End of the Horizontal Light [WI]

[Big John]

ISTR that the latest MUTCD requires that there be a signal head over each lane in overhead installations and yes, I am starting to see quite a few 'FIB-style' signals here in the Appleton area, too.  OTOH, the City of Green Bay has been doing the 'one head over each lane' thing for a long time, but their signal heads are horizontal.

And yes, they just don't look right...

Grrrrrr.....

Mike

Actually Green Bay changed to the vertical lights in 2008 and now all new installations feature that.  Plus the Oneida Street reconstruction in suburban Ashwaubenon replaced the signals with all vertical signals and utilized the FYA into the area for the first time.

[on_wisconsin]

Here is an interesting set up in Fitchburg: (excuse the shitty cellphone pic)

The 2010 standard on the left and an old Dane Co. style stop light on the right.

[DaBigE]

Here is an interesting set up in Fitchburg: (excuse the shitty cellphone pic)

on_wisconsin, do you have the road names for that intersection, by chance? Judging solely on the banners and street width layout, I would guess you were either on Fish Hatch. or CTH PD/McKee Rd.

The 2010 standard on the left and an old Dane Co. style stop light on the right.

The right (arched trombone) is actually an City of Madison setup. Fitchburg contracts with the City of Madison Traffic Engineering Dept for their signal design/maintenance. Only a handful of other arched arms still exist, as Madison went on a replacement binge several years ago, upgrading them to standard trombone arms, before they switched to the current monotube design.

[on_wisconsin]

on_wisconsin, do you have the road names for that intersection, by chance? Judging solely on the banners and street width layout, I would guess you were either on Fish Hatch. or CTH PD/McKee Rd.

My bad, its Fish Hatchery Rd/ CTH D at Post Rd. http://goo.gl/maps/GVuGI

[lepidopteran]

Lots of traffic signals in Florida are horizontal.  I wonder if wind resistance has something to do with it.

See: https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=2580.0

[SSOWorld]

Sorry for the topic necro - but in driving around the state over the past month, I've seen more areas adapting the FIB-Tube - including Superior (US-53), Eau Claire - lots of locations including Downtown and Hastings Way, Prairie du Chien (of all places  ), Marshfield, Yes.  Some of these are being put up in places where one would not expect (WisDOT's view is multilane divided only - but some are putting them on city streets (Eau Claire and PDC).

EDIT: This doesn't mean the trombone is gone.  Platteville replaced a set south of downtown that got knocked out by a tornado with a matching set save for the street light head being LED.

[mgk920]

Sorry for the topic necro - but in driving around the state over the past month, I've seen more areas adapting the FIB-Tube - including Superior (US-53), Eau Claire - lots of locations including Downtown and Hastings Way, Prairie du Chien (of all places  ), Marshfield, Yes.  Some of these are being put up in places where one would not expect (WisDOT's view is multilane divided only - but some are putting them on city streets (Eau Claire and PDC).

EDIT: This doesn't mean the trombone is gone.  Platteville replaced a set south of downtown that got knocked out by a tornado with a matching set save for the street light head being LED.

The two counties (Outagamie and Winnebago) just installed a new set of 'classic' Wisconsin style trombone-arm stop-and-go lights at the newly rebuilt County 'BB'/County 'CB' intersection just south of the ATW airport here in the Appleton area (County 'BB' is the county line).

Mike

[triplemultiplex]

stop-and-go lights

One of my favorite Wisconsin-isms. 

[SSOWorld]

Sorry for the topic necro - but in driving around the state over the past month, I've seen more areas adapting the FIB-Tube - including Superior (US-53), Eau Claire - lots of locations including Downtown and Hastings Way, Prairie du Chien (of all places  ), Marshfield, Yes.  Some of these are being put up in places where one would not expect (WisDOT's view is multilane divided only - but some are putting them on city streets (Eau Claire and PDC).

EDIT: This doesn't mean the trombone is gone.  Platteville replaced a set south of downtown that got knocked out by a tornado with a matching set save for the street light head being LED.

The two counties (Outagamie and Winnebago) just installed a new set of 'classic' Wisconsin style trombone-arm stop-and-go lights at the newly rebuilt County 'BB'/County 'CB' intersection just south of the ATW airport here in the Appleton area (County 'BB' is the county line).

Mike

as you can see - we will not see the end of the "Horizontal Light".

Wausau repaved Grand Ave, which had very old signals (old enough that there were burn marks on the lenses).  They replaced the pavement, the light standards (with LEDs ) and the signals - with trombone horizontal classic Wisconsin style :thumbup:

Signals vary greatly by what area you're in.  Example: the Chippewa Valley area seems to like putting a TB on the left with a vertical "Ahead" signal on divided highways (124, Seymour Clay "Butts" Sr Blvd (sorry - had to  ), Clairmont Ave; Didn't see them on Hastings Way but saw plenty of FIB Tubes.)

[tchafe1978]

Sorry for the topic necro - but in driving around the state over the past month, I've seen more areas adapting the FIB-Tube - including Superior (US-53), Eau Claire - lots of locations including Downtown and Hastings Way, Prairie du Chien (of all places  ), Marshfield, Yes.  Some of these are being put up in places where one would not expect (WisDOT's view is multilane divided only - but some are putting them on city streets (Eau Claire and PDC).

EDIT: This doesn't mean the trombone is gone.  Platteville replaced a set south of downtown that got knocked out by a tornado with a matching set save for the street light head being LED.

But yet Platteville put up that odd looking set of lights with the vertical overhead at Water St. and Main St. I'd prefer cities just stick with one standard.

[on_wisconsin]

Signals vary greatly by what area you're in.  Example: the Chippewa Valley area seems to like putting a TB on the left with a vertical "Ahead" signal on divided highways (124, Seymour Clay "Butts" Sr Blvd (sorry - had to  ), Clairmont Ave; Didn't see them on Hastings Way but saw plenty of FIB Tubes.)

The vertical/ horizontal trombone combo was sort of a NW WisDOT norm until the monotubes were mandated. (The Clairemont Ave rebuild was completed in 2008 and STH 124 before that. Both were related to the US 53 bypass project.) ISTR 

[Milwaukee, WY]

The vast majority of the new installations in Milwaukee county are monotubes, even on local streets not under control of WisDOT or the county. Interestingly, the city of Milwaukee has even begun to turn its overhead signals vertical on its unique concrete pole-mounted mast arms. A notable exception to the monotubes is a new signal on Burleigh St. in Wauwatosa in front of the new Mayfair Collection a couple blocks east of US 45. Seems odd in that it's a multilane divided highway, but cost probably played a role, since the developer likely had to pay a share for the signal. West Allis currently has several intersections with temporary span wire, and some foundations for monotubes already poured along Geeenfield Ave. and S 84th St. as well.

[Roadguy]

Two reasons I heard at one point why WisDOT was changing to monotubes was because the trombone arm style (Horizontal style) does not meet FHWA wind loading requirements and with the new signal head per lane requirement in the MUTCD it would be hard to meet with the trombone arms.

I was also told that local municipalities are under their own discretion to decide which types they will be using.  Many continue to use the trombone arms because they can justify them if these are the only styles they have in their cities for maintenance purposes.  Because so many signals are owned and maintained by the municipalities due to Wisconsin's odd arrangement called "connecting highways", many signal styles in the state will be dictated by locals instead of the DOT.

In my opinion, hopefully cities realize the benefits of monotubes.  MN and IA with their monotubes use them to their full advantage.  IA has done the signal head per lane for many years.  MN uses their monotubes for signals and signs on the signal mast arms.  WI could really help lower driver confusion with the new monotubes and even place signs on the monotube arms.  These are both options that were not allowed in most situations with the old trombone arm style.

Currently the DOT requires that the concrete bases on these monotubes need 8' concrete wings underground off the circular concrete base.  No other state that I am aware of (in the upper midwest) does these for 55' length or less mast arms (This is the maximum length for WisDOT's new monotube arms, which is short by most other states' standards).  Signals are a large amount of the time placed in urban areas and have undergound utilities everywhere.  It is hard enough to find room for the circular base, let alone a 12' clear area for a concrete base with 8' concrete wings.  They have to make the installation of the monotube style as clean as possible to cities if they want them to use it.

[DaBigE]

Two reasons I heard at one point why WisDOT was changing to monotubes was because the trombone arm style (Horizontal style) does not meet FHWA wind loading requirements and with the new signal head per lane requirement in the MUTCD it would be hard to meet with the trombone arms.

The signal-per-lane is a recommendation, not a requirement. All of WisDOT's current trombone assemblies are capable of handling up to two signals mounted vertically.

I was also told that local municipalities are under their own discretion to decide which types they will be using.  Many continue to use the trombone arms because they can justify them if these are the only styles they have in their cities for maintenance purposes.  Because so many signals are owned and maintained by the municipalities due to Wisconsin's odd arrangement called "connecting highways", many signal styles in the state will be dictated by locals instead of the DOT.

This is true. West Bend installed a new signal on Main St a couple years back that not only still uses trombone arms in Wisconsin's traditional layout, it also refrained from using the flashing yellow arrow, instead, sticking with the five indication stack. More recently, Waunakee installed trombone arms in the traditional fashion when Wis 19 was reconstructed this past summer in "downtown" Waunakee.

Currently the DOT requires that the concrete bases on these monotubes need 8' concrete wings underground off the circular concrete base.  No other state that I am aware of (in the upper midwest) does these for 55' length or less mast arms (This is the maximum length for WisDOT's new monotube arms, which is short by most other states' standards).  Signals are a large amount of the time placed in urban areas and have undergound utilities everywhere.  It is hard enough to find room for the circular base, let alone a 12' clear area for a concrete base with 8' concrete wings.  They have to make the installation of the monotube style as clean as possible to cities if they want them to use it.

I've been told that WisDOT is working on longer monotubes. Further, the wings are only required for monotubes in excess of 35-ft. Many urban areas have found ways around using monotubes > 35-ft, with either pedestal-mounted signals in small medians or reversed-arm monotubes in larger medians. The new jug handle on Madison's west side sports both monotubes and trombone arms (as well as what I believe is Wisconsin's first single section continuous movement signal).

[Revive 755]

The signal-per-lane is a recommendation, not a requirement.

I've occasionally gotten the impression, but have not gotten any confirmation, that going against recommendations in the MUTCD can still bring legal issues if there is a crash, and the agency in charge cannot adequately justify why they did not follow the recommendation.

(Edited to fix quoting error)

[Milwaukee, WY]

Anyone have any idea why WisDOT decided to mount the signals vertically on the monotubes? They could've gone with horizontal à la Texas or Nebraska.

[Mdcastle]

^^^ Maybe to align with what most of the rest of the country does, Texas, Nebraska (and Florida) are exceptions, not the rule. Similarly I believe that's the reason Mn/DOT switched to doghouses for five lights when the flashing yellow arrow is used, rather than adapt a 5-light vertical which could easily have been done (perhaps with the encouragement of the FHWA).


I've talked with other signal geeks about the possibility of an agency exposing themselves to liability for refusing to follow the MUTCD; the city of Minneapolis refuses to install flashing yellow arrows and is instead installing new 5 light "yield on greens". Although a lawyer for a city would get out that the MUTCD is a set of guidelines and not a legal requirement, failing to follow published national standards is not going to look good.

[DaBigE]

Anyone have any idea why WisDOT decided to mount the signals vertically on the monotubes?

My guess is part because it matches the majority of the country, part because it allows for the most amount of horizontal separation between the signals.

They could've gone with horizontal à la Texas or Nebraska.

Or like Green Bay used to, or this one odd-ball in Madison

[SSOWorld]

Anyone have any idea why WisDOT decided to mount the signals vertically on the monotubes?

My guess is part because it matches the majority of the country, part because it allows for the most amount of horizontal separation between the signals.

They could've gone with horizontal à la Texas or Nebraska.

Or like Green Bay used to, or this one odd-ball in Madison

That's definitely installed by the municipality.  There's a bunch of weird setups in Madison.

[flmowi]

Happened to be in Janesville today where I noticed they're putting (much-needed) lights at the Milton Ave (WIS 26) and 39/90 interchange.

The new traffic lights are trombone signals...so I guess they're not dead yet?

[dvferyance]

Are lights hung vertically or horizontally? The old trombone style arm is still occasionally used but the light is hung vertically.

[flmowi]

Are lights hung vertically or horizontally? The old trombone style arm is still occasionally used but the light is hung vertically.

Caught only a brief glimpse but it looked to be horizontal.

[Revive 755]

^ Is the signal turned on/active yet?  There were some signals in the Milwaukee area that were horizontally hung while inactive, but had the heads vertically after they were turned on.

[flmowi]

^ Is the signal turned on/active yet?  There were some signals in the Milwaukee area that were horizontally hung while inactive, but had the heads vertically after they were turned on.

Nope...maybe that's what they'll do then. Interesting.

[JREwing78]

Happened to be in Janesville today where I noticed they're putting (much-needed) lights at the Milton Ave (WIS 26) and 39/90 interchange.

The new traffic lights are trombone signals...so I guess they're not dead yet?

Those are temporary signals during the I-39/90 construction.

They're yanking out the loop ramps and putting in temporary on-ramps while construction work is ongoing to replace the interchange bridges and widen the interstate. Through there, there will be 4 lanes in each direction on the interstate mainline (for a total of 8 lanes), PLUS two additional lanes in each direction on separate carriageways for entering/exiting traffic. It's going to be a monster when it's finished.

During that process, they're converting the Hwy 26 interchange to a diverging-diamond style; that one will more than likely hew to the current vertical signal standard.