Jughandles

[WeeeZer14]

Jughandles are usually set back far enough from the actual junction to be capable of servicing an overpass junction, had an overpass actually been built, even though that actual junction is just an at-grade traffic signal.

This is a very good point. At many (most?) jughandle equipped intersections in NJ, the traffic on the main/major/bigger route actually functions as if there was an overpass. At the grade intersection itself, no turns of any kind are allowed. If it wasn't for traffic from the crossing road entering the main road, it could very well be mapped as if it were an overpass. So the jughandle basically does act as an exit ramp to the traffic on the main road.

[WeeeZer14]

Sleep is overrated. And only in New Jersey does a 3 mile stretch of highway (US-22 in Union and Springfield) get its own unique classification...

I would agree that the key determination is the presence of a BGS. That's the primary reason for deviating from the Wiki and using a ramp: to suppress its long text.

Maybe your Wiki text should be updated to emphasize that the exception counts where any kinds of exit sign (BGS) is present, as opposed to the way it is now, where it seems to emphasize having an actual exit number to count for this exception?

All the time I've spent on the road lately, all I wanted was my own bed. Now that I have it? I am sitting at the computer

22 in Union and Springfield is my old stomping ground. I always said they couldn't decide if they wanted a super highway or a mall loop road, so they built one thing to be both!

I agree that signage could be a good trigger, but will we count a LGS as well as a BGS? What if the signs just say "All Turns"? What if there is a BGS but it just has the exact name of the intersecting road -- nothing more, nothing less?

For the wiki, I'd lean towards adding another example since the existing GSP one is basically just turn lanes mapped. The existing wording would probably get tweaked also. But I'll wait for a consensus to bubble up before worrying about wiki edits

[WeeeZer14]

Okay orbitc wins the bonus points. (Not that they are worth anything )

So I was in bed trying to get to sleep but I kept thinking about this more and I had the thought of these two cases:

1.) A road segment that supplements an intersection. This is basically the At-grade connector as depicted in the wiki where we are indicating a path of travel that is "too far away" from the main intersection or needs advance instructions.
2.) A road segment that functions on its own with no related intersection. This would be the U-turn only jughandle or these in the median u-turns on 22 (which over time have been ramps and major highway back and forth ad nauseum).

But then jughandles for a "normal" intersection could arguably fall into case 1 and we are more or less back to where we began.

The wiki for at-grade connectors DOES have an exception where we use ramps -- I put in the exits on the southern end of the GSP where they are just grade intersections BUT they are signed as exits with a BGS. So we can extend that exception to include jughandles with a BGS (or more likely a LGS) which covers the concern of long names.

There has been some concern expressed about using street type for a jughandle. If say route 9 intersects with a regular street and it has the same name on both sides of the highway and the sign for the jughandle has the name of the road, why NOT have the jughandle as type Street? That would follow the existing at-grade connector guidance. And using ramp in that case has the negative that we usually prefer (not sure if we ever agreed or documented it) that a ramp should connect to primary streets at the lowest since if it is important enough to have a ramp, it must be more than a regular street.

Sorry for the jumble of thoughts, I had to get these thoughts down so I could sleep!

[WeeeZer14]

Okay here is a wonderful example of NJDOT's best.

The current Waze map version has been heavily modified by multiple users so I did a mock up. This is what it would look like using At-grade connector rules:

Fun fun fun

Waze_at-grade-jughandles.png (443.18 KiB) Viewed 1596 times

Light grey arrows show the major flows of traffic for the minor highway. Basically it switches which side of the freeway it travels along at this point.

This is what I had in mind when I said it can be confusing and sloppy looking.

Crazy thought, but wouldn't it be nice if Ramp didn't have a priority of its own and it just inherited the priority of the segments to which it was connected?

Bonus points to anyone who recognizes where this is in NJ

[WeeeZer14]

Ironically, someone made the simple right-turn connectors across the street into ramps...

Yeah that is the type of segment I think every one of us here will agree should be treated as an at-grade connector and nothing more in 99% of cases.

And these junghandles-via-surface-street beasts are probably a whole different topic that touches on which street types are used for different distances. A topic that has been brought up to Waze and they are working on changes so we probably shouldn't focus too much on those.

But I would say ramps should NOT have residences on them. Businesses? Preferably not, but I bet they exist (especially gas stations).

RE: your last example, all of a sudden the basemap "Ramp" label all of a sudden starts to look like a good idea

[WeeeZer14]

Using surface streets as a jughandle is another fun deal. Here is an example in Cherry Hill that isn't perfect right now. The highlighted path is how you need to head north from east bound 70. A similar situation exists on the other side too. Luckily in this case the N/S road is "only" a primary street. But if it were Minor or Major we'd have a much bigger problem.

Okay then, lets focus the conversation as such:
Find a situation where the current rules for at-grade connectors applied to a jughandle does NOT work or is not ideal for any reason.

[WeeeZer14]

I too of course prefer one simple set of rules to follow nation-wide. I just know that jughandles seem to always create questions and so far we do not directly cover them. When I wrote the wiki pages for At-grade connectors I left jug handles out specifically because I wasn't sure at the time.

Anyway, I should note that the specific case of jughandle that brought this topic up this time is the jughandle that only serves as a U-turn. Here is the same jughandle shown 3 different ways:

Major

jug_major.png (166.52 KiB) Viewed 2053 times

Ramp

jug_ramp.png (154.27 KiB) Viewed 2055 times

Street

jug_street.png (168.79 KiB) Viewed 2055 times

I'll see if I can find some other interesting examples of situations more like what most people consider to be an at grade connector...

[WeeeZer14]

So the topic of jughandles bugs me every time I edit one or near one. I've been on the road almost constantly the past 2 months so I haven't edited one recently, but a conversation with orbitc got me thinking again.

Of course road types in general are up in the air right now as we wait on Waze to refine the routing engine, but I still think we can at least start to think about this topic.

So what is the best road type to use for a jughandle? I'm starting this conversation in the NJ forum since NJ must have the most jughandles per capita in the country

There are 3 main options I think:

• same as the road it is serving
• Ramp
• Street

But each as pros and cons:

• same as the road it is serving
  
  • Follows wiki guidelines for at-grade connectors
  • no routing penalty for street type changes
  • does a short curved loop of asphalt with slow transit times that is mainly used by local traffic really deserve to be the same type as the main road?
  • May look sloppy or confusing on the map
• Ramp
  
  • Against current wiki guidelines for at-grade connectors
  • allows "hiding" of long names which may be on signs for the jughandle
  • does a short curved loop of asphalt with slow transit times that is mainly used by local traffic really deserve to be a HIGHER type than the main road?
  • May "look" better since it is visually different from the main road
• Street
  
  • Against current wiki guidelines for At-grade connectors
  • May hinder use of a jughandle in the middle of a long distance route (I am not sure of a specific example, but I wouldn't doubt one exists)
  • May "look" better since it is visually different from the main road

I've definitely SEEN all three approaches in use. And I bet I have personally USED all three approaches at different times.

Does anyone have any other approaches? Any personal experience of how an approach works or doesn't work in real life? Any pros or cons I neglected to list?

[sketch]

[*]same as the road it is serving

• Follows wiki guidelines for at-grade connectors
• no routing penalty for street type changes
• does a short curved loop of asphalt with slow transit times that is mainly used by local traffic really deserve to be the same type as the main road?
• May look sloppy or confusing on the map

I disagree with the last two points here, especially the last point. Making jughandles stand out on the map should be a desired goal, so a user glancing at a map sees it coming and doesn't disregard it as an insignificant local street.

I can see a case for using the ramp type very sparingly for certain at-grade connectors, but I do agree that it might give inexperienced editors the wrong idea.

[PhantomSoul]

If the cross street is a primary street, then the standard at-grade connector rule says to use primary street for the connector, regardless of the main road type. Would that primary street fork approaching the connector say "exit right" or "keep right"? With jughandle connectors, that really needs to say "exit right" - something that can only be consistently produced by using ramps, if I understand correctly.