Joining two ways and giving them a new designation, alongside others.

General talk
1

Hi, this is my first JOSM edit…

The situation is, I am trying to join two existing ways and give them a new designation, which is intended to exist along with the other designations.

(Pardon my lack of proper vocabulary, I’m still learning…)

Portland OR’s SW Maplewood Road is divided into two segments on OSM, for cycling purposes. Now the whole of Maplewood Road has been designated the “Maplewood Greenway” by the local neighborhood association and can therefore be designated as “network = lcn” on OSM and be depicted on the map as such (in this case, with a dotted grey/blue line).

So, I opened up JOSM, located Maplewood Road, selected the two segments or “ways”, noted that each has its own set of relationships.

I noted eighteen relationships between the two ways. For cycling purposes the whole of Maplewood is not designated as anything. Half of it has its own tag.

I’d like to designate the whole of Maplewood Road, as part of a local cycle network, and as a cycle route give it the name the local neighborhood association http://www.swni.org/maplewood/transportation has given it, Maplewood Greenway.

I don’t want to replace anyone else’s work, as the already existing relations (tags?) are accurate, since Maplewood does serve other functions, it’s just that insofar as Portland cycling infrastructure is concerned, it is technically a “lcn” and I’d like to designate it as such.

So is it correct for to me join the two ways that are already there and construct a new tag for them, combined?

Or should I actually “draw” a whole new way on top of the already existing ones and designate it myself?

Again pardon my developing technical vocabulary, any advice appreciated!

Eddie

2

Are we talking about https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/172235538 ?

It is not usual practice to recombine ways once they have bee split.

Also how it gets displayed is up to the particular rending application that you use. Nothing in what you have so far described would justify a chance that would result in its rendering differently on the standard Mapnik layer at openstreetmap.org, and you should not code it to appear in a particular way on any other layer, but rather code it to represent what it is, and then raise bug reports against the renderers if it doesn’t render correctly.

It is currently tagged as a tertiary public highway. If that is correct, its main purpose is for motor vehicles. (The definition of tertiary is country specific, but this looks more like residential.)

Finally, network is normally associated with relations.

I would say what you really want here is to create a relation for Maplewood Greenway (assuming one doesn’t already exist) and add these two sections of road to that relation.

I’m also a little concerned that every road has a name beginning with “Southwest”, but that doesn’t appear in the names used in the document you quote. That makes me think that someone has added meta data to the official name of the road. The name on OSM should be the official name, as evidenced by local signage, or any US Federal map (or state map, if such maps are treated by the local legislature as public domain). Normally I would expect a Southwest xxxx to be connected to a Northeast one, but that is not the case here.

3

Are we talking about https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/172235538 ?<<

yes

It is not usual practice to recombine ways once they have bee split.<<

For cycling purposes there’s no good reason to split this road, as it in its whole has been designated by city planners as a single unit, the “Maplewood Greenway”

Also how it gets displayed is up to the particular rending application that you use. Nothing in what you have so far described would justify a chance that would result in its rendering differently on the standard Mapnik layer at openstreetmap.org, and you should not code it to appear in a particular way on any other layer, but rather code it to represent what it is, and then raise bug reports against the renderers if it doesn’t render correctly.

It is currently tagged as a tertiary public highway. If that is correct, its main purpose is for motor vehicles. (The definition of tertiary is country specific, but this looks more like residential.)<<

Insofar as cycle layers are concerned, the nearby SW 52nd Ave https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/172235538#map=17/45.47138/-122.72834&layers=C is tagged with “lcn” and is therefore rendered as a “local cycle network” route.

All I’m trying to do here is get the same designation and symbology for SW Maplewood Ave, as a whole. In fact, it’s my project to do this for the entire city, to update the cycling infrastructure.

Also, 99% of the cycling routes in the United States are on roads primarily used by automobiles. So as with SW 52nd, what makes SW Maplewood a cycle route is the signage, space for bicycles, and relative lack of heavy traffic on the road. (There are very few “pistes” here.

Finally, network is normally associated with relations.

I would say what you really want here is to create a relation for Maplewood Greenway (assuming one doesn’t already exist) and add these two sections of road to that relation.<<

That sounds reasonable, thanks.

I’m also a little concerned that every road has a name beginning with “Southwest”, but that doesn’t appear in the names used in the document you quote. That makes me think that someone has added meta data to the official name of the road. The name on OSM should be the official name, as evidenced by local signage, or any US Federal map (or state map, if such maps are treated by the local legislature as public domain). Normally I would expect a Southwest xxxx to be connected to a Northeast one, but that is not the case here.<<

In Portland, OR, the roads are named according to their quarter of the city. All roads west of the Willamette River and south of Burnside St. - regardless of their orientation - are designated SW xxx. However, putting a “SW” or “NW” etc. in front of the name of a road can get tiresome, so in the Southwest Neighborhoods website http://www.swni.org/maplewood/transportation street names are given without the SW.

4

You seem to be talking about https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/7088729 which is a relation that groups a sequence of ways into a route. That is what I was saying you would need.

In JOSM, select all the component ways. From the presets menu, select Relations and then Routes and Bicycle Route, then fill in the fields and then click New Relation. Arrange the component ways into the correct order. If any are one way, you should arrange the forward section forwards, followed by the reverse section backwards. Finally click OK.

However, I would note, that as a cycle route, it is rather short. A more typical route would be: https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/10963#map=11/51.5395/-0.2650&layers=C In England, one wouldn’t normally rename a road in its use as a cycling route segment. One also wouldn’t normally declare a cycling route just because a road had a cycle lane.

I would also suggest that it probably needs cycle_network=Portland Greenways.

Also, there is a general principle that one doesn’t abbreviate in names, so Ave should be Avenue and Blvd should be Boulevard. It is up to the renderer to abbreviate, if necessary. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Names#Abbreviation_.28don.27t_do_it.29

5

Here in the states there is so little cycling infrastructure the mere existence of a cycle lane often elevates it to a “greenway” or a “cycle route”.

Insofar as the Greenways are concerned, Here’s a map of the officially designated ones: https://www.portlandoregon.gov/transportation/article/554218 . As you can see, they’re mostly little segments of roads here and there scattered throughout the city. All but the ones in the lower left hand corner of the map, near “Miles Court” are on OSMs “cycle” layer, so I’m just trying to add them to the map.

There are cycle routes which aren’t “Greenways”, as seen here: https://www.portlandoregon.gov/transportation/article/323778 but you’ll note that about 90 percent of those routes are roads whose principal users are motorists, and the routes are classified according to how much automobile traffic can be found there, and hence the danger factor.

I followed pretty much all of the steps you suggested, selected all the ways then created a new relation for them. It’s my hope that classifying this relation as “network=lcn” will be enough of a designation to get the area I’m attempting to update to “turn blue” and be symbolized properly on the map.