Since a couple of months, Google maps marked some secrets routes like FL-91 (FL Tpk) and GA-400 secret series who identify an interstate corridor in Georgia. This time they marked another "secret route" number, NJ-444 more well known as Garden State Parkway http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&ll=40.429766,-74.228182&spn=0.043905,0.10952&z=14 (http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&ll=40.429766,-74.228182&spn=0.043905,0.10952&z=14)
Interesting. They have the Palisades Interstate Parkway marked as 987C (text only)... even on the New Jersey section (its NJ-445 in NJ)
Yeah, Google Maps seems to have gotten updated recently. Although, still not completely "up to date". I-99 west of State College still isn't shown as complete, and there is some sloppiness to the drawing (get a load of this) (http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=New+York,+Kings,+New+York&ll=40.809181,-78.055522&spn=0.007763,0.01929&z=16), although the new US-15 freeway by Lawrenceville is now on there. Strangely enough, the part by Painted Post has been downgraded from freeway orange to local street yellow... and the new interchange with I-86, that was there before, is now gone.
Off of I-99, a new section of road which opened in my city (Stamford, CT) on July 2nd still isn't there... although a previous error which put Howard Road in a place where no pavement does, has, or was ever planned to exist is now corrected.
An interesting cosmetic change: when you zoom out far enough, non-interstate freeways are shown with thinner orange lines than interstates.
Italy, China, India, South Korea, Japan, Argentina, and South Africa also now have their own custom route markers for their national highways.
I see that google is denoting some of our secret routes in CT but in a different way. They aren't putting the State route marker symbol on the road, but writing it out in text next to the street name. This link shows both Tunnel Road (Secret route 533) and South Frontage Rd (Secret Route 541) as their Street names PLUS "State Route 533" and "State Route 541" respectively. http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&ll=41.831976,-72.462258&spn=0.00598,0.013937&t=h&z=17 (http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&ll=41.831976,-72.462258&spn=0.00598,0.013937&t=h&z=17)
A bit off-topic since it's not in the Northeast area, Google maps also marked the secret numbers of the Kentucky parkways (KY-9001, KY-9002....) http://maps.google.ca/maps?hl=fr&ie=UTF8&ll=37.387617,-86.888123&spn=1.466479,3.504639&z=9 (http://maps.google.ca/maps?hl=fr&ie=UTF8&ll=37.387617,-86.888123&spn=1.466479,3.504639&z=9)
This is what happens when people working on the maps are not cartographers or roadgeeks...
The Google Maps update took care of a number of serious CT problems:
CT 173 continuing north to CT 185
US 44A in on Middle Turnpike in Manchester (never was true)
CT 83 in two places in Vernon (the real route and SR 527)
CT 66 and 322 overlap from Southington into Meriden
US 5 and CT 150 overlap into Meriden to I-691
CT 349 in 2 places in Groton
The new map is much better, though the secret route feature includes some interesting mistakes: State Highway 116 (http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=litchfield,+ct&sll=41.840513,-72.462655&sspn=0.003757,0.009645&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=Litchfield,+Connecticut&ll=41.758828,-73.138304&spn=0.015046,0.038581&z=15) in Litchfield (was true before 1961)
While unofficial, the freeways that connect the two segments of Route 16 here in Northern California (I-5 and US 50) are shown with the Route 16 shield as well on Google Maps...
However, Business 80 is just marked now as "I-80 BUS" in text (it had previously been marked as I-80, and before that, State Route 80, originally being marked just as Capital City Freeway) north of US 50/Route 99. No mention of Route 51.
I really like having hidden routes, old alignments, etc all signed.
The cat's out of the bag now. Google Maps made the best error I've seen in a while.
The abandoned Tri-Borough Road in Chatham for the never-finished Eisenhower Parkway is marked in its entire overpass and the diagram for the cloverleaf interchange (unfinished) is marked as well. Tri-Borough Road, which was supposed to be part of the Eisenhower Parkway is marked as "Eisenhower Parkway" for the portions that were constructed.
This is the biggest folly I've seen in a while there. (And I was looking it up just for an aerial)
I believe that earlier in the days of Google Maps (not street view), I remember seeing a US-39 shield in the Beaver, UT vicinity (it's still there since I last checked, at I-15 Exit 109, if you zoom in far enough) (http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&ll=38.248073,-112.641985&spn=0.012234,0.019248&z=16") :-D . Other cases where Google Maps is inaccurate is that it shows UT-78 going all the way down from its western end at I-15 almost all the way down to Scipio, and UT-22 at its full UT-62 to Bryce Jct. (UT-12/UT-63) length (http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&ll=37.972891,-111.962357&spn=0.392972,0.615921&z=11").
As for a Utah road that has recently been updated, UT-38 was shown duplexed with UT-69. In case you didn't know, UT-69 once ran from Brigham City to Logan (via Deweyville, near Tremonton), then was cut back to UT-30 (which was officially extended into Logan and east) in the 1970s. However, it was still a mere 15-20 miles from college town Logan, where Utah State University students would often take the time to drive out to UT-69 to steal the signs. The sign theft became so bad that they had to renumber it UT-38 in the early 1990s.
Apparently in their most recent update, they borrowed a bunch of data from OpenStreetMap. I had a suspicion that was going on when I noticed that a lot of the errors on Google Maps were the same as on OpenStreetMap, though the one that convinced me was the alteration of "Van Vleet Oval" in Norman to "Van Fleet Oval." It appears that OSM had that error first and it worked its way into Google Maps from there. So if you find a bunch of problems with their maps (and you will), that may just be why...
More on the topic of the thread, in Google Maps' most recent update, they also started marking MD-61 (which in the real world is not marked with its number, just its name, "Canal Parkway"). However, they placed the number on the wrong street (Virginia Ave.), and they incorrectly labeled the actual MD-61 as "Wineow Street".
Take a look at the State College area... Google actually went backwards in time with its data!
Another place when Google went backwards in time, it's north of Elmira, before NY-17 was upgraded http://maps.google.ca/maps?hl=fr&ie=UTF8&ll=42.153653,-76.810291&spn=0.010563,0.02635&z=16 (http://maps.google.ca/maps?hl=fr&ie=UTF8&ll=42.153653,-76.810291&spn=0.010563,0.02635&z=16)
and US-66 is now only marked in text in Alburquerque :no: :-(
Quote from: agentsteel53 on October 08, 2009, 01:39:50 PM
I really like having hidden routes, old alignments, etc all signed.
well if they're all signed they really aren't secret or hidden now are they :)
Quote from: deanej on October 08, 2009, 04:32:54 PMTake a look at the State College area... Google actually went backwards in time with its data!
Ironically, it's data has caught up after a 60 year lapse in other parts of Pennsylvania.
Quote from: agentsteel53 on October 08, 2009, 01:39:50 PM
I really like having hidden routes, old alignments, etc all signed.
Indeed, but it is nice if Google would be accurate when doing it.
That's Google's biggest problem with maps: they don't care about accuracy anymore. The move from NavTeq proved that. These days the only thing I use google maps for anymore is street view.
They also added lot boundaries to the maps.
I found I-46 :wow: :confused: :pan:
http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=790+N+4th+St,+Platteville,+Grant,+Wisconsin+53818&ll=43.673832,-92.984676&spn=0.054382,0.154324&z=13 (http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=790+N+4th+St,+Platteville,+Grant,+Wisconsin+53818&ll=43.673832,-92.984676&spn=0.054382,0.154324&z=13)
CT 540 lives! (http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&t=h&ll=41.922078,-72.725544&spn=0.03819,0.09038&z=14&layer=t)
CT401 also gets recognized. However, they are behind MSN Bing maps in recognizing that part of Rainbow Rd has taken on the International Dr. name, or the existence of the International Dr. roundabout at the East Granby town line.
Correction. Google Maps ended using TeleAtlas and now has a problem request form where you can fix their data! Lots of cartography errors are normal again!
Quote from: Roadgeek_Adam on October 09, 2009, 09:00:00 PM
Correction. Google Maps ended using TeleAtlas and now has a problem request form where you can fix their data! Lots of cartography errors are normal again!
Seriously? Awesome! I might have to submit a few corrections myself (a few streets in the Richmond area disappeared during the update...).
Yep, I've reported almost 2 dozen errors in NJ and NY already - It is fun
Quote from: Roadgeek_Adam on October 09, 2009, 09:00:00 PM
Correction. Google Maps ended using TeleAtlas and now has a problem request form where you can fix their data! Lots of cartography errors are normal again!
I don't think I have the time necessary to point out to Google all of the errors on their map that I've found so far...
They don't even allow you to report errors in Canada....
EDIT: Ok, I'll take that back. That option wasn't there last night, but it's there now.... Wierd.....
Well, the data is less accurate, but it looks like Google is FINALLY taking responsibility for the errors in map data. And street view is in Canada too! If Google is sincere about fixing the errors, they may be my primary online map tool again.
Sorry, but Google went back to data dating back a few years, at least in the Salt Lake City metro. US-89 in Kaysville isn't shown as a freeway (it was before the update); Legacy Pkwy doesn't exist (it did before the update as well); SR-71 is cosigned with SR-7, SR-700 and SR-735 (which is just bizarre). Not sure what exactly they're doing...
Check out exit 200 on NY 104! :pan:
http://maps.google.com/maps?ie=UTF8&hl=en&ll=43.191207,-77.619524&spn=0.009465,0.022638&z=16 (http://maps.google.com/maps?ie=UTF8&hl=en&ll=43.191207,-77.619524&spn=0.009465,0.022638&z=16)
For hidden designations I have found...
-The Falmouth Spur in Maine is I-495
-Old US 322 at the Commodore Barry is marked NJ 324
-I-595 in Maryland is even signed!
Exit 9 or 19?
http://maps.google.com/maps?ie=UTF8&hl=en&ll=43.324928,-70.604925&spn=0.015048,0.038409&t=h&z=15 (http://maps.google.com/maps?ie=UTF8&hl=en&ll=43.324928,-70.604925&spn=0.015048,0.038409&t=h&z=15)
I-695 in DC is correctly marked now (http://maps.google.com/maps?ie=UTF8&hl=en&ll=38.878071,-76.995749&spn=0.019979,0.045447&z=15). It had previously been labeled as part of I-395. However, the Center Leg Freeway segment of I-395 is not shown as a freeway anymore for some reason.
A lot of secondary routes in Virginia are no longer labeled with "shields", but are labeled "Co Road (number)" or "State Route (number)". Some of these are wrong (SR 2000 in Prince William County is labeled as SR 642). A number of former SRs inside Marine Corps Base Quantico are labeled this way, too, even though they haven't been SRs for decades.
I just basically lost all confidence in Google Maps. They simply reverted to a old set of data since they stopped using TeleAtlas (obvious move since TeleAtlas owned its data IMO). What a waste.
Indeed. Just to give an idea of how old some of this data is, the map refers to the Science Museum of Virginia as Broad Street Station, which it hasn't been since 1975!
VA 399 (the access road into the museum) is also not Davis Avenue, and used to be labeled as VA 399 before the "update".
Nuckols Road and Shady Grove Road in Henrico County are also SR 695 and SR 624, respectively...even though those have never existed as Henrico County does not have SR's (except that SR 695 was erroneously signed for a while in the late 90's to 2002 or so).
I could go on and on...
Depends on the area. Some areas are ancient, others are brand new. As street view expands it will probably get better (as the new areas seem to have coverage from around the same time they got street viewed, like US 15 in Lawrenceville).
Not necessarily... I've found a lot of areas that have streetview coverage that have horrendous errors on the map. Can't they just look at streetview and see the shields themselves?
I didn't realize Google switched their map data sources. Interestingly, in some of my spot checks the maps have improved where others have degraded.
In looking around areas of Nevada, I've found that many misplaced, old, or otherwise incorrect state/US highway icons on the map have been removed--although in many cases, these now show up as the street name instead of the route shield. However, there have been newer roads in urban areas that are now incorrect or removed. Also, Google seems to have lost some street name changes in the Vegas area--particularly Lake Mead Pkwy (changed from Lake Mead Drive in the early 2000s) and Dean Martin Drive (changed from Industrial Road about four years ago).
I'm still waiting for Google Maps to add text or icons of bannered routes on its map images, particularly for Interstate business loops. It is so odd to be looking at a map to see a regular blue and white Interstate shield placed on a city street or arterial that isn't I-180 in Cheyenne, WY...
Quote from: deathtopumpkins on October 12, 2009, 06:14:50 PM
Not necessarily... I've found a lot of areas that have streetview coverage that have horrendous errors on the map. Can't they just look at streetview and see the shields themselves?
Take a look at WI-29 East at I-39's North Terminus, you'll find a contradiction to that.
Quote from: Master son on October 12, 2009, 11:51:13 PM
Quote from: deathtopumpkins on October 12, 2009, 06:14:50 PM
Not necessarily... I've found a lot of areas that have streetview coverage that have horrendous errors on the map. Can't they just look at streetview and see the shields themselves?
Take a look at WI-29 East at I-39's North Terminus, you'll find a contradiction to that.
I never said it held true everywhere. ;-)
It was pointed out to us that unsigned Interstates 595 (http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=washington,+dc&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=52.505328,78.662109&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=Washington,+District+of+Columbia&ll=38.944057,-76.795807&spn=0.104272,0.154324&z=13) and 695 (http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=washington,+dc&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=52.505328,78.662109&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=Washington,+District+of+Columbia&ll=38.87727,-76.993389&spn=0.10437,0.154324&z=13) are now acknowledged on Google Maps!
In the case of Google Maps using OpenStreetMap data, something that I've noticed is that even though Google Maps is using the data, they're not attributing the data to OpenStreetMap as required by their license. (http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Legal_FAQ) Of course, I doubt OSM will do anything about it (they don't have anywhere near the amount of money required to sue Google, and if they just asked nicely, Google would tell them to go to hell.)
Are you sure they're using OpenStreetMap? The data doesn't appear to match up. OpenStreetMap actually has all of I-99 (Google does not). On the other hand, Google does not have a hole in US 220 near I-80...
Quote from: deanej on October 16, 2009, 12:53:24 PM
Are you sure they're using OpenStreetMap? The data doesn't appear to match up. OpenStreetMap actually has all of I-99 (Google does not). On the other hand, Google does not have a hole in US 220 near I-80...
They don't seem to be using it everywhere, but in the places I looked at in Norman, OK, all the errors in the street names match up.
I suppose they're using different data sources for different locations, with good and bad results. For at least a year or more, the Cincinnati maps have been terribly outdated. They showed railroads that were torn up in the mid 70's as still being in place, mislabeled parks, and not-so-new subdivisions were missing. In the most recent update from a few weeks ago, all the railroads are correct, it shows the bike trails that had been missing for years, and many roads out in the suburbs have been properly updated. There's still mistakes, but no more than there were before. I also rather like the addition of property lines to the closer-in views, where they're available. I hope to see more of that in the future.
Yeah, it's a hit-and-miss. Some areas are great, and others haven't changed. One thing I do like is the property lines shown in Map View.
Now, some comments on specific posts:
Quote from: Duke87 on October 08, 2009, 12:25:21 AM
Yeah, Google Maps seems to have gotten updated recently. Although, still not completely "up to date". I-99 west of State College still isn't shown as complete, and there is some sloppiness to the drawing (get a load of this) (http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=New+York,+Kings,+New+York&ll=40.809181,-78.055522&spn=0.007763,0.01929&z=16), although the new US-15 freeway by Lawrenceville is now on there. Strangely enough, the part by Painted Post has been downgraded from freeway orange to local street yellow... and the new interchange with I-86, that was there before, is now gone.
US 15 is covered good in the Lawrenceville Bypass. I haven't been on US 15 since August 2008, so it's a fairly good virtual tour. I like having the old interchange there for a comparison. I do find it weird to downgrade the freeway that's been there since 1969.
Quote from: deanej on October 08, 2009, 04:32:54 PM
Take a look at the State College area... Google actually went backwards in time with its data!
Maybe they'll go back to a time before I-99! :sombrero:
Quote from: agentsteel53 on October 08, 2009, 01:39:50 PM
I really like having hidden routes, old alignments, etc all signed.
Me too! I like to see "Old ____ " or the hidden route number on the map!
Quote from: deanej on October 12, 2009, 06:05:09 PM
Depends on the area. Some areas are ancient, others are brand new. As street view expands it will probably get better (as the new areas seem to have coverage from around the same time they got street viewed, like US 15 in Lawrenceville).
Exactly. Speaking of US 15, I miss the old road. I haven't been on the new road, but I've seen pictures and Street View of the new road, as noted above.
The routing for the directions is all screwed up now too. Instead of making a left turn onto the local highway (completely legal), it direct me through the intersection, making a right turn onto a dead end, and then back tracking to the intersection to make a right onto the highway.
I should run directions that use jughandles, it will really mess with their new system's logic.
Quote from: Master son on October 09, 2009, 05:50:43 PM
I found I-46 :wow: :confused: :pan:
http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=790+N+4th+St,+Platteville,+Grant,+Wisconsin+53818&ll=43.673832,-92.984676&spn=0.054382,0.154324&z=13 (http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=790+N+4th+St,+Platteville,+Grant,+Wisconsin+53818&ll=43.673832,-92.984676&spn=0.054382,0.154324&z=13)
No comment.
While seeking the Google Maps street view of NY 112, I saw something much too far-fetched to the east along the westbound service road of the Long Island Expressway; It's a housing development with a single street marked New York State Route 495!!!!
:confused:
Edited link (http://maps.google.com/maps?q=New+York+112,+Suffolk,+New+York&ie=UTF8&hl=en&cd=1&geocode=FeNVbwId3ySm-w&split=0&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=23.875,57.630033&hq=&hnear=New+York+112,+Suffolk,+New+York&ll=40.826719,-72.965484&spn=0.007566,0.015385&z=16)
When did Google Maps add parcel lines?!
QuoteWhen did Google Maps add parcel lines?!
Around the same time they switched their map data source...or shortly before this thread started.
Google Earth signs the Garden State Parkway as NJ 444.
Thats not right, the one with the I-341. It also has marked Pennsylvania as Tennessee!!!
Anyway, the southern end of I-787 is marked as its reference route, NY 912S:
http://maps.google.com/maps?ie=UTF8&hl=en&ll=42.634038,-73.775833&spn=0.009945,0.022681&t=h&z=16 (http://maps.google.com/maps?ie=UTF8&hl=en&ll=42.634038,-73.775833&spn=0.009945,0.022681&t=h&z=16)
Seems then Google don't mark any longer some unsigned/secret highways like NJ-444/GSP
On the other hand they show TX-548 on the Hardy Toll Road in Houston, does TX-548 is a secret number?
http://maps.google.ca/maps?hl=fr&ie=UTF8&ll=29.862604,-95.3512&spn=0.05002,0.10952&z=14
Quote from: Stephane Dumas
On the other hand they show TX-548 on the Hardy Toll Road in Houston, does TX-548 is a secret number?
http://maps.google.ca/maps?hl=fr&ie=UTF8&ll=29.862604,-95.3512&spn=0.05002,0.10952&z=14
I believe so, yes, but only for the southern mile and a half from I-610 to Crosstimbers. See:
http://www.dot.state.tx.us/tpp/hwy/ss/ss0548.htm
--Andy