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 <[email protected]> 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:[email protected]] > *Sent:* Sunday, May 1, 2016 8:26 PM > *To:* Elliott Plack <[email protected]> > *Cc:* Kerry Irons <[email protected]>; FTA/Ethan < > [email protected]>; Wade <[email protected]>; Phil! Gold < > [email protected]>; [email protected] > *Subject:* Re: Is USBR 11 in Maryland complete/correct in OSM? > > > > Elliott Plack <[email protected]> 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
_______________________________________________ Talk-us mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
