Trunk v Primary roads

Question re trunk roads v primary. Have been doing some mapping along Beenleigh - Redland Bay Rd, just south of Brisbane Relation: ‪47‬ (‪530947‬) | OpenStreetMap after a trip up there last week. Realised, when I went to add a bike lane, that it’s been tagged as a highway=trunk, which doesn’t seem right, as it’s certainly not a major highway, nor a connection between major population centres. When I checked into it, I found out that it had been changed from =primary to =trunk Changeset: 96830592 | OpenStreetMap by the mapper who’s done the same thing to a few roads on the GC e.g. Changeset: 96752282 | OpenStreetMap, apparently based solely on the fact that the roads have a State Route reference? I’ve tried to contact them via Changeset Comment previously to ask them about it, but no response. So, what do we think - does simply having a State Route reference number make it a highway=trunk?

In my area having a state highway designation or reference is not a reason for tagging as trunk.

However there are variations around the world on how local highway systems are mapped into OSM highway classifications. So you should probably consult with the mapping community in your country for more definitive guidance.

The fact that you have not received responses to your changeset comments is, to me, a red flag that you may be dealing with a mapper who is doing their own thing without worrying about community consensus.

1 Like