Road Types (USA) – comprehensive overhaul of drivable roads

Moderator: Unholy

Re: Road Types (USA) – comprehensive overhaul of drivable ro

Postby kentsmith9 » Sun Jun 01, 2014 3:27 am

I think you have one more error on the intersection of "Major Collector" and "SR-23". I believe that should be Minor as it is on the National FC.
kentsmith9
Waze Global Champs
Waze Global Champs
 
Posts: 4964
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2012 3:33 pm
Location: SF/SJ Bay Area of Northern California
Has thanked: 1230 times
Been thanked: 1465 times

Re: Road Types (USA) – comprehensive overhaul of drivable ro

Postby Daknife » Sun Jun 01, 2014 7:31 pm

Fredo-p wrote:Could it be possible to have every state champ create a list of sorts for how every state recognizes and classifies their road types, then submit this information in one massive pool with all the champs to examine?
Just a nitpick. Not every state has a champ. A state may have an L6 CM like me but no champ, or may not even have an L5 CM.

Tapatalking via my Galaxy S4
Image
AM in Utah; CM USA
Utah Forum: Utah Forum
Samsung Galaxy S4 running 4.4 KitKat on Sprint
Daknife
Waze Mentor
Waze Mentor
 
Posts: 1683
Joined: Sat Dec 24, 2011 11:03 pm
Location: Riverdale, Utah
Has thanked: 456 times
Been thanked: 227 times

Re: Road Types (USA) – comprehensive overhaul of drivable ro

Postby Fredo-p » Sun Jun 01, 2014 7:54 pm

daknife wrote:Just a nitpick. Not every state has a champ. A state may have an L6 CM like me but no champ, or may not even have an L5 CM.

Tapatalking via my Galaxy S4


And so the issue is brought to light. I can now see why my idea would seem beyond difficult. If I was to take on the task to gather all 50 states individual classification system into one data pool, could that help any?
Fredo-p
Beta tester
Beta tester
 
Posts: 1971
Joined: Mon Aug 05, 2013 4:35 am
Location: AZ, NJ, NY, ND, CA
Has thanked: 269 times
Been thanked: 615 times

Re: Road Types (USA) – comprehensive overhaul of drivable ro

Postby sketch » Sun Jun 01, 2014 8:38 pm

The only thing that should change from one state to the next is the way that state handles its own state highway system (and possibly county routes). By default, all state highways are mH or higher. Some states which have both primary and secondary state highways may wish to demote the secondary state highways into the "State Hwy BUS, SPUR[a], LOOP" column. Some states don't have county routes at all; some states have "county highways" and "county roads" and may wish to make the former mH+ and the latter just Street+.

But the bulk of the guidance remains the same — nothing major changes in FC, except that some states might just use the "Other Freeway" class (as opposed to "Other Freeways and Expressways"), thereby placing all partially-limited-access 'expressways' into the "Other Principal Arterial" class. Michigan does this, for example. That doesn't actually change any FC rule, it simply makes the distinction easier for us in that state. Also, the guidance as to US highways remains the same.

So it isn't really necessary for all 50 states to supplement the FC guidance, as some will not need to change any of the state highway rules at all. If anything, making a state chart should only involve renaming some column headers to match that state's maps and maybe removing a column or row or two if they don't apply. For example, Michigan does not have "Other Expressway", and calls the next two classes "Other Principal Arterial" and "Minor Arterial"; Louisiana has "Freeways/Expressways" and "Principal Arterial" and "Minor Arterial", and "Parish Roads" (not county routes), no Interstate business routes, no CONN or ALT (I think) state highways, and so forth.
ALL US EDITORS READ: New USA road type guidance
new orleans based • detroit enthusiast • usa country manager
2013 ford focus titanium hatchback 5mt • performance blue
Image Image
sketch
Waze Global Champs
Waze Global Champs
 
Posts: 5651
Joined: Sat Aug 08, 2009 6:13 pm
Location: New Orleans, LA
Has thanked: 1225 times
Been thanked: 1673 times

Re: Road Types (USA) – comprehensive overhaul of drivable ro

Postby Fredo-p » Sun Jun 01, 2014 9:29 pm

sketch wrote:The only thing that should change from one state to the next is the way that state handles its own state highway system (and possibly county routes). By default, all state highways are mH or higher. Some states which have both primary and secondary state highways may wish to demote the secondary state highways into the "State Hwy BUS, SPUR[a], LOOP" column. Some states don't have county routes at all; some states have "county highways" and "county roads" and may wish to make the former mH+ and the latter just Street+.

But the bulk of the guidance remains the same — nothing major changes in FC, except that some states might just use the "Other Freeway" class (as opposed to "Other Freeways and Expressways"), thereby placing all partially-limited-access 'expressways' into the "Other Principal Arterial" class. Michigan does this, for example. That doesn't actually change any FC rule, it simply makes the distinction easier for us in that state. Also, the guidance as to US highways remains the same.

So it isn't really necessary for all 50 states to supplement the FC guidance, as some will not need to change any of the state highway rules at all. If anything, making a state chart should only involve renaming some column headers to match that state's maps and maybe removing a column or row or two if they don't apply. For example, Michigan does not have "Other Expressway", and calls the next two classes "Other Principal Arterial" and "Minor Arterial"; Louisiana has "Freeways/Expressways" and "Principal Arterial" and "Minor Arterial", and "Parish Roads" (not county routes), no Interstate business routes, no CONN or ALT (I think) state highways, and so forth.


That is why I was thinking of making a database of all 50 states so we all can see how each state uses the class system and what specific naming they use.

If you look at the table I made for how Arizona names their class system, you will see how much has been removed (not observed).

If anything, IMO to have an efficient FC across the nation, it would be important to ensure that Interstates, Highways, and Freeways all have the same FC. Anything other than that would be dealt with via the States FC system. Since we want to ensure that Waze has proper routing on long distances, this should be the most important thing to focus on. Once that is established, we can then focus on the lesser class types, until everyone feels satisfied with the changes.

The major issue, as stated before, is the rural roadways and Indian Reservations. But rural roadways can vary state to state as well. One state may utilize rural roads and ensure they are paved and marked. But another state may not see them as important, or have the funding, and have their road conditions unpaved or needing major repairs, thus possibly routing to other, less high level class roads.

In the west valley (Tonopah/Buckeye) we ran into this very problem. The Town of Tonopah classified a CR as a MH. The problem is that halfway through the road becomes unpaved. Contacting the FC Coordinator revealed that it would take months to change the classification of that road, and a visit to the Towns City Hall to start the change process.

If this CR where to link to another state, and that state had it paved and marked with signs, it would cause problems with routing. We, in Arizona, are already aware of the issues that rural municipalities handle classifications. That is why we changed everything to the states FC first, then are going back and reviewing the rural areas to see if there is a better way to reroute some of the roads through reclassifying the road itself. We have to play the part of DOT and make the needed changes ahead of the DOT. They are already preparing to meet for their FC update with all the cities.

As soon as that meeting happens, the FC Coordinator will advise me of the changes and I will pass that information to the rest of the AZ editors to make the needed changes. Sadly, it takes at least a few months to see the changes come through.

[EDIT]
Just want to make it clear, I'm not talking about making a table in the wiki. Just a database that anyone, or the champs, could look at in aiding on decision making since many states don't have Champs and high ranking editors throughout all of their state. I was under the impression that there where a lot of high ranking editors in every state, but since that isn't the case, the more the information available, the better.
Fredo-p
Beta tester
Beta tester
 
Posts: 1971
Joined: Mon Aug 05, 2013 4:35 am
Location: AZ, NJ, NY, ND, CA
Has thanked: 269 times
Been thanked: 615 times

Re: Road Types (USA) – comprehensive overhaul of drivable ro

Postby qwaletee » Mon Jun 02, 2014 3:53 pm

Just a quick note on what has been going on here recently. "Experiment" is not a pejorative. In factm in science, it is one of our important tools for advancement.

In fact, I would call the current FC implementation an experiment. We are still finding out new things about it every week.
US Champ / Country Manager | State Manager NY, NJ, PA, CT, MA, RI, VT, ME, NH | Northeast ARC | Mentor | Responding to Map Issues
qwaletee
US Waze Champs
US Waze Champs
 
Posts: 2775
Joined: Wed Feb 13, 2013 1:42 am
Location: NYC Metro - Active throughout NE^2 (Northeast & New England)
Has thanked: 220 times
Been thanked: 1032 times

Re: Road Types (USA) – comprehensive overhaul of drivable ro

Postby bart99gt » Wed Jun 04, 2014 11:36 am

davielde wrote:
bart99gt wrote:FWIW, US-51 in N Mississippi has several stretches where it is classified as a primary collector. It parallels I-55 for most of its length.

The goal of the automatic upgrade to MH minimum for US routes was to have a consistent "resolution" level, which is the pruning concept discussed elsewhere as part of the FC rollout. A US route collector (actually any collector) classified as a Primary Street segment will not be considered apart from the first or last 15km of a short route or 50km for a longer route. Major Highways do not have that limitation, and they help better reflect the "network" that makes up the US highway system. The upgrade to MH doesn't mean that Waze would prefer the collector portions of US-51 over another potentially faster road, but it would at least consider them for longer routes.

Unless as a collector it routes someone through a fire swamp or is filled with rodents of unusual size, it sounds like it may be a good bypass for I-55 if someone has "avoid highways" (freeways) enabled. Waze would be more willing to use it for longer distance travel or detours as a MH if it's deemed faster than any other route. Keeping it as PS may end up routing such a user way out of the way even if US-51 otherwise would be part of a fastest or shortest non-freeway route.

Perhaps we need to get a basic section on "pruning" added to the wiki as well. That may help clear up some confusion as to where road types actually do matter from a routing perspective.


I really wasn't suggesting downgrading it to a primary street, as I've always been of the opinion that in 99% of cases that any road with a state/US highways shield should always be classified as some sort of highway in Waze. I was just pointing out that there are instances where a US highway could have a fairly low FC.
ImageImageImage
Mississippi State Manager
Memphis, TN Area Manager
Cobb/Douglas County, GA Area Manager

Mississippi Wiki Page https://wiki.waze.com/wiki/Mississippi
bart99gt
State Manager
State Manager
 
Posts: 471
Joined: Mon Apr 15, 2013 9:53 pm
Location: Olive Branch, MS
Has thanked: 85 times
Been thanked: 196 times

Re: Road Types (USA) – comprehensive overhaul of drivable ro

Postby pumrum » Wed Jun 18, 2014 12:06 am

After driving 8+ hour trips a few times over the last couple weeks, I can say that the new FC implementation in Waze is AWESOME. On several occasions I have been routed off a congested interstate onto a nearby US Highway or other MH/mH and around some very gnarly traffic (accidents, construction, rubberneckers). These are routes that would previously not have been considered.

If I could be granted one wish, it would be that everyone prioritizes getting the US Highway system upgraded to at MH or FWY (as appropriate). Spending most of my time in the New England area I really took it for granted, but driving more of the southeast and midwest I have come to realize how useful it is.
pumrum
State Manager
State Manager
 
Posts: 669
Joined: Mon Dec 09, 2013 3:02 am
Has thanked: 92 times
Been thanked: 293 times

Re: Road Types (USA) – comprehensive overhaul of drivable ro

Postby bart99gt » Sat Dec 27, 2014 5:06 pm

pumrum wrote:After driving 8+ hour trips a few times over the last couple weeks, I can say that the new FC implementation in Waze is AWESOME. On several occasions I have been routed off a congested interstate onto a nearby US Highway or other MH/mH and around some very gnarly traffic (accidents, construction, rubberneckers). These are routes that would previously not have been considered.

If I could be granted one wish, it would be that everyone prioritizes getting the US Highway system upgraded to at MH or FWY (as appropriate). Spending most of my time in the New England area I really took it for granted, but driving more of the southeast and midwest I have come to realize how useful it is.


And I'm following up several months later and....

Yes it is AWESOME. The number of URs I get for Waze going out of the way when it could have taken another route that was shorter and faster, but previously had low or no classification have almost disappeared. When I drive through a relatively unedited area, one of the first things I do is check to see if FC has been done there, and if not, where I can find the maps and get it done. While it isn't a perfect system, it really has improved Waze for the better.
ImageImageImage
Mississippi State Manager
Memphis, TN Area Manager
Cobb/Douglas County, GA Area Manager

Mississippi Wiki Page https://wiki.waze.com/wiki/Mississippi
bart99gt
State Manager
State Manager
 
Posts: 471
Joined: Mon Apr 15, 2013 9:53 pm
Location: Olive Branch, MS
Has thanked: 85 times
Been thanked: 196 times

Re: Road Types (USA) – comprehensive overhaul of drivable ro

Postby bz2012 » Sat Feb 14, 2015 12:00 pm

Paragraph needing possible revision:
Emergency Vehicle and DOT Service Roads Service road.png[edit]
Emergency.jpg "Emergency and Authorized Vehicles Only" and DOT Service Roads are to be treated as Non-drivable roads. These are found primarily through the median of divided highways to connect opposite direction lanes. If mapped, they should not be connected to any drivable road, with properties set to road type Private Road, and lock the segment at as high a rank as possible, up to rank 5.

I believe the word I have shown in red above should be removed, or the rest of the sentence revised to remove the inherent contradiction (why bother to have it at all, if it is not connected to a drivable road and why bother to set it to private type?)
State Manager, Louisiana
bz2012
Map Raider
Map Raider
 
Posts: 1376
Joined: Wed Nov 23, 2011 4:32 pm
Location: Baton Rouge, La
Has thanked: 781 times
Been thanked: 249 times

PreviousNext

Return to Wiki Updates and Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot]