[talk-au] Converting railway= abandoned to highway=track

[Josh Marshall]

Thanks for the feedback, Jono, Mike, Ewen, good points.

I had considered already where the proposed trail or current accessible
track deviates from the old railway, as there are indeed some collapsed
bridges and deviations: some of the cuttings are completely overgrown and
so the accessible track goes around on the high side. So I will do those as
separate ways, but for where the new track matches the railway exactly I
will double-tag the way. It's not actually open to vehicles from the public
(there's some illegal 4wding happening at times), so will tag no to vehicle
access.

I checked the Fernleigh Track on OpenRailwayMap
https://www.openrailwaymap.org/?lang=null&lat=-32.94859657974205&lon=-208.28267097473145&zoom=15&style=standard
re: having the ways tagged as both highway=? and railway=abandoned and it
shows up fine there.

I will do a new relation for the proposed trail and update the old one with
the missing segments (and TIL "gunzel"... interesting origin on that term
:O - I'm not one myself but I can appreciate the hobby and will be careful
to keep them happy.)

Will use all your links as references and reply again when I'm done. Once
I've done the updates, I will wait until they filter through to the fitness
sites and then go check it all on the ground again.

On Sun, Feb 14, 2021 at 2:57 PM Jonathon Rossi <jono at jonorossi.com> wrote:

> On Sun, Feb 14, 2021 at 12:27 PM Josh Marshall <josh.p.marshall at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> My proposal is to alter the ways associated with the track to
>> highway=track (it’s all wide enough for vehicles), but retain
>> railway=abandoned, and add all the missing ways to the above relation.
>>
>> My main reasoning behind this is to raise it’s visibility as a walk and
>> ride option, and allow routing along it, as current routers (Strava,
>> Komoot) ignore it altogether (much to my annoyance). It’s what’s been done
>> for locally, the Fernleigh Track (
>> https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/2269030), and elsewhere eg The
>> Great Victorian Rail Trail (
>> https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/1043265)
>>
>> Now the other question is what should be done with the proposal as far as
>> adding tags. This way is on the old rail line and part of the proposal,
>> https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/243988974 has railway=abandoned,
>> highway=proposed and proposed=cycleway. It’s all accessible now, so it
>> should be highway=track (surface=unpaved), but then how to tag for the
>> proposal?
>>
>
> I agree, it should have highway=track now if someone could drive on it.
> That video on the council website looks like some significant work is going
> into this project.
>
> I'd drop the current "name=Richmond Vale Railway" tag (only if the tracks
> have been removed), leave old_name, and add "proposed:name=Richmond Vale
> Rail Trail". If the railway tracks remain (as they do in some sections of
> imagery at some unknown date) and the rail trail is a different alignment,
> you might need to map them separately.
>
> --
> Jono
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-au/attachments/20210215/2741360c/attachment.htm>