[Tagging] Mapping busways with alternating physical separation

Richard Mann richard.mann.westoxford at gmail.com
Wed Mar 4 09:41:01 UTC 2015


Trams used to be just done as a simple tag on the road way, but they have
slowly been converted to having their own OSM ways (one for each track). I
haven't been paying attention; there might not be many of the original
method left.

I'd probably draw it as four parallel ways, and regard the white line as
effective separation. I don't think the tags for busways are entirely
settled yet. Some in the UK are
highway=service+access=no+psv=yes+name=Busway, but the one in Cambridge
uses highway=bus guideway+psv:guided=only, which shows up in bright blue at
zoom 13 in the default rendering, but isn't recognised by many data users.

{I'd probably suggest that the blue rendering should be based on something
other than the highway tag, but that's another matter}.

Richard

On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 11:33 PM, Fernando Trebien <
fernando.trebien at gmail.com> wrote:

> I assume there is no opposition to either method then.
>
> Most tram systems are mapped as individual ways (usually in parallel
> pairs), even when they share space with cars and have no physical
> separation. I'm not really acquainted with tramway mapping (they're
> very rare in Brazil), but I tried to sample various cities (see list
> below) and what I found is that, where the street is drawn as a single
> way and cars share space with trams, a platform that is a physical
> divider essentially never really causes the road to be drawn as
> separated lines. The road is usually divided for its entire length for
> other reasons (I'm guessing it's usually due to local law requiring
> cars to stay out of the tramway except when turning at intersections
> or reaching a destination at the opposite side).
>
> This suggests it is ok to map the BRT system in Porto Alegre as bus
> lane tags on the main ways. However, the map would show a platform on
> the left side of the way that on reality is on the right side of the
> buses as they arrive. By mapping as a separated way, one can render a
> bus map where lines are clearly identified as going through the
> corridor (faster, reachable only by the middle platforms) or through
> the main ways (slower, reachable by the sidewalk). So I think mapping
> separately has more practical value.
>
> Here's the list of cities I've sampled: Moscow, Saint Petersburg,
> Toronto, Melbourne, Berlin, Paris, Milan, Brussels, Antwerp,
> Amsterdam, The Hague, Stuttgart, Bremen, Leipzig, Dresden, Hanover,
> Zürich and Manchester. A few odd cases I found that you might want to
> check out:
>
> 52.3545998 4.8884183 Highway and railway tags mixed on same line (akin
> to maping bus lanes with tags on the main way)
> 52.0680083 4.288239 Same as previous
> 43.6513302 -79.3843008 Highway and railway are overlapping ways
> (probably bad practice, and also seems to break the logic of "one line
> for each rail track")
> 53.0806042 8.8297144 Tramway space can be used by non-rail public
> service vehicles
>
> On Mon, Mar 2, 2015 at 6:20 AM, Richard Mann
> <richard.mann.westoxford at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Map it one way or the other (I'd say either was acceptable), but don't
> > switch repeatedly between the two.
> >
> > There are many tram systems which only really separate from the road at
> > stops, with much less separation between stops than your clear white
> line.
> >
> > On Mon, Mar 2, 2015 at 3:20 AM, Fernando Trebien
> > <fernando.trebien at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> I'd like to hear your opinion on how to properly represent my
> >> hometown's (Porto Alegre) bus rapid transit (BRT) system, which is
> >> slightly unusual.
> >>
> >> The system consists of bus lanes (buses can switch to/from main
> >> traffic at any point and do so almost at will along several stretches)
> >> that become separated from the main ways next to platform/stops, which
> >> act as physical barriers. Check either:
> >> - an illustration: http://i.imgur.com/O4MaQhK.jpg
> >> - the reality:
> >>
> https://maps.google.com/maps?layer=c&cbll=-30.008432,-51.183492&cbp=12,84.21,,0,7.43
> >>
> >> If strictly following OSM's conventions on separation of ways [1], I
> >> think it would be represented as lanes:psv=* on many (but not all)
> >> spans of the main ways, with highway=service ways only next to
> >> platforms.
> >>
> >> After some research, I think this would be a rare, perhaps unique
> >> ("weird") mapping of a BRT system in OSM. Here
> >> [http://i.imgur.com/RLdZgDk.png] is an comparison of several major BRT
> >> systems in reasonably well mapped areas of the world. All of those
> >> systems are correctly mapped as separated service ways because there
> >> is continuous physical separation between the busways and main
> >> traffic. So I'm wondering if, for clarity, my hometown's case
> >> could/should be mapped "as if" there is continuous physical
> >> separation, like almost everywhere else.
> >>
> >> Notes:
> >>
> >> In my comparison table, Mexico City's and Jakarta's BRT systems' stops
> >> are highlighted because they probably qualify as "bus stations" [2].
> >>
> >> Buenos Aires' system is quite similar to Porto Alegre's. They use a
> >> variety of physical structures between bus lanes and regular lanes,
> >> but I'm not sure if the smallest ones are considered "physical
> >> separators" in Argentina. In case they are not, it would turn out as
> >> the same "weird" situation as in my hometown in some places. The
> >> Brazilian separators are quite different, but their status as
> >> "physical separators" is well agreed upon. [3]
> >>
> >> An opinion [4] made me wonder if highway=service is indeed adequate
> >> for these bus tracks. They really don't provide local access to
> >> "sites" (parking lots, private properties, bus stations, etc.).
> >> Instead, they allow people to move across vast distances around the
> >> city, just like regular roads. Maybe they should be
> >> highway=unclassified as in Brisbane.
> >>
> >> I know that Cleveland has a BRT system based solely on bus lanes, but
> >> with no separation from main traffic next to platforms.
> >>
> >> To help anyone interested, below are coordinates of areas that I
> >> consider "representative examples" of each of those BRT systems. They
> >> are good starting points for exploration.
> >>
> >> -27.4785878 153.0205546 Australia/Brisbane/South East Busway
> >> 45.4064414 -75.6642915 Canada/Ottawa/Transitway
> >> -34.5922814 -58.4407038 Argentina/Buenos Aires/Metrobus
> >> 34.1812658 -118.5534848 USA/Los Angeles/Orange Line
> >> -23.6915090 -46.5570539 Brazil/São Paulo/Corredor ABD
> >> -25.4359510 -49.3072766 Brazil/Curitiba/Linha Verde
> >> 49.4409999 1.0825457 France/Rouen/TEOR
> >> 47.2060680 -1.5388248 France/Nantes/Busway (line 4)
> >> 52.2340794 0.1350110 UK/Cambridge/The Busway
> >> -23.0003967 -43.3829705 Brazil/Rio de Janeiro/TransOeste
> >> -23.5620123 -46.6124021 Brazil/São Paulo/Expresso Tiradentes
> >> -6.1878222 106.8229964 Indonesia/Jakarta/TransJakarta Corridor 1
> >> 19.4036069 -99.1692696 Mexico/Mexico City/Metrobus lines 1-3
> >>
> >> [1]
> >>
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Editing_Standards_and_Conventions#Divided_highways
> >> [2]
> >>
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Public_Transport#Station
> >> [3]
> >>
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-br/2013-December/004837.html
> >> [4]
> >>
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2010-November/005799.html
> >>
> >> --
> >> Fernando Trebien
> >> +55 (51) 9962-5409
> >>
> >> "Nullius in verba."
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Tagging mailing list
> >> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
> >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Tagging mailing list
> > Tagging at openstreetmap.org
> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Fernando Trebien
> +55 (51) 9962-5409
>
> "Nullius in verba."
>
> _______________________________________________
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20150304/730c7044/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the Tagging mailing list