[OSM-np] Classification of Roads in Nepal

[Sakar Pudasaini]

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.*
highway = motorway*

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)

*Highway = trunk*





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.*Highway = trunk_link (if they are connecting Type B)
Hightway = tertiary (otherwise)*

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)
*Highway = residential*

[image: Description: https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/images/cleardot.gif]


Type D: Unpaved roads intended for cars.

*Highway = track*



Type E: unpaved or paved galli's that will not fit cars but motorcycles and
cycles can go through them

*Highway = path (then tag bicycle, foot and motorcycle)*



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.

*Highway = living_street*


As before, Type B, C and C1 are the confusing points

On Wed, Jul 4, 2012 at 10:05 PM, Prabhas Pokharel <
prabhas.pokharel at gmail.com> wrote:

>
>
> On Wednesday, July 4, 2012, Sakar Pudasaini wrote:
>
>> Rajeev,
>>
>> It makes perfect sense. And it has simplicity on its side which is
>> generally a winner in my book.
>>
>> In this case though I do worry the system proposed is conflating too much
>> into a single value. At some point this stuff have to rendered visually and
>> for all 2 lane roads to look the same might not be so good. As for the
>> upkeep problem, that is going to be a pain in the ass in a fast urbanizing
>> city like Ktm anyway.
>>
>> Prabhas,
>>
>> You attempt to a description for Type A1 and I'll attempt to classify
>> them into the final classifications :-) Deal?
>>
>
> Thanks for forcing me to think about it. I withdraw my A1 proposal. I
> think the Koteshwor highway is a particularly "advanced" A, but we can just
> differentiate that by tagging the number of lanes in each of the ways.
> Pat of it will be taken care by one thing we should do, which is to
> separate 'divided' highways (where you can't take a u-turn, or take a right
> turn, etc.) that I thought of as I was driving down Baneshwor. Parts of
> Baneshwor<->Maitighar, Koteshwor<->Thimi, and Putalisadak are like this.
>
> The other thought that is worth mentioning is that it may not be a bad
> thing to have different standards for Kathmandu and rest of Nepal for some
> of the road classification issues (although we should make these
> differences very limited).
>
> -S
>>
>> On Mon, Jul 2, 2012 at 11:26 PM, Rajeev Amatya <rajeevamatya at gmail.com>wrote:
>>
>> 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
>>
>>
>>
>
> --
> 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
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-np/attachments/20120705/ad39b2c3/attachment-0001.html>