Proposal: partial divide of Paradise Rd under Monorail
An informal discussion has arisen among Las Vegas editors about possibly dividing a portion of Paradise Road under the monorail tracks. Opening for discussion amongst all editors and, of course RMs, Champs, etc.
Left hand turns along this section (SB at Edison and Elm, NB at Sierra Vista) require the user to get into the left turn lane well before the intersection (50m at Edison, 75m at Sierra Vista, 100m at Elm).
Permalink
The default representation for any roadway is a single 2-way segment, even if the physical roadway is divided. Dividing a roadway carries with it the burden of proof that the change will improve the usability and/ or simplicity of the Waze map.
Arguments for dividing this road:
1. Usability. These left turn lanes are actually separated from the main traffic by a concrete barrier so if you miss the early turn, you're out of luck. At one intersection (Elm), where Waze directs a left turn, the left turn is actually not possible (unless you were smart enough 100m earlier to get into the turn lane.) Separating would allow enabling earlier turn instructions and properly restricting the turn at the opening for the cases where left turn is only allowed from the turn lanes.
2. Usability. The monorail tracks (railroad type) currently do not display on the client, but may display in a future version. Currently the road is offset to one side of the monorail tracks (so that it can be edited) but this would create a confusing picture to a client who saw tracks on the opposite side in reality as in the client. (And it's a pain to edit with the tracks there.)
3. Simplicity. A one-way segment on one side of a clearly raised barrier will conform the map to a user's visual expectations.
4. The section may meet one of the criteria for dividing: U-turns are required to properly make turns from public drivable road types that are blocked by a median. A U-turn at Sands (or creative driving at a business off Elm) is required to get to the Embassy Suites from southbound Paradise Rd. (However, waze does not give a U-turn instruction there and U-turns are not allowed at Elm.)
5. The section of road does not meet any of the listed criteria for not dividing.
1. If a road is currently working with no problem reports, consider leaving it as is
We have not been receiving many problem reports although those of us who drive there have frequently missed turns... when we actually turn. The main road, as an arterial, receives a LOT of traffic and the turns are comparatively seldom used (Edison goes to an apartment complex, Elm goes to a hotel and convenience store, Sierra Vista goes to a gated service entrance).
2. Try to avoid switching roads back and forth between being divided and 2-way. For example, if most of the road is clearly divided and only parts would be considered a single two-way road, consider leaving it all divided. If only a small portion seems better off divided, consider keeping it all 2-way.
This is less than a half mile stretch of the road and the remainder of Paradise (except for the portion where it connects to the Airport Connector) is clearly 2-way.
3. Simplicity. This will require the divided main road segments (not a huge problem) and each separated left turn lane (3) to be mapped.
4. Generally, a road should be undivided unless it meets any of the requirements for dividing a road. The road does not clearly meet most of the specific criteria for dividing.
Left hand turns along this section (SB at Edison and Elm, NB at Sierra Vista) require the user to get into the left turn lane well before the intersection (50m at Edison, 75m at Sierra Vista, 100m at Elm).
Permalink
The default representation for any roadway is a single 2-way segment, even if the physical roadway is divided. Dividing a roadway carries with it the burden of proof that the change will improve the usability and/ or simplicity of the Waze map.
Arguments for dividing this road:
1. Usability. These left turn lanes are actually separated from the main traffic by a concrete barrier so if you miss the early turn, you're out of luck. At one intersection (Elm), where Waze directs a left turn, the left turn is actually not possible (unless you were smart enough 100m earlier to get into the turn lane.) Separating would allow enabling earlier turn instructions and properly restricting the turn at the opening for the cases where left turn is only allowed from the turn lanes.
2. Usability. The monorail tracks (railroad type) currently do not display on the client, but may display in a future version. Currently the road is offset to one side of the monorail tracks (so that it can be edited) but this would create a confusing picture to a client who saw tracks on the opposite side in reality as in the client. (And it's a pain to edit with the tracks there.)
3. Simplicity. A one-way segment on one side of a clearly raised barrier will conform the map to a user's visual expectations.
4. The section may meet one of the criteria for dividing: U-turns are required to properly make turns from public drivable road types that are blocked by a median. A U-turn at Sands (or creative driving at a business off Elm) is required to get to the Embassy Suites from southbound Paradise Rd. (However, waze does not give a U-turn instruction there and U-turns are not allowed at Elm.)
5. The section of road does not meet any of the listed criteria for not dividing.
- Median is about 6-7m (one lane width plus monorail support width) and about 3 feet high barrier along most of its length
- The cross segments at two of the intersections do not permit left turn for the side of the median without turn lanes, and the third has no cross segment
- No center turn lane (all turn lanes are clearly defined one-way)
- No u-turns
1. If a road is currently working with no problem reports, consider leaving it as is
We have not been receiving many problem reports although those of us who drive there have frequently missed turns... when we actually turn. The main road, as an arterial, receives a LOT of traffic and the turns are comparatively seldom used (Edison goes to an apartment complex, Elm goes to a hotel and convenience store, Sierra Vista goes to a gated service entrance).
2. Try to avoid switching roads back and forth between being divided and 2-way. For example, if most of the road is clearly divided and only parts would be considered a single two-way road, consider leaving it all divided. If only a small portion seems better off divided, consider keeping it all 2-way.
This is less than a half mile stretch of the road and the remainder of Paradise (except for the portion where it connects to the Airport Connector) is clearly 2-way.
3. Simplicity. This will require the divided main road segments (not a huge problem) and each separated left turn lane (3) to be mapped.
4. Generally, a road should be undivided unless it meets any of the requirements for dividing a road. The road does not clearly meet most of the specific criteria for dividing.
- No clearly definable gap in GPS tracks
- No on-street parking
- No U-turns required (But possibly see item 4 above.)
Re: Proposal: partial divide of Paradise Rd under Monorail