Is this proper?
I thought that we do not specifically add segments for a U-Turn unless such a U-Turn has a specific sign or instruction on the roadway for it.
https://www.waze.com/editor/?env=usa&lon=-75.74444&lat=39.63642&layers=997&zoom=6&segments=83450873#
It looks wrong to me.
I guess someone looked at the wiki and saw that the four goals of Waze map editing are usability, simplicity, retention, and reducing the number of automated map problem reports. :lol:
I’ve seen a few of these pop up-- and I think they’re added to prevent errors being thrown saying that the roads are spaced too far apart since the median opening is so wide. Thoughts?
https://www.waze.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=622&t=122844
I’ve been seeing a lot of map errors for disconnected roads that indicate that they are from missing u-turns. Regardless, that H-junction is too wide to stop a u-turn so a specific AGC is not really needed so I don’t think that applies here.
What should be done about this one? If it’s to stay, it should be a MH not street. And it really shouldn’t have a street name of “u-turn” on it.
I don’t think it should stay just to get around a limitation of the lack of u-turn instruction in Waze, else we’ll be putting these things everywhere. In other locations, if we need to draw a u-turn to fix a map problem, probably should look at if stretching the junction out further than 15 meters so a u-turn is allowed will work first.
I agree that it should be an MH with no street name.
I’m not sure what the path forward would be. I don’t see a lot of these in DE, so maybe we look at them individually and see if they’re really warranted? Navigation-wise, they seem to work just fine as long as the turning movements are enabled/disabled as needed.
Well in Delaware I’m just a contributing editor, so it’s y’alls decision! I’m just here to help! 
btw, I Iike how your sig is formatted. Hope you don’t mind if I am inspired by it!
By all means! :mrgreen:
This still bothers my OCD. For traffic timing stats, a left-turn and u-turn out of that node is going to take the same amount of time so dropping that AGC in there is going to defeat that. Before when traffic stopped at the light, the amount of time it took to do the left turn at that intersection vs going straight was kept track of at the node that crosses Old Baltimore Pike. Now that’s not possible since there’s a node at the stop line further back for the u-turn. So it can only track traffic going either to the left through the u-turn or “straight.” Left turn traffic has to go straight through that node and then left at the node at Old Baltimore Pike. So we just made Waze less accurate at predicting traffic timings there.
The only place for timing purposes an AGC should be put in is for the two lefts off of Old Baltimore Pike since people wait at the light behind the one node, then proceed straight through the node and then left at the second node so it doesn’t really track the traffic delay properly for left turns there.
Yeah, I’m pontificating like I’m an expert because this is a something I just learned about during a recent map raid when Ottonomy went over how this stuff works, and I was like, “woah.” I was so impressed I copied his chat text to my wiki page…
I PM’ed PrettyInterstateMachine and got a fairly compelling response back about the early break for the u-turn – but I would say that also applies to the left-turn there since the stop line is back that far too.
I’d like to try to modify this intersection a bit to address all of our concerns, and the original editor’s issue. Russ, could you lower these segments to 3 so I can work on it please?
I’m going to model it a bit after that chat Ottoman gave on how to handle box intersections, even though this really isn’t a full box.
Thanks.
Here’s an example I did nearby similar to the box diagonals method Ottoman talks about.
It’s a tricky setup, but done right generally mitigates a lot of the routing and timing issues inherent to ‘standard’ box intersections.
I drive the Old Baltimore Pike/SR-896 intersection daily, so I’ll keep an eye on routing/timing and the like when we start testing out this idea.
Link?!
I think Waze editors should just start calling that thing he made the Ottobox. Easier to remember! I wonder if I can get that into the wiki…
Whoops, sorry about that! Here’s the link: https://www.waze.com/editor/?env=usa&lon=-75.66028&lat=39.63238&layers=3045&zoom=6&segments=79735655
And I think Ottobox is hilarious. Do it!
Someone removed that u-turn. Still waiting on an unlock to rework this intersection. Probably will put it in the unlock forum. I know russ doesn’t monitor Delaware every day (can’t imagine why, it’s such an exciting forum! )
Anyway, curious, did any of you axe the u-turn?
Not me. I must admit, I was tempted, but I didn’t do it.
I do note that all of the segments around where the AGC was deleted were last edited on Jan. 6 by the same rank-6 editor. Of course, that could just be a coincidence.
Nah, it wasn’t him. He was the one who did the initial unlock. That was the day he responded to the unlock request on the forum.
I don’t know what it looked like before so I can’t make any judgments on what was there, but we definitely still need the ability to allow u-turns on Route 7 here. Can someone tackle that?
I think that U-turns are already being handled correctly, within the limitations of the Waze routing engine. https://www.waze.com/livemap?lon=-75.7436192440407&lat=39.63950592318066&from_lon=-75.74831363331619&from_lat=39.64646373695232&to_lon=-75.74394480639164&to_lat=39.646475068441184.
Yeah, it works as is. The original user was trying to fix a UR that was complaining that Waze was saying to “turn left, then turn left” for the u-turn instead of saying to just “make a u-turn” so they put in a street named “u-turn” so it would say “keep left on u-turn”
There might be a case that the turn instruction comes late because the stop line is far back from the junction node but then you’d have to put in an AGC for a left as well and then this starts to get complicated – then what about the other side as well.
I fouled up by clicking the link above to see the intersection being discussed. My bad!
However, with that being said, the intersection of US-40 & SR-7 doesn’t allow u-turns for either direction of SR-7. That’s the one I saw needed u-turns added. Anyone here disagree?
It seems like we would need to add a junction between these two segments, and likewise on the other diagonal corner. Any problem with that?