So what do we do when a private road is signposted with a 5mph speed limit, but WME will not accept that as a valid speed limit? Specific example I have come across is Thames Quays
https://www.waze.com/en-GB/editor/?env=row&lon=-0.01537&lat=51.50034&zoom=7&segments=148334716
which is clear from streetview as having a 5mph speed limit. Better to leave it without a speed limit rather than an incorrectly high one I would have thought.
Don’t set speed limits on private roads. See https://www.waze.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=55&t=176406
ah I knew the parking roads being exempt, I’d missed that private roads were too.
That’s not what it says. 
Changing the emphasis slightly, they do not need to be set. There certainly isn’t any reason not to set them.
I wasn’t aware 5mph doesn’t work. If it doesn’t work and the road is private, I wouldn’t worry about it. But I certainly set speed limits on PLR and PR when I can identify them.
Thanks for clarifying Iain. I was always under the assumption that as private road speed limits aren’t ‘legal’ limits, then they don’t go on to Waze. I stand corrected.
Breaking such limits might not result in a nice letter from the local constabulary inviting you to donate a bit of cash in return for topping up the points on your licence (and what do points make… no, not prizes in this case), but in some cases they can result in other sanctions being taken against drivers - e.g. breaking the limit on the road networks within some private sites could lead to your being banned from driving on that site, or potentially even banned from entering the site at all.
So if we know what the limit is for a stretch of private road, then it’s definitely worth adding it to the Waze map data - I just wouldn’t worry too much about spending any real time or effort in trying to verify any private road limits when they’re not already known, at least not until every public road segment has had it’s limit set correctly, every last UR, MP and PUR has been dealt with, and there genuinely is absolutely nothing else that needs looking at by any of us… So, basically, never :lol:
I’m basing the 5mph not working right because if you set it at 5mph two things happen, firstly the highlight in the validator is bright red (i.e. this is WRONG red) which could just be a thing, but also the popup when you roll over the 5mph road says “A-B speed 5MPH (Not valid)”
That’s because URO+ (which generates that popup) doesn’t have an encylopedic knowledge of every valid limit for every country in the world, and instead uses a set of basic rules to flag up potentially invalid limits - when editing within the UK, the rule is simply that any limit which isn’t a multiple of 10MPH is considered invalid. Note also that the popup actually says (not valid?) - i.e. it’s questioning whether the limit on that segment is correct, as opposed to stating that it isn’t correct
It won’t be difficult to inhibit the validity check on segments tagged as private/parking/etc, where non-standard limits may be found, so I’ll add that to my to-do list for the next release…
Essentially, scripts like URO+ and Validator are trying to perform an additional layer of validation on top of what Waze itself requires. If WME allows a limit value to be set and saved, and if it then also displays the same value after reloading the newly saved segment data, then it’s a valid limit as far as Waze’s internal handling of speed limits is concerned. Our extra layer of validation is there to try and root out limits which are valid for Waze, but not necessarily valid for that particular type of road in that particular part of the world.
There’s a lot of interesting points here:-
Set it, WillFeasey, but bear in mind what Ian said
Yes, searching for them would be pointless, but this one was obvious. Also, Thames Quay is a pretty big development, so there’s a good chance that a few Waze users will go there.
Well, it ‘works’ in that you can set it, but in WME it flags up as
A-B speed: 5MPH (not valid?)
Indeed, it might not be valid. The DfT says that “all speed limits must be in multiples of 10 mph”, which seems to rule out the possibility of there being a 5 mph limit (and why WME accepts a 10 mph limit as valid, but not 5 mph), but have seen hospitals with 5 and 10 mph limits set (admittedly on ‘home-made’ signs). Technically, it’s just about impossible to drive at 5 mph and some digital speedometers don’t show a speed of less than 8 mph, which should be enough to get a driver prosecuted if the police’s supposed tolerance level is a fact. What I can’t find any factual evidence for is whether trying to enforce a 5 mph limit is even legal. Ignoring this suggested limit though
So good enough reason to enter 10 mph or 5 mph limits where they can be seen, ‘valid’ or not.
But Private Roads get a bit more complicated: Have a look at the area of Wilmslow. To the north and south of Macclesfield Rd are estates that have their roads set as ‘Private Roads’. Take the southern one first.
There is only one way into this estate. GSV shows no gate, no barrier. In my opinion a private road can’t be private unless access to it can be closed. There is a sign saying “Private Road Residents Parking Only” and another saying “Private Road 20 mph”. I’m not sure about the enforceability of the first, but the second is not legally enforceable. The estate would ‘inherit’ the 30 mph speed limit of Macclesfield Rd. However, Editors have been sufficiently confused to leave the entire private road estate without speed limits.
The northern estate is different. It has access from Macclesfield Rd and Addlington Rd. At both there are official roadsigns posting a 30 mph limit and forbidding any vehicles except for access. At the Macclesfield Rd access, there is an additional sign banning 7 1/2 tonners (and lorries with higher axle weights) because of a width restriction. Much clearer to Editors, the 30 mph limit has been applied to all segments on this estate.
In addition, Private Roads can be used as a tool, as in this estate in Warrington. This is not a private estate, but there are roadsigns at every access point to it banning all traffic except for access. It was, I think Kkervinjones who came up with the solution to make every segment accessing this estate a private road. Effectively, this prevnts Waze from making through navigations, but allows navigations to destinations on the estate.
In my opinion, the mapping of the two Wilmslow estates should follow this pattern, with private roads set only at the access points from other roads. This would open up the mapping in WME, so it could be read more easily by Editors and the roads within the estates showing up more clearly on the app for those who need to get to an address on either estate.
Sorry to bang on, but I find Private Roads and invalid speed limits strangely fascinating. :geek:
Mike
I think the enforceability or legality of speed limits on private roads is entirely a red herring. It has no effect on whether we should set them.
If a private road has a white circular sign with a red border and a black speed limit number, that is an entirely reasonable request from the owner/manager of the private road that that speed limit should be observed. Additionally, if we do not set the speed limit, users will inevitably report it as missing. If a clearly posted speed limit is visible to us, then map it.
As for WME saying 5mph is not valid, please let me be clear. The Waze Map Editor is saying nothing of the sort. If WME knew all the valid speed limits that were possible, it could then restrict us to always using one of them. These warnings (in the pop-up from URO+ and the highlight from Validator) are nothing more than advisory warnings from add-on scripts. They are pointing out that, based on some simple rules, a speed limit of 5mph may not be correct.
It is important to remember that the various scripts that attempt to point out potential mistakes are only advising us of possible issues. Consider WME Color Highlights: this highlights every un-named road in orange. But, as anyone who has edited in the UK countryside knows full well, there are thousands of miles of country roads in the UK that have no name.