Yesterday, I had an issue with the directions given going through this circle on northbound US-202. It is locked at L5, and from a visual inspection of it, everything looks ok, but when I drove through, I got the roundabout graphic in the upper left corner of the display, which is ok, but as I got close the instructions simple said “Take roundabout exit” and nothing more. Once I got into the roundabout, there was no instruction to take the first exit into US-202 N / Somerville.
There are a few other URs nearby that appear to be suggesting the same kinds of problems. I would think that every exit out of every roundabout - including the so-called through-routes in New Jersey’s circles - should always produce a “Take nth roundabout exit at…” instruction, even if the angle of deflection is zero, as it appears in this case.
I have driven through it a few times with Waze but I don’t remember any issues with it. Then again, I may not have been paying attention as I knew where I was going. It does seem odd that it wouldn’t give you any directions to stay right regardless of geometry. Is it possible (I’m not looking at it as I’m on my iPad) that both segments meet together at the circle as opposed to having you enter and then exit the circle? Just a thought…
Ok I took a quick look at it even though it’s awkward on the iPad. I think the segment exiting needs a really tiny adjustment at the closest zoom to create enough of an angle to trigger a “stay to the right at US-202” command without making it visible on the client. I’m sure that would make all the difference. I think jondrush has bee on vacation but should be back shortly to unlock the circle so edits can be made.
For what it’s worth, OyyoDams’s Toolkit extension does identify this circle as a roundabout with potential problems with its dashed-blue-purple line over the circle. Not sure how to get further information about it though…
Also, I don’t use toolkits to do most of my editing since my work laptop won’t allow me to install extensions so I can’t really speak to Oyyodam’s Toolkit function. I really should start using them on my personal laptop, but I rarely take the time to break it out.
Also, now that I’m looking closer, I see that the issue appears to happen regardless of the entrance/exit segment. That’s troubling. I had it pegged as a ‘stay straight’ issue. Do you think naming the segments in the circle may have caused the problem? I thought standard practice was to not give roundabout segments a street name? Is this the result?
Naming segments in a roundabout (circle) is supposed to be a no-no, I think. This is why editors will often put a landmark into the circle if it is known by a name - though I’m not sure if we’re supposed to do that or not. I think, also, that the roundabout segments have to be whole, and the only junctions can be entrances and exits, which also need to be unnamed. Roundabouts also don’t like ramp segments, though I didn’t see any here; that is, for each entrance and exit in the roundabout, you have to be able to complete those access roads without going over any ramp segments. That means no short ramp “way-finder” segments to describe a BGS at the turn.
Can anyone comment on these theories?
I noticed there’s a parking lot driveway connected into the roundabout at about “5 o’clock.” Perhaps this is causing the problem? If so, there’s a bunch of businesses along the circle, and we may have to choose between the driveways or just getting rid of the roundabout and using regular highway segments.
I’m pretty sure using a landmark is acceptable for a named circle such as this. I’ve never heard anything about not naming the connecting segments to a roundabout. That’s a first for me. I know you can’t build a road through a roundabout (hamburger-style circle such as Rt 1 & Washington Rd in Princeton).
I also hadn’t heard anything about the ramp segments, although I can definitely see how that would be an issue. It changes the nomenclature from ‘stay to the right’ to ‘exit right’.
I was eyeing up the Parking Lot Road as well, although I’ve driven through roundabouts with Parking Lot Roads connected that still functioned properly. I do know that Parking Lot Roads create all sorts of routing havoc as any node with one connected tends to lose it’s turn restrictions; all rules apparently are tossed out the window. I wonder if Carl (CBenson) has anything to add? He’s the resident routing expert.
Welcome back from the depths of the forum. To revive this thread, the previous problem still exists in that entering the circle only gives an voice prompt of “At the roundabout…” with not other direction.
There was a recent hangout theory by PesachZ to restrict turns into the parking lots located on the Flemington Circle, but this theory would need to be validated prior to implementing.
So who wants to set-up a testing area in the wilds or are there other theories such as removing the PLRs and adjusting stop points in Google MM and Waze, as needed?
I believe that at some point Flemington Circle was turn into a non-circle regular road. Is there a problem solving it this way? It really is not a real circle from the point of view of traffic. The yield signs are placed in such a way that staying on US-202 gets a preference, not like it would be on an actual traffic circle.
True, but from both US-202 approaches, it’s signed as circle. I know PhantomSoul has more experience with this as it once was MH as opposed to roundabout.
They’re there in Waze SV, but here’s the google link since it can be PL’d. I wanted to check the instructions and signs when I drove to Baltimore earlier this month.
I would try rebuilding this circle from the ground up. I’m pretty sure the parallel segments are causing errors here. Circles (roundabouts) must have consecutive segment numbers, must have 1 and only 1 way to traverse around the roundabout (the parallel segments are in violation of this), must not have any segments on the inside of it, and every node along the roundabout traversal can have no more than 3 segments touching it, 2 of which are part of the roundabout’s traversal.
One thing to consider here, which I know has caused URs in the past implementations of this junction: if we configure this junction as a circle (roundabout), all the turns into the parking lots off the circle will count as roundabout exits. This means that when traveling through north on Route 202, for example, instead of getting a “Take the first roundabout exit to US-202…”, you will get a “Take the fourth roundabout exit…” because the 3 driveways along that part of the circle count as the first 3 exits. I agree that this is highly confusing navigation, because I, at least, would never consider those parking lot access roads as roundabout exits or entrances. In fact, you don’t even notice them unless you’re trying to turn into or out of them.
In the end, I’m pretty sure we will have to choose between roundabout style navigation at this junction, or just a quick series of keep lefts/keep rights depending on where you’re going. Personally, I’m leaning toward the latter because of those parking lot access roads, and Waze’s lack of supporting those as part of a roundabout without counting them in the sequence or roundabout exits you have to navigate.
But if you want to play with it… my suspicion is that the “exits” being at such an oblique angle is what created the problem in the first place. They are almost a perfect 180deg.
I think I have to agree with qwaletee’s latest assessment here - we need to drop the roundabout segment and the roundabout navigation language. I just don’t see a way to make it work with the parking lot driveways along the southeast part of the circle without them being announced as sequenced exits in the roundabout.
Coming north on Routes 202/31, we absolutely cannot have the parking lot be the “first exit from the roundabout;” people are just not going to see that as much as the right fork for Route 202 north being the first exit of the roundabout. Yet we still have to connect the parking lots to the highway at the aprons if we want to avoid routing errors in the area.
Because of the above concern with roundabout segments, we no longer have a closed loop of roundabout segments, and cannot use a roundabout - or that style navigation - here.
Instead, I would suggest a each fork have a minimal name (maybe just the highway shields?) so that a rapid sequence of “keep lefts” and “keep rights” can be read out in time for each maneuver based on the average speeds that WME Route Speeds shows.
Agreed on all points, especially on this. Because of the elongated nature of the circle, I would advocate for having both keep left and right instructions at each major junction (those junctioned to a SR or US highway).
We just need ARC or RC approval to unlock the circle, if in agreement.
OK, but I don’t want this to go round in circles again (pun unintended), or to discover we broke it worse than before, and aren’t managing the fix process careful. Can we agree on the following:
One editor will be designated owner
Owner is responsible for all changes
Owner will elicit feedback from community on implementation ideas and results
For each attempt to fix it, there will be an active study period
Owner will try to recruit other editors who regularly travel the circle