Waze is showing el baquero rd and lindel rd as connecting. I was confronted by a property owner stating that lindel rd does not connect to el baquero. Was shown by property owner maps from county of riverside showing this. Stated i was trespassing on 4 different pieces of property by using this route.he stated this is a non county maintained road and that damages caused to the road are fixed by the residents. Also, speed limit on el baquero is posted as 15 mph. Please update el baquero rd and lindel rd. I have attached google maps showing it doesnt connect. Also, i took a picture of the map he showed me which i attached as well.
Lindell rd showing connecting to el baquero rd via waze. Roads do not connect. Trespassing on multiple properties. Not a legal rd per county of riverside.
Thank you. However, i would highly recommend that you do not show lindell road as connecting to el baquero rd as the maps do not show this road and el baquero rd does not allow for thri access. Also, due to the fact that the property owner expressed that any vehicles trying to utilize this will have the sheriff or chp and press charges for trespassing and destruction of private property.
This is the definition of a private road. As long as there is another route with a reasonable ETA, Waze will not route through this connection. However, if someone ignores the suggested route takes the private section (such as the homeowner you spoke with), Waze will recalculate and route correctly.
Is there a gate restricting access? A No Trespassing sign?
OK. I've added a further restriction that will prevent all traffic. If they have properly posted signs and/or a gate restricting access, there's no reason to allow through traffic at all. Without the signs or gate they really can't restrict anything, so that would have been good information up front.