UrbanUnPlanner's Comments
| Changeset | When | Comment |
|---|---|---|
| 174715390 | about 1 month ago | For those wondering what's going on here -- the Forest Hill Flyover was opened as of the day this edit was made (see https://www.trains.com/pro/freight/chicago-railroads-celebrate-completion-of-forest-hill-flyover/ for details). This edit is considered "interim" because it is a best-effort interpolation of the track infrastructure to remove the at-grade crossings and shoofly trackage; we'll need 2026 aerials to come up with a final map for this. |
| 158953471 | about 1 year ago | You'll want to take that up with bhousel (the Rapid maintainer) -- I'm following Rapid's logic re: crossing:signals these days. (The overall intent is to deprecate the distinctions in crossings=* in favor of separate tagging for markings, signals, and other crossing properties.) |
| 106852859 | over 2 years ago | Please do not glue landuse to roads -- it makes editing the map much more difficult and is very obnoxious to clean up after. |
| 136801192 | over 2 years ago | Yeah -- I had to prune out a duplicate way from @watmildon's conflict resolution work (had them upload the change because iD barfed when I tried to resolve it myself and I don't use JOSM). (As a sidenote: part of the reason we're hitting snags may have to do with the fact I'm removing some of the non-bridges on the rail line as there are several places along the line where concrete box-type culvert structures were mapped as bridges instead. |
| 115589810 | over 3 years ago | A visual verification of the bell being present is sufficient (it's generally found atop one or both of the sign/light masts at the crossing) |
| 120763200 | over 3 years ago | DOT# 529617W has been closed since 1985 -- I suspect that bogon is an issue with the underlying MDOT dataset. Also, are you proposing that we use ref= for FRA IDs and not ref:fra_crossing=? |
| 115589810 | over 3 years ago | It was taken from the FRA GIS record for crossing 675158C -- it could very well be an internal/unsigned ref though. |
| 115592726 | almost 4 years ago | Last but not least for now, while you're out by Tomball, the Holderrieth Rd (FRA 597100E, OSM node/1425821570) has a minor FIXME on it, and there's also the issue in Tomball itself of the possible humped crossing warnings on the Main Street/FM2920 crossing (FRA ID 597102T, OSM node/340144640) -- I left a note where Streetside shows the W10-5 humped crossing warning on the EB approach to be |
| 115592726 | almost 4 years ago | Also, closer to home, there are the crossings at Landry Blvd (near Old Louetta Road, FRA ID 597095K, OSM
|
| 115592726 | almost 4 years ago | If you want a place to start though, Agg Road crossing (FRA ID 597101L,
|
| 115592726 | almost 4 years ago | Most of the issues lie further NNW on the line (there are several crossings further out in the sticks with FIXME tags due to bad data) -- I was able to get a fairly reliable dataset within Houston using aerial/birdseye imagery + what street-level shots were available to augment/verify the grade crossing reports. |
| 115588331 | almost 4 years ago | Thanks for pointing that out, it seems to have been detritus from the TIGER import that I'll have to keep an eye out for in the future. |
| 115585529 | almost 4 years ago | The access=unknown was added to denote the presence of conflicting access information (i.e. a private crossing on something that's mapped as if it were a public street ROW). It could very well be fair to map the access=private restriction on the crossing ways with ownership=private on the crossing node, though -- the notion of a "private crossing" generally implies that public access is foreclosed save for a few select exceptions. (In fact, private crossing signage generally carries the necessary verbiage to have the same weight as a posted "No Trespassing" sign). |