One problem in Florida is you travel behind a truck whether near of far and your view of the signal heads are obstructed! They are mounted too close together and only in front! The Garden State has them on divided highways all around. Also NJ (along with IL and DE) are the only ones to think about installing two left turn signal heads while 47 other states follow the MUTCD and install only one unless there are two turn lanes.
I have to say New Jersey has the best signals around.
They seem rather large to me. Not talking about the lens size since that's standard, but just the overall body and sun shields of the signals.
New Jersey is also one of the few places that still installs signals on those truss arms. But best signals around? Your opinion might change if you go to Quebec...
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffarm6.static.flickr.com%2F5250%2F5344435167_837aa3cd16_z.jpg&hash=d45eb4e609e30fa2ddf5e0c2c4cbb244fe01b527)
I was about to post a picture of Quebec's superior traffic lights, but I see I was beaten to it.
I actually like the Wisconsin setup. Also, a side benefit of having the traffic signals at the corners instead of 18 feet in the air is that you look at pedestrians waiting to cross at the same time you look at the traffic signal. Though from what I see with Google StreetView, NJ is also good.
yes, Quebec uses different shapes for each phase as well. Yellow is a diamond, green is a circle.
Quote from: agentsteel53 on April 09, 2011, 11:40:24 PM
yes, Quebec uses different shapes for each phase as well. Yellow is a diamond, green is a circle.
Actually, Quebec recently stopped doing this because they discovered they didn't help the color blind as they were intended to do. I'm just wondering if PEI is going to stop using them as well.
Quote from: roadman65 on April 09, 2011, 09:56:36 PM
Also NJ (along with IL and DE) are the only ones to think about installing two left turn signal heads while 47 other states follow the MUTCD and install only one unless there are two turn lanes.
Never having been to New Jersey, I cannot comment, but Illinois has a requirement that there be a minimum of three signal heads per direction. A bit much, IMHO, as I still favor Michigan's span wire signals.
Quote from: roadman65 on April 09, 2011, 09:56:36 PM
Also NJ (along with IL and DE) are the only ones to think about installing two left turn signal heads while 47 other states follow the MUTCD and install only one unless there are two turn lanes.
You can add Nevada to this list. All new traffic signal installations in Nevada (as well as many older installations in the Las Vegas area) will have a supplemental signal head pole mounted on the far corner of the intersection--this is done for both left turn and through indications.
In most cases--especially with new installations or intersection reconstructions--Nevada signals will have one signal head per lane mounted overhead on the mast arm, as recommended by the MUTCD and/or ITE. (This isn't a constant, however, as the number of overhead left-turn signal heads typically max out at two even if there are three left turn lanes, and sometimes overhead signals heads max at three through faces where four through lanes are provided).
Nevada even takes things a step further with larger intersections. Often for wider intersections, a near-side supplemental signal face is provided in addition to the other faces mentioned above. For the through movement, this is pole-mounted on the right near side corner. For the left turn movement, it is increasingly common to see a near-side left signal face mounted overhead on the opposing direction's mast arm.
Example showing some of these characteristics: Las Vegas Blvd SB at Tropicana Ave (http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=las+vegas+blvd+and+tropicana+ave,+las+vegas,+nv&aq=&sll=36.196317,-115.24197&sspn=0.002926,0.005681&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=W+Tropicana+Ave+%26+Las+Vegas+Blvd+S,+Paradise,+Clark,+Nevada+89109&t=h&layer=c&cbll=36.101012,-115.173097&panoid=wJ6TWhPd5EonVWLkWDW6Cg&cbp=12,212.57,,0,-3.23&ll=36.100944,-115.172827&spn=0.001456,0.00284&z=19). Three through lanes with four through signal heads: 3 overhead, 1 near side pole mount out of view (strangely, far right side pole mounts were left off at this intersection in all directions). Also, three left turn lanes with a total of four left turn signal heads: 2 standard overhead, 1 far side pole mount, 1 near side overhead mount.
Quote from: roadfro on April 10, 2011, 02:57:40 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on April 09, 2011, 09:56:36 PM
Also NJ (along with IL and DE) are the only ones to think about installing two left turn signal heads while 47 other states follow the MUTCD and install only one unless there are two turn lanes.
You can add Nevada to this list. All new traffic signal installations in Nevada (as well as many older installations in the Las Vegas area) will have a supplemental signal head pole mounted on the far corner of the intersection--this is done for both left turn and through indications.
In most cases--especially with new installations or intersection reconstructions--Nevada signals will have one signal head per lane mounted overhead on the mast arm, as recommended by the MUTCD and/or ITE. (This isn't a constant, however, as the number of overhead left-turn signal heads typically max out at two even if there are three left turn lanes, and sometimes overhead signals heads max at three through faces where four through lanes are provided).
Nevada even takes things a step further with larger intersections. Often for wider intersections, a near-side supplemental signal face is provided in addition to the other faces mentioned above. For the through movement, this is pole-mounted on the right near side corner. For the left turn movement, it is increasingly common to see a near-side left signal face mounted overhead on the opposing direction's mast arm.
Example showing some of these characteristics: Las Vegas Blvd SB at Tropicana Ave (http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=las+vegas+blvd+and+tropicana+ave,+las+vegas,+nv&aq=&sll=36.196317,-115.24197&sspn=0.002926,0.005681&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=W+Tropicana+Ave+%26+Las+Vegas+Blvd+S,+Paradise,+Clark,+Nevada+89109&t=h&layer=c&cbll=36.101012,-115.173097&panoid=wJ6TWhPd5EonVWLkWDW6Cg&cbp=12,212.57,,0,-3.23&ll=36.100944,-115.172827&spn=0.001456,0.00284&z=19). Three through lanes with four through signal heads: 3 overhead, 1 near side pole mount out of view (strangely, far right side pole mounts were left off at this intersection in all directions). Also, three left turn lanes with a total of four left turn signal heads: 2 standard overhead, 1 far side pole mount, 1 near side overhead mount.
I obviously am wrong about it being 47 states! NV and WI have some on the sides as well. I was in Vegas in 00 but did not remember this, but now seeing the photo it does bring back memories. All I know is the standard way causes trucks to block view of upcomming signals. One time a truck driver ran a light in front of me that I had to slam on my brakes real hard to avoid running the light. It was very unsafe and with them all around like as above mentioned by all, you can see them better.
In most "standard" cases, you can also add Minnesota and New Mexico to that list.
I'd also disagree with New Jersey being "the best". Zmapper made a good point about the Wisconsin setup, with both overhead and side-mounted signals. Illinois also has this to a degree but not as much as Wisconsin, Minnesota, or New Mexico...the three of which are fairly similar, the main exception being Minnesota using vertically mounted overhead signals while Wisconsin and New Mexico use horizontally-mounted.
Wow another northerner coming to Florida and telling everyone about how much better things are "up north"? I-95 goes both ways amigo.
j/k of course :)
I've noticed that California is pretty anal about signal visibility. They use overhead, side mount, and if the intersection is on a hill or around a corner, two or thee extra signal heads pointed around the corner. Oddly though, they seem to use only one left turn signal even if it's a double turn, although they almost always have a pull through left turn signal mounted on a pole on the far left side.
Quotealthough they almost always have a pull through left turn signal mounted on a pole on the far left side.
This is the Minnesota standard, but since you mention Cali, I do recall seeing it in the San Diego area.
the best traffic signals are found in Loving County, Texas.
Quote from: agentsteel53 on April 10, 2011, 01:46:55 PM
the best traffic signals are found in Loving County, Texas.
LOL, or for that matter, Keweenaw County, Michigan.
Quote from: PennDOTFan on April 09, 2011, 11:56:42 PM
Actually, Quebec recently stopped doing this because they discovered they didn't help the color blind as they were intended to do. I'm just wondering if PEI is going to stop using them as well.
There also some parts of New Brunswick and Nova Scotia who use the same traffic light set-up used in Quebec and PEI as well. I don't know if they might stop as well.
Quote from: Stephane Dumas on April 10, 2011, 07:01:29 PM
There also some parts of New Brunswick and Nova Scotia who use the same traffic light set-up used in Quebec and PEI as well.
To connect this line with the antonym of the topic title, some of the New Brunswick, New Jersey traffic lights suck. Many don't have any all-red times to clear the intersection, half of them, you can't make a left turn (even if it's a two-way road or a one-way in that direction), and me and my bike can't actuate the signal on Neilson St. approaching Commercial Ave.
And to the original poster, I was traveling on US 1 a few weeks ago stuck behind a truck, I could not see any of the signal heads in some locations. Almost ran a red due to this problem. A side-mounted head would have helped, but none were here.
East of the Mississippi, side-mounted signals are the exception instead of the rule. The only EotM states I can think of that use them on a regular basis are Wisconsin, Illinois, Massachusetts, and DC. Yes, I know DC isn't a state, but they use side-mounted almost exclusively, thanks to Congress and their limitations on overhead structures in the District.
New Hampshire also uses the side-mounted signals a lot. PennDOT District 6 (greater Philadelphia area) uses the side-mounted/pedestal signals as well, same with a few cases in New York City.
Side-mounted traffic lights are almost uniform in Miami-Dade County, Florida. More and more of these newer traffic light installations, complete with VERY large black mast arms, are side-mounted in Broward County, Florida. The reason I have heard is they withstand hurricane force winds better if side-mounted. Palm Beach County is moving toward more large mast arms, but the traffic lights are mounted upright.
I also think signal lights that are horizontal are easier to see rather than those that are vertical.
^^^
Having spent nearly all my life east of the Mississippi, I have not seen many side mounted signals. So, to me, they look weird.
I can only think of one place in Nashville where the lights are horizontal and not vertical.
EDIT:
Strike that. I was thinking of horizontal mounted signals, sorry.
They seem the norm in Quebec and are showing up elsewhere from time to time.
Having the lights all at the same eye level makes it easier to read, I think.
QuoteNew Hampshire also uses the side-mounted signals a lot. PennDOT District 6 (greater Philadelphia area) uses the side-mounted/pedestal signals as well, same with a few cases in New York City.
QuoteSide-mounted traffic lights are almost uniform in Miami-Dade County, Florida. More and more of these newer traffic light installations, complete with VERY large black mast arms, are side-mounted in Broward County, Florida.
I forgot about New Hampshire. But the other examples are all local examples and not at a statewide scale.
Quote from: froggie on April 10, 2011, 09:21:32 PM
East of the Mississippi, side-mounted signals are the exception instead of the rule. The only EotM states I can think of that use them on a regular basis are Wisconsin, Illinois, Massachusetts, and DC. Yes, I know DC isn't a state, but they use side-mounted almost exclusively, thanks to Congress and their limitations on overhead structures in the District.
Memphis (http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=memphis,+tn&aq=&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=53.345014,79.013672&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=Memphis,+Shelby,+Tennessee&ll=35.073914,-89.905818&spn=0.01368,0.01929&t=h&z=16&layer=c&cbll=35.073914,-89.905818&panoid=_1VKHWNkeANWXKXe9Zh-jA&cbp=12,271.04,,0,9.31) uses (http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=memphis,+tn&aq=&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=53.345014,79.013672&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=Memphis,+Shelby,+Tennessee&ll=35.098314,-89.839444&spn=0.003419,0.004823&t=h&z=18&layer=c&cbll=35.098314,-89.839444&panoid=P7JwtVxYHjz3ZZwhak0Enw&cbp=12,85.84,,0,8.31) quite a bit (http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=memphis,+tn&aq=&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=53.345014,79.013672&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=Memphis,+Shelby,+Tennessee&ll=35.1487,-89.981535&spn=0.006834,0.009645&t=h&z=17&layer=c&cbll=35.1487,-89.981535&panoid=r6b2zGHNYiFw2jNMvuQdyA&cbp=12,289.48,,0,6.41) of side-mounted signals on the far left side of the intersection
New Orleans uses pole mounted on medians & far corners (both corners) plus mast mounted
http://maps.google.com/maps?client=opera&oe=utf-8&q=new+orleans&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=New+Orleans,+Orleans,+Louisiana&gl=us&ll=29.962111,-90.090551&spn=0.022122,0.033088&z=15&layer=c&cbll=29.961992,-90.09064&panoid=PRSTkUsp6HUAL_daGt8Ztw&cbp=12,219.96,,0,0
Yes they do...I've seen them myself (both Memphis and NOLA). But I was referring to statewide policy and not local examples.
Oh, now that I've finally seen a pic of what you keep referring to as "side-mounted signals," I'm surprised they aren't the norm. I see them everywhere in California and most western states.
That's why I like Quebec... Horizontally mounts the traffic lights onto the side-mounted signals.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffarm5.static.flickr.com%2F4144%2F5014029656_a194e9e778_z_d.jpg&hash=c25e5310a2c8be59e27929a4a36632f5b3d21e9b)
This is about as close as it gets to a "typical" MnDOT signal arrangement. Note the use of both side-mounted and overhead signals. Intersections in the Twin Cities metro with heavier left-turning volumes or visibility issues will often include a median-mounted signal, either on the far side or the near side (and sometimes both), not unlike this example:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffarm5.static.flickr.com%2F4147%2F5009230545_bd279c09f7_z_d.jpg&hash=1bcb751f817683e4089de660b845178b113a2749)
One more note, which you can see in these two photos: median width will often (but not always) dictate whether the primary left turn signal is overhead (narrow median) or median-mounted (wide median).
Nice photos from Minnesota. Similar to standard Calif. and Nevada practice actually. Although I'm from the Long Island/NYC area where overhead signals are the norm, I like that combination of overhead and pole mounted heads used in the western states. It gives you the best of all worlds. Overhead signals seen from a distance. Far-right pole-mount to see from the stop-line (or around those large trucks as you approach) And far-left supplemental to aid those making left-turns.
And re: the New Jersey configuration. A good case can be made for that too. They are the only state I know of that uses that near-side supplemental head on the reverse side of the mast-arm as their standard. It actually works pretty well.
You can make a case for many configurations. I've always liked California the best. Though it did take me a week to get used to those side-mount heads, the first time I travelled there.
I've noticed that California seems to have three common side-mounted variations:
a) What I presume the oldest, the bar that holds the actual traffic lights has two supporting beams that are very thin.
b) What seems to be a bit newer, the two supporting beams are gone and the bar that holds the traffic lights is bent. This seems to be the most common.
c) The newest style, seemingly at the busiest intersections, has square-looking poles that lack any bends and typically hold at least three dedicated lights, sometimes up to four.
Quote from: Quillz on April 11, 2011, 10:52:03 PM
a) What I presume the oldest, the bar that holds the actual traffic lights has two supporting beams that are very thin.
Those are known as guy-wires. They're a common site in New York City, but in California, they're as old as dirt.
Are they new in NYC? They are definitely quite old in CA, because all the ones that used to be near me are being replaced with one of the other two styles I mentioned. In fact, there is only one intersection near my house that still uses the guy-wire style.
Pics of typical
Wisconsin stop light configurations, for those who may be unfamiliar with WisDOT signals:
http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showpost.php?p=55809439&postcount=367
EDIT
I know this supposed to be about NJ's signals but I came across this paragraph in the WisMutcd that many here may find interesting:
QuoteAll traffic signals shall either be post-mounted or mast arm mounted.
Permanent traffic signals shall NOT be installed on overhead cables (or any
other means which would permit significant movement under windy conditions). Temporary traffic signals may be installed on overhead cables if construction or maintenance operations would not make post or mast arm mounting possible. If installed on overhead cables, temporary traffic signals must be converted to post or mast arm mountings as soon as possible after the construction operation permits.
:cheers:
Quote from: SignBridge on April 11, 2011, 10:03:36 PM
And re: the New Jersey configuration. A good case can be made for that too. They are the only state I know of that uses that near-side supplemental head on the reverse side of the mast-arm as their standard. It actually works pretty well.
As I mentioned previously, this is increasingly common in Nevada (particularly the Las Vegas area) at new/reconstructed signals for larger intersections. It is by no means a state standard, though, as I think there's only one example in the Reno area (Sparks, actually), and that's a very unusual set of signals.
Quote from: Quillz on April 11, 2011, 10:52:03 PM
I've noticed that California seems to have three common side-mounted variations:
a) What I presume the oldest, the bar that holds the actual traffic lights has two supporting beams that are very thin.
b) What seems to be a bit newer, the two supporting beams are gone and the bar that holds the traffic lights is bent. This seems to be the most common.
c) The newest style, seemingly at the busiest intersections, has square-looking poles that lack any bends and typically hold at least three dedicated lights, sometimes up to four.
Presumably, you meant overhead or mast-arm mounted variations (and not "side-mounted")... Particularly, the examples you cite refer to variations on the mast-arm itself, as opposed to the mounting of signal heads.
The double-guy wire masts have been used at older, smaller intersections in the Las Vegas area of Nevada. These are often on one or two-lane approaches where not a whole lot of signal heads are needed, because the mast typically supports only one signal head. There have been no new installations of this type in the Vegas area (that I'm aware of) within the last 20 or so years.
The angled monotube mast arm was also very common with older signals in the Reno-Sparks and Carson City areas. It surprised me when I moved to Reno as I'd never seen that type in Nevada before having grown up in Vegas. There have been relatively few new installations of this type in the area in the last 9 years.
The straight monotube mast arm is the de facto Nevada standard, and has been for some time. This design offers the ability to span large distances with as many as seven or eight signal heads on one mast (this requires very thick poles for the mast and support, but it's been done), but also works for small spans where only one or two overhead signals are needed.
That 2-guy-wire mast-arm mentioned above is still standard in New York City. Many were built in the 1960's to replace the old 2-color post mounted signals from probably the 1930's (?) Some have a short pipe-extension built on to increase the length, but they are still too short on wide roads. Usually used in a diagonal-span configuration. Most have only one head hung on them, but some in Manhattan have 2 heads adjacent to each other, for thru traffic and a turning-arrow signal. Not sure if that complies with MUTCD or not.
California's mast-arm poles are the most elegant. Cary, NC and Research Triangle Park, NC also use the same design, though the signals are mounted differently.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi174.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fw102%2Farchitect77%2Fcalwoodposts.jpg&hash=de5375127e3f35d56e7993f6f278e02d3b8300a5)
From an aesthetic standpoint, I actually like the long, squared pole design the best. Like the ones used in Quebec or at large intersections in California. Normally, I'm a fan of things that are curved or rounded, but I just prefer how the former look. In Thousand Oaks, a city close to where I am, they also paint the poles either a dark brown or black and then use white legend on brown background for the street names, and it looks really nice.
Quote from: Quillz on April 12, 2011, 03:01:12 PM
From an aesthetic standpoint, I actually like the long, squared pole design the best. Like the ones used in Quebec or at large intersections in California. Normally, I'm a fan of things that are curved or rounded, but I just prefer how the former look. In Thousand Oaks, a city close to where I am, they also paint the poles either a dark brown or black and then use white legend on brown background for the street names, and it looks really nice.
I'm not so sure (http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&ll=34.175491,-118.876188&spn=0,0.038581&z=15&layer=c&cbll=34.175491,-118.876188&panoid=nQRCKOce08AztNnMQnzr6A&cbp=12,131.17,,1,5.66) - looks like grey pole, white on green street name to me. Westlake Village (http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&ll=34.148217,-118.819714&spn=0,0.038581&z=15&layer=c&cbll=34.148186,-118.819597&panoid=SzbHRCYj_-az2-DkdI1VNA&cbp=12,64.43,,1,0.8), the other side of the LA county boundary has white-on-brown street names and darker poles. (Street view coverage is poor there!)
And I only know as Westlake Village is where I've spent the most nights in my trans-atlantic travels.
Quote from: Quillz on April 11, 2011, 11:14:57 PM
Are they new in NYC? They are definitely quite old in CA, because all the ones that used to be near me are being replaced with one of the other two styles I mentioned. In fact, there is only one intersection near my house that still uses the guy-wire style.
NYC has been using them for quite awhile, and they still continue to use them, which is neat.
Maryland also happens to use those western US style mast arms, which is also neat:
(https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/_ZkmN2RrOJxw/S9396J6vkdI/AAAAAAAAbSs/Gu0urv1ntDM/s640/IMG_5916.JPG)
Both of those appear to rather recent changes. The ones I'm referring to use white on brown signs and even have a custom font. But as they get replaced, it seems they are going to more standards compliant signage.
NJ does side mount traffic lights on divided highways. There is usually at least one mounted just above the jersey wall in each direction.
Buckhead in Atlanta's new streetscape improvement:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi174.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fw102%2Farchitect77%2Fbuckhead.jpg&hash=5899f8e8620ec0f0afc9e6c0c5537ab232948678)
Those always seem like they will fall down.
Personally, i have always liked how Illinois did signals in the 80's era. There was always at least one signal pole on the near right corner, one on a mast arm (which i thought was a cool looking arm), and one on the far left corner at a minimum. Usually also had one the far right pole with the mast arm mount for main intersections. If the intersection had a double left turn lane, the pole with the mast arm would be in the median with one on the pole, one halfway on the arm and one on the end of the arm, such as the case for Route 53 at I-55 and Route 53 at Lily Cache Ln. Too bad Illinois has gone to the generic arms since the 90s. Thank God Wisconsin still uses that nice looking arm although on Wis 81 west of I-90, there are some newer Illinois style arms. bluh!
^^ I thought the trusses were more from the 70s as we tended to have mastarms installed from the late 70s onward around here. I have noticed that the trusses were very common in District 1 and are far fewer in number in other IDOT districts.
I know that I started it to see what others thought about New Jersey signals and if there are others like them, but I would like to also know what happened in Puerto Rico to the old Jersey style signal heads there?
When I went there back in 75 as a youngster, I remember that PR had two types of signal assemblies used there. One was Jersey style truss mast arms with yellow signal heads all with back to back signal heads on both sides of the intersection just like in the Garden State and with the red lens being 12 inches and the yellow and green being only 8 inches like in Ontario. The other assembly was span wire signals that had green heads and all three orientations having 8 inch lenes.
Back in 09 I was there and found all the signal heads being black (just like Florida and California) and all having 12 inch lenses! Also with the addition of mono tube mast arms along with the span wires and Jersey truss mast arms. Only the signal heads are not back to back anymore! All mounted in front of the driver. This commonwealth must of done a lot of work to replace many signals throughout this small island. Does anyone know when this was all done during the 34 years I was away?
Quote from: Quillz on April 11, 2011, 11:14:57 PMAre they new in NYC?
They go back to the 1960's, when NYC started getting rid of their old two-color traffic signals en masse.
Why does NJ mount signals over the opposite direction lanes? Seems like most intersections will have the standard two signals, but then on the mast arm for the other direction, they will mount a third signal over the opposite direction lanes. What is the purpose of that?
So traffic further back from the stop line can see the light. Adds more visibility approaching the light as well, especially if you're behind a bigger vehicle and don't see the light change.
Originally most NJ traffic signals had two overhead lights, one hung on the far side mast-arm and one on the near side over the opposing lane. In more recent years a second signal head is now mounted on the far side arm, and the one on the opposing lane mast-arm has become a third supplemental head, which works well for the reasons J&N stated in his above post.
Glad this thread was revived. I've been admiring some New Jersey traffic signals lately. Very impressive placement compared to many other eastern states (except bits of Massachusetts).
Two of my favorite intersections I've spotted so far:
Mullica Hill Bypass (both ends, really ... the all-black signals seem to be unusual): https://goo.gl/maps/88mJgTSwY31ZPQC16
Hightstown Bypass @ Route 33: https://goo.gl/maps/dZoPqY5xzgEfEmiJ6
The placement is very thorough, but still fairly unique compared to some Midwestern or Western states. The overhead placement is a bit reminiscent of Japan.
Quote from: jakeroot on February 15, 2020, 10:36:33 PMGlad this thread was revived. I've been admiring some New Jersey traffic signals lately. Very impressive placement compared to many other eastern states (except bits of Massachusetts).
Two of my favorite intersections I've spotted so far:
Mullica Hill Bypass (both ends, really ... the all-black signals seem to be unusual): https://goo.gl/maps/88mJgTSwY31ZPQC16
Hightstown Bypass @ Route 33: https://goo.gl/maps/dZoPqY5xzgEfEmiJ6
The placement is very thorough, but still fairly unique compared to some Midwestern or Western states. The overhead placement is a bit reminiscent of Japan.
The black masts, posts and blackplates was most likely a request from the town, which they may have contributed to the additional cost.
Since you found this...two oddities: Even though it's US 322, this is under county jurisdiction. And US 322 used to turn and coexist with NJ 45 thru downtown Mullica Hill. While the bypass was built for US 322, and thus signed as US 322, I've never seen it officially switched thru those FHWA postings we see on occasion.
When I'm working the snow plow/salt trucks with NJDOT, this is the southern-most location of my route. If it's late at night and no traffic, I'll just make a full u-turn in the middle of the intersection. Otherwise I'll turn right onto 322 and pull into the shopping center there behind the Harrison House Diner, or continue down 45 and go around the Old Mill to turn around.