Get a sneak peek at whats next for Permanent Hazards on our April 7th Office Hours!

Post Reply

[Page update] At Grade Connectors

Post by
I would like to change this page:
https://www.waze.com/wiki/At-Grade_Conn ... _mapped.3F

To remove the bolded section:
Should the connector be mapped?

First and foremost, the need to have the connector mapped needs to be established. As the driver approaches an intersection, Waze has usually given at least one warning that a turn is imminent, and we can assume that the driver is already looking for turn lanes. For most intersections, that is enough to guide the driver into the proper lane and to turn at the proper time; in other words, it is enough that the two roads intersect without separately mapped turning lanes.

There are only a few situations in which connectors are called for in an intersection:

When the turn lane physically separates from the main road well in advance of the intersection
When the turn lane is far enough from the point of intersection on the map (due to the size of the intersection or the angle at which the roads meet) that the driver might overshoot while waiting for a delayed "turn" audible, or that the Waze client might become confused and disrupt navigation
When the area is "busy" enough that the driver may not get any advance warning that a turn is coming up--in which case a connector lets you notify the driver a little earlier
When there are user complaints (update requests) that the audible was too late, or that the map should have shown a connector
When you get an automated report (map problem) that the roads are too far apart due to the intersection being too far from the turn lane
As written, we'd be adding turn lanes to just about any decently sized intersection that uses a mapcat bowtie. I feel the rest of the reasons listed for adding a turn lane cover the times when a turn lane is needed. The MPs about roads being too far apart have too many false positives to be used as a justification by itself to add a turn lane.

Inspired by this thread:
viewtopic.php?f=8&t=69514

[EDIT: Wiki change completed Nov 18, 2013]

POSTER_ID:6884845

1

Send a message
Last edited by kentsmith9 on Wed Mar 19, 2014 3:49 am, edited 3 times in total.
Reason: Updated thread title; noted Wiki edit completed

Post by CBenson
Doesn't the "What links here" link in the "Tools" box at the bottom left of each page provide the information.
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
I hate to muddy the water. There was some objection to the visual appearance of the highway AGCs here. Thus, if we are going to revisit the typing for AGCs there are a couple more options that should be considered to reduce the clutter on the map. One is to use ramps. Another is to use the same road type as the AGC splits from. These options would reduce the number of highway AGCs. The ramp option would not address the exit problem that you raise.
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
Well personally, I don't find the vast majority of ACGs at cross roads to provide any clarity when I drive. I can figure out to be in the right turn lane for an upcoming turn right instruction and in the left turn lane for an upcoming turn left instruction. So I'd be happy just eliminating most ACGs. On the other hand some users clearly prefer the earlier instructions and all things being equal I prefer more information to less. So I'm not advocating eliminating ACGs where they are separated from the intersection.

Map clutter would seem to be a visual clarity issue for drivers as much as getting "keep" rather than an "exit" instruction would be a spoken clarity issue. Neither seem to be functional operation issue to me. Using the type that the AGC splits from would produce the same spoken instructions as using the higher road type and would result in fewer highway type AGCs to the extent that some users find highway AGCs unclear on the map.

I would be happy with any of these options. If forced to vote, I'd vote for the status quo as I don't see these issues as being significant enough to be worth spending a lot time going back to change a bunch of AGCs.
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
sketch wrote:A total rewrite of the AGC rules is unnecessary and overbroad, would lead to an ugly map, would be extremely tedious to implement, and would serve no purpose other than to change a few "exit" instructions to "stay" instructions.
Agreed, except for the "lead to an ugly map" as I'm not sure how a rewrite would lead to an uglier map than the current guidance does.
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
We have agreed to several exceptions to not using ramps for at-grade-connectors. The wiki currently lists Median U turn intersections, Restricted crossing U turns, Displaced left turn intersections, Jughandles and signed numbered exits as exceptions. My understanding of the upside to these exceptions is the suppression of the segment name on the map. I had though the only downside would be possible display issues with ramps.

However, in response to the routing issue raised here, the waze routing team responded that this is a
3 road type issue, we have a high penalty when you're on major highway -> exit to ramp -> enter to primary street, to solve it try to change the ramp to primary street or major highway
Accordingly, I believe we need to revisit the exceptions to not using ramps for AGCs. At least where there is no name on the segment (like the jughandle at issue in the other thread), the normal street types would be better options.
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
As you might imagine, I don't know the answer to your questions. I have no objection to trying to get more information. However, if the reason to use ramps is just that we presumed the ramp to be type agnostic and now we are told it is not, then it seems we need to change to our guidance for using the ramp type.
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
Let's race. I'll change the guidance. You get them to remove that penalty.
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
sketch wrote:Okay, but then you also have to change all the segments that were edited following that guidance first.
Alright point taken (although the ones around here haven't caught up this guidance yet). I'll wait to see what further we can find about why the routing works this way and if it can be changed.
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
I do find the visuals in the wiki helpful on this issue.
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
sketch wrote:Or we need to get them to remove that penalty.
Any word on the status of this penalty. If they aren't going to remove/change it, then we should implement their advice not use ramp type for jughandles.
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