I’m working on edits basen on my recent South Coast NSW trip, and had a question about the highway classifications. According to the wiki, B routes are tagged as highway=primary. The tags for the NSW section of the Monaro Highway B23 (from the ACT border the the Snowy Mountains Highway) and the Snowy Mountains Highway B72 (entire highway) have recently been changed to highway=trunk. The section of the Kings Highway B52 from the ACT to Braidwood has also been changed to highway=trunk (the Braidwood to Batemans Bay section has been left as highway=primary). Should these be changed back to highway=primary, or is there a good reason to leave them as highway=trunk (and if so, should the Braidwood to Batemans Bay section be upgraded to highway=trunk)?
The route to highway classification listing is meant to be a guide or starting place, not a definitive rule. If the roads match another classification more than the one listed for the route, I’d change it.
I’m trying to understand the intent more: is there a consequence of the change you’re attempting to resolve other than a strict adherence/interpretation of the guideline?
Both Monaro Highway and Kings Highway are state-managed roads.
highway=trunk seems overreach to me. The guideline suggests trunk roads are “Important highways connecting major population centres”. Batemans Bay, with a population of 12263, fails most criteria definitions of a “major population centre” even if Canberra is one end of the route. highway=primary seems a better fit.
Monaro Highway is not linking any major population centres either.
Furthermore, none of the roads that were tagged as trunk are on the Key Freight Routes map weakening further the case to be highway=trunk.
Yes, I tend to agree. “The standard practice in Australia is generally consistent with the global definition … The classifications provided below are a guide, but mappers should classify highways based on the actual nature of the road, rather than any formal route designation.”
Somebody else had posted an opposition to the downgraded classification changesets I made for Barry Way to help prevent unfortunate and unprepared drivers who are not familiar from being sent down this ‘doomsday’ route and I’m not yet aware of any reasonable basis to elevate these routes unnecessarily. I’m here now, but coming from Los Angeles previously, these roads are more primary (or even secondary if really held to an international standard) imo.
As per shashp’s comment, the relevant changeset is for changing the Snowy River Road and Barry Way from a highway=secondary to a highway=track with smoothness=very_bad is 153390909 (Changeset: 153390909 | OpenStreetMap). It was myself that raised the concern with such a significant change, that doesn’t appear to reflect what is on the ground.
This was undertaken by Shashp, including to paved sections of the road, which have no pot holes and are two lanes wide and easily travelled at 100km/h by all vehicle types.
I’m seeking the community’s viewpoints on this changeset. As from my own experience in the last couple of weeks (for the Victorian section), this road is passable by 2wd, and is at worst a smoothness of ‘bad’ in some locations, but largely ‘intermediate’. The speed of vehicles is governed by the corners on the road, or the road width down to 1 lane in some places. There is no signage that this is a 4wd only route, with the signage noting the distance to next fuel and clear route signage (as well as speed limit/advisory speed signs in some places).
This route does not require high clearance, is passable by a normal 2wd (albeit not a lowered vehicle that struggles over carpark humps) and is not a goat track, but a major through route in the area.
I believe the ‘secondary’ was appropriate for the road, as it links the population centre of Jindabyne south through minor localities (Suggan Buggan, Seldom Seen, Gelantipy, Butchers Ridge etc) to towns such as Buchan and to the primary road network of the Princes Hwy. However ‘tertiary’ could also be considered appropriate, but certainly not ‘track’ (under both the Aus guidelines or the international use).
As can be seen by the changeset comment, it appears that the change has been to rectify a routing issue, rather than to meet the tagging guidelines. With Shashp relying on Trip advisor to justify the change. (Noting that trip advisor also includes many people advising suitable for 2wd.) Such a significant change should have been consulted with the community or at least the previous authors of the road tagging.
Thoughts?
I don’t have local knowledge so I don’t want to weigh in too much, but my 2c it seems like it could be considered higher than track, perhaps unclassified? All the physical attributes like smoothness, 4wd/2wd, remoteness, capable speeds shouldn’t weigh into the highway=* classification debate. If it’s mostly for minor land access like forestry, fire fighting, agricultural then use highway=track, if it’s part of the “road network” that people routinely use to get between localities then something higher than highway=track.
The reason many people end up on this road is because it is misclassified, or it would be avoided by most drivers attempting to access the endpoints. Here’s a selection of descriptions from the community since the request was for consultation. Locals do not recommend it as a way to access relevant towns unless specifically seeking out the remote campgrounds that can only be access via this path or the risk/adventure of taking it when prepared:
"Thought the road conditions would get better or at the least stay the same, I was wrong, the road got significantly worse. Need experienced 4WDers, gravel slippery, wheels skidded out of control multiple times, driving on mountain face, no warnings for danger- except sign saying something like ‘no caravans’ (can’t recall), two way winding road up mountain with single lane, unable to see oncoming cars. Pit holes as big as tyres. Called 000 as I had no phone reception and didn’t think I’d make it, 000 not available due to no reception from any towers. Drive took 3 hours, would not do it again. Be prepared
Written May 8, 2024
“Warning to all drivers that are not in a four wheel drive. DO NOT TAKE THIS ROUTE when it appears on google maps as an alternative.
We took this route as we wanted go to Jindabyne from Phillip Island and google maps stated that it was only 21 mins longer than the Monaro Hwy. so stupidly thought this would be just like any other sealed road but a bit more winding which would be the extra 21 mins needed. So it was decided, we would go a route we had never been before in our Nissan Qashai . What a huge mistake. No where did it state that this was a four wheel drive gravel winding road with pot holes as big as small dams. 
Would have been good to be sign posted at the start that it was all gravel, but it just said winding road for next 35 km and we stupidly thought they where doing road works at the start of the drive.
Oh half way through a sign did say no caravans!!! A tad late I think, as once on this gravel track it is nearly impossible to turn around.
I have no idea how long it ended up taking but I can assure you I was well over it by the time we got back on sealed roads. Google estimated an 80 km speed whereas in our Nissan we done around 15 km and never got over 40 km.
Yes there was some beautiful scenery which would have been enjoyed more if we had known what we were in for from the start.”
" This journey should only be undertaken by very experienced drivers in a reliable 4WD . There is no signage to warn of the treachery ahead other than indicating the road is not suitable for caravans.
We were travelling in a new AWD and became precariously close to sliding off the side of a very soft edge. Fortunately we were rescued by road side workers who came to our assistance and towed us to safety. (Thanks guys!)
Be warned!"
Written January 18, 2024
“Drove the Barry Way from north to south early January 2024 in my 2WD Holden Cruze. Decided to take this most direct route from Jindabyne to Lakes Entrance. Thought it was going to be a relatively easy drive as the signs only said not recommended for caravans and trailers. Boy was I wrong! Started out being a nice bitumen road, then went to dirt and a bit windy, then got worse from there. After about an hour or so, I felt committed to the drive as it was too narrow to turn back. Passed about 10 4WDs 3 with caravans, and 3 dirt bikes going the other way. Allowed 2 adventure bikes and 4 4WDs to pass me, as I was driving very slowly. The scenery was breathtaking, with waterfalls down the cuttings, lovely river views and expansive mountain ranges. The drive was intense, having to negotiate ruts, potholes, corrugations, blind corners, steep grades, flowing water, sheer cliffs, rock cuttings and fallen rocks. Front wheels started spinning going up one steep rocky section. Finally got through after about 4.5 hours. I don’t think I’d drive it again with a 2WD, certainly not after rain. I was lucky that I didn’t have opposing traffic in the difficult steep narrow cliff sections. It was exhausting and nerve racking. I probably wouldn’t have taken the risk if I knew the conditions before I started. Luckily car and family got through unscathed.”
Lucky car and family were unscathed doesn’t appear in the Aussie classifications for secondary roads. People are coming here not because they intended it but because the road is misclassified.
If it was properly tagged with grade, road conditions, and all the other attributes then I could believe ‘unclassified’ could be appropriate for the 5 locals (according to the 2021 Aussie Census) that live in Suggan Buggan and rely on it as the only path. Since I don’t have that specific level of detail for all parts of this path I still believe track is more appropriate, certainly than secondary rating.
The Barry Way/Snowy River Road, is used as through route and not just for minor land access. Definitely part of the road network.
I agree the smoothness etc should not weigh in for what is the highway classification, else many roads in Australia would all just be classified as ‘track’ and not provide a meaningful hierarchy.
I would not class this road as ‘unclassified’ due to it being the main north south through route in the area, and has a clear higher hierarchy than other roads in the area. Hence why it was classified ‘secondary’.
From experience there is a mixture of use on the road:
- being a key route to local farms and households to be able access food/supplies From Jindabyne or heading south to Buchan/Bairnsdale.
- A through tourist/touring route.
- local traffic for farmers accessing parts of their land
- local access from the north or south to points of interest (but not through route).
For context the middle section is through national park, with the farms south or north of this. Those south do travel north through the park to Jindabyne for supplies and medical facilities etc.
The road is also a B-double Truck approved route (in Victoria at least, haven’t checked NSW) and other similar mass vehicles, noting that there as some weight restrictions on bridges in the area, requiring the use of a ford beside the bridge for these vehicles.
For comparison some other key routes across Australia, that are rough/even more unsuitable for 2wds, but classified as secondary (to give further weight that the smoothness/vehicle requirements is not related to highway classification), and largely serving a similar purpose to Barry Way:
- South Australia - Oodnadatta Track or Birdsville Track
- WA - Gibb River Road
- Qld - Peninsula Development Road or Bloomfield Road
Please, please don’t tag as highway=track. Road maintenance is the responsibility of the local council, which it sounds like it is if there were road side workers. If it gets tagged as a track, it ends up in the same category as fire trails and other low-volume tracks. The road will have less chance of being maintained to fix those gigantic pot holes.
Use highway=unclassified at least, please, especially as there are residents who rely on the road, no matter how few.
FYI - the Victorian portion of the road is managed/maintained by VicRoads/Department of Transport & Planning. Not sure on the NSW side.
I drove the Victorian side last week, and only minor corrugations were present, was a well maintained road. If needed I can reach out to friends that completed the full route last week as well to see if it changed north of the border, however the conditions are subject to change being a dirt road and caution is required after very heavy rainfall in the area.
It is classed as part of the Arterial Road Network, with the designator C608 applying to the NSW/Vic boarder.
source: https://www.vicroads.vic.gov.au/traffic-and-road-use/road-network-and-performance/maps-of-declared-roads/ (not used to justify map changes, only provided as reference for this conversation, I haven’t checked the licensing of the data).
Sure, then by all means reject the change to track or modify to unclassified. Given my international driving and mapping experiences there’s no possibility I believe Barry Way is secondary just because it’s become standard AU practice in some other rural places.
By the examples in the Aussie guideline a rural secondary road standard is at least depicted as:
It might also be worth considering an update to the Aussie guidelines if there are in fact other purposes to elevating classifications for the purpose of maintaining local relative hierarchies, or encouraging local councils to maintain those elevated classification roads better when it’s usage is unintentionally inflated by unfamiliar drivers who traverse it by mistake for the actual connecting network. (To be clear I don’t believe there’s any local council managing these as Steve’s latest post appears to also highlight).
apologies if this belongs in the help section - I’ve not had to change edits I’ve made before, is there a way to apply a classification update to the edits in the relevant changeset using the web editor or i need to manually recreate the changes to each road segment to now set it to unclassified if that’s the consensus here, or does this discussion need to stay open for others to weigh in for a certain period of time?
I use JOSM to do my editing, which has a revert changeset functionality. However you need to be careful in using this. Given the small size of the changeset it would be easier to modify each road section (JOSM can retrieve all the ways/nodes etc modified by a changeset, allowing the tagging to be changed easily.)
I was planning on waiting another day or so, than was going to change the highway classification back to the previous classification of secondary, if no consensus was agreed. This is in alignment with other similar roads across the Alpine area (i.e. Mckillops Rd to the south, or Benambra-Corryong Road to the west) and across Australia as noted above.
It is definitely a higher classification than “unclassified”. As noted above it is a part of the arterial network, a heavy vehicle route, and has a ‘C’ route classification in Victoria so would meet the ‘secondary’ guidance on the Australian Tagging Guidelines for the Victorian section. The NSW section could be either ‘tertiary’ or ‘secondary’, however, to me, it makes sense for the full route to be secondary given the description on the wiki.
I’m also planning to adjust the smoothness to align with what was experienced by myself for the Victorian portion of the road, which was majority of the road was intermediate, with the surface smoothness not governing the speed, noting the surface is a mix of paved and unpaved roads. The speed as noted above was governed by the corners and visible distance required to be able to stop especially in narrow sections of the road.
Ah okay, then the updates I just submitted can be ignored or rejected, I marked it to be reviewed. I’ll stay away from it, digitally and otherwise.
I noticed that in addition to changing the highway classification to unclassified, you have now changed the max speed attribute to 40km/h (this was 100km/h on at least the Vic section).
Just checking whether this was based on an authoritative source?
Last week it was still signed (in Victoria) as 100km/h.
Transport Vic declares that C roads are generally two lane sealed roads with shoulders (plural).
Barry Way is:
- not sealed throughout most of it’s length
- 1 lane even in the parts that are sealed
- has no shoulders, though there are wide/flat parts that open up at certain points along the way
If we’re assigning the formal classifications to any roads in Open Street Maps now, instead of their actual condition, are we supposed to mark this 1 lane dirt road with blind corners as a 2 lane sealed road at 100kmph? Have I totally misunderstood the guidelines or Oz just plays by different rules because some drivers like this 1 lane route?
https://transport.vic.gov.au/business/road-and-traffic-management/road-types-and-responsible-authorities#:~:text=C%20Roads-,expand_circle_down,-'C'%20roads%20are
If this is a such a major shipping lane for transporting supplies to and from this area at 100kph as Steve says it is, I would like to know how it’s physically possible for these trucks to pass by each other travelling northbound and southbound:
or is it standard practice in AU for trucks to start this 40-some-odd km stretch that takes some drivers over 4.5 hours to cross and they each go 1 at a time?
OSM captures what is on the ground, with guidelines to support consistent approach.
The Transport Vic quote, notes that this is ‘generally’ the case, not ‘always’ the case. They have declared it as a C route in Victoria.
https://www.vicroads.vic.gov.au/traffic-and-road-use/road-network-and-performance/maps-of-declared-roads/
(Edit: Even in NSW this is a classified road, identified from a quick Google search: https://www.transport.nsw.gov.au/system/files/media/documents/2023/classified-roads-schedule.pdf)
Not all of the road is one lane. There are sections that are 1 lane, which requires trucks to radio ahead (with signs to advise this), but the majority of the road is 2 lane. For the sections that are one lane, there are passing opportunities for cars quite regularly and while there are blind corners you can regular see further along the road so can anticipate the need to pull over to allow someone to pass.
I’m not saying that people travel at 100km/h for the full route, as noted this is not possible. The maxspeed is to capture the maximum speed of the road, which in this case is signposted as 100km/h, not 40km/h as per your edit.
Have you traveled on this road? As the edits appear to be based on TripAdvisor reviews and poor resolution Bing Imagery and do not reflect the actual condition/signage of the road.
After reviewing your recent changesets last night, I have reverted the details that do not align with my own recent (and regular) experience on this road. This included ensuring the lane/width, maxspeed, classification and road surface/condition were accurate. A lot of effort has gone into this road from previous mappers, please do not arbitrarily make wholesale changes to all ways in this route to reflect TripAdvisor reviews.
If you want to use that as a criteria, then just about every road in Tasmania (including designated “A” / trunk roads!) would have to be downgraded! 
I wasn’t meaning for it to apply to every road I have no experience with, but this path in particular. I conceded it’s more than a 2-track path, but I don’t agree this is a secondary road in Victoria for the standards locally here. I haven’t visited let alone driven in Tassie so I expect local mappers to help there where up/downgrades are warranted.
also @Fizzie41 my whole point is that I DONT believe the roads should stick to the formal criteria to justify, while I admit track was an over-correction here.