Is it Acceptable to Map a Roundabout Incorrectly?

Image

Moderators: Unholy, Timbones

Is it Acceptable to Map a Roundabout Incorrectly?

Postby AndyPot2 » Wed Jun 25, 2014 6:00 pm

I suspect this may be divisive but I'm looking for guidance / opinions from other editors. I'm wondering if it would be acceptable to map a roundabout incorrectly to make it appear to map correctly for the majority of users :roll:

There is a UR here on the A404 which is a major dual carriageway linking the M40 with the M4, it's a road I (and I suspect a number of other editors) know well. The problem is this roundabout has 5 exits however all the road signs only show four exits. The road signs do not show a small dead end road called Under the Wood that serves a few houses.

Bisham Roundabout.JPG
Bisham Roundabout Road sign
Bisham Roundabout.JPG (24.35 KiB) Viewed 646 times


Under the Wood should be shown at the 7 o'clock position on the road sign therefore if approaching the roundabout heading towards the M4 ie staying on the A404, Waze will prompt you to take the third exit, if you follow the road sign (and why wouldn't you it's 20 foot high) you will end up turning right towards Marlow. Although I live locally and use this road a lot I had never noticed the extra exit but looking on street view it's quite obvious. I suppose in mitigation you look at that road sign and then as you approach the roundabout you are looking right trying to spot a gap, the Under the Wood exit is then out of your line of sight.

UndertheWood.JPG
Extra junction on roundabout
UndertheWood.JPG (53.16 KiB) Viewed 646 times


As can be seen Under the Wood is not just a track, in fact it's got a small traffic island separating the lanes.

I believe one solution would be to connect Under the Wood to the same node as the A308 Marlow Road. I think that will put the exit count back to 4 which should satisfy most Waze users. Looking at the road geometry I suspect that Under the Wood was originally connected to the same node as the A308 but has recently (quite correctly) been disconnected and that is why it is now mapping differently.

Anyone got any other ideas? Someone has suggested in the UR that maybe marking as a private road would help, does anyone know? I suspect that private roads will still be counted as exits.

Thanks in advance,

Andy.
AndyPot2
Area Manager
Area Manager
 
Posts: 348
Joined: Thu Dec 19, 2013 8:01 pm
Location: Beaconsfield
Has thanked: 131 times
Been thanked: 74 times

Re: Is it Acceptable to Map a Roundabout Incorrectly?

Postby CABuzz » Fri Sep 05, 2014 4:39 pm

Hello all,

I have looked over the Waze forums and I can't find an example of a working roundabout which has a similar layout to this one. The working roundabouts that do have a shared node seem to have a unique exit to that node, e.g. a one way segment entry before a two way segment or two one way segments (entry and exit). In these situations Waze can explicitly determine the exit and hence the numbering works. Here there isn't a unique exit and the routing algorithm for whatever reason doesn't like this. I agree this situation should work but only Waze HQ I guess can tell you why it doesn't. This is only my observation and may be totally incorrect and be some other bug.

In the meantime, should this junction be turned back to how it was originally? Connecting Under the Wood to the southbound A308. So that at least users get given exit numbers, correctly or incorrectly depending on their opinion.

Alternatively, what about extending the entry from the southbound A40 and connecting Under the Wood to the same node. I have driven this route quite a few times and it is quite easy to miss the Under the Wood exit, on the A40 Southbound. By doing this Under the Wood becomes a left turn instruction from the A40 southbound which there is a signpost for, near the roundabout. The exit numbers then become the same as signposted Southbound A40, which I am guessing is where most of the previous URs about exit numbers came from.

For other entry points users then have "more time" to see the Under the Wood exit and count it. Just my guess that will bring the least number of URs.

There is almost certainly something I have missed with this solution, but I would be interested to hear the thoughts of more experienced editors.

Chris
Image
I like maps.
CABuzz
Map Editor - level 2
Map Editor - level 2
 
Posts: 46
Joined: Fri Aug 01, 2014 1:10 pm
Has thanked: 20 times
Been thanked: 2 times

Re: Is it Acceptable to Map a Roundabout Incorrectly?

Postby CTCNetwork » Thu Jun 26, 2014 7:48 pm

Hi,

Yes, I have had this experience on the A610 roundabout (Nuthall Island). A central road exists but if it is connected and you follow the A610 through to nottingham you get a 4th exit for the exit onto the A610 and a raft of UR's complaining that it is the 3rd exit for the A610 when it actually isnt. Most people discount the exith thy have driven past that is on the inside of the roundabout.

So actually it does work, it just depends on your perspective and point of view.. :D

Des. . . ;)
CTCNetwork
 
Posts: 1431
Joined: Wed Aug 20, 2014 11:19 am
Has thanked: 11 times
Been thanked: 15 times

Re: Is it Acceptable to Map a Roundabout Incorrectly?

Postby CTCNetwork » Tue Sep 23, 2014 12:43 pm

Hi,
Twister-UK wrote:The actual roundabout has now been updated based on the results of my test designs, and *fingers crossed* appears to be behaving exactly as required...

For the time being.. :)

Des. . . ;)
CTCNetwork
 
Posts: 1431
Joined: Wed Aug 20, 2014 11:19 am
Has thanked: 11 times
Been thanked: 15 times

Re: Is it Acceptable to Map a Roundabout Incorrectly?

Postby ditchi56 » Wed Jun 25, 2014 7:25 pm

MsDizzie wrote:what would happen if the road was marked up as Private

The private road at this roundabout counts as an exit.
ditchi56
Area Manager
Area Manager
 
Posts: 1909
Joined: Tue May 29, 2012 12:35 pm
Has thanked: 268 times
Been thanked: 670 times

Re: Is it Acceptable to Map a Roundabout Incorrectly?

Postby ditchi56 » Wed Jun 25, 2014 7:34 pm

AndyPot2 wrote:one solution would be to connect Under the Wood to the same node as the A308

Here's an example of a roundabout with two roads connected to the same node, if you want to play and test the exit counts. I think it has the effect you want.

(Footnote: the exit count effect was not wanted at this example roundabout. The edit was done to stop the constant stream of UR's complaining about Waze routing south to north A24 traffic via the roundabout, instead of staying on the two lanes bypassing it. Despite the incorrect "1st exit" when heading from the south onto the B road, no UR has ever been raised to complain about that.)
ditchi56
Area Manager
Area Manager
 
Posts: 1909
Joined: Tue May 29, 2012 12:35 pm
Has thanked: 268 times
Been thanked: 670 times

Re: Is it Acceptable to Map a Roundabout Incorrectly?

Postby ditchi56 » Wed Jun 25, 2014 10:01 pm

MsDizzie wrote:Thanks for the answers ditchi56 (I'm still learning)

Me too!
ditchi56
Area Manager
Area Manager
 
Posts: 1909
Joined: Tue May 29, 2012 12:35 pm
Has thanked: 268 times
Been thanked: 670 times

Re: Is it Acceptable to Map a Roundabout Incorrectly?

Postby MsDizzie » Wed Jun 25, 2014 7:18 pm

Andy I was thinking "out of the box" re: what would happen if the road was marked up as Private. Its a bit of a puzzle that's for sure.
Image
MsDizzie
Area Manager
Area Manager
 
Posts: 133
Joined: Thu Mar 06, 2014 10:27 am
Has thanked: 30 times
Been thanked: 4 times

Re: Is it Acceptable to Map a Roundabout Incorrectly?

Postby MsDizzie » Wed Jun 25, 2014 9:15 pm

Thanks for the answers ditchi56 (I'm still learning)
Image
MsDizzie
Area Manager
Area Manager
 
Posts: 133
Joined: Thu Mar 06, 2014 10:27 am
Has thanked: 30 times
Been thanked: 4 times

Re: Is it Acceptable to Map a Roundabout Incorrectly?

Postby MsDizzie » Sat Aug 02, 2014 10:35 am

Spotted a couple of URs and I've made them aware that the 0th exit problem is being investigated. I've pointed them here to follow the discussion.
Image
MsDizzie
Area Manager
Area Manager
 
Posts: 133
Joined: Thu Mar 06, 2014 10:27 am
Has thanked: 30 times
Been thanked: 4 times

Next

Return to United Kingdom

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: ditchi56, Smesh1337