Signals on gantries at intersections

[intelati49]

Division and National in Springfield, MO

[kj3400]

There's these two on Broening Hwy at the Port of Baltimore:

https://goo.gl/maps/XLM7etM6Yj52
https://goo.gl/maps/uizSxfqmCpA2

[Brian556]

In general, I hate signals on gantries. This is because the gantries create so much visual clutter, and because they are so large that they dwarf the signal heads, making them less visible.

[jakeroot]

In general, I hate signals on gantries. This is because the gantries create so much visual clutter, and because they are so large that they dwarf the signal heads, making them less visible.

Agreed. They can be extremely bulky. The monotube ones are okay, but the ones that use actual trusses are too busy and definitely harm signal visibility. Things would be better if the states that used these big gantries all used backplates, but not all do.

[jay8g]

Oregon hangs signal heads from BGS gantries all the time. I'm really not a fan, since it feels like all the signage would severely distract from the signal indications, which are almost always the most important piece of information.

WSDOT will install signals on gantries from time to time, but this is the closest I can find to a combo sign-signal gantry. I don't particularly mind the use of a monotube gantry for signal heads, but the use of a single, diagonal gantry seems a bit iffy for signal visibility. (Then again, I've never had issues with this monster of an intersection, so maybe it's not that big of issue anyways.)

[mapman1071]

As for other examples, here are a handful I've come across in my travels...

I-215 at the Eastridge/Eucalyptus Avenue SPUI in Moreno Valley, California[/li][/list]

Wow Caltrans not using a mast arm set up!  Also only two signal heads per direction?   That is odd considering California does what Illinois does and mounts side signal heads in addition to the MUTCD overheads.

Edit: Now I see them, as they are behind the image in the caption.

Still a bit odd for them to not use a signal side-mounted on (in this case) the gantry. California is mental about signal placement, so to see them only using one side-mounted signal is odd. Especially since it's a stop line signal, and those have traditionally been extra-credit (although have become ubiquitous lately).

All told, the only side-mounted signals you really see at SPUIs are those mounted on their own exclusive poles, usually on the near or far side of the intersection. That said, here's a couple examples of signals being mounted on or near the signal gantry: Tucson, AZ; Langley, BC (a rare monotube signal gantry -- BC rarely utilises this).

The Tucson one (Broadway Blvd @ AZ 210 (Barraza-Aviation Parkway)) may be removed or replaced when the Freeway is extended NW to I-10 near St Marys Road.

[jakeroot]

Still a bit odd for them to not use a signal side-mounted on (in this case) the gantry. California is mental about signal placement, so to see them only using one side-mounted signal is odd. Especially since it's a stop line signal, and those have traditionally been extra-credit (although have become ubiquitous lately).

All told, the only side-mounted signals you really see at SPUIs are those mounted on their own exclusive poles, usually on the near or far side of the intersection. That said, here's a couple examples of signals being mounted on or near the signal gantry: Tucson, AZ; Langley, BC (a rare monotube signal gantry -- BC rarely utilises this).

I didn't realize until you posted this, but all those Nevada SPUI intersections I posted also follow this pattern. No pole-mounted signal heads on the main mast/monotube poles (but always a near-side pole mount for the through movement and a way-far-side pole mount for the left turn movement).

Really strange. I was starting to believe that perhaps these large gantries weren't capable of supporting signals mounted to their masts, but it would appear as though Caltrans/NDOT simply don't bother. Here's another gantry in Tucson, AZ (also at a SPUI) with mast-mounted signals: https://goo.gl/JRyyY7. In a bizarre twist, the SPUI directly south of that link has zero pole-mounted signals for the through movement (just three overhead signals): https://goo.gl/PyyEQa. I've never seen an intersection in Tucson without a pole-mounted through head. No excuse here, since the pedestrian refuge is huge, and there's no gantry to bother with (since the SPUI is "subterranean").

Looking around other states and countries known for their use of post-mounted signals...

- Australia uses regular mast arms and median-mounted signals, as is the norm there (no SPUIs in New Zealand)
- Arizona seems to mostly use regular mast arms at SPUIs, but those with gantries lack mast-mounted signals (Tucson's two examples seem to be the exception)
- Minnesota uses near and far signals, but nothing on the side of the gantry
- Illinois uses near signals, but nothing on the side of the gantry
- Neither Wisconsin nor Colorado seem to have any SPUIs with overpasses
- Idaho uses near and far signals (at least in Boise), but again, nothing on the mast.

Basically, Tucson seems to be the only place in the US where signals are mounted to the gantry mast. I'm still stunned that neither California nor Nevada have installed any on masts before. The only reason I can think of, as to why they wouldn't bother, would be because the masts are too far to the right for the signals to be of any use. And that specifically seems to be the case rather often. But why no signal in the pedestrian refuge area on the edges of the middle of the intersection (between the off and on ramps), I couldn't say. Seems like a great place to put one.

[jakeroot]

This isn't quite the same thing, but I can't help but appreciate the complexity of this temporary signal mast arm. Used last summer in Downtown Spokane during a signal replacement project, the mast arm bears some resemblance to the overhead sign gantries used in some European countries, and also Florida (although on a much smaller scale).