CBenson wrote: As far as the draft goes, I have some issues with defining an expressways as partially-limited-access roadways.

That's the shorthand I used for it, but if there's objection to it (if y'all think it'll be confusing), we can just spell out "partially-limited-access roadways" instead.

Do you have any thoughts on the ramp-serviceroad-highway connection issue?

Wrong link?

I remember that thread. "Service Road" seems to have been used consistently for Texas's feeder roads. They probably came that way from the basemap. As far as I know, it hasn't led to any problems besides detour prevention failures. Also as far as I know, there hasn't been any concerted effort to come up with a new type for it. If they are all converted to "streets", a lot of routes will fail, and quickly.

I suppose another alternative would be to make all such collector/distributor service roads "minor highway" — continuous ones, like in Texas or Detroit. I imagine this would allow proper routing in most instances, and if we did to change the short segments between ramps and a Major Highway cross-street to Major Highway, it wouldn't look all that bad. It doesn't work, however, for "service road"-type interchanges without continuous service roads—it looks really, very bad. Ramps could be used for this, but it requires careful naming.

CBenson wrote: As far as the draft goes, I have some issues with defining an expressways as partially-limited-access roadways.

BTW, my use of "expressway" is consistent with the MUTCD:

Section 1A.13 Definitions of Headings, Words, and Phrases in this Manual wrote:"71. Expressway—a divided highway with partial control of access."

AndyPoms wrote: By mapping a surface street any higher than "Minor Highway" you WILL cause routing problems & Waze won't detect/highlight traffic on those streets (using the default segment speed as a point of reference).

My experience is quite contrary to this. I have noticed improvements in routing in both Louisiana and Michigan after the implementation of functional classification which equates Principal Arterials with the Major Highway type.

And higher types will actually cause more traffic highlighting. The default speed for a Major Highway is higher, so the upper limit for a jam will be higher. On the contrary, setting the road type too low will limit traffic jam highlighting to only very low speeds.

About half of the jams in this image are on Major Highway surface streets with 35 mph speed limits.

"Overclassification" is an entirely subjective judgment, though.

CBenson said it nicely. The best way to think about it is as designating a set of "alternatives". Of course the only multi-lane 55 mph roads in urban centers are going to be freeways. What if the freeway's logjammed? You want your next alternatives to be the next type down, principal arterials, so Waze will "see" them more easily. A 35 mph surface road can be faster than a "55 mph" freeway, especially if the freeway's moving at 20 and the surface road is more direct.

Here it is. Weigh in on the linked topic.

Proposed overhaul of Road Types (USA) for drivable non-private roads