Can we put them in? I’d be more than happy to do the work. It needs to be more than just a lane added. There are specific places that you can enter and leave the lane, doing so elsewhere will get you a ticket. It’s an HOV/Toll lane, so it would currently fall under toll. It could be configured to allow either or both, for support for when the app adds it.
Thanks
I have thought about adding the HOT lanes for SR-167 be for. Unfortunately there is not really an easy way to do this sense these lanes are not separated by much (Double white line). HOT lanes are in couple other places around the USA but to my knowledge they are not included in waze.
I’m curious to see how well it works, especially sense there are HOT lanes soon to open on I-405.
I say go for it, i’ll stat unlocking SR-167 for you. Well see how well it works, and if it adds confusion or too much clutter well just remove them.
Before I just jump in and screw something up, here’s my plan. From what I’ve seen of other states HOV lanes, when added, they use the Major Hwy classification so as to prefer the Freeway it travels in between. I’ve seen a few use a slightly higher elevation as well, to try to keep the routing engine from just snapping back and forth. My plan would also use exits back and forth at the appropriate places. Two to get onto the HOV/HOT lane, one to get off. One of the get on ramps would be Toll (no trucks or towing or hazmat), the other would be “no toll” HOV, Motorcycle, buses, etc… (no trucks or towing or hazmat). The exit would just be an exit to the mainline. I don’t think this will screw with routing at all in this particular case because the HOT/HOV lane doesn’t deviate from the main line at all.
I think this won’t be too much different than when there’s already two existing roadways paralleling each other. Some users will have some snapping issues, most won’t. Just my thoughts. What say you?
I see why some would map HOT lanes as Major Hwy. But I say it should be freeway because if someone has waze set to “Avoid Freeway” it might automatically send them on to the toll road. Causing Frustration and confusion to many wazer’s.
I agree that there should be two segments connecting SR-167 to SR-167 HOT Lane. One addressing the HOV part, the Other addressing the Toll part.
HOT Lane:
*The HOT lane should be Freeway Road Type.
**At first lets try with Elevation 7, and see if routing server will choose to route on it. The routing server is suppose to frown upon elevation changes of 5 or more. If routing server does not route to HOT Lanes lower elevation to Ground.
*The HOT lane should be named “SR-167 N HOT Lane” or “SR-167 S HOT Lane”.
*The HOT lane geometry should be placed on left shoulder to hopefully prevent Waze from snapping back to SR-167.
Entrance to HOT lane:
*Both entrance segments should be Ramp road types.
*Both entrance segments should connect to SR-167 at the same node and connect to SR-167 HOT Lane at one node. But make sure they do not overlap or that they are not loop segments.
*Both entrance segment should be named “to HOT Lane” or maybe “to SR-167 HOT Lane”. TTS should say “Keep Left to HOT Lane” or “Keep Left to State Route-167 HOT Lane”
**Entrance segment 1 should allow only HOV
**Entrance segment 2 should allow any type vehicle but set as toll
Exit from HOT lane:
*Exit segment should be Freeway Road Type to prevent TTS from saying Exit.
*Exit segment should be named “to SR-167”.
Let me know if the above does not sound right. We are testing this out, so we may need to make some changes until it works the way we want. But it may just not work at all. The important thing is that we make sure the old SR-167 works the way it always has and the HOT lane becomes an option if absolutely necessary.
OK, I think I did it. Lets hope it works more than it doesn’t work.
No sooner do I get done with it than I find this http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/Tolling/SR167HotLanes/access.htm
Basically they’re doing away with the double stripe. You can cross from mainline to HOT lane and back at any point. So I don’t think our placement will be quite so critical for the lane changes, just so long as the users can get to their exits in time. And lets face it, if it’s heavy traffic they’ll have time to figure it out.
They’re live!!
I drove 167 today north and south. I didn’t do the toll lane. I rode in the left lane both directions. I didn’t get snapped to the HOT/HOV lane at all. I have a buddy who is a courier and uses the toll lanes where ever he goes, because time is money. He’ll let us know if there’s any issues with the HOT lane. So far I think we’re good.
I tested a route in live map. https://www.waze.com/livemap?zoom=17&lat=47.48288&lon=-122.21707&from_lat=47.25011&from_lon=-122.25363&to_lat=47.48288&to_lon=-122.21707
Routing server does choose to route on the HOT lanes as preferred route, but route is possible as alternate. The HOT lane option took 17min and mainline took 13min.
This could be because they are new segments and traffic data has not built up yet.
This could also be because of the elevation.
So I say we give it awhile to build traffic data. Your friend could help, if he/she would like, by selecting the alternate route that uses the HOT lanes. This will automatically snap to the HOT lanes, and build up traffic data.
After we are sure the Traffic data has build up enough to properly determine when its a good idea to use the HOT lanes we can lower the elevation.
But looks like its working!!!
My main concern at this point is whether it is clear to drivers when waze wants them to use HOT lanes and when it wants them to use mainline.
How would you recommend tagging HOV-only exits on I-405 and SR-522? We have one near our house and Waze never provides it as an option. AFAIK there are two of them on I-405 (NE 6th st in Bellevue and NE 128th St in Kirkland) and one on SR-522 (NE 108th Ave?).
HOV only lanes aren’t currently supported in the app. What we could do is to remove the restriction from the entire segment, then just restrict either the turn onto the segment or a small section of the first segment to HOV. This would allow you to use the HOV lanes, and once on them you’ll get a reroute, but you won’t get routed onto them until they come up with HOV lane support. Personally I was shocked when I found out that the app couldn’t do it yet. HOV lanes have been around since before smartphones.
If I had to guess, Waze will add vehicle type restrictions to the app in the next couple updates. Its been in the editor for over a year, so its about time.
Really like having the HOT lanes enabled, thanks!
Have heard some confusion when Waze tells people to “exit” from the HOT lane, they think they’re being told to exit the freeway rather than exit onto the mainline.
Thought: would it make sense to name the “exit ramp” from the HOT lane “to mainline SR-167” instead of simply “to SR-167” so that the instructions make it clearer you’re moving from HOT to mainline?
I was just going to say much the same thing. I think we should have the Exit from the HOT lane feed directly to the exit off the freeway. Then for the entrance, the onramps from the freeway should have a short segment before telling the driver to “exit” to the HOT lane. When I first set it up I was going off of the old “double line” configuration, but that’s gone now except for the beginning and end of the HOT lanes.
I’ve been reconfiguring this a bit. The thought of having a ramp to get onto the HOT lane has the voice commands saying Exit Left, sometimes it says Exit Right, even though it’s on the left. Also, since there’s no double line issue anymore there’s no reason to have the exit/entrance at certain spots. The problem that caused was Waze would be giving instructions to get into, get out of, get back into, get back out of commands.
Since there has been no further discussion here about what to do I decided to make the entrances to the HOT/HOV lane a Freeway segment. I’m also making the exit from the HOV/HOT lane a ramp straight to the Exit off the freeway (to keep get in, get out, get in, get out commands). I’m going to need this ramp lowered to 3 or just connect the exit from the HOT/HOV lane to it. https://www.waze.com/editor/?env=usa&lon=-122.21953&lat=47.43571&layers=1537&zoom=5&segments=66482044