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

[Elliott Plack]

Steve and Friends,

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.

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.

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.

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?

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).

I have mapped my observations with this changeset:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/39027403

Best,

Elliott

On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 6:40 PM Kerry Irons <irons54vortex at gmail.com> wrote:

> Steve,
>
> When the locals have confirmed your work, let's provide a concise summary
> of
> the issues to MDOT.  I have the contact information in the agency.
>
>
> Kerry
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: stevea [mailto:steveaOSM at softworkers.com]
> Sent: Friday, October 17, 2014 2:32 PM
> To: FTA/Ethan; Elliott Plack; Wade; Phil! Gold; Kerry Irons
> Subject: Is USBR 11 in Maryland complete/correct in OSM?
>
> Hello Ethan, Elliott, Wade, Phil and Kerry:
>
> Ethan made a great effort to get most of USBR 11 in Maryland entered into
> OpenStreetMap (OSM) a week ago.  I understand his apparent trepidation at
> entering the remainder of the southerly portion of the route near Weverton
> and Keep Tryst Road:  there is what appears as a dangerous-to-bicyclists
> routing that MDOT has documented in its application.  The application notes
> that "Bicyclists Must Use Shoulder" on Maryland 67 and US 340, and the
> interchange between these and onward to Keep Tryst Road seems OK for USBR
> 11
> southbound cyclists.  However, for USBR 11 northbound cyclists it involves
> some contraflow shoulder riding on US 340 against 55 MPH automobile traffic
> for about a kilometer (the last 500 m on the cloverleaf), and may involve a
> tricky crossing across the southern terminus of Maryland 67 just south of
> the bridge over US 340 so that subsequent riding is with the flow of
> traffic
> on the shoulder of Maryland 67.
>
> I documented these difficulties in "source ways and nodes" of OSM with note
> tags.  However, these do not show up in rendered maps, they are there
> largely to guide OSM editors of how present intentions are tagged and
> intended to be tagged in the future as newer infrastructure is built:
> thankfully, Page 10 of MDOT's USBR 11 application notes that MDOT "will
> pursue grant funding for a new shared-use path to route bicyclists between
> Keep Tryst Road and MD 67 under US 340.  This will eliminate the need for
> bicyclists to ride on US 340 in this location.  Until such time as the
> shared-use path is constructed, bicyclists will use US 340."  My note and
> note_2 tags are intended to convey these intentions.  My bicycle=shoulder
> tag is something I have never used before, but it is intended to convey
> MDOT's intention that "bicyclists must use shoulder" on Maryland 67 and US
> 340.
>
> Somewhat confusingly, I note that Page 9 of the application (PDF), or Page
> 3
> of the turn-by-turn directions, notes specific northbound routing for USBR
> 11 cyclists.  These actually "Begin" at Keep Tryst Road and US 340, "3.7
> miles from West Virginia State Line."  As I understand the application,
> this
> implies that northbound USBR 11 cyclists have no routing from West Virginia
> for these 3.7 miles.  I am further confused by what is an apparent error in
> the application here, instructions to turn RIGHT (eastbound) from the
> T-intersection of Keep Tryst Road onto US 340, while the intended direction
> is clearly westbound:  indeed, the corresponding "General Direction of
> Travel" says "West."  The most recent satellite imagery I see shows Keep
> Tryst Road does not allow a crossing of dual-carriageway US 340 here to
> travel westbound with the flow of automobile traffic.
> Finally, the next turn-by-turn instruction is to travel 0.4 miles from US
> 340 and turn right onto Maryland 67 in an eastbound direction.  First,
> there
> is no turn to be made here (that I can determine -- it seems it must be a
> contraflow shoulder ride through the cloverleaf, then that tricky crossing
> to ride with the flow of traffic south of the overcrossing) and Maryland 67
> is northerly here, not easterly.
>
> The relation in OSM is http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/4095725
> and the "tricky part for bicyclists" can be seen here:
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=18/39.33225/-77.68856&layers=C .
> Also, I have updated the wiki entry
> (http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_U.S._Bicycle_Route_System)
> for proposed USBR 11 in Maryland to reflect its completion in OSM (as I
> currently understand it).
>
> I ask OSM editors in Maryland, especially those familiar with this area, to
> please double check my work around the Maryland 67 and US
> 340 interchange.  Is the tagging adequate?  Is the routing (both southbound
> and northbound) correct?  Kerry, if you have an email contact for anybody
> in
> MDOT associated with this application, I encourage you to forward this onto
> them for a similar review of OSM's accurate documenting of this proposed
> USBR in Maryland.  The most useful link to use is the relation link above,
> then zoom and pan.
>
> Thank you to everybody for a great team effort here!
>
> Steve All
> USBRS WikiProject coordinator
> California
>
>
> >Wonderful, thanks. I'm absolutely open to collaborators on any project :).
> >
> >Ethan
>
> --
Elliott Plack
http://elliottplack.me
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-us/attachments/20160502/23e3fb10/attachment-0001.html>