I routinely zap whatever is in the House Number field for a car park. Why would a public car park want a house number? A private car park belonging to just one property might - but then we should delete the whole car park.
Not that I can think of any like this right now, but there may be the odd one here and there which has been allocated a property number as part of its address. Having WME refer to them as house numbers is a bit misleading in any case, given that most non-residential buildings will also have them…
It’s also possible that allocating property numbers to car parks is something which is more commonly done in other countries - we already know that Waze don’t tend to spend much time on localising their products beyond what’s absolutely necessary, so if leaving the HN field globally enabled for car park addresses means they meet the needs of some editing communities whilst confusing the heck out of others, then so be it.
For those who’ve not had enough we now have Type 70 (auto generated MP for where people have parked) and Type 71 (auto generated where there is a parking road).
Run while you still can :evil:
Mmm, I just noticed a type 70 in my feed… how long until we can trace the entire outline of the M25 just by joining the dots between these MP markers 
Oh well, best update URO+ again to deal with these beasties - Iain, any more custom marker requests for these types :lol:
No thank you. I, like many Global Champs have had enough of the Parking Project. As far as I’m concerned I’m done with it. I’m going to tell HQ to get lost.
I have posted a long and angry rant on the Parking Project thread in the Global Champs forum. This is where Waze tell us what’s coming (with little or no notice) and mostly utterly ignore any concerns of feedback we have. It is also where I get the very few answers I am able to feed back to the community.
In fairness to you all, and so that you will understand my point of view, I am going to copy the post below, particularly since I’ve already been asked by another GC if the post can be shared with others.
Please note that this is my personal point of view and was not discussed in advance or agreed with anyone else. But I honestly believe that my statement accurately reflects the feelings of many Global Champs and other editors.
1 Like
Health Warning: I suggest you keep the MP layer switched off in your editor then :o :roll: :evil:
Well said Iain. When the speed limit URs return I suspect we won’t be able to see much of the map anymore under the sea of icons. This is becoming a lesson to all organisation on how not to treat your volunteers. 
Well bugger me, it looks as if you may have managed to slip something useful into their collective thick skulls this time, because as of right now I can’t find a single open or closed type 70 or 71 map problem marker anywhere…
Whilst I’d love to think that this marks the beginning of a happy new chapter of openness, humility and a willingness to listen to the collective experience of the global editing community from the devteam, I fear it’s nothing more than another knee-jerk reaction (as with the sudden disappearance of SLURs) to counteract another problem of their own making and that it’ll be business as usual again tomorrow.
You could be right. I’m not sure how much credit I can personally take: I’m not the only one who has complained - but possibly one of the most vociforous and long-winded. :lol:
We had a post from Waze HQ around lunchtime. I’ve been dealing with some real-life issues this evening, so I’m sorry I didn’t post here earlier.
The MPs for PLR segments created a particularly widespread concern amongst the champs. As we all know, PLRs are used to control routing in many situations other than car parks, so that was likely to be a disaster. And MPs for “lots of people parking” is a pretty vague definition and was likely to throw up many false positives.
So the good news is that HQ are saying they will stop getting ahead of themselves and take the time to fix the current problems - and proving that they can sometimes respond to feedback.
The not-so-good news is that Holiday season is just beginning in Israel, so it’s hard to judge how quickly that will be. And it’s all very well HQ saying they will do better. But the proof of the pudding is in the eating - a little English saying to confuse all my non-UK readers! :lol:
I’d like to think that, if/when these MPs re-appear, at least URO+ will be ready for them in advance. As long as they don’t change the type numbers. :roll:
I saw a few of these before they disappeared for supermarkets and retail parks etc where we had mapped just the building (as per UK guidelines) and so the PLR were not within a place.
I did not see any where the place was drawn to include the PLRs so I’m wondering if Waze were assuming here that private car parks would be contained within the main place. I seem to recall that originally there were guidelines that places should be mapped “to the fenceline” which would therefore include any private car park.
Just a thought - and of course, it doesn’t help all those other situations where PLRs are used to restrict through routing.
Not in my brief experience of starting to deal with them before they disappeared - I was seeing numerous examples raised at hospitals, retail parks etc. where the associated area place had been mapped “to the fenceline” and therefore where all of the PLRs were contained entirely within the place boundary.
Agreed - so it’s good to see see a whole load of car park PURs have appeared on the map to zap the house number and street data that is incorrectly cluttering the House Number field.
… oh, hang on, they are replacing it with the same incorrect house number but without the street. :roll:
There are now car park points created by Waze where the was a car park area created and updated by me. Until they wind back all car park info to where we were before this stupid project started I am not touching another car park.
If they then wish to start the project again and implement it properly I will consider providing assistance
Very, very disappointed
In regards to House numbers if its accurate, is it not a good this as if Waze knows the car park is No.12, no.10 should be next door?
Although normally as I can see no.12 would be next door.
Just realised why this latest change as the house number field has had the road name in it, making a duplicate entry with the actual road name.
Hi,
I find it even more amusing now as, having accepted the dumb reality of Waze’s actions I have gone around and added back a few car parks local to me.
Well, I thought I had…
Only to find they are deleted not long after!!!
I mean, WTF do they want us to do??!!
Des. . .
I agree - I had also spent quite some time adding and correcting local car parks only for them to be deleted and then for some of them to be automatically resurrected incorrectly. So as much as I hate things being wrong, and others relying on incorrect data, I also will not be submitting any further amendments until this silly situation is resolved.
Thanks. Sometimes it’s tough to figure out new things just popping up on the map. This was a helpful post.
I foolishly started again to try and tidy up some of the car parks, then realised I was repeating ones I had done not long ago. I have now decided, as is seems have a lot of editors, to just ignore all issues to do with car parks until there is some stability and reasoning. I guess this could be a while. 
Phew, thought I was losing my mind (I’m SURE I’ve done that car-park before!). I shall stop repeating myself as well I think.
I am totally with you here… Car Parks is now at the bottom a long list (and yes the car park error list is growing)
We need someone… anyone to give us a definitive answer on what to do with these blooming things.
Personally I’d like to delete them all and start again… :lol: