Re: [talk-au] NSW Bridle Track

[Warin]

On 22/2/23 08:27, Mark Pulley wrote:
On 21 Feb 2023, at 2:42 pm, Josh Marshall  
wrote:


Australian road tagging guidelines at 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Australian_Tagging_Guidelines/Roads arguably 
override the general OSM guidelines, and they read:


highway=track: "Service and access roads that aren't part of the 
general road network. Generally not paved, often not public access 
for vehicles."... in rural "Fire trails, forest drives, 4WD tracks, 
and similar roads.


highway=unclassified is: "Minor roads that are neither tertiary or 
residential roads. Not generally through routes."


Given that, I'd argue =track is the right option.


When I surveyed the Bridle Track back in 2009 (I think this was the 
year before the landslide) I picked highway=track as it was very 
rough. I don’t remember if it was signposted four-wheel-drive only, 
but I can still remember the look of shock on the face of the tourist 
information lady at Hill End when I mentioned I had arrived via the 
Bridle Track in my two-wheel-drive vehicle!


The new section bypassing the landslide at Monaghans Bluff looks good 
in the photos I’ve seen of the construction, but whether it remains 
good is another question. There was no work on the remainder of the track.



I have a report Feb 6th halfway down the first hill from Hill End, the 
council had dozers and graders on the road getting it looking good...




If the classification was changed to highway=unclassified, it will 
definitely need the addition of 4wd_only=recommended


highway=tertiary is wrong. I would not use the DCS NSW Base Map as a 
source for the highway classification. I’ve seen too many errors in 
this map to trust this. (As an example, in Armidale NSW, Boorolong 
Road comes in from the west as a tertiary road. As it enters Armidale, 
the main road then follows Handel Street / Queen Elizabeth Drive, but 
the Base Map takes the road classification across the train line and 
along Shambrook Avenue, a minor and narrow road.)


I’ll have a look at the new road when I can (if not this weekend, then 
the weekend after), as I live close by.



Thanks, I think it will be busy, take care.



Mark P.


___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] NSW Bridal Track

[Andrew Harvey]

On Tue, 21 Feb 2023 at 14:46, Josh Marshall 
wrote:

> A tangent, but I'm rather happy that iD _*finally_* fixed their English
> description for =track (it included "unmaintained" for a long time; many
> were quite annoyed at the original change to include that)... and I can't
> find any discussion about why they finally gave in and reverted it! Vested
> interest, since it along with =path are likely my two most used, given I
> map a lot of bush with fire trails and run/ride singletrack.
>

https://github.com/openstreetmap/id-tagging-schema/pull/288

We can have Australian translations for these terms in iD. I just added
Fire Trail as a synonym for it.
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] NSW Bridal Track

[Josh Marshall]

Ah, I think I've let the mapping of tracks local to me influence my stance
too much. And for context of my interest here, my plan was to bikepack
the Track but that got put off due to covid and family.

The Australian guidelines don't say much about =tertiary, but bouncing over
to the main =tertiary page at
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dtertiary:
"Outside urban areas, tertiary roads are those with low to moderate traffic
which link smaller settlements such as villages or hamlets. For quieter
linking roads, consider using highway=unclassified instead."

Given this along with your points, leaving it set as unclassified is likely
the right call.

And this discussion so far has modified my overall view to be:
- tertiary: roads that are used as genuine links between two towns
- unclassified: if driving it is more a recreational activity than a need
for a thoroughfare, even if it links two localities
- track: more limited access for whatever reason: drivability, lesser
usage, gated, spurs from unclassified, fire trails, etc

I'd agree with 4WD recommended, if coming from the south most camp sites
> can be accessed with little trouble in a reasonable vehicle.
>

The signage says 4WD-only in all the photos I've seen. But I've also driven
on the initial portion of 4WD-only track in a 2WD. Is the solution to note
the signage somehow, but tag the actual ways as to their genuine
accessibility ie south section = recommended, north section = required?
(Back in the early days of GPS navigation I was routed out of Wombeyan
Caves on the eastern side, which was an... experience.)


On Tue, 21 Feb 2023 at 19:32, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:

>
> On 21/2/23 14:42, Josh Marshall wrote:
>
> Australian road tagging guidelines at
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Australian_Tagging_Guidelines/Roads 
> arguably
> override the general OSM guidelines, and they read:
>
> highway=track: "Service and access roads that aren't part of the general
> road network. Generally not paved, often not public access for
> vehicles."... in rural "Fire trails, forest drives, 4WD tracks, and similar
> roads.
>
> highway=unclassified is: "Minor roads that are neither tertiary or
> residential roads. Not generally through routes."
>
> Given that, I'd argue =track is the right option.
>
>
> The Bridal Track is open to the public, part of the general road network
> and a through route. It would never have been reopened if it was not for
> public money. at lest not reopened to the public.
>
> So from that you could say tertiary. I'd not go that far.
>
>
> A tangent, but I'm rather happy that iD _*finally_* fixed their English
> description for =track (it included "unmaintained" for a long time; many
> were quite annoyed at the original change to include that)... and I can't
> find any discussion about why they finally gave in and reverted it! Vested
> interest, since it along with =path are likely my two most used, given I
> map a lot of bush with fire trails and run/ride singletrack.
>
>
> On Tue, 21 Feb 2023 at 09:23, cleary  wrote:
>
>>
>> The name should not constrain the classification of the highway  (e.g.
>> Dowling Track, Ooodnadatta Track). And, as I've commented previously in
>> other threads, the DCS NSW Base Map can be quite outdated.
>>
>> However, a quick look at a YouTube video suggests that the Bridle Track
>> should still be tagged as 4WD only (it was signposted as such and probably
>> still is). Wikipedia reports that part of the route is new, apparently a
>> diversion around the landslide that blocked the old track at Monaghans
>> Bluff. I'd prefer not to change the OSM tags etc until someone surveys the
>> route.
>>
>
> The Bridal Track has been brought up to a very high standard ... so the
> pollies would have no trouble opening ! It will not stay that way - I have
> been told no water truck was used in the constructions ..
>
> I'd agree with 4WD recommended, if coming from the south most camp sites
> can be accessed with little trouble in a reasonable vehicle. The problem is
> the hill going upto Hill End .. t6hat can get lost of erosion .. and it is
> narrow with blind corners.
>
> I do know the Track fairly well from a number of trips. The diversion
> looks to be less of an obstruction compared to the more difficult bits, at
> leas until it is weathered..
>
>
>>
>>
>> On Mon, 20 Feb 2023, at 9:17 PM, Warin wrote:
>> > Hi
>> >
>> > This track is now continuous having been closed due to a rock fall and
>> > road collapse at Monaghans Bluff.
>> >
>> >
>> > Given the importance of the road and that it is not really a 'track' in
>> > the OSM sense (Roads for mostly agricultural or forestry uses) ... and
>> > that the DCS Base Map places it at least tertiary level I would think
>> > that all of this 'track' be classified in OSM as 'unclassified'.
>> >
>> >
>> > Thoughts?
>>
>
>
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org

Re: [talk-au] NSW Bridle Track

[Mark Pulley]

> On 21 Feb 2023, at 2:42 pm, Josh Marshall  wrote:
> 
> Australian road tagging guidelines at 
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Australian_Tagging_Guidelines/Roads 
>  
> arguably override the general OSM guidelines, and they read:
> 
> highway=track: "Service and access roads that aren't part of the general road 
> network. Generally not paved, often not public access for vehicles."... in 
> rural "Fire trails, forest drives, 4WD tracks, and similar roads.
> 
> highway=unclassified is: "Minor roads that are neither tertiary or 
> residential roads. Not generally through routes."
> 
> Given that, I'd argue =track is the right option.


When I surveyed the Bridle Track back in 2009 (I think this was the year before 
the landslide) I picked highway=track as it was very rough. I don’t remember if 
it was signposted four-wheel-drive only, but I can still remember the look of 
shock on the face of the tourist information lady at Hill End when I mentioned 
I had arrived via the Bridle Track in my two-wheel-drive vehicle!

The new section bypassing the landslide at Monaghans Bluff looks good in the 
photos I’ve seen of the construction, but whether it remains good is another 
question. There was no work on the remainder of the track.

If the classification was changed to highway=unclassified, it will definitely 
need the addition of 4wd_only=recommended

highway=tertiary is wrong. I would not use the DCS NSW Base Map as a source for 
the highway classification. I’ve seen too many errors in this map to trust 
this. (As an example, in Armidale NSW, Boorolong Road comes in from the west as 
a tertiary road. As it enters Armidale, the main road then follows Handel 
Street / Queen Elizabeth Drive, but the Base Map takes the road classification 
across the train line and along Shambrook Avenue, a minor and narrow road.)

I’ll have a look at the new road when I can (if not this weekend, then the 
weekend after), as I live close by.

Mark P.

___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] NSW Bridal Track

[Warin]

On 21/2/23 14:42, Josh Marshall wrote:
Australian road tagging guidelines at 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Australian_Tagging_Guidelines/Roads arguably 
override the general OSM guidelines, and they read:


highway=track: "Service and access roads that aren't part of the 
general road network. Generally not paved, often not public access for 
vehicles."... in rural "Fire trails, forest drives, 4WD tracks, and 
similar roads.


highway=unclassified is: "Minor roads that are neither tertiary or 
residential roads. Not generally through routes."


Given that, I'd argue =track is the right option.



The Bridal Track is open to the public, part of the general road network 
and a through route. It would never have been reopened if it was not for 
public money. at lest not reopened to the public.


So from that you could say tertiary. I'd not go that far.



A tangent, but I'm rather happy that iD _*finally_* fixed their 
English description for =track (it included "unmaintained" for a long 
time; many were quite annoyed at the original change to include 
that)... and I can't find any discussion about why they finally gave 
in and reverted it! Vested interest, since it along with =path are 
likely my two most used, given I map a lot of bush with fire trails 
and run/ride singletrack.



On Tue, 21 Feb 2023 at 09:23, cleary  wrote:


The name should not constrain the classification of the highway 
(e.g. Dowling Track, Ooodnadatta Track). And, as I've commented
previously in other threads, the DCS NSW Base Map can be quite
outdated.

However, a quick look at a YouTube video suggests that the Bridle
Track should still be tagged as 4WD only (it was signposted as
such and probably still is). Wikipedia reports that part of the
route is new, apparently a diversion around the landslide that
blocked the old track at Monaghans Bluff. I'd prefer not to change
the OSM tags etc until someone surveys the route.



The Bridal Track has been brought up to a very high standard ... so the 
pollies would have no trouble opening ! It will not stay that way - I 
have been told no water truck was used in the constructions ..


I'd agree with 4WD recommended, if coming from the south most camp sites 
can be accessed with little trouble in a reasonable vehicle. The problem 
is the hill going upto Hill End .. t6hat can get lost of erosion .. and 
it is narrow with blind corners.


I do know the Track fairly well from a number of trips. The diversion 
looks to be less of an obstruction compared to the more difficult bits, 
at leas until it is weathered..






On Mon, 20 Feb 2023, at 9:17 PM, Warin wrote:
> Hi
>
> This track is now continuous having been closed due to a rock
fall and
> road collapse at Monaghans Bluff.
>
>
> Given the importance of the road and that it is not really a
'track' in
> the OSM sense (Roads for mostly agricultural or forestry uses)
... and
> that the DCS Base Map places it at least tertiary level I would
think
> that all of this 'track' be classified in OSM as 'unclassified'.
>
>
> Thoughts?


___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au