Switch to full style
Post a reply

Re: No through traffic

Tue Jun 24, 2014 6:24 am

kentsmith9 wrote:The only down side to that technique is that vehicles on the two main side roads that parallel Matteson will not be routed straight across through the middle of the neighborhood, but will be forced to be routed to the main roads on the perimeter.
You forgot about the traffic going "eastbound" on Matteson TO the freeway onramp at the same intersection. All of these unncessary restrictions now destroy Waze's raison d'etre; namely, finding the Smart route, to avoid the complete rush hour gridlock on the three MH streets around this area.
kentsmith9 wrote:There are no other signs on the other roads into that neighborhoods simply because no traffic is coming from those directions
Um, wow.

Since this has now drifted into this thread, and you've opened the side discussion about the right turn here, allow me to present the following:
Sawtelle Matteson west corner.jpg
(63.17 KiB) Downloaded 920 times

which clearly shows the rounded corner, allowing right turns from Sawtelle into Matteson. Were the right discouraged or restricted, the choke area would come out to a squared corner, as it does in many other places in the city, rather than having a gentle curve. Additionally, if traffic were to be restricted from Sawtelle, there would be plentiful signage facing north and south, clearly indicating same, and there would not likely be a Left Turn Arrow light, as there is on N/B Sawtelle.

There are definitely places, like Estrella in Scotts Valley, where a Private Road segment on an otherwise public street is absolutely the correct solution for discouraging Through Traffic -- I've done it many times myself, in other places -- THIS is not one of them.

That said, my feeling is that there should be a brief mention of this usage under Private on the Road Types page, with a link elsewhere for expansion and clarification. I feel that Private Installation is not the correct place for that expansion, due to the extra confusion juxtaposing Private/Public already causes, so I agree with Kent that a new page, or, possibly another location in the Wiki (not coming to mind at the moment) would be a better place.

Re: No through traffic

Tue Jun 24, 2014 7:22 am

tonestertm wrote:
kentsmith9 wrote:The only down side to that technique is that vehicles on the two main side roads that parallel Matteson will not be routed straight across through the middle of the neighborhood, but will be forced to be routed to the main roads on the perimeter.
You forgot about the traffic going "eastbound" on Matteson TO the freeway onramp at the same intersection. All of these unncessary restrictions now destroy Waze's raison d'etre; namely, finding the Smart route, to avoid the complete rush hour gridlock on the three MH streets around this area.

My proposal was to make the area private inside the houses streets so Waze would have no problem exiting the area back to the freeway on the route you noted.

I don't think I have ever seen a road that had a no thru traffic sign have more than one sign at the entrance of the road. A posted sign is enforceable to the entrance regardless of where you come from and how early you can see it.

Re: No through traffic

Tue Jun 24, 2014 8:30 am

Looking at the image, I can see that the larger-than-normal curb appears to be made that way to deal with the fact that the road afterwards is allowing curbside parking. The massive curb seems to "shield" the cars parked on the street from anyone coming westbound on Matteson.

Here is a clearer version of the sign that Kent showed in his initial shoot about the right hand turn. It states "No Thru Traffic" so it's trying to inform drivers coming off of the ramp that "this road is for those who live here" and not to be used as a regular street. Hence why certain trucks aren't allowed in it as well. Looks like the community managed to convince the city council to do this. But it does not restrict those travelling north or south on Sartelle Blvd as they do not have the same sign, thus the "no thru traffic" wouldn't apply to them.
big curb turn.jpg
(90.26 KiB) Downloaded 584 times

Re: No through traffic

Tue Jun 24, 2014 8:36 am

But if you look at this lovely, Californian decorated sign, you can see that traffic can go any way......Sorry, just wanted to show the sign. :D
lovely sign.jpg
(72.84 KiB) Downloaded 586 times

Re: No through traffic

Tue Jun 24, 2014 12:03 pm

There is one thing that we can do to do a partial private implementation. Have a brief split in the Matheson road at Sawtelle. The incoming lane would be private, the outgoing lane would not. This accomplishes what private installations are supposed to, except only in this direction on this one street. Waze will not route traffic onto it, bit it will route traffic out of it.

It would be a tiny flattened diamond, or two half bowties if you will.

It will still have the downside of local destinations being unnecessarily routed around this street, but at least it won't affect any other routes in or through the neighborhood.

Re: No through traffic

Tue Jun 24, 2014 12:40 pm

Fredo-p wrote:So, would all of the roads associated with a "no thru" community have to be set as private road? Or, could you only set the access streets as private and, depending on the type of location, (gated community), make the rest parking lot roads?

I would get txemt or driving79's input on this as they deal a lot with gated communities and "no through traffic"

My understanding of the situation in talking to them is that the roads need to be set like the large private installations. Otherwise people leaving the neighborhood or access will have trouble getting the correct routing out. The routing engine for some reason seems to have a tough time in larger areas that are all set to private roads on the correct routing out of the neighborhood.

I have been trying to prove that theory wrong for about two months now, but have been unsuccessful in doing so. I am not sure if either would have any input in no through streets but the concept seems to be the same to me.

Re: No through traffic

Tue Jun 24, 2014 5:48 pm

For the 2nd example, I would use the private in, street out that is used for private installations....only on the one from the ramp (that sign is confusing to me). As for the first example I would be ok with the one segment as private, how it is now, because you have street types on either side of it so routing should send people out correctly. You could do the private in, street out for the 1st example, but I think it's overkill and the one private road should accomplish what is needed, so keep it more simple. I would also test the heck out of the 1st example to make sure it's doing what is desired, once live (including leaving a home from inside the private segment).

We have tons and tons of these in Florida, especially Orlando or the nicer areas, where entire neighborhoods which would be great to cut through, are not allowed. If you mark all the streets inside these as all private, it does not route you back out of it correctly. The only way we have had 100% success is with the private in, street out.

Re: No through traffic

Tue Jun 24, 2014 8:05 pm

driving79 wrote:For the 2nd example, I would use the private in, street out that is used for private installation
On the second one I originally considered the Private in, Street out, but that restricts movement from Sawtelle to Matteson. As shown above, there is clearly an allowed right turn from "southbound" Sawtelle, and this left turn arrow on "northbound" Sawtelle
Sawtelle Matteson left turn arrow.jpg
(52.68 KiB) Downloaded 879 times

clearly shows that traffic is allowed there. Along with the lack of any north- or south- bound signage it's pretty obvious the only thing intended to be restricted here is the freeway offramp traffic. For this, a TR from the offramp serves essentially the same purpose without limiting the Sawtelle traffic.

Re: No through traffic

Tue Jun 24, 2014 8:11 pm

So what if I'm coming off the ramp and going straight because I live there? Wouldn't a TR stop that? I don't think they really want tons of people turning right from Sawtelle that don't live in there either, I get it's not clearly posted from that direction. If you only do the TR from the ramp, then waze may do funky routes from the ramp to get them to turn right onto Sawtelle, uturn using other streets nearby and then turn right onto it (because it would still be faster). Not ideal.

Re: No through traffic

Tue Jun 24, 2014 8:31 pm

This appears to be a limit to Wazes nav functions. Until Wazes algorithm can determine whether to route some whose address is in that community vs routing someone around due to the road segment restriction, its going to be one or the other. Time to request this algorithm feature be developed.

Sent from my DROID4 using Tapatalk
Post a reply