In my view it depends on whether the complex is built around a PL or whether it has streets through it. It might even be mixed.

Ok, so here's one example where there's a street through an apartment complex that has to be a through street (it goes to a major park).

https://www.waze.com/en-US/editor?env=u ... 6,69863328

nzahn1 wrote:

russblau wrote:Does anyone have an example PL?

Here's an example. A privately owned rd, but with HNs/addresses.

https://www.waze.com/editor/?env=usa&lo ... 6,21997482

I think you're talking about "Pipestem" driveways which are privately owned streets with more than one address. Example from Fairfax: http://www.fairfaxcounty.gov/dpwes/util ... _signs.htm

For the dead end apartment complexes that only have one way in and one way out, I don't see what the advantage is to have PLR. As Nick stated it may have adverse routing problems later in routes for cut-throughs.
From other discussions the National guidance was to have consistency and all are mapped the same. Personally I think our MAR editors are smart enough to see there is no cut through traffic and use a local street.

For multiple entrance apartment complexes (i.e cut thru traffic is possibility) that raises question of looking for signs for private property and figuring out if others are allowed. If posted no parking w/o permit, usually one still can drive through. If there is a "no through traffic" sign then is it official from VDOT/city/county or just one posted by organization. Much murkier and harder to discern the true legality. So I would be inclined to just leave as PLR.