Great discussion here. There are thousands WME of road segments in CT with posted black and white SL signage. This signage is visible to the driver. Since the CT-DOT speed limit list only covers about 60-70% of the road segments in CT - those segments not on the list with Posted SL signage will never be mapped on the WME. I drive through CT weekly make notes of roads where no SL comes up on the app. When i check the list - they are not on the DOT list. Most of these segments are "Street" type, who's weighted average only counts about 2% against SL update %, or so.. By Waze standards, these roads are relatively insignificant for SL purposes.

That brings me back to my post previously. Do we treat "street" type - L1 locked road segments differently? A large percentage are not on the CT-DOT list. Waze places a low (low single digit %) weighted value on adding speed limits to "Street" type segments when calculating the state rank. Something like 90% of the weighted speed limit ranking comes from FW, MH and mH updates. Most of those are on the CT-DOT list and match posted signage.

My suggestion is to add wiki guidance to grant an exception to the CT Waze Wiki for "Street" type segments and allow SV images to be used for mapping SL's. This will provide editors the opportunity to update these segments and match posted signage - which is how SL's are mapped on WME using USA guidance. CT is the only state that does not follow USA Wiki guidance for mapping SL's.

All other WME road types (FW, MH, mH & PS) will utilize the current CT wiki SL guidance with the intent of submitting a list of discrepancies to CT-DOT. I don't believe such a list is necessary for "Street" type's - the majority of which are 25-35 mph, as they are not listed on the CT-DOT list in the first place. Void filled.

Using only the official state SL list is a good start, but what do when part or all of a street is not covered on the list? For example Browning Rd in Norwich is 25 MPH from Rogers Rd to Yantic Ln, but is not on the list from Yantic Ln to Bozrah town Line.

How about Exit road types with white SL signage? Most are either yellow signs or none, but there are some with enforceable white signs.

We have. But it's Andy's state apparently; we're just living in it. ;P

New editor actually in CT here... So after reading the entire thread, I agree with AndyPoms. Let's update based on the DOT list, and then see what's left. Any streets that are left, personally, I think should be based on what is physically posted - whether enforceable or not. As has been said, the average driver using Waze only cares about not getting a ticket. A local cop is going to go off the posted sign, and it is a PITA to have to fight that using statute, regulation, and some list from DOT. Most will just pay it.... So why don't we help them to avoid it in the first place?

In summary, I support the project to update the CT SLs based on the list from DOT first...

This is what I was basing my post off of - if the powers that be at Waze want what is legal entered, then that is what we should do. We can then go back and report discrepancies and add in missing SLs.

AndyPoms wrote:I've discussed this with the Staff at length, they want the LEGAL speed limit in the app (i.e. the one from the list).

There's always going to be controversy when you have conflicting sources of truth.

As Sanzclew indicates some consistency is needed -- is the intent of using Waze as a navigation app to attempt to be the source of truth (i.e., superceding posted signs) or to be an aid to information existing on the road? Clearly as map editors we want to supply information which is legally correct but. . .

#1 Waze Terms of Use has as its first key point:
"Road information prevails. The information provided by the Service is not intended to replace the information provided on the road, such as travel direction, time based restrictions, lane restrictions, road blockades, traffic signs, traffic lights, police instructions, etc."

It may be true that the official lists are what are enforceable in court, but by intentionally editing to different standards than those posted on the streets, it seems that we're also intentionally creating conflict.

#2 As eaglestailg8ter pointed out in local conversations, the CT General Statues CT Gen Stat § 14-218a (2014) states "The presence of such signs adjacent to or on the highway or parking area for ten cars or more shall be prima facie evidence that they have been so placed under the direction of and with the approval of the Office of the State Traffic Administration."

It is quite possible that when there is a discrepency that signs have been erected without the required process and approval of the OSTA and is therefore is not legally enforceable (i.e., won't hold up in court).

However, this statue also indicates that a driver legally could be pulled over and ticketed for violating a posted speed limit. Then the onus is up to the driver to prove that the sign was not legally erected (if the driver knows about the process required to erect signs).

If the posted limit somehow ends up faster than the "official list" limit you can't really be legally ticketed for violating the official list limit given that the posted limit is prima facie the legal limit (even if not legally erected). And if you do, you can still argue that you were driving the prima facie limit.

#3 From a pragmatic standpoint, how does an editor respond to a UR that says that the SL on Waze is not matching the SL posted on the street? It would be going down a slippery slope to say "Waze is correct here, please see the official list as the street sign is incorrect" as that effectively goes against that first key term in the TOS.

Importantly, I agree that this should probably not be a CT-specific decision, as this issue exists in other states.

Having a state-specific decision would cause even more confusion amongst both editors and drivers, particularly since many editors and many drivers cover multiple states and regions.

I was under the impression that the posted signs that we see within WME's street view is old or missing in most cases. When that's the case, (missing signs or old date on the WME SV) the best alternative is to use DOT data.
Now, I'm hearing that there are major conflicts with the DOT data and the posted (Current or up to date signage).

My question is:
How do we inventory of all those posted signs and that they are current (not based on the old WME SV image).
Also, how many conflicts are there in between the actual signs on the roads and DOT data