For your information,
It has been decided to update the criteria for adding a turn lane (junction connector) at an intersection in the Map Editor guidelines.
See Mapping turn lanes at junctions.
Excellent news. This will definitely improve navigation. Will there also be a fix regarding junctions with traffic lights, to prevent situations where a driver is instructed to turn right at the traffic light, reaches the light, and cannot turn because the turn was 15-20 meters earlier, and other cars are already standing behind them? And the closest place they can make a U-turn is a significant driving distance away. Iโm sure many have encountered a situation where the car in front of you at a traffic light junction tries to back up right into you, aiming to get into a separate lane that turns right. HaAmakim Junction-Route 4 for example. It happens there all the time.
It isnโt the instruction to turn right at the traffic light that causes a driver to reverse. The instruction including the word โtraffic lightโ has only existed recently, whereas instances of drivers reversing after missing a right turn is an age-old phenomenon (predating Waze).
The instruction means to turn right at the signalized intersection, and it is only provided if the turn lane doesnโt exist or if it begins within 30m of the intersection. In principle, the word โtraffic lightโ could be omitted when there is a turn lane, but itโs the companyโs decision when and how to play this instruction with the word โtraffic light.โ You are welcome to suggest to the company via the Suggestion Box that they change the phrasing of the instruction (for example, to: โTurn right at the signalized intersection,โ or something like that).
The rules regarding signalized intersections in English already include recommendations for adding turn lanes (Slip lanes or AGC). The question is whether we in Israel should follow these recommendations, or whether we should add turn lanes regardless of the existence of traffic lights, according to the updated rules in Hebrew only?
- The document you referred to was written by the company and is not part of any community rules.
- Each community sets its own mapping rules, unless there is a clear directive from the company that its rules must be followed.
- Even in the rules you pointed to, it says (and we decided this anyway, despite there being no such requirement):
So at the very least we would recommend doing it for any AGC that is longer than 30m from the center of the relevant segment
- Any driver who sees a right-turn lane before a small triangular traffic island and is told to turn right at the light wonโt keep going straight and try to go around the small island to turn after it. You would have to give the โWorst Driver Awardโ to any driver who did such a thing.
- Although there is no chance a driver would do something so foolish, if you think this instruction is confusing, then as I have already written, we can suggest that the company change the prompt to something clearer, such as: โTurn right at the traffic light.โ
- Drivers arenโt supposed to be looking at the screen at all; they should be looking at the road and following the voice prompts. Even if they did look, itโs unlikely they would even notice there was a turn lane right next to the intersection (had we mapped such a lane for a small triangle).
If thereโs one thing Iโve learned, itโs this: never underestimate Israeli drivers and their endless supply of excuses.
I understand that this can be customized for each locale individually.
For instance, the US community changed the American English instruction to โat the light / after the lightโ instead of โat / after the traffic light.โ
It might be possible to change it in Hebrew too.
Iโm not in favor of the change. Iโve never heard anyone say โturn at the signalized intersection.โ On the other hand, Iโve heard people say โturn at the lightโ thousands of times.
Thank you very much for the explanation.
There are members who understand โtraffic lightโ as the point where the device is installed and โjunctionโ as the area that includes all the turns within it.
Alright. In the meantime, Iโll deal with 30x20 junctions that I know are congested at certain times. Exceptions to this โ by opening a discussion in the forum 
As noted above by R0den, every intersection has separate statistics for those turning right (just as there are for every turn in every possible direction). Therefore, there is no special significance to adding a turn lane just because there is a traffic jam going straight (for instance) and no jam for those turning right.
Sometimes the straight-ahead jam also affects the right-turn statistics, because when the jam extends beyond the exit point of the turn lane, even those who need to turn right must wait for the traffic light to turn green and for the jam to clear.
In general, it is difficult to give an accurate ETA when there is a signalized intersection with a cycle of several minutes, because sometimes a vehicle arrives when there is a green light and passes through without any wait, and sometimes the vehicle must wait several minutes (even if it is turning right via a turn lane as mentioned above). The statistics use an average, which is also only correct for data collected in the past (distant or recent, depending on the time until the intersection), and sometimes it is not even the correct average for the moment of crossing the intersection (because traffic changes from moment to moment).
Apparently here the driver claimed: But Waze told me โat the roundabout, continue straight.โ
Okay. As I understand from the updated rules and recommendations regarding traffic lights, we draw an additional turn lane without forum discussions only if the condition (at least one) regarding the distances from the junction is met, as shown in the illustration. In all other cases, we request approval in the forum and provide proof of the need for it. Right? And who is responsible for granting the approvals?
The illustration does not reflect the rules for several reasons:
- The measurements are not based on the length of the segments on the map, but rather on the actual situation on the ground (otherwise, someone could come along and, even though the separation starts 25 meters before the intersection, they would insert a turn lane starting 31 meters from the intersection, and on the map it would look like there is over 50m, but this does not comply with the rules). Measurements are based only on the situation on the ground as seen in an aerial photo, for example.
- The figure 17m does not exist in the rules. It is unclear what this represents.
- The rules are not related to the presence of any traffic light, as might be implied by the illustration.
- The turn lane is not a straight line but must follow the actual alignment on the ground.
A turn lane (connector) can be added exactly as described in the rules. If something in the rules is unclear, you can suggest a change to the rules rather than presenting an alternative. Any case where an editor wishes to make an edit that deviates from the rules must be presented as a request in the forum, explaining why an exception is necessary. Every exception must be approved by the Leads (who are also the ones who established the rules).
Thatโs perfectly fine. Just a small reminder regarding 17 meters: back when I was at Level 2 and just starting to bug you all, we corresponded here on the forum and this number was agreed upon as the critical distance for separation from a junction, where at this distance and beyond, screen jumping starts and itโs already worth adding a helper segment. And of course, a helper segment is almost never as straight as a ruler; thatโs just in the illustration. Although Iโve also seen zigzag shapes (not drawn by me) The rest is clear โ if itโs more than 30 meters long and there are different traffic loads between โstraightโ and an exit turn, then as everyone knows.