I made a thing to maybe better understand the life-cycle tags for railways. It will allow you to get out a look around a location to see the railway or “signs of a railroad right of way” many of us see in the ground and map. This is a confusing feature as naturally it is not a place we navigate to on our own, unless you are a railroader or were one.
1 Like
“Projected” Example 1: https://www.mapillary.com/app/?pKey=835291200669744&focus=photo
“Abandoned” Example 2: https://www.mapillary.com/app/?pKey=862995113157808&focus=photo
“Abandoned” Example 3: https://www.mapillary.com/app/?pKey=1005171080218704&focus=photo
“Razed” Example 1: https://www.mapillary.com/app/?pKey=1458118065495738&focus=photo
“Razed” Example 2: https://www.mapillary.com/app/?pKey=1627753614729671&focus=photo
“Razed” Example 3: https://www.mapillary.com/app/?pKey=243281851463131&focus=photo
There is no railway in any of the pictures linked above.
Any railway=* features at any of these locations should be deleted.
5 Likes
”Abandoned
The rail has been removed and the right-of-way may have been reused or left to decay but is still clearly visible, either from the replacement infrastructure, or from a line of trees around an original cutting or embankment. Use railway=abandoned. Where an abandoned rail right-of-way is being re-purposed as a bicycle path (e.g. “Rails to Trails”), add highway=cycleway. If known, add end_date=* or more specifically railway:end_date=* of when the abandonment happened.”
This is part of education on railway lifecycle tags and why I am here to educate.
3 Likes
The projected example is for Link Light-Rail to Redmond. Here is what it looks like in construction from the same spot:
Here it is today:
given Stalebot closing old notes and deleting abandoned railways? - #5 by Natfoot I want to check before reading further than the title and checking some supposedly mappable cases: is it also intended as 1st April joke?
3 Likes
Sure - once construction starts and/or there is actual infrastructure in place, it’s definitely great to get that mapped! I doubt anyone would disagree with that.
My point of contention was specifically about the “projected” (as in, “there are plans to build this but nothing happening on the ground yet”) features, which as I understand it, do not belong in OSM.
I guess I should amend my statement above, to explicitly make clear what I thought was implied:
1 Like
If it’s planned and approved/funded, it should be proposed:* (Lifecycle prefix - OpenStreetMap Wiki)and is not uncommon to be added. But for sure we do not want to have any kind of plans which might or might not be build.
2 Likes
Firm agree that all of these “Abandoned” and “Razed” image samples need to be considered “Obliterated”.
If the metal rails are gone but the ballast bed is still there, I’m comfortable with keeping it in.
If the ballast bed has been replaced with the asphalt of a cycleway, it’s got to go.
5 Likes
Life cycle tags are there to be used. If we did not have them then we would not use them. We use them so that the map may show what is on the ground and what is seen as all resembles railway right of way.
Several life cycle tags are actually saying there is nothing on the ground, e.g., proposed and razed
There is a consensus, that razed should only remain in the database if there is a risk, couch mappers might add the railway from current aerials and proposed you might only add for important projects after community discussion.
For everything in the range of construction to abandoned, I agree with you.
5 Likes