Only in this state....

[agentsteel53]

Hm.  I was born and raised in California and I never heard the term "sign routes".  Maybe it's a Socal thing.  Or maybe it dates from when California had legislative route numbers that were almost completely unlike the posted route numbers.

it's bureaucratic horseshit.  the average motorist doesn't know about LRNs vs sign routes, and they really shouldn't.

[NE2]

Or maybe it dates from when California had legislative route numbers that were almost completely unlike the posted route numbers.

This.

[roadman65]

Only in New Jersey will they use green arrows instead of green balls at signals where there is a one way street to show direction of the one way flow.  In Elizabeth, NJ, on Trenton Avenue at 3rd Avenue where traffic must either turn left or right onto 3rd Avenue because Trenton Avenue becomes one way, there are two green arrows that appear when the light is green on NB Trenton Avenue to show left and right.  Although, a good tool to let a motorist know that you cannot go beyond the intersection, having a green arrow to the left can tell someone that it is a protected left turn when in this case it is not.

Irvington and Newark used to have these, but went to green ball when left turn signals became more popular as that was the norm at one way streets or end of two way traffic.  I would imagine the MUTCD does not approve this method anymore, and this intersection may be grandfathered in.

http://maps.google.com/maps?q=Elizabeth,+NJ&hl=en&ll=40.649867,-74.201346&spn=0.000518,0.001321&sll=27.698638,-83.804601&sspn=9.892242,21.643066&oq=eliz&t=h&hnear=Elizabeth,+Union,+New+Jersey&z=20&layer=c&cbll=40.649757,-74.201331&panoid=krTZw_mr0jT4MypQT7Xk3w&cbp=12,62.97,,0,0

[cpzilliacus]

Only in New Jersey will they use green arrows instead of green balls at signals where there is a one way street to show direction of the one way flow.

This is a standard practice at signalize intersections in the District of Columbia.

[Mergingtraffic]

Only is this state (CT) will they do anything possible toavoid putting in a left turn lane.  They would even revise a signal and add in a left turn arrow phase rather than put in a left turn lane, even if there is enough pavement to do it.

[roadfro]

Only is this state (CT) will they do anything possible toavoid putting in a left turn lane.  They would even revise a signal and add in a left turn arrow phase rather than put in a left turn lane, even if there is enough pavement to do it.

By the very nature of a left turn arrow phase, that means a left turn lane would be required.

EDIT: Unless you're talking about a split-phase sequence where all movements in one approach begin and end at the same time. This is to be avoided where not absolutely necessary, as it hinders signal timing optimization and/or progression.

[vdeane]

Not always.  Sometimes you see left turn arrows that simply hope that left turning traffic isn't stopped by through traffic.  There are a couple right here in Potsdam on NY 56.

[roadman65]

Not always.  Sometimes you see left turn arrows that simply hope that left turning traffic isn't stopped by through traffic.  There are a couple right here in Potsdam on NY 56.

I think, though, that modern assemblies now are doing away with the left turn arrow so that it could be more standardized.  I lived in New Jersey for 25 years of my life, and we could easily tell which ones are protected and which ones were not by the use of a left turn lane or "LEFT TURN SIGNAL" sign as well as the give away that traffic control arrows are usually along with another direction arrow.  Most protected lefts had a 12 inch arrow beneath the normal 8 inch lens, so the shape of the head gave that one away.  Now more left turn signals are being added nationwide and many road departments are now doing away with the arrows to denote one ways and do not enters.

This is what I gather.  Also, remember we live in a world where common sense is defined by where you were raised and who you are around.  That is why more issues with roads in addition to sprawl and more automobiles.  Things now need to be more idiot proof in this century than last century.

[Mr_Northside]

Only is this state (CT) will they do anything possible toavoid putting in a left turn lane.  They would even revise a signal and add in a left turn arrow phase rather than put in a left turn lane, even if there is enough pavement to do it.

By the very nature of a left turn arrow phase, that means a left turn lane would be required.

There's a couple of intersections around here I know of where there is a protected left turn phase for one direction of travel (either thru a doghouse or an additional green arrow that disappears), but no left turn lane on a two lane street.  Perrysville Ave / Perry Highway (US-19) had a bunch of new signals installed 2 years ago, and this situation now exists at the intersection with Highland Ave.  NB traffic is just a single lane, with no turn lane, and gets a protected left via a doghouse.  There could be no left turning traffic, but SB traffic has to wait an extra 30 seconds or so to get their green anyway.

And there is quite a few intersections around the PGH area where there is a 4 lane road that has no dedicated left turn lanes (the left lane is left-or-straight), but has protected phases that "assume" that there might be some left-turning traffic:  http://goo.gl/maps/QUpTE

[roadman65]

Only is this state (CT) will they do anything possible toavoid putting in a left turn lane.  They would even revise a signal and add in a left turn arrow phase rather than put in a left turn lane, even if there is enough pavement to do it.

By the very nature of a left turn arrow phase, that means a left turn lane would be required.

There's a couple of intersections around here I know of where there is a protected left turn phase for one direction of travel (either thru a doghouse or an additional green arrow that disappears), but no left turn lane on a two lane street.  Perrysville Ave / Perry Highway (US-19) had a bunch of new signals installed 2 years ago, and this situation now exists at the intersection with Highland Ave.  NB traffic is just a single lane, with no turn lane, and gets a protected left via a doghouse.  There could be no left turning traffic, but SB traffic has to wait an extra 30 seconds or so to get their green anyway.

And there is quite a few intersections around the PGH area where there is a 4 lane road that has no dedicated left turn lanes (the left lane is left-or-straight), but has protected phases that "assume" that there might be some left-turning traffic:  http://goo.gl/maps/QUpTE

What irks me is many places in New Jersey have two different phases for each direction to allow left turns without having to install a left turn signal.  One such exists in Raritan, NJ  at the intersection of US 202 and CR 567.  US 202 is a typical NJ divided highway with jughandles there, but CR 567 is a local road.  It gets two phases so that it can turn left, right , and straight all at the same time, but one particular instance back in 85 where I was heading south on US 202 I had to wait longer for a red signal than I needed.

I stopped for the CR 567 signal where there were cars going waiting to cross both N and S on CR 567.  The light first turned green for one direction where all of the few cars went straight across US 202 with no one turning left.  Then after the other direction had turned green, the one or two vehicles proceeding there went straight across US 202 with no one else turning.  CR 567 is striped for two lanes each way at the light, so there is no reason why either a protected left or full signal could have been installed.  In that instance all NB and SB vehicles on CR 567 could have went at the same time and the intersection would have operated more efeciently.  This kind of practice should only be used on heavily traveled roads or on single lane roads where it is known for plenty of left turns.

Now this was 27 years ago, but the situation might still exist either there or at plenty other intersections to this day where the arrows would work better than a whole separate phase.

[kphoger]

one particular instance back in 85 where I was heading south on US 202

Southwest?  US-202 runs east—west through that intersection, right?

without having to install a left turn signal.
[...]
there is no reason why either a protected left or full signal could have been [could not have been?] installed

But they do have left-turn signals for CR-567 (that's First Ave, right?); otherwise drivers wouldn't know it's OK to turn left while opposing traffic has a red light.  Google Street View shows five lamps on the leftmost signal for northbound and for southbound traffic, indicating left-turn signals on both approaches.  It actually sounds to me as though you would prefer having no left-turn signal at all–which would allow "all NB and SB vehicles on CR 567 [to go] at the same time," as you said.

[roadman65]

one particular instance back in 85 where I was heading south on US 202

Southwest?  US-202 runs east–west through that intersection, right?

without having to install a left turn signal.
[...]
there is no reason why either a protected left or full signal could have been [could not have been?] installed

But they do have left-turn signals for CR-567 (that's First Ave, right?); otherwise drivers wouldn't know it's OK to turn left while opposing traffic has a red light.  Google Street View shows five lamps on the leftmost signal for northbound and for southbound traffic, indicating left-turn signals on both approaches.  It actually sounds to me as though you would prefer having no left-turn signal at all—which would allow "all NB and SB vehicles on CR 567 [to go] at the same time," as you said.

I meant signed SB US 202.  No, I am not in favor of doing away with left turn signals, but I am for them here rather than the split phases.  My example (even though its decades ago) supported the fact that a left turn arrow would have worked better than.  I'll check out street view to see the latest configuration, though.

I just checked out GSV from NB First.  It appears that arrows were added, but I have seen some NJ (and other states) use arrows on split phase operations.  I cannot tell how this signal was set up, but being that the light was red when google was traveling north into the intersection there were cars heading the opposite way waiting for the same light.  When google crossed the road (US 202), those vehicles were gone and the opposing signal was red with cars behind google traveling with him that were turning left.  I will assume that the signal turned green first on SB First Avenue and then back to red and then green NB for First Avenue which would account for the vehicles being out of the waiting area there.  Then the light was still green after google passed through the intersection to continue to allow for those still passing through the intersection.

The other possibility is that NB First Avenue might receive its left turn arrow afterward and therefore those that were heading SB on First already made it across with the signal being red so that the motorists behind the google vehicle  can indeed turn left.  There are some that give even protected left turn arrows at the end of the phase rather than before it.

[Alps]

one particular instance back in 85 where I was heading south on US 202

Southwest?  US-202 runs east—west through that intersection, right?

without having to install a left turn signal.
[...]
there is no reason why either a protected left or full signal could have been [could not have been?] installed

But they do have left-turn signals for CR-567 (that's First Ave, right?); otherwise drivers wouldn't know it's OK to turn left while opposing traffic has a red light.  Google Street View shows five lamps on the leftmost signal for northbound and for southbound traffic, indicating left-turn signals on both approaches.  It actually sounds to me as though you would prefer having no left-turn signal at all–which would allow "all NB and SB vehicles on CR 567 [to go] at the same time," as you said.

Roadman65, please fact check before posting information in the future. You have been proven incorrect on many occasions, often without much work to do so. Thank you.

[kphoger]

Admittedly, it would be hard to fact check a situation that one remembers from 1985.

But I'm still struggling to understand the situation he's describing, even imagining a hypothetcial intersection instead of that specific one.  If there were no turn arrows, then how would northbound left-turning traffic know they had a protected left turn while southbound traffic was facing a red–and vice versa for the second phase?  It just doesn't make sense to me.

[agentsteel53]

one day, in 1973, I was turning left and there were lane stripes.  or there weren't lane stripes.  I forget.  I also forget what state I was in.  whatever, facts are for losers.

[kendancy66]

one day, in 1973, I was turning left and there were lane stripes.  or there weren't lane stripes.  I forget.  I also forget what state I was in.  whatever, facts are for losers.

It is also interesting that you were driving nine years before you were born.

[jeffandnicole]

Admittedly, it would be hard to fact check a situation that one remembers from 1985.

But I'm still struggling to understand the situation he's describing, even imagining a hypothetcial intersection instead of that specific one.  If there were no turn arrows, then how would northbound left-turning traffic know they had a protected left turn while southbound traffic was facing a red–and vice versa for the second phase?  It just doesn't make sense to me.

Unfortunately, there are many cases where NJ does this.  The regulars that use the intersection often know the timing of the light.  The irregulars that don't normally go thru the light are often informed they can go via a horn honk.

The traffic light closest to me used to be like this.  Then they changed the phasing to the normal phasing (both E/W traffic had the green at the same time).  However, they never posted a sign alerting people to that.  The first few weeks involved a lot of slamming on the brakes.

NJ has gotten a little better in adding a left turn arrow in these split phase instances in new or reconstructed intersections, but not always.

one day, in 1973, I was turning left and there were lane stripes.  or there weren't lane stripes.  I forget.  I also forget what state I was in.

HAHAHAHA.

[hbelkins]

one day, in 1973, I was turning left and there were lane stripes.  or there weren't lane stripes.  I forget.  I also forget what state I was in.  whatever, facts are for losers.

Sounds like you either were or were not in Alanland.

[Alps]

one day, in 1973, I was turning left and there were lane stripes.  or there weren't lane stripes.  I forget.  I also forget what state I was in.  whatever, facts are for losers.

Sounds like you either were or were not in Alanland.

Incorrect. He was in and not in Alanland.

[roadman65]

one particular instance back in 85 where I was heading south on US 202

Southwest?  US-202 runs east—west through that intersection, right?

without having to install a left turn signal.
[...]
there is no reason why either a protected left or full signal could have been [could not have been?] installed

But they do have left-turn signals for CR-567 (that's First Ave, right?); otherwise drivers wouldn't know it's OK to turn left while opposing traffic has a red light.  Google Street View shows five lamps on the leftmost signal for northbound and for southbound traffic, indicating left-turn signals on both approaches.  It actually sounds to me as though you would prefer having no left-turn signal at all–which would allow "all NB and SB vehicles on CR 567 [to go] at the same time," as you said.

Roadman65, please fact check before posting information in the future. You have been proven incorrect on many occasions, often without much work to do so. Thank you.

What do you mean?

I was stating something I experienced many years ago.  I was not stating that the intersection was at present.  That is why I stated it was 27 years ago, as I do know that things change over time, as it was proven to me here.   Then I stated that, there probably might be other scenarios out  there like it and that if there was, I was simply suggesting a solution.

I was not pointing fact out, but simply offering a solution to a personal experience that I encountered. kphoger misunderstood something I said, he thought that I thought that the left turn signals (or arrows) should be removed as he did not understand that I was talking about what happened in 88 when those arrows did not exist then. 

I then went to point out that I checked out street view, and saw the change, but implied from the fact that many two phase lights do use arrows and with the way the google car moved through the intersection could be that intersection is that way. 

Nothing I said was factional, but just a personal experience and a suggested solution!

[NE2]

Nothing I said was factional

[InterstateNG]

3 days is a long time to be awake.

[roadman65]

Admittedly, it would be hard to fact check a situation that one remembers from 1985.

But I'm still struggling to understand the situation he's describing, even imagining a hypothetcial intersection instead of that specific one.  If there were no turn arrows, then how would northbound left-turning traffic know they had a protected left turn while southbound traffic was facing a red—and vice versa for the second phase?  It just doesn't make sense to me.

http://maps.google.com/maps?q=Hazlet,+NJ&hl=en&ll=40.436732,-74.141225&spn=0.004156,0.010568&sll=40.67766,-74.400455&sspn=0.003881,0.010568&oq=hazle&t=h&hnear=Hazlet,+Monmouth,+New+Jersey&z=17&layer=c&cbll=40.436973,-74.1411&panoid=iis7Mo3UMbwWMij9jCUWFA&cbp=12,42.24,,0,0

Here is a signal on Laurel Avenue near Keansburg, NJ that has what I am talking about.    Notice the cars turning left with other cars stopped on the opposing side, yet no arrow with the green.

http://maps.google.com/maps?q=Hazlet,+NJ&hl=en&ll=40.436969,-74.141096&spn=0.004156,0.010568&sll=40.67766,-74.400455&sspn=0.003881,0.010568&oq=hazle&t=h&hnear=Hazlet,+Monmouth,+New+Jersey&z=17&layer=c&cbll=40.437176,-74.141002&panoid=UhDCjxDzfv9vOfx1-NINGg&cbp=12,357.24,,0,0

Now here is the google car making that  same protected left.  Jeff and Nicole said it best to back me up as it is quite common in New Jersey for this particular practice.

[agentsteel53]

Wisconsin:  No single-digit state highway.

Nope.  See Nevada.

just noticed: Wyoming as well.

[The High Plains Traveler]

Wisconsin:  No single-digit state highway.

Nope.  See Nevada.

just noticed: Wyoming as well.

Nor Arizona. Nor Hawaii.