Re: [talk-au] Melbourne - Suburban Rail Loop - Too early to mark as under construction?

[stevea]

Sorry, I meant railway=proposed becoming railway=construction.  The tag 
state=proposed is something used (I do so frequently) in other routes besides 
route=railway relations, like route=bicycle relations.  I apologize for any 
confusion.
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] Melbourne - Suburban Rail Loop - Too early to mark as under construction?

[stevea]

Catching up on this thread (a bit on the late side, just upgraded macOS from 
Monterey to Ventura) I could say a lot.

In short, I think you've got it right tagging construction=* when you get 
actual digging, paving, power-poles and laying of rail.  I like "well, we've 
got road closures already..." meaning that "we're under construction," that 
sounds right.  And as a segue, "construction" means "funded," what I consider a 
crucial aspect for any project, and anybody rolling backhoes or paving rollers 
is getting paid to do so by a project manager and authority with money for 
paychecks and material.

Where I could say a lot more is when you might say state=proposed.  (When to 
make the transition from tagging "proposed" to "construction" is about as easy 
as reading the previous paragraph).  A shorter version is that OSM is OK with 
tagging state=proposed when "there is funding for the project."  Yet, a LOT 
more than that in OSM gets tagged state=proposed (maybe on the up-and-up, maybe 
somebody needs to redact that tag or some ways).

For example, see the section in our wiki [1] about California's High Speed Rail 
project (the USA's biggest public works project at about US$100 billion and 
controversial / a political hot potato in every way imaginable, although it's 
gotten much better in the last few months as funding gets more certain and 
Phase 1 enters a sort of "middle").  While there were always Phase 1 and Phase 
2, in 2019 (with a new Governor elected) and especially 2020-2 (with COVID), 
the project has been "re-defined" in ways that both explain the delays, cost 
overruns, pandemic pauses, and also break apart Phase 1 into Phase 1a and Phase 
1b in a way that's hard to explain.  The table in the wiki tries to do this, 
and also tries to explain how actual "rail under construction" and "rail 
proposed" differ, mainly by "whether it's funded," but there are aspects of 
"did this pass environmental review" (most of it has), "did this complete 
design work prior to construction" (1b North and 1b South are IN design now), 
and if those two hurdles have been jumped, did it go out to public bidding and 
was a bid actually tendered by the Authority?  For this project, and to keep 
OSM feathers from getting ruffled, we seem to have consensus that it's OK to 
put state=proposed on 1a and 1b, even though they are not quite yet funded (but 
are in design, which is right before bids for funding go out, and the money is 
"more or less promised by the state to be there") — there is odd history.  So, 
"proposed" can be complicated before construction — it certainly is on 
California High Speed Rail.  BTW, expect to start riding this train around 2030 
(Phase 1a "Interim" service), 2031 or so for the initial San Francisco to Los 
Angeles service.

But "construction" is pretty much "are crews constructing?"  Yeah.

Thanks for reading.

[1] 
https://wiki.osm.org/wiki/California/Railroads/Passenger#California_High_Speed_Rail_(passenger=regional)_trains_(CAHSR),_under_construction
 

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

Re: [talk-au] Melbourne - Suburban Rail Loop - Too early to mark as under construction?

[Graeme Fitzpatrick]

Thanks, Michael

Yes, they are already warning of some occasional disruption to both car &
foot traffic, so I'll up it all to under construction.

Thanks

Graeme


On Wed, 2 Nov 2022 at 17:22, Michael Collinson  wrote:

> Being a grand cynic or at least just jaundiced,  'proposed' can be
> translated to "I'll be lucky to see this in my life time", so any actual
> work at all is a major, major change in significance so I'd go for 'under
> construction' in at least Graeme's example. Utility works also have an
> impact on the visible landscape (visual navigation) and may affect
> formal/informal right of way, particular to foot traffic.
>
> Mike
>
> On 2022-11-01 23:07, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote:
>
> Similar question here on the GC with the latest stage of the Light Rail.
>
> They've now started "utility works" - relocating power poles & conduits,
> sewer & water manholes, removing some trees etc.
>
> When should the "proposed" line get updated to "under construction"? Now,
> or only when they actually start digging the roads up & laying track?
>
> Thanks
>
> Graeme
>
>
> On Wed, 2 Nov 2022 at 07:43, Andrew Davidson  wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Nov 1, 2022 at 8:37 PM Dian Ågesson  wrote:
>> > Just seeking views from others here: is this a bit premature? Should
>> only a section of the loop be marked as under construction, or any parts of
>> it at all?
>>
>> Normally I would have said that construction would only apply to the
>> bits that were actually under construction. However, in this case it's
>> underground, so we won't be able to tell.
>>
>> ___
>> Talk-au mailing list
>> Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
>>
>
> ___
> Talk-au mailing 
> listTalk-au@openstreetmap.orghttps://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
>
>
> ___
> 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] Melbourne - Suburban Rail Loop - Too early to mark as under construction?

[Michael Collinson]

Being a grand cynic or at least just jaundiced,  'proposed' can be 
translated to "I'll be lucky to see this in my life time", so any actual 
work at all is a major, major change in significance so I'd go for 
'under construction' in at least Graeme's example. Utility works also 
have an impact on the visible landscape (visual navigation) and may 
affect formal/informal right of way, particular to foot traffic.


Mike

On 2022-11-01 23:07, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote:

Similar question here on the GC with the latest stage of the Light Rail.

They've now started "utility works" - relocating power poles & 
conduits, sewer & water manholes, removing some trees etc.


When should the "proposed" line get updated to "under construction"? 
Now, or only when they actually start digging the roads up & laying track?


Thanks

Graeme


On Wed, 2 Nov 2022 at 07:43, Andrew Davidson  wrote:

On Tue, Nov 1, 2022 at 8:37 PM Dian Ågesson  wrote:
> Just seeking views from others here: is this a bit premature?
Should only a section of the loop be marked as under construction,
or any parts of it at all?

Normally I would have said that construction would only apply to the
bits that were actually under construction. However, in this case it's
underground, so we won't be able to tell.

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

Re: [talk-au] Melbourne - Suburban Rail Loop - Too early to mark as under construction?

[Graeme Fitzpatrick]

Similar question here on the GC with the latest stage of the Light Rail.

They've now started "utility works" - relocating power poles & conduits,
sewer & water manholes, removing some trees etc.

When should the "proposed" line get updated to "under construction"? Now,
or only when they actually start digging the roads up & laying track?

Thanks

Graeme


On Wed, 2 Nov 2022 at 07:43, Andrew Davidson  wrote:

> On Tue, Nov 1, 2022 at 8:37 PM Dian Ågesson  wrote:
> > Just seeking views from others here: is this a bit premature? Should
> only a section of the loop be marked as under construction, or any parts of
> it at all?
>
> Normally I would have said that construction would only apply to the
> bits that were actually under construction. However, in this case it's
> underground, so we won't be able to tell.
>
> ___
> 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] Melbourne - Suburban Rail Loop - Too early to mark as under construction?

[Andrew Davidson]

On Tue, Nov 1, 2022 at 8:37 PM Dian Ågesson  wrote:
> Just seeking views from others here: is this a bit premature? Should only a 
> section of the loop be marked as under construction, or any parts of it at 
> all?

Normally I would have said that construction would only apply to the
bits that were actually under construction. However, in this case it's
underground, so we won't be able to tell.

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

[talk-au] Melbourne - Suburban Rail Loop - Too early to mark as under construction?

[Dian Ågesson]

Hello,

In a recent edit, the Suburban Rail Loop [1]was marked as "under 
construction", and as a result is now rendering as a dashed railway 
line.


Just seeking views from others here: is this a bit premature? Should 
only a section of the loop be marked as under construction, or any parts 
of it at all?


Dian

Links:
--
[1] https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/14747150___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au