[Talk-GB] Improving gate data

[Russ Garrett]

Very interesting analysis!

I'm not sure if this is out of scope at the moment, but the map is
missing a number of modal filters around my area (East Canonbury,
Islington), which are gateless camera-enforced filters tagged as
normal highway segments with `motor_vehicle=permit`. This is a
modification that Islington has rolled out in the last few months -
blue badge holders are allowed to pass through these (as well as
emergency vehicles).

I think this one (https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/253039186) is
being picked up as a modal filter because it separates a
`highway=footway` from a `highway=pedestrian` area which does not have
any motor_vehicle access tags. As it turns out, that area is
permanently blocked to motor vehicle traffic, but I think this kind of
tagging of pedestrian areas is quite common and it may be more correct
to assume they're `motor_vehicle=no` if there are no access tags
provided.

I am pretty sure this one is erroneous, and I can't immediately see
why - it's just a small section of segregated cycleway if I recall
correctly: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/686188420

Cheers,

Russ

On Sun, 24 Apr 2022 at 15:43, Martin - CycleStreets
<list-osm-talk-gb at cyclestreets.net> wrote:
>
>
>
> We've been working on determining the location of modal filters across the
> UK[1]. You can currently see the data on this demo site, but a standalone
> site will be launched in a few weeks with the same data:
>
> https://bikedata.cyclestreets.net/modalfilters/
>
>
> We've been looking in particular at gate data, and around the UK there are
> a lot of gates which don't specify access details, or have other areas.
> Here is a map of all gates our analysis is picking out as potential modal
> filters, but within this we have spotted that some data errors are present:
>
> https://bikedata.cyclestreets.net/modalfilters:type=gate/#7.54/52.93/0.006
>
>
> Particular errors that are noticable, most of which are easily fixable,
> are:
>
> - In town/city areas, gates which implement gated communities, i.e. private
> estates, are not always being marked as access=private, nor often is the
> road going through them. These are often spottable by a pair of gates near
> each other. Adding access=private to both is needed. These are particularly
> worth fixing and very easy to do.
>
> - Gates for a residence or limiting access to a track coming off the road
> are sometimes being put on the main road itself rather than on the spur.
> That means it is very ambiguous as to whether they apply to the road
> itself. Again, these are easy to fix by shifting them to the side Way.
>
> - Gates which genuinely restrict access often don't have access=... put on
> either the gate itself or the Way following. E.g. a gate which stops
> traffic but which people can legally walk/cycle round might have e.g.
> access=no/permissive, foot=yes, bicycle=yes. Fixing these would help
> routing and clear up a fair amount of mess on the map.
>
> The wiki has the documentation for barrier=gate:
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:barrier%3Dgate
>
>
> It would be great if mappers could look round their area and audit the
> gates shown. Those in rural areas in particular tend to be less
> well-mapped.
>
>
> [1] https://www.cyclestreets.org/news/2021/07/25/mapping-ltns/
>
>
> Martin,                     **  CycleStreets - For Cyclists, By Cyclists
> Developer, CycleStreets     **  https://www.cyclestreets.org/
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb



-- 
Russ Garrett
russ at garrett.co.uk