ!2e0!4m2!3m1!1s0x87f8bcea14d7cb19:0xfd8f343e562030e1
All I know is that I now want an official MUTCDPD badge.
Quote from: Duke87 on October 17, 2015, 08:17:39 AM
Quote from: Big John on October 16, 2015, 09:57:12 PM
Backplates on pedestrian signals :ded:
Also, signal poles in the median. While kinda visually cool for its retro aspect, this practice is frowned upon today because those poles represent a safety hazard (fixed objects that can be crashed into).
The poles in JMAN12343610's original post are all break-away bases. Median signals aren't the preferred mounting method, but are still widely acceptable practice in Wisconsin.
Quote from: Big John on October 16, 2015, 09:57:12 PM
Backplates on pedestrian signals :ded:
Other parts of Wisconsin would just erect the signal hardware except for the signal heads, or just the wiring, and put in stop signs until the signal was actually warranted.
Agreed. Even this setup in Johnson Creek (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.0824516,-88.7623755,3a,75y,122.06h,79.38t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1srOfdwlLrsJ8QSn-IFjgl7g!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) probably would have been more appropriate. There are several in the Madison metro area that are just the reverse...should be signals, have all the signal hardware, but are all-way stops. As for the ped signals with backplates, I can only guess the original engineer in charge of specs and miscellaneous quantities got lazy and spec'd backplates for all signals. :pan:
Also interesting they went with split-phasing for the side road (https://www.google.com/maps/place/WI-29+BUS+%26+Chippewa+Crossing+Blvd,+Chippewa+Falls,+WI+54729/@44.9201744,-91.3729303,3a,66.8y,36.57h,72.45t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s3Mzc2vjV_i7SiuIc-6o66w!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!4m2!3m1!1s0x87f8a606effa14c7:0xd48b3292737b49d8!6m1!1e1).
https://www.google.com/maps/@41.5763991,-87.346461,3a,75y,335.52h,88.46t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sEjyqmdattluqAOcnMJsjWg!2e0!5s20110801T000000!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1
Yet another one from Gary, IN. This one is at a school parking lot (which is no longer used) and serves along a residential street. If you look at an older image on streetview, you can even see the signal on the end of the truss arm facing you was replaced. This install is in flash 24/7.
Since this image was taken, the signal on the pole mount by itself has gone missing. It hasn't been replaced.
Off-topic compared to everything discussed thus far, but Wisconsin seems to have pulled a page out of the Vienna Convention with all those pole-mounted near-side signals they use. I think they're fantastic, and good on them for using so many protective/permissive signals, but it is strange to see so many pole-mounted signals outside of an urban area.
Also, I quite like how they separated the turn lanes from the through lanes with curbing. Seems like you could erect fencing on those curbs and use Dallas Phasing for those turn lanes in place of an FYA (which wouldn't be a huge stretch for them, as I'm pretty sure those doghouses are aimed squarely at the turn lanes, which I don't believe is permitted either -- I could be wrong though).
EDIT: Is Wisconsin trying to hide the yellow backing of the signals, or is the visible yellow strip on purpose?
EDIT 2: Wisconsin reminds me of BC with their use of parallel lines at stop-controlled crossings and zebra markings for yield-crossings. Also with the pole-mounted near-side signals. Just no Clearview here. :-D
Here's another one from Gary. No vehicular traffic here whatsoever. One of the signalized directions doesn't even have a road there. In fact, there was never a road there. Those signals still get maintained (new bulbs, lenses, etc...). including the direction with no road. https://www.google.com/maps/@41.5733657,-87.3853134,3a,75y,58.23h,80.01t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sVKI8voQ3AM-Z2MUxk_14sA!2e0!5s20110801T000000!7i13312!8i6656
Quote from: Mohkfry on October 19, 2015, 09:17:32 PM
Here's another one from Gary. No vehicular traffic here whatsoever.
Well of course there isn't: Gary's population has dropped by 55% since 1960. Most of Gary's unnecessary signals were likely necessary at some point.
Quote from: jakeroot on October 19, 2015, 11:50:07 PM
Quote from: Mohkfry on October 19, 2015, 09:17:32 PM
Here's another one from Gary. No vehicular traffic here whatsoever.
Well of course there isn't: Gary's population has dropped by 55% since 1960. Most of Gary's unnecessary signals were likely necessary at some point.
That's my point exactly. Gary did a study about 10-12 years ago stating that some 47 signals needed to be removed. Most were at one time necessary, while others were never needed in the first place. Take this one for example...
https://www.google.com/maps/@41.6143534,-87.2515906,3a,75y,141.05h,85.25t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sDZG26WWQQ3Ne2MSnlm8m3Q!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1
This signal was never really needed. There is no access to the mills from the Miller neighborhood, and this signal isn't on a main route to Lake Michigan, so it's not like there's tourist traffic and semis coming through here. This area is 100% residential and hasn't really grown or shrunk in terms of population unlike the rest of the city yet the signal still stands and today, functions like a normal signal despite being in flash when google drove through.
Quote from: jakeroot on October 19, 2015, 08:31:51 PM
EDIT 2: Wisconsin reminds me of BC with their use of parallel lines at stop-controlled crossings and zebra markings for yield-crossings. Also with the pole-mounted near-side signals. Just no Clearview here. :-D
The control type usually isn't a factor in deciding what type of pedestrian crossing markings to use. Parallel lines are the default type (if they're marked at all), zebra/Continental are used at higher ped volume/less visible/"more important" ped crossings.
Lincolnway E at 26th St in Massilon, OH: https://www.google.com/maps/@40.7973663,-81.486274,3a,75y,99.37h,92.78t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1skLE8ZCU2-eVYh_A8vcvkmw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
This light is only there to serve as access for a now-closed Kmart (when GSV passed through there, the Kmart was in the middle of its GOOB sale)
28th St at Jenkins Ave in Wyoming, MI: https://www.google.com/maps/@42.9134182,-85.6917379,3a,75y,102.56h,86.89t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sORPg5LnbQnnwwT9J8cLo8g!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
Light now removed, but used to only serve the now-closed Rogers department store (Klingman's, which was in there briefly after Rogers closed, moved down 28th St a few years ago)
Quote from: JMAN12343610 on October 18, 2015, 10:37:31 PM
Here is a similar setup in Eau Claire with only some minor signalling differences. This intersection is actually quite busy, handling a lot of downtown bound traffic coming from US 53.
Birch St and Birch St? (https://www.google.com/maps/place/Galloway+St+%26+Birch+St,+Eau+Claire,+WI+54703/@44.8215213,-91.4664353,3a,36.9y,349.73h,101.07t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1swNklaS6Vv8C-o6GDv2fD5Q!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!4m5!3m4!1s0x87f8bcea14d7cb19:0xfd8f343e562030e1!8m2!3d44.8213626!4d-91.466513) I get that it's supposed to indicate that the name takes a turn here, but it just looks silly. Maybe should've used some arrows.
Quote from: Rothman on October 19, 2015, 09:42:08 AM
All I know is that I now want an official MUTCDPD badge.
Yes! Someone with more artistic skills than me should make some and sell them. I'd buy it.
Quote from: MNHighwayMan on March 05, 2018, 12:16:19 PM
Quote from: JMAN12343610 on October 18, 2015, 10:37:31 PM
Here is a similar setup in Eau Claire with only some minor signalling differences. This intersection is actually quite busy, handling a lot of downtown bound traffic coming from US 53.
Birch St and Birch St? (https://www.google.com/maps/place/Galloway+St+%26+Birch+St,+Eau+Claire,+WI+54703/@44.8215213,-91.4664353,3a,36.9y,349.73h,101.07t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1swNklaS6Vv8C-o6GDv2fD5Q!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!4m5!3m4!1s0x87f8bcea14d7cb19:0xfd8f343e562030e1!8m2!3d44.8213626!4d-91.466513) I get that it's supposed to indicate that the name takes a turn here, but it just looks silly. Maybe should've used some arrows.
Quote from: Rothman on October 19, 2015, 09:42:08 AM
All I know is that I now want an official MUTCDPD badge.
Yes! Someone with more artistic skills than me should make some and sell them. I'd buy it.
Submitted for your disapproval: Sheridan Road at Skelly Drive in Tulsa. Skelly Drive is one-way going west from Sheridan, and connects with 41st Street. (Used to go through before ODOT "improved" the intersection a few years ago).
The City installed this signal, along with appropriate signage several years ago in an attempt to get drivers to turn left here instead of on 41st Street to alleviate traffic at I-44. Nobody fell for it, so the protected-left indication gets used a handful of times a day, and the pedestrian signals almost never.(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20180308/c8453c842ff354460acc197f59e75063.jpg)
SM-G892A
Quote from: Buffaboy on October 17, 2015, 09:21:25 PM
Quote from: Mohkfry on October 16, 2015, 10:00:03 PM
I have a few for you. Both are in Gary, IN.
This first signal was a fully working install, but was put into flash when google drove through. As of today, the signals are fully functional again. There is no need for a fully operational signal here (or any signal at all really) at this intersection. There really isn't even enough traffic to warrant a 4-way stop here, but the signals are still maintained and kept in working order.
https://www.google.com/maps/@41.6143546,-87.2518512,3a,75y,109.46h,76.54t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s3OzrTyRK-tCnhBJkMSXCAg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1
Here's another...
This one is in an area that was never all that busy. There are no businesses around, and the road serves as an access road to Lake Station from Gary.
https://www.google.com/maps/place/Gary,+IN/@41.5872639,-87.2784902,3a,75y,285.67h,82.97t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sdbhncmQFmNLyLx3eDsyRFA!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo2.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DdbhncmQFmNLyLx3eDsyRFA%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D340.41925%26pitch%3D0!7i13312!8i6656!4m2!3m1!1s0x8811c26949eba4df:0x3ec3739841d01645!6m1!1e1
If you want more useless signals, I can show you more around Lake County, Indiana.
I'm guessing that they were to handle the heavy traffic from when Gary was in its heyday with the steel mills and that INDOT hasn't bothered taking them down.
Gary and Portage did seem to be sleepy towns when I passed through a year ago.
Flint, Michigan has traffic lights setup in this fashion. Everything in Flint pretty much seems like it was last updated in the 60's or 70's.
This light right here at Davison and Dexter operates 24 hours a day as if there is a bunch of traffic at 3am that this light is going to need to serve. Davison is a major street but Dexter ends within a half mile in both directions.
https://www.google.com/maps/place/N+Dexter+St+%26+Davison+Rd,+Flint,+MI+48506/@43.033057,-83.6401187,3a,75y,293.72h,90t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s6mbpQEg24VThIikUbDYRPA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!4m5!3m4!1s0x882381a95f1e4cd1:0xbf4a8653a6e51e2f!8m2!3d43.0331059!4d-83.6403733
Weber Rd and Patrick Dr in Crest Hill, IL. There isn't even a road established there yet. Note the jersey walls blocking the east approach.
https://goo.gl/maps/wCJETJw1ys22
https://www.google.com/maps/@40.1269687,-75.0883167,3a,75y,42.64h,97.95t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1si_cBAsITb5WflTJzA40gTQ!2e0!5s20171001T00
Another extremely unnecessary intersection, surprised that there are "NO PED" signs too, looks pretty safe to cross to me
https://www.google.com/maps/@34.6239548,-79.0074692,3a,75y,284.61h,84.43t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sRcxU-1h4bdMiXfdJZeHxdA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
https://www.google.com/maps/@34.6275545,-79.0085471,3a,60y,87.34h,82.9t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1spDpbXcYwB-0Ku0M6gObsdQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
https://www.google.com/maps/@34.627524,-79.0072879,3a,60y,275.23h,93.04t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sU9ohoy0qgGjO6l4yZj3fhA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
https://www.google.com/maps/@34.6275171,-79.0057496,3a,75y,245.57h,88.62t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sTLnzftSEpn1SpOqRAzGAyQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
None of these signals in Lumberton, NC seem that necessary. They can't be there for the reason that the town was one bustling, because it was smaller in the past.
Quote from: traffic light guy on March 11, 2018, 01:47:55 PM
https://www.google.com/maps/@40.1269687,-75.0883167,3a,75y,42.64h,97.95t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1si_cBAsITb5WflTJzA40gTQ!2e0!5s20171001T00
Another extremely unnecessary intersection, surprised that there are "NO PED" signs too, looks pretty safe to cross to me
What is with the random side mast mounted signal that doesn't appear to be aimed at anything?
Quote from: JMAN12343610 on March 12, 2018, 04:10:44 PM
Quote from: traffic light guy on March 11, 2018, 01:47:55 PM
https://www.google.com/maps/@40.1269687,-75.0883167,3a,75y,42.64h,97.95t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1si_cBAsITb5WflTJzA40gTQ!2e0!5s20171001T00
Another extremely unnecessary intersection, surprised that there are "NO PED" signs too, looks pretty safe to cross to me
What is with the random side mast mounted signal that doesn't appear to be aimed at anything?
It's supposed to be used for pedestrian crossing, despite the fact that the rest of the intersection doesn't allow ped crossing.
I go through this light a lot and it happens to stay green way too long for Seidel. Traffic will be piling up to the red light on Center with zero traffic on Seidel but the light takes a ridiculous amount of time to change back to green for Center. And what's worse is there use to be another light at Century Drive and Center.
I'm talking about this light right here
https://www.google.com/maps/@43.4226573,-84.0148615,3a,75y,170.14h,89.12t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sP2wRFdmL4_w3czUZmsGyHg!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo2.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DP2wRFdmL4_w3czUZmsGyHg%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D135.15326%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i13312!8i6656
Quote from: traffic light guy on March 11, 2018, 01:47:55 PM
https://www.google.com/maps/@40.1269687,-75.0883167,3a,75y,42.64h,97.95t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1si_cBAsITb5WflTJzA40gTQ!2e0!5s20171001T00
Another extremely unnecessary intersection, surprised that there are "NO PED" signs too, looks pretty safe to cross to me
Want to say that PA requires the no ped signs on every pole that has a direction without a pedestrian signals in order to be ADA compliant...
This GSV is from October, 2013. https://goo.gl/maps/ZJbAyUFCkuG2 There was a signal placed at this new T intersection sometime in 2014 which still has never been uncovered or turned on.
Also interestingly, (the GSVs are too old to show it), the 'Traffic Signal Ahead' signs were installed upside down, with green at the top and red at the bottom. Not once, but twice. I'm not sure of the meaning behind that, as it seems not only odd both were installed the wrong way, but no one has ever taken the time to fix them.
Quote from: freebrickproductions on March 13, 2018, 02:50:42 PM
Quote from: traffic light guy on March 11, 2018, 01:47:55 PM
https://www.google.com/maps/@40.1269687,-75.0883167,3a,75y,42.64h,97.95t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1si_cBAsITb5WflTJzA40gTQ!2e0!5s20171001T00
Another extremely unnecessary intersection, surprised that there are "NO PED" signs too, looks pretty safe to cross to me
Want to say that PA requires the no ped signs on every pole that has a direction without a pedestrian signals in order to be ADA compliant...
Not all of the installs are ADA compliant, look at this:
https://www.google.com/maps/@40.1386721,-75.1250894,3a,75y,161.29h,87.38t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sChtTx2KivyLL8nQ-bco4pQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en&authuser=0
NO signs and NO pedestrian signals
This one: https://www.google.com/maps/@42.2454625,-83.6133691,3a,37.5y,329.56h,88.64t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sP9R0V5nQUV6cniJeFOHo8A!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
N Huron St at W Cross St, Ypsilanti, MI
The problem with this one is the protected left arrow. It works independently of the signal for Huron at Cross. The left only protects the short crosswalk. If someone triggers the signal with the pushbutton (or sometimes at random intervals), the signal stays red far longer than is necessary, sometimes stuck on red for several minutes. Combine that with people who don't know that it's legal to turn left on a red ball from a one-way to a one-way, and traffic will back up for a couple blocks.
Quote from: renegade on March 15, 2018, 02:36:32 PM
This one: https://www.google.com/maps/@42.2454625,-83.6133691,3a,37.5y,329.56h,88.64t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sP9R0V5nQUV6cniJeFOHo8A!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
N Huron St at W Cross St, Ypsilanti, MI
The problem with this one is the protected left arrow. It works independently of the signal for Huron at Cross. The left only protects the short crosswalk. If someone triggers the signal with the pushbutton (or sometimes at random intervals), the signal stays red far longer than is necessary, sometimes stuck on red for several minutes. Combine that with people who don't know that it's legal to turn left on a red ball from a one-way to a one-way, and traffic will back up for a couple blocks.
The best solution would be to re-time the crossing. A short 15-second phase should do it (walk sign for 5, then 10-second countdown), preferably with a lockout when Huron St has a green signal. So not really unnecessary, just poorly implemented.
Quote from: renegade on March 15, 2018, 02:36:32 PM
This one: https://www.google.com/maps/@42.2454625,-83.6133691,3a,37.5y,329.56h,88.64t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sP9R0V5nQUV6cniJeFOHo8A!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
N Huron St at W Cross St, Ypsilanti, MI
The problem with this one is the protected left arrow. It works independently of the signal for Huron at Cross. The left only protects the short crosswalk. If someone triggers the signal with the pushbutton (or sometimes at random intervals), the signal stays red far longer than is necessary, sometimes stuck on red for several minutes. Combine that with people who don't know that it's legal to turn left on a red ball from a one-way to a one-way, and traffic will back up for a couple blocks.
The left turn lane becomes the left lane of Cross St (Cross is one lane WB only just west of Huron)