bmitch3020 wrote:When I first considered doing this, I was only going to do it with segments in one direction, but the two way segment going out the north of the parking lots made it so both directions were needed. I also considered putting the private segments in the airport, but with U-turns, parking lots, etc, there were too many possibilities for routing to do something strange. But this was also when parking lots themselves needed to have streets internally because the routing algorithm counted every segment instead of only the transitions.
I too was thinking that only segments leaving the airport needed to have a section of private. Then if you start routing at the airport you have to travel over a private road segment but that private road segment would prevent routing through the airport. So an equal penalty for every route starting at the airport and a prohibitive penalty for routing through the airport. That doesn't need the segments on the inbound roads and ramps. What am I missing or misunderstanding?
These segments are disconnected due to a security gate so routing won't go that way. And the segments just north of there are already private roads so they'll be avoided as well.
If I recall correctly there were some UR's that popped up because of some funky routing from 28N into the airport. I pointed the editor at the private road segments and said that they were the likely culprit, this section of ramp specifically so their disappearance is at least in part my fault. Why do you think that the ramp from 28/greenway into the airport needs a private segment?