[Talk-us] Is USBR 11 in Maryland complete/correct in OSM?

Sat Jun 18 21:05:59 UTC 2016

I didn't see any of the oval USBR signs out there. I thought the routing
was a little different though. The part from Keep Tryst to MD 67 would
require an illegal movement to go the wrong way on what is essentially a
freeway and around a freeway ramp the in the wrong direction. Is that
really the route? On this photo, the blue arrows show what I interpreted
the route to be. There are some bike signs on the part of Jefferson Pike
between the Potomac River, including ones directing to and from MD 67.

[image: pasted1]

What's the text description of the route?

On Sat, Jun 18, 2016 at 4:56 PM Kerry Irons <irons54vortex at gmail.com> wrote:

> Recognize that the small sign is not a USBR sign.  In your first link I
> could find no bike route sign unless it is that sign way off in the
> distance that I can’t make out.
>
>
>
>
>
> Kerry Irons
>
>
>
> *From:* Elliott Plack [mailto:elliott.plack at gmail.com]
> *Sent:* Saturday, June 18, 2016 3:03 PM
> *To:* Kerry Irons <irons54vortex at gmail.com>; OSM Volunteer stevea <
> steveaOSM at softworkers.com>
> *Cc:* FTA/Ethan <emann15 at hotmail.com>; Wade <wade.crump at comcast.net>;
> Phil! Gold <phil_g at pobox.com>; talk-us at openstreetmap.org
>
>
> *Subject:* Re: Is USBR 11 in Maryland complete/correct in OSM?
>

>
> I've been out there a few times taking Mapillary photos along the route so
> you can see some of the bike signage.
> http://www.mapillary.com/map/im/3Aq9dVh3Av7K_di9KKUudQ/photo
>
>
>
> This tiny one is my favorite. It's so small compared to the massive BGS:
> http://www.mapillary.com/map/im/8I80lkxdGCOgfsOCKDyYSg/photo
>
>
>
On Mon, May 2, 2016 at 7:58 AM Kerry Irons <irons54vortex at gmail.com> wrote:
>
Just to echo Steve’s comment on signs: encouraged but not required.
> Currently just under 18% of the USBRS is signed.  Budget is the issue, both
> at the state and local (non state highway) level
>
>
>
>
>
> Kerry
>
>
>
> *From:* OSM Volunteer stevea [mailto:steveaOSM at softworkers.com]
> *Sent:* Sunday, May 1, 2016 8:26 PM
> *To:* Elliott Plack <elliott.plack at gmail.com>
> *Cc:* Kerry Irons <irons54vortex at gmail.com>; FTA/Ethan <
> emann15 at hotmail.com>; Wade <wade.crump at comcast.net>; Phil! Gold <
> phil_g at pobox.com>; talk-us at openstreetmap.org
> *Subject:* Re: Is USBR 11 in Maryland complete/correct in OSM?
>
>
>
> Elliott Plack <elliott.plack at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> Update on this. I was out along the AT in the Weverton area and had a
> chance to observe this unique condition where cyclists are encouraged to
> use what is effectively a motorway for travel.
>
>
>
> I always found my armchair mapping of this highly suspect and so I added
> copious tags that it still needed additional editing.  >1.5 years later,
> Elliott submits nice, solid work after a field trip.  Well, all right!
>
>
>
> There is no sign or specific indication of USBR 11 anywhere out there that
> I observed. What I did see was that the eastbound carriageway of US 340 had
> a green sign indicating that it was a bicycle route between the Keep Tryst
> Rd / Valley Rd intersection, and Exit 2, which had a sign indicating the
> bicycles must exit. The "Bike Route" signs did not have a number reference.
> There is a Bike Route sign on the exit to MD 67 as well, which is the part
> that is USBR 11.
>
>
>
> Kerry might remind everybody that signage is optional (I would say
> “encouraged” but I don’t think that is official) on the USBRS.  The route
> exists by state DOT declaration and “acceptance” into the national (non)
> network (called USBRS) by AASHTO.  Signs cost money and effort to erect:
>  sometimes there is budget to do so and the state DOT finds a way to erect
> signs, sometimes signage is a more grass-roots effort (fundraising,
> sign-raising…) than it is state (DOT) sanctioned or funded.  A Bike Route
> sign is a legal, MUTCD-acceptable way to sign here but I think we all agree
> the M1-9 sign (USBR 11) would be preferred.
>
>
>
> For the sections of US 340 where cyclists are allowed, I added the
> cycleway:right=shoulder tag. I also fixed any FIXMEs related to this
> condition.
>
>
>
> Thank you, thank you.
>
>
>
> Curiously, the eastbound carriageway is tagged as trunk, while the
> westbound is tagged motorway. While there is a single grade intersection
> along the eastbound portion (at Keep Tryst Rd), I think that this is
> probably not enough to call the entire section trunk. Thoughts on that?
>
>
>
> You did the field trip!  The whole area around Keep Tryst Road and how it
> interfaces with AT and bicycles is complicated, and now seems much better
> tagged.
>
>
>
> Finally, I also improved the routing of USBR 11 where it crosses the
> Potomac River on a shared-use rail bridge. There is a staircase to access
> the bridge that I added the steps tag too. I am not sure how bicycling
> routers, like OSRM or Strava will handle steps, but cyclists are allowed
> there provided they dismount (per signage).
>
>
>
> There is also a lcm (local cycleway network) around here with a staircase,
> it is near the Santa Cruz Boardwalk at the mouth of the San Lorenzo River.
> These things can get complicated, but I believe with the proper tagging of
> bicycle=dismount (to walk up or down stairs carrying your bicycle) that a
> router should be able to figure that out.  Especially if is part of a
> lcn/rcn/ncn.  Still, I wouldn’t mind a bicycle router showing “special”
> semiotics here (yellow or hatching or something like that).
>
>
>
> I have mapped my observations with this changeset:
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/39027403
>
>
>
> Deeply appreciated.  This tagging and routing were a little sticky here,
> and now are much better.
>
>
>
> SteveA
>
> California
>
> USBRS WikiProject coordinator
>
> --
>
> Elliott Plack
> http://elliottplack.me
>
-- 
Elliott Plack
http://elliottplack.me
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-us/attachments/20160618/c10533a8/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: pasted1
Type: image/png
Size: 504957 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-us/attachments/20160618/c10533a8/attachment-0001.png>