[OSM-np] Classification of Roads in Nepal

Mon Jul 2 18:41:21 BST 2012

Hi guys,

Pardon me if I do not make any sense.

Whether a street is paved or not will change over time and we may not be
able to update the info regularly. If possible, we should only use tag for
that.

I would rather categorize the roads by lanes and go with particular
attributes. Naming could be done accordingly.

The tags in italics are not necessary.

How about:

For urban roads,
categories:
1. Multi-lane road,* tag footpath, tag traffic lights??* (eg. baneshwor to
maitighar)
2. Two lane road, tag footpath * tag traffic lights??* (eg. thapathali
area?)
3. Two lane road, tag no_footpath,  tag traffic lights?? (eg. airport to
sinamangal)

4. One lane road, access two cars, one or two way tag
5. One lane road, access one car, one or two way tag

6. No lane road,* access bike/bicycle*, tag restricted (eg. durbar square,
shankhamool bridge)
7. No lane road, *access bike/bicycle*, tag crowded (eg. ason)
8. No lane road, *access bike/bicycle*, tag narrow (gallis)

rajeev

On Mon, Jul 2, 2012 at 5:44 PM, Sakar Pudasaini <sakar at galligalli.org>wrote:

> For the moment I say we favor proliferation. And then we go through a
> round of culling. So I've added a Type A1 and Type C1 to accommodate your
> suggestions. Perhaps you could type out your thoughts more "formally" to
> give us a working definition on the A's since that is unclear to me.
>
> Type A: Roads that connect major cities and designed to lead traffic out
> of, into or around a town. These streets are relative broad and though they
> maybe potholed occasionally, regular resources are committed to keep them
> in good shape.
>
> Type A1:
>
> Type B: Roads with in the city that deal with (or are capable of dealing
> with) significant volumes of traffic. These roads are designed for motor
> vehicles AND regular resources are committed to their upkeep. I'm thinking
> Ram Shah Path, the gausala road running from Chabil Chowk to Baneshwor
> Chowk, Pasupati Sadak (running from Kamalpokhari towards the airport)
>
> Type C: Roads with in the city that are designed for Motor Vehicles BUT do
> not see regular upkeep. There are side streets that accommodate 2 way
> traffic and might have been pitched at some point but now are maybe half
> pitched at the best. These often tend to be connectors between two Type B
> roads.
>
> Type C1: Like a Type C but an only accommodate one car at a time in either
> direction (though the road itself might be a two way)
>
> Type D: Unpaved roads intended for cars.
>
> Type E: unpaved or paved galli's that will not fit cars but motorcycles
> and cycles can go through them
>
> Type F: roads in heavily populated areas that could fit cars but where
> street vendors and pedestrians hold sway e.g. Ason. This is the
> "living_street" I think.
>
>
> On Mon, Jul 2, 2012 at 8:28 PM, Prabhas Pokharel <
> prabhas.pokharel at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Sakar, I like that. Lets go with it a bit.
>>
>> What about the difference Bibek and I were chatting about... roads which
>> are otherwise Type C, but two cars side by side could not fit on them. Lots
>> of roads in the Purano Baneshwor / Gaushala area, in Patan area, etc. Do
>> you think that is worth separating out?
>>
>> Finally, on the type A side, is there a difference between the new
>> Koteshwor highway, and type A (I think ring road at one end of this and
>> Mahendra Highway on the other)? I could go either way on this, probably
>> merging them into the
>>
>>
>> On Monday, July 2, 2012, Sakar Pudasaini wrote:
>>
>>> Yeah. Super west centric... think I've seen a total of 1 road sign in
>>> the last month. Also the idea of a cycle path, so designated by law is
>>> pretty much laughable. I have not tried it but I imagine I could take a
>>> damn horse anywhere I really pleased... ride it all the way to china down
>>> the highway :-)
>>>
>>> May I make a suggestion. How about we flip the script and first try to
>>> agree on the types of roads we think exist in Nepal, then decide what is
>>> the appropriate tagging for it. It maybe that two of our types go into the
>>> same tag, or it may be that a tag that exists is irrelevant for Nepal etc.
>>> Also I agree with Prabhas' assessment but I do think we should try to norm
>>> within at least the rest of the subcontinent, don't imagine their
>>> situations is that different from ours. And norms are nice when they can
>>> be established.
>>>
>>> Here is my attempt at a few, this is going to be Kathmandu-centric since
>>> I have not had a chance to explore outside the valley for a while:
>>>
>>> 1. Type A: Roads that connect major cities and designed to lead traffic
>>> out of, into or around a town. These streets are relative broad and though
>>> they maybe potholed occasionally, regular resources are committed to keep
>>> them in good shape. E.g. Arniko highway, ring road
>>>
>>> 2. Type B: Roads with in the city that deal with (or are capable of
>>> dealing with) significant volumes of traffic. These roads are designed for
>>> motor vehicles AND regular resources are committed to their upkeep. I'm
>>> thinking Ram Shah Path, the gausala road running from Chabil Chowk to
>>> Baneshwor Chowk, Pasupati Sadak (running from Kamalpokhari towards the
>>> airport)
>>>
>>> 3. Type C: Roads with in the city that are designed for Motor Vehicles
>>> BUT do not see regular upkeep. There are side streets that accommodate 2
>>> way traffic and might have been pitched at some point but now are maybe
>>> half pitched at the best. These often tend to be connectors between two
>>> Type B roads.
>>>
>>> 4. Type D: Unpaved roads intended for cars.
>>>
>>> 5. Type E: unpaved or paved galli's that will not fit cars but
>>> motorcycles and cycles can go through them
>>>
>>> 6. Type F: roads in heavily populated areas that could fit cars but
>>> where street vendors and pedestrians hold sway e.g. Ason. This is the
>>> "living_street" I think.
>>>
>>> I struggled with B and C. They could very well be the same thing, but as
>>> someone who rides a motorbike around town they feel very different.
>>>
>>> -Sakar
>>>
>>> On Sun, Jul 1, 2012 at 7:50 AM, Prabhas Pokharel <
>>> prabhas.pokharel at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hmm, not sure that I have more clarity in my head of how to tag things
>>>> now. There are also highway=service and highway=path that we could pair
>>>> with motorcycle=yes.
>>>>
>>>> In general, I think the rules that are built are very western centric,
>>>> as you can see in the images in the path controversy (
>>>> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Path_controversy). So the
>>>> guidelines we build for ourselves should be a result of creative
>>>> interpretation of norms in place in other places of the world rather than
>>>> trying to find the exact meaning based on pictures that one is very
>>>> unlikely to see in Nepal.
>>>>
>>>> --p
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Saturday, June 30, 2012, bibekshrestha at gmail.com wrote:
>>>>
>>>> For living_street vs residential road, the first paragraph here
>>>> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dresidential kind of
>>>> explains the difference. Atleast the image on the right side does not look
>>>> like a living_street.
>>>> --
>>>> Bibek Shrestha
>>>> bibekshrestha at gmail dot com
>>>> Twitter: http://twitter.com/bibstha
>>>> "You mustn't be afraid to dream a little bigger, darling.", Eames to
>>>> Arthur, Inception 2010
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Sat, Jun 30, 2012 at 4:55 PM, bibekshrestha at gmail.com <
>>>> bibekshrestha at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> The following references try to clarify the confusion, but only to some
>>>> extent.
>>>>
>>>> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Tag:highway%3Dpedestrian#footway_vs_pedestrian
>>>> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Path_controversy
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Bibek Shrestha
>>>> bibekshrestha at gmail dot com
>>>> Twitter: http://twitter.com/bibstha
>>>> "You mustn't be afraid to dream a little bigger, darling.", Eames to
>>>> Arthur, Inception 2010
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Sat, Jun 30, 2012 at 4:54 PM, bibekshrestha at gmail.com <
>>>> bibekshrestha at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Bibek Shrestha
>>>> bibekshrestha at gmail dot com
>>>> Twitter: http://twitter.com/bibstha
>>>> "You mustn't be afraid to dream a little bigger, darling.", Eames to
>>>> Arthur, Inception 2010
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Sat, Jun 30, 2012 at 8:45 AM, Prabhas Pokharel <
>>>> prabhas.pokharel at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Bibek, thanks for making a first draft of this important document. One
>>>> minor suggestion: should we think of something that is very similar to
>>>> highway=pedestrian, but streets that are accessible to motorcycles? As we
>>>> know, there are a lot of places like this in Kathmandu, does dual tagging of
>>>> highway=pedestrian and motorcyle=yes make sense?
>>>>
>>>> I think we agree on motorcycle=yes on this but I'm not too sure whether
>>>> we use highway=footway or highway=pedestrian. (Which Sakar mentioned in his
>>>> reply).
>>>>
>>>> I would personally prefer highway=pedestrian for the following criteria.
>>>> a. if the road is as wide enough as a normal road but people use it
>>>> only for walking (usually city centers, squares, etc),
>>>>
>>>> highway=footpath
>>>> b. The narrow gallis and shortcuts which cannot have a car (sth bigger
>>>> than a maruti may be because maruti usually can squeeze in any kind of
>>>> road) move through it. Like the gallis in Bhaktapur or Kathmandu.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The trickiest part when tagging that I come across is deciding between
>>>> highway=residential and highway=living_street Its usually very diffi
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>
>>>> Talk-np mailing list
>>>> Talk-np at openstreetmap.org
>>>> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-np
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>> --
>> Prabhas Pokharel
>> http://twitter.com/prabhasp
>> US mobile: +1 347 948 7654
>> skype/facebook/whatever: prabhasp
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Talk-np mailing list
>> Talk-np at openstreetmap.org
>> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-np
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-np mailing list
> Talk-np at openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-np
>
>

-- 

Rajeev Amatya

Mobile: +41 78 806 64 95 (CH)  /  +49 1578 7608487 (DE)
Email:   rajeev.amatya at student.unisg.ch / rajeevamatya at gmail.com

University of St. Gallen
Master of Arts in Strategy and International Management (SIM)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-np/attachments/20120702/4a1854d3/attachment.html>