Naming Michigan lefts

Map Editors Community United States Michigan
1

I think it’s high time we got to this. Unnamed Michigan lefts (all of them, as far as I can tell) don’t actually tell you where you’re going – telling you you’re gonna have to turn left in 6 miles onto the road you’re already on isn’t helpful.

Some Michigan lefts have little green signs that tell you where they’re gonna take you.

It seems pretty much standard that, if there is a sign, the road you’re on is listed first, and the road you’d be going to or coming from is listed second, if at all. Most of the signs I’ve seen give both. If there is a name and a route number, typically the name is given first, with the route number second. The one up there on M-59 is an exception, but it’s just before the beginning of the M-59 freeway portion, so maybe that has something to do with it.

To help navigating Michigan make sense, I think we should start naming those little Michigan left turnarounds, with a standard format: “to [road you’re on] [direction you’ll be going] / [road you might be eventually turning onto] [direction you’d be going if you made that turn]”. So if you’re travelling westbound on Metro Pkwy at Gratiot, the label for the Michigan left turnaround would read “to Metro Pkwy E / Gratiot Ave S”. If you’re traveling south on the expressway portion of M-53 at 30 Mile, the label for the turnaround would be “to M-53 N / 30 Mile Rd E”.

In cases where there is both a name and a route number, in this case, I think we should leave the route number out. IMO, it’s a waste of space to have to put “Gratiot Ave S / M-3 S” in there, and it would kind of defeat the purpose to lose out on the name of the other road because the first one used too much space on the screen. Unless you think it’s better to use just the route number …

The more common Michigan left sign, of course, is the one placed at the intersection from the other street:

That can be used to find the proper name to use on the Michigan left.

For more complicated intersections, if there is another, dedicated way to get to one of the two roads served by a Michigan left, then the turnaround doesn’t need that instruction. See Van Dyke at 15 Mile:

https://www.waze.com/editor/?lat=42.55158&lon=-83.02766&zoom=5&layers=BFTFFTTTTTTTTTTTTTFTTTTFTT

There is a dedicated connector to get from Van Dyke N to 15 Mile W, so it is not included on the turnaround. In contrast, there is no dedicated connector from Van Dyke S to 15 Mile E, so that instruction is included in the turnaround.

Also, since these are at-grade connectors, use the lower of the two road types at the intersection, even if they aren’t actually physically connected. Even if that means a primary street in the middle of two minor highway spans (see the same example), we want to keep the road types as low as we can to limit displaying these names, but we need to keep it as high as we need to for navigation. If you’re coming from or going to 15 Mile, you’re on a primary street anyway, so having the turnaround as a primary street won’t cause any trouble.

(Obviously you’d use Primary Street and not Dirt Road for the 30 Mile example up there. I would imagine, if the type of one street changes at an intersection, that it would be appropriate to use the higher of those two types for that road, to keep it both navigable and symmetrical.)

So, in short:

  • Name every Michigan left turnaround with the name of the two streets it serves in the directions it serves each preceded by “to” (NEW), starting with the street the Michigan left connects to; and
  • Type every Michigan left turnaround as a ramp (NEW) (changed from: “with the lower of the types of road it serves”).

The link a couple paragraphs above is done up how I think it should be done.

What do you think? Good idea? Any issues with it?

In particular, how do you feel about dropping either the road name or route number when there are both?

2

Additional considerations: Maybe “ramp” is a more appropriate type, even though it violates “at grade connector” rules, so as to suppress extraneous text on the map. New Jersey uses similar practices with their infamous “jughandles”: http://www.waze.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=276&t=48389

Long discussion there, and it’s not exactly conclusive, but it seems most NJ editors have made an exception to the at-grade connector rule in cases where jughandles have Big Green Signs or Little Green Signs.

For a local example of a jughandle, check out New Haven: https://www.waze.com/editor/?lat=42.72399&lon=-82.79366&zoom=5&segments=67978123&layers=BFTFFTTTTTTTTTTTTTFTTTTFTT

3

For starters, please clarify if you are making a distinction between a Michigan Left (to or from a split road) and any ordinary split road connector.

Split road connectors have a very intuitive purpose of either turning left across the oncoming lanes, or a left U-turn to switch sides. These ordinary connectors would not need labels or names IMO.

4

I think this is one case where the u-turn should be set to the same Type as the adjoining road. I wouldn’t use ramps, although the ramp type suppresses the name of the road showing on the map.

Here’s an example of why.

This is a local Michigan Left:

Previously, Waze preferred this bad routing, which is not the “official” way to go, and during heavy traffic, it’s difficult to fight your way into traffic after making the U-Turn. (This entire area was under heavy construction for several years, so the speed data is probably all FUBAR also.)

By making the “official” U-turn a Minor Hwy in the southeast corner of the shot, it gets everybody routing the correct way.

My only question is how you’d name the U-turn. It works well here as “U Turn”. But if you were to name it “to Carrollton Ave”, it’s just going to tell you “Turn left at Carrollton Ave”, which is a bad instruction and will generate complaints.

5

Yeah, I’m talking only about Michigan lefts here, where two roads meet but don’t allow you to make direct lefts, rather requiring a right followed by a U turn or a U turn followed by a right.

Ordinary connectors (we call them “U turn” here, but here they are typically signed “U turn”) aren’t typically used in long-distance routing, they’re usually only used at the beginning or the end of a route if your start point or destination is on the opposite side you’re supposed to be on. It’s okay if those are Street type for that reason, and it’s okay if they’re unnamed because they only really serve the road you’re already on.

Michigan lefts on the other hand are typically signed for both streets, and can be used in the middle of long routes.

Jason, according to my proposal, it would be named “to Earhart Blvd W / Carrollton Ave N”.

6

So my next question is in the case of a right turn followed by a U turn, that’s still just an ordinary split road connector for a U-turn. What is gained by naming it?

7

It depends on the intersection. Would you use the same connector as a U turn followed by a right turn onto the other road? Then it’s a Michigan left. By naming the connector, you get the name of the street onto which you’d be making the Michigan left.

I’ll use Hall Rd and Van Dyke as an example.

If you’re traveling south on Van Dyke and need to go east on Hall Rd, then you’re right, not much to gain from naming the connector. You’ll already know that Hall Rd is the next step.

But if you’re traveling west on Hall Rd and need to go south on Van Dyke, if it’s left unnamed, your first instruction is “turn left at Hall Rd”. Not very useful. With my proposal, your first instruction will be “Turn left at Hall Rd E / Van Dyke Ave S”. So you’ll know even when you’re still ten miles from the turn that your next move is to make a Michigan left onto Van Dyke, without having to check the navigation list at 50 mph.

I make this proposal because I’ve had that exact problem, and I think it was at this exact location, too. People want to know which way Waze is taking them before they actually get there – I know I do, anyway.

8

So it would be clearer to say this is a proposal for naming Michigan Left turns from a split road onto an intersecting road only. Turns onto a split road and split road course reversals are not necessarily affected.

9

In a sense yes, turns onto a split road would not necessarily be affected, but they would be affected in places where they use the same segment as turns from a split road. The first instruction would be the same, but the second would change. Directly, however, yes, this mainly benefits Michigan left turns from a split road, without detriment to turns to a split road.

I’m thinking about it per-intersection, rather than per-turn. If there is one left turn from A to B at a given intersection that doesn’t give the name of B in the first instruction, that’s where this comes into play.

Standalone split road course reversals are not affected.

10

Seems like a good idea at the local level. I know there are bigger fish to fry at the state level, but since editors like me can’t work the whole state we need good ideas like this. :slight_smile:

11

I’m gonna start out following the at-grade connector rules for road types. I’ll be driving up there in a couple weeks, so I’ll be able to see how it looks firsthand. If it’s bad, let’s consider a switch to ramp type at that time.

Also, what do you think, is it better to just say “to M-59 E” or “to Hall Rd E”? Should we consider it on a case-by-case basis? I was thinking it would be better to say “M-59” in that case because Hall Rd does not exist independently of M-59, but that it would be better to say “Gratiot Ave” instead of “M-3” because Gratiot exists independently of M-3. It also just feels right.

edit In the case of “double Michigan lefts” like this, with two split roads: https://www.waze.com/editor/?lon=-82.89116&lat=42.56921&zoom=5&layers=BFTFFTTTTTTTFTFTFTFTTTTFTTTTTTTTTTTTT&segments=24081234,24077528,24088684,24079372
I’ve been naming them all, using the same rules as before (i.e., including both names on each segment), because although MDOT recommends that you turn right then change direction, there’s nothing to stop Waze from recommending that you change direction then turn right. We’re writing navigation instructions here, not road signs.

12

With respect to the particular situation with a right turn followed by a u-turn, I would put in a small connector so you can have complete instructions. If I’m from out of town and I know I need to head south, I would like to hear “turn right to some road north / some road south”, instead of just “turn right to some road north”.

13

While it would be excellent, it would also require some hackneyed map editing to be truly useful (i.e., telling you N or S, not both). Otherwise, you’d still get the “N/S” instruction even if you were just turning right, which wouldn’t be any more helpful, or at least not enough to justify adding nonintuitive connectors.

14

I like this discussion because I don’t have these example nearby but it is good to know about these type or scenarios. I certainly agree that if the routing instruction was to go to Hall St when you were actually needing to route onto Van Dyke, I can see not being familiar with the area, like myself, I would be pondering why it is telling me to route onto the road I am already on. Since I can’t really field test this myself, I’ll do what I can to help support the direction this needs to go.

15

After my most recent visit to Michigan, I noticed one thing I’d like to change before committing to a rule.

IMO a second “to” should be added after the slash. For example, “to Metro Pkwy E / to Gratiot Ave S”.

The reasoning: the first “to” is not spoken and is included in every ramp or ramp-like segment to differentiate it from the road you’re going to (when using the Select Entire Street feature, for example). So with the first proposal TTS says “Turn left, at Metro Parkway East, Gratiot Avenue South.”

Every time I got such an instruction, it struck me as misleading; it sort of implies that either (1) Metro Pkwy and Gratiot are coincident, or (2) there will be a later choice between Metro and Gratiot, like on a freeway exit.

Instead, if it said “Turn left, at Metro Parkway East / to Gratiot Avenue South”, that would imply that you are turning onto Metro Pkwy with the option to turn onto Gratiot later.

This is similar to freeway exit which say “TO” on the top. I used a similar principle on these two exit ramps back home. The signs for the exits say, respectively from left to right, “TO [US-61 shield]” on top and “Cleary Ave” underneath, and (2) “TO [US-90]” on top and “Deckbar Ave” underneath. [Airline is 61; Jefferson is 90.]

Since the exits are taking you directly to Cleary and Deckbar, which can respectievly take you to 61 and 90, it’s more clear to say “Exit to the right, at Cleary Avenue, to US-61” and “Exit to the right, at Deckbar Avenue, to US-90”, because that’s the order you’ll be driving in. Leaving out the second “to” makes it sound like Cleary and US-61 are the same thing, which isn’t the case.

Anyway, let me know what you think.

16

Without being able to drive through those turns, I can’t really say anything other than to word it in a way that is clear. However, in the last case you mentioned where you said you wanted to reverse the roads on the sign, I’m not sure that’s a good option. Not only will it end up being a battle to keep them from being changed to match the sign, but it won’t really be reflecting what people see on the sign. People have been following road signs for decades and I don’t think anyone has any trouble dealing with a road sign that has the “TO” highway number above the street that you’ll actually be on. So I don’t see any reason why Waze needs to do anything different. I think it’s a better idea to match the signs as closely as possible. It just makes it less confusing for drivers if the instructions match the sign in the same order as on the sign. Drivers really don’t need to know when using GPS navigation that the road they’ll turn on after the exit is the bottom road listed on the sign. Once they get to the turn, the instruction there will tell them that they are turning onto that road. They just need to know what the exit sign says to help them take the correct exit. Just my opinion.

17

Yeah, that’s fair. I’ve also been thinking of changing it to “Exit: to US-61 / Cleary Ave”.

Anyway, that’s not related. The Michigan Left signs all list the first road first and the second road second. I did take that Cleary exit yesterday, and that second “to” was pronounced quickly but clearly; it doesn’t take much extra time to rattle it out, which is good.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk 2

18

Your link doesn’t highlight the exits you’re talking about and I can’t seem to find them, but based on your description of the sign, that looks like what I would expect (with an exit number if there is one, of course). What’s there now?

Yeah, I don’t see any problem with including “to” as far as speed of reading it goes. I just pulled up a street view and found an example. I think that it makes sense to have something like: Metro Parkway W / to Schoenherr Rd N.

19

Wow, I posted entirely the wrong permalink. Here it is: https://editor-beta.waze.com/editor/?lon=-90.15351&lat=29.97005&zoom=3&layers=TBFTFFTTTTFTTFTFTTTFTTTTTT&env=usa&segments=20949846,20940504

The exits on Earhart aren’t numbered. Previously I’d thought it was better to do “to XXX” on unnumbered exits because it avoids the redundancy of “Exit right, at exit to XXX”, instead saying “Exit right, at XXX”, but now I think consistency might be more important. Although I prefer “Exit: Clearview Pkwy” rather than “Exit to Clearview Pkwy” because (1) it’s more consistent with “Exit 226: Clearview Pkwy” and (2) it allows for differentiation between “Exit: to US-61 / Cleary Ave” and “Exit: US-61” for an exit that would go directly to US-61.

I posted a number of street view examples of Michigan left signs in the OP of this thread.

20

Yeah, I think that if it is an actual Exit, it should say Exit: at the beginning even if it isn’t numbered. It seems to be what I’m seeing elsewhere as well. You also have the issue with an exit that is just signed something like: [TO] I-75. Without using Exit: at the beginning, you’re left with verbal instructions saying “Exit right at to I-75” instead of “Exit right at Exit: to I-75”. Unless the TTS is set up to remove the “at” if it starts with “to”, it just makes it sound bad. And even if you remove the “at”, you’re left with a question of whether “to” means you’re exiting onto that road or exiting toward that road. Including Exit: just seems best, I think.