Get a sneak peek at whats next for Permanent Hazards on our April 7th Office Hours!
The place to get information and ask questions about everything to do with properly and successfully editing the Waze Map.

Use this forum for all general editing questions, and the sub-forums for specific types of Waze Map Editor features.
Post by BlazeTool
I don't see any reason to not do a simple u-turn lane for this one. (Unless of course the AM's and CM's have a problem with it). The only thing I would suggest is, despite the real world u-turn lane starting back near the prior intersection, keep the u-turn lane's length to a minimum so that it doesn't confuse things visually.

Not only does this function as a u-turn, but is also visually says "hey I'm a u-turn" for anyone who is not routed through the turn.
uturn.jpg
(27.52 KiB) Downloaded 434 times
BlazeTool
Posts: 142
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 2 times
Send a message

Post by BlazeTool
I assume you would use the same type as you would for an "at grade connector" which is the lesser of the two roads it connects. In this case, Minor Highway. Using a type street would add penalties for crossing type from Minor Highway to Street and then back.
BlazeTool
Posts: 142
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 2 times
Send a message

Post by Borgholio
Could use some advice myself. Simple U-turns are setting off a missing road alert. Here's one example:

https://www.waze.com/editor/?lon=-117.5 ... TTTTTTTTFT

I just added a left turn lane.

Here is another example which does not have an actual left turn lane:

https://www.waze.com/editor/?lon=-118.0 ... TTTTTTTTFT

I added an "H" connector to allow Waze to route legal U-turns there.

Is there another preferred way of dealing with "missing road" errors that are a result of legal U-turns?
Borgholio
Area Manager
Area Manager
Posts: 322
Has thanked: 17 times
Been thanked: 40 times
Send a message
You will be assimilated...bunghole!

Area Manager - Southern California, Highway 395, Yosemite National Park, Mariposa County and surrounding area.

[img]https:///NvxDK[/img] [img]https:///ZPXMBb[/img]

Post by Borgholio
Doesn't the system have issues if you mark a problem as solved when it can keep happening in the future?
Borgholio
Area Manager
Area Manager
Posts: 322
Has thanked: 17 times
Been thanked: 40 times
Send a message
You will be assimilated...bunghole!

Area Manager - Southern California, Highway 395, Yosemite National Park, Mariposa County and surrounding area.

[img]https:///NvxDK[/img] [img]https:///ZPXMBb[/img]

Post by Borgholio
So it sounds like not resolved is better since it wasn't really actually solved...
Borgholio
Area Manager
Area Manager
Posts: 322
Has thanked: 17 times
Been thanked: 40 times
Send a message
You will be assimilated...bunghole!

Area Manager - Southern California, Highway 395, Yosemite National Park, Mariposa County and surrounding area.

[img]https:///NvxDK[/img] [img]https:///ZPXMBb[/img]

Post by Borgholio
So rather than adding segments, would it instead be best to mark those Missing Road reports as not identified or solved?
Borgholio
Area Manager
Area Manager
Posts: 322
Has thanked: 17 times
Been thanked: 40 times
Send a message
You will be assimilated...bunghole!

Area Manager - Southern California, Highway 395, Yosemite National Park, Mariposa County and surrounding area.

[img]https:///NvxDK[/img] [img]https:///ZPXMBb[/img]

Post by Borgholio
Yeah that's what I mean. Ok, thanks.
Borgholio
Area Manager
Area Manager
Posts: 322
Has thanked: 17 times
Been thanked: 40 times
Send a message
You will be assimilated...bunghole!

Area Manager - Southern California, Highway 395, Yosemite National Park, Mariposa County and surrounding area.

[img]https:///NvxDK[/img] [img]https:///ZPXMBb[/img]

Post by CBenson
icebox4u wrote:Just want to confirm that if I name this new 'u-turn' segment the same as the SR7 highway, that there shouldn't be any Waze announcement given when traveling Northbound on this highway near the new u-turn?
I believe that is correct, that you will not get an announcement when traveling northbound. However, I believe that the only thing naming the segment will achieve is to have the "select entire street" function pick up this segment as well (although I'm assuming the segment is over 15m long).
CBenson
EmeritusChamps
EmeritusChamps
Posts: 10330
Has thanked: 608 times
Been thanked: 1642 times
Send a message
Regional Coordinator: Mid-Atlantic, US
Verizon, Nexus 6, Android 6.0.1, Waze 4.7.0.902

Post by CBenson
For the second example, I just mark them not identified (you may wish to mark them solved if you avoid not identified). Waze can route the U if it is appropriate without the added segment, so I don't see the necessity to add the segment.
CBenson
EmeritusChamps
EmeritusChamps
Posts: 10330
Has thanked: 608 times
Been thanked: 1642 times
Send a message
Regional Coordinator: Mid-Atlantic, US
Verizon, Nexus 6, Android 6.0.1, Waze 4.7.0.902

Post by CBenson
Borgholio wrote:Doesn't the system have issues if you mark a problem as solved when it can keep happening in the future?
Many editors mark all MPs solved to avoid attracting IGN editors as mentioned by Kuhlkatz. I'm don't really have any evidence the system that generates the MPs tracks previous issues at all. There are a number of spots on the map that will continuously generate MPs (such a tunnel where the GPS tracks don't match the road). It doesn't seem to matter whether you mark the issue "not identified" or "solved," the system just keeps generating the MPs at spots like this. The only apparent difference is that "not identified" alerts the waze team that the issue was not resolved.
CBenson
EmeritusChamps
EmeritusChamps
Posts: 10330
Has thanked: 608 times
Been thanked: 1642 times
Send a message
Regional Coordinator: Mid-Atlantic, US
Verizon, Nexus 6, Android 6.0.1, Waze 4.7.0.902