Re: [Talk-us] bike rail trail as built vs as proposed and imported
On 08/12/2009 06:55 AM, Greg Troxel wrote:
>> Probably not; however, it is accepted practice in OSM. As you say,
>> someone with more familiarity with railroad procedures and how they
>> differ between the US and elsewhere might be able to answer that.
>
> I think one of the bugs in OSM is failure to follow established
> practice. But that's not worth worrying about in this case.
Often this is because there aren't necessarily people in the OSM
community who know where to find the established practice. This is
presumably less true now, but I don't see anyone chiming in with "I has
the solution!!!" on this list
>> I think that's a big understatement. I would go so far as to say that
>> it's nearly impossible to take an arbitrary piece of railroad track and
>> determine whether it's abandoned or out of service (in the US legal
>> sense) -- or indeed, whether it's in fact still in service.
>
> For tracks that are not abandoned, in service or out of service is
> determined by the railroad.
Sure, but you can't tell by looking at it. Do they publish this somewhere?
> Yes, it is hard to find out, but that does not make it unverifiable. I
> suspect one can write to the STB and ask and find out, although I
> haven't tried.
>
> You are applying an unreasonable standard.
I'm not applying a standard at all; I'm just asking if it is feasible
for someone to actually find out this information.
Not saying you can't tag this information, just that it's IMO unlikely
that a tagging scheme for this will see much use, because it's so
difficult to get the information.
Incidentally, there are other problems with the railway=abandoned /
railway=disused. Specifically, using them loses information about what
type of railway it is ("standard" rail, tram, narrow_gauge, subway...)
See http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Comparison_of_life_cycle_concepts
and http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_Features/Status
-Alex Mauer "hawke"
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] bike rail trail as built vs as proposed and imported
On 12 Aug 2009, at 12:55, Greg Troxel wrote: > > Alex Mauer writes: > >> On 08/11/2009 06:10 AM, Greg Troxel wrote: >> >>> But, is "abandoned" really in use in other countries to mean what >>> in the >>> US we call "old railroad grade"? (Here I am taking USGS norms to be >>> established practice in the US.) >> >> Probably not; however, it is accepted practice in OSM. As you say, >> someone with more familiarity with railroad procedures and how they >> differ between the US and elsewhere might be able to answer that. > > I think one of the bugs in OSM is failure to follow established > practice. But that's not worth worrying about in this case. Do please join the 'talk-transit' list where we would love to talk about tagging public transport related stuff and where I often push for OSM to "follow established practice'. Talk-transit is *the* list where we can get a lot of these issues resolved in an internationally consistent way. http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-transit Do also check out the public transport section of the wiki which is developing fast at present. more help would be appreciated. Here is the new public_transport wiki page with links to all the main transport modes. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Public_transport And here is the category for public transport:- http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Category:Public_transport Regards, Peter Miller ITO World ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] bike rail trail as built vs as proposed and imported
Alex Mauer writes: > On 08/11/2009 06:10 AM, Greg Troxel wrote: > >> But, is "abandoned" really in use in other countries to mean what in the >> US we call "old railroad grade"? (Here I am taking USGS norms to be >> established practice in the US.) > > Probably not; however, it is accepted practice in OSM. As you say, > someone with more familiarity with railroad procedures and how they > differ between the US and elsewhere might be able to answer that. I think one of the bugs in OSM is failure to follow established practice. But that's not worth worrying about in this case. >> The Surface Transportation Board of the ICC makes abandonment decisions, >> and they are published by the federal government. An example: >> >> http://regulations.vlex.com/vid/railroad-abandonment-lamoille-valley-22682301 >> >> I'm not saying this is trivial to find, > > I think that's a big understatement. I would go so far as to say that > it's nearly impossible to take an arbitrary piece of railroad track and > determine whether it's abandoned or out of service (in the US legal > sense) -- or indeed, whether it's in fact still in service. For tracks that are not abandoned, in service or out of service is determined by the railroad. > If my understanding is correct: > * This several page document describes just one section of track. So > there are many, many of these documents. > * This document just lists an intent to abandon a section of railroad. > It may or may not have been accepted by the relevant authority (although > it probably was) > > Can you provide an example of the steps one would have to go through to > actually find this out for a specific piece of track? As far as I can > tell it would involve trawling through > http://www.stb.dot.gov/decisions/readingroom.nsf/DailyReleases?OpenView > or http://www.gpoaccess.gov/fr/advanced.html (the latter of which only > goes back to 1995, and the former of which goes back to 1996) > > So you might be able to find out if it *is* abandoned (If you're really > lucky it's on your other link at http://www.trainweather.com/aban.html) > but even that's extremely difficult, and it's even less possible to > determine that it's not abandoned. It seems that the only way to do so > is to go through every single abandonment notice, and if it's not on any > of them, then it's probably not abandoned after 1995 -- though it would > be easy to miss it among the huge number of documents. And if it is on > one of those abandonment notices, then you have to somehow figure out if > the abandonment was approved. Yes, it is hard to find out, but that does not make it unverifiable. I suspect one can write to the STB and ask and find out, although I haven't tried. You are applying an unreasonable standard. Abandonment is an established legal fact through government decisions and final notices From the railroad. This is no different than whether a street has been accepted as a public way, and is easier than whether the public has a right of access to a particular place (easements and adverse possesion), or where property lines are. If this distinction -- which those working on rail trails are keenly aware of (usually entirely clear about a particular section) -- is objectionable because it is hard to verify, then we need to get rid of a lot of 'access=no' etc, and reconsider the whole notion of showing park boundaries. That's clearly not the right thing to do. pgpj9AWqt21TE.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] bike rail trail as built vs as proposed and imported
On 08/11/2009 06:10 AM, Greg Troxel wrote: > But, is "abandoned" really in use in other countries to mean what in the > US we call "old railroad grade"? (Here I am taking USGS norms to be > established practice in the US.) Probably not; however, it is accepted practice in OSM. As you say, someone with more familiarity with railroad procedures and how they differ between the US and elsewhere might be able to answer that. > The Surface Transportation Board of the ICC makes abandonment decisions, > and they are published by the federal government. An example: > > http://regulations.vlex.com/vid/railroad-abandonment-lamoille-valley-22682301 > > I'm not saying this is trivial to find, I think that's a big understatement. I would go so far as to say that it's nearly impossible to take an arbitrary piece of railroad track and determine whether it's abandoned or out of service (in the US legal sense) -- or indeed, whether it's in fact still in service. If my understanding is correct: * This several page document describes just one section of track. So there are many, many of these documents. * This document just lists an intent to abandon a section of railroad. It may or may not have been accepted by the relevant authority (although it probably was) Can you provide an example of the steps one would have to go through to actually find this out for a specific piece of track? As far as I can tell it would involve trawling through http://www.stb.dot.gov/decisions/readingroom.nsf/DailyReleases?OpenView or http://www.gpoaccess.gov/fr/advanced.html (the latter of which only goes back to 1995, and the former of which goes back to 1996) So you might be able to find out if it *is* abandoned (If you're really lucky it's on your other link at http://www.trainweather.com/aban.html) but even that's extremely difficult, and it's even less possible to determine that it's not abandoned. It seems that the only way to do so is to go through every single abandonment notice, and if it's not on any of them, then it's probably not abandoned after 1995 -- though it would be easy to miss it among the huge number of documents. And if it is on one of those abandonment notices, then you have to somehow figure out if the abandonment was approved. Do I have it right? -Alex Mauer "hawke signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] bike rail trail as built vs as proposed and imported
Another page on abandonments with references to STB/ICC decisions: http://www.trainweather.com/aban.html pgpqhlwJ8lgjg.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] bike rail trail as built vs as proposed and imported
It's not unintuitive, it's just not the same as US legal definitions. disused = no longer used abandoned = track/infrastructure removed OK, I see your point. The real problem is that disused would be used for two different situations. But, is "abandoned" really in use in other countries to mean what in the US we call "old railroad grade"? (Here I am taking USGS norms to be established practice in the US.) Does anyone who is into old railroads think these values make sense? Is there somewhere that describes the difference between "abandoned" and "out of service" railways, preferably something which is verifiable (in the OSM sense, see http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Verifiability)? The Surface Transportation Board of the ICC makes abandonment decisions, and they are published by the federal government. An example: http://regulations.vlex.com/vid/railroad-abandonment-lamoille-valley-22682301 I'm not saying this is trivial to find, but it's a legal fact and very verifiable. It's not really any different from a private way being accepted by a town and becoming a public way, or whether people have a legal right to walk on some path. pgpSTmypQrhJx.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] bike rail trail as built vs as proposed and imported
On 08/08/2009 07:31 PM, Greg Troxel wrote: > The current tag definition is awkward: > > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:railway > > because tags mean something unintuitive: It's not unintuitive, it's just not the same as US legal definitions. disused = no longer used abandoned = track/infrastructure removed Is there somewhere that describes the difference between "abandoned" and "out of service" railways, preferably something which is verifiable (in the OSM sense, see http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Verifiability)? -Alex Mauer "hawke" signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] bike rail trail as built vs as proposed and imported
Paul Johnson writes: `> On Mon, 2009-07-20 at 08:19 -0400, Bill Ricker wrote: >> The Upper Charles Trail was included in the MASSgis import. It has a >> note="under construction". As imported and proposed, it slavishly >> followed a passenger and freight line straight to the center of town, >> but Milford sensibly added scenic curves and grades, connecting a >> picnic area and municipal ball fields, and using an interchange >> underpass instead of digging anew where I-495 had obliterated the >> rail. As fair as I can tell from web, it may not be completed much >> beyond where I explored on foot in Milford. >> >> What are the tags for abandoned RR right of way that is NOT a >> biketrail, but still visible? > > railway=abandoned > highway=construction > construction=cycleway > note=Proposed cycleway > > Successfully used this on a way that has since been converted to an > actual cycleway (removing the railway and construction tags, and > changing highway=construction to highway=cycleway). I may have left the > railway tag off mine since by the time I was aware of the project and > OSM, the tracks were long gone. That sounds fine, modulo "abandoned" vs "old_railroad_grade". I usually look to USGS for guidance and prior art - their 1:25000 topo maps are an inspiration. They distinguish among 'railroad', 'abandoned railroad', and 'old railroad grade'. According to their classification, abandoned railroads have visible tracks. In the US 'abandoned' is a legal/technical term, an no tracks more or less 100% implies abandoned. A case I found that's semi relevant, in that it's about abandonment and rail trail conversion: http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal/judicial/dc/opinions/94opinions/94-1403a.html The current tag definition is awkward: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:railway because tags mean something unintuitive: abandoned => "old railroad grade" disused => abandoned (this is missing a key differentiating point) disused => "out of service" (this is fine, just the usual uk/us translation) rail => "in server" (this is fine) pgpxh8lAgyJXJ.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] bike rail trail as built vs as proposed and imported
On Mon, 2009-07-20 at 08:19 -0400, Bill Ricker wrote: > The Upper Charles Trail was included in the MASSgis import. It has a > note="under construction". As imported and proposed, it slavishly > followed a passenger and freight line straight to the center of town, > but Milford sensibly added scenic curves and grades, connecting a > picnic area and municipal ball fields, and using an interchange > underpass instead of digging anew where I-495 had obliterated the > rail. As fair as I can tell from web, it may not be completed much > beyond where I explored on foot in Milford. > > What are the tags for abandoned RR right of way that is NOT a > biketrail, but still visible? railway=abandoned highway=construction construction=cycleway note=Proposed cycleway Successfully used this on a way that has since been converted to an actual cycleway (removing the railway and construction tags, and changing highway=construction to highway=cycleway). I may have left the railway tag off mine since by the time I was aware of the project and OSM, the tracks were long gone. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] bike rail trail as built vs as proposed and imported
On Mon, Jul 20, 2009 at 7:12 PM, Greg Troxel wrote: > So abandonment is a serious legal step, and can > revert ownership of the ROW, etc. The tracks can still be present. but preferably transferred to a railtrail org or the state -- Bill n1...@arrl.net bill.n1...@gmail.com ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] bike rail trail as built vs as proposed and imported
Alex Mauer writes: > Greg Troxel wrote: >> Someone said railway=abandoned, but there are three separate things -- >> my opinion is partly from USGS topo maps: >> >> * out of service (disused=yes above) >>[tracks present, no trains, but not abandoned] >> >> * abandoned (this is a legal distinction in the US) >> >> * old railroad grade (beyond abandoned, where there are no longer tracks) > > What's the difference between "out of service" and "abandoned"? I > assume the distinction is in how often the railway is used. I know of > some rail lines near me that are classified in the TIGER import as > abandoned (not even out-of-service) , but which still have trains run on > them occasionally (or even fairly often) "Out of service" means the railroad has decided to stop running trains. If there is even 1 train a month it's in service. (In the US) to abandon a line, the railroad has to apply to the ICC or something like that for permission. So abandonment is a serious legal step, and can revert ownership of the ROW, etc. The tracks can still be present. If there are trains then the abandoned marking is almost certainly incorrect. But, there is probably some de-abandonment procedure. pgpjAYA9bDrxN.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] bike rail trail as built vs as proposed and imported
Am 20.07.2009 um 21:25 schrieb Alex Mauer: > Greg Troxel wrote: >> Someone said railway=abandoned, but there are three separate things >> -- >> my opinion is partly from USGS topo maps: >> >> * out of service (disused=yes above) >> [tracks present, no trains, but not abandoned] >> >> * abandoned (this is a legal distinction in the US) >> >> * old railroad grade (beyond abandoned, where there are no longer >> tracks) > > What's the difference between "out of service" and "abandoned"? I > assume the distinction is in how often the railway is used. I know of > some rail lines near me that are classified in the TIGER import as > abandoned (not even out-of-service) , but which still have trains > run on > them occasionally (or even fairly often) The distinction, I believe, applies mostly to the legal status; if that way falls under railway regulations, but is (seldomly) used, it might be out of service. This usually includes upkeep of the infrastructure to a certain degree, and running trains requires little to no preparation to the track. When abandoned, some infrastructure might remain, but railway regulations do no longer apply to the right of way, and running a train (with any kind of service, i. e. more than just you playing on your own private property) is not easily possible. When abandoned, track, sleepers, ballast and other infrastructure might very well be removed, as they're worth money. In your example, if there are trains still running on these tracks, they are likely not abandoned, and the TIGER data is probably wrong. HTH, STefan -- Stefan BethkeFon +49 151 14070811 ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] bike rail trail as built vs as proposed and imported
Greg Troxel wrote: > Someone said railway=abandoned, but there are three separate things -- > my opinion is partly from USGS topo maps: > > * out of service (disused=yes above) >[tracks present, no trains, but not abandoned] > > * abandoned (this is a legal distinction in the US) > > * old railroad grade (beyond abandoned, where there are no longer tracks) What's the difference between "out of service" and "abandoned"? I assume the distinction is in how often the railway is used. I know of some rail lines near me that are classified in the TIGER import as abandoned (not even out-of-service) , but which still have trains run on them occasionally (or even fairly often) -Alex Mauer "hawke" signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] bike rail trail as built vs as proposed and imported
On Jul 20, 2009, at 11:29 AM, Greg Troxel wrote: > > * out of service (disused=yes above) > [tracks present, no trains, but not abandoned] > > * abandoned (this is a legal distinction in the US) > > * old railroad grade (beyond abandoned, where there are no longer > tracks) My criteria is: if there are still rails in place, then it's railway=disused; and if the tracks are gone but you can still see evidence of it then it's railway=abandoned. If it's been bulldozed into nonexistance, then it's railway:historical=abandoned. There are other tags which indicate whether the right-of-way is usable for passage and by whom. -- Russ Nelson - http://community.cloudmade.com/blog - http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:RussNelson r...@cloudmade.com - Twitter: Russ_OSM - http://openstreetmap.org/user/RussNelson ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
[Talk-us] bike rail trail as built vs as proposed and imported
What are the tags for abandoned RR right of way that is NOT a biketrail, but still visible? I found http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/detailed_Railway_Network Someone said railway=abandoned, but there are three separate things -- my opinion is partly from USGS topo maps: * out of service (disused=yes above) [tracks present, no trains, but not abandoned] * abandoned (this is a legal distinction in the US) * old railroad grade (beyond abandoned, where there are no longer tracks) Is there any value to keeping the MASSGIS tags for the old right of way and proposed route where it has been blocked by re-grading, housing development, and or foliage? Rail nerds want to know where the railway was. Often there is evidence on the ground still, so it's fair for the map. Not sure about MassGIS - that seems to be about proposed trail, which is less interesting than old grade. This will matter in Stow as the old Marlboro Branch of the Fitchburg is in use as a service road in an orchard and the ARRT is going to have to go around. pgpfyzWmvRmM3.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] bike rail trail as built vs as proposed and imported
Am 20.07.2009 um 14:19 schrieb Bill Ricker: > What are the tags for abandoned RR right of way that is NOT a > biketrail, but still visible? http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:railway railway=abandoned Stefan -- Stefan BethkeFon +49 151 14070811 ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
[Talk-us] bike rail trail as built vs as proposed and imported
The Upper Charles Trail was included in the MASSgis import. It has a note="under construction". As imported and proposed, it slavishly followed a passenger and freight line straight to the center of town, but Milford sensibly added scenic curves and grades, connecting a picnic area and municipal ball fields, and using an interchange underpass instead of digging anew where I-495 had obliterated the rail. As fair as I can tell from web, it may not be completed much beyond where I explored on foot in Milford. What are the tags for abandoned RR right of way that is NOT a biketrail, but still visible? Is there any value to keeping the MASSGIS tags for the old right of way and proposed route where it has been blocked by re-grading, housing development, and or foliage? How much of the MASSGIS tags should be copied to the as-built path, if any? -- Bill n1...@arrl.net bill.n1...@gmail.com ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
