OpenGeofiction
Hi there,
since a while I’ve been sporadically working on the city of Jaka, in addition to slowly expanding the neighbourhoods of the capital Pyingshum. The city centre of Jaka is largely inspired by the city of Amsterdam, and is supposed to be not car-free, but well… very unsuited for regular car use at least ;) However, I’ve run into an issue to the north of the historic centre, west of the central railway station. Here, a highway comes from the north, and some other major arterias are supposed to connect here to exchange traffic with each other and feed to/off the highway. It is however also situtated at a relatively large body of water, so that a “simple” single interchange is not very easy to realise. Im unsatisfied with the current layout, mostly because it involves a diagonal bridge and some weird 2-level constructions and ramps. Regarding the traffic flow it quite maches up with the picture I have in my head, but can you have a look at it and give me some creative feedback or tips to improve it? Thanks :)
P.S. If you look at the historic centre, you ‘ll see that the roads with the type “unclassified” mostly cover up the canals unless one zooms in to a very high level of detail. I’ve tested a different road type on 4 streches of road , which makes the canals much more visible and the street more distinguishable. Could you quickly mention what you think about this and which rendering you prefer and why :D?
Discussion
Comment from histor on 23 October 2015 at 08:21
Interesting idea, your Amsterdam-child. Looks good in its structure.
a) make your canals (or most of them) broader as 10 m - may be 20 m. What are the use of this canals? If only to lay the area dry, 10 m are enought. But they are in the heart of the city and so I think they give access to merchant houses. So the ships must have place to turn. You can make small piers, so the ships can lay at land with the stern at land and side by side. In this case you need canals of 20 to 25 or 30 m.
b) please delete the motorway at the waterfront. Looks ugly. In reality nobody will pay such construction.
c) the diagonal bridge of the green road is not elegant.
Comment from wangi on 23 October 2015 at 08:40
The realistic solution is probably the trunk road ending at a roundabout with the primary, on the north bank of the Gochaka. Also unlikely you’d have bridges over all four water ways there?
Comment from wangi on 23 October 2015 at 11:20
I think some of strangeness on the rendering is due to the use of level tags, where you should have layer? (I started off with that mix up too!)
Comment from Leowezy on 23 October 2015 at 14:02
@histor Thanks, trying my best ;D a) I looked at it again, and at least according to the ruler in the browser the (narrow) canals are 20-25m wide, which is pretty much the widht of the typical canals in real-world Amsterdam; but as I said the streets alongside them cover up much/everything of the water in the rendering, hence my question whether you guys think it would be appropiate to use a “wrong” tag on the streets to match with my rendering expectations. b) I’m indeed very unsure about the motorway at the shore… my point here was, that there would need to be some kind of dam or other flood protection on the sea anyways, and that the water would be very shallow as well, and so the city might utilise this structure for a motorway as well. It is, however, not just a bridge-like construction over the sea, that would indeed be a total waste of money; I think the blue highway just covers up the land underneath it. Maybe I should reduce the distance to the actual shoreline to make it look more realistic? c) That’s exactly my thought as well, that’s why I’m asking for some alternative suggestions :)
@wangi Thanks for pointing out the level vs. layer issue, I will definetely fix that. You’re probably right about just having one roundabout at the northern bank, and then maybe just one bridge across; I think I overestimated the incoming car traffic, especially considering that there wouldn’t be much car usage in the inner part of the city anyways.
Comment from wangi on 23 October 2015 at 15:00
Something which will improve the rendering is setting back the roads a bit more from the canals. If you assume the building frontages would be ~12m from the waters edge then i’d put the road 6m from the edge.
Comment from isleño on 23 October 2015 at 19:02
@Leowezy
I thought it was one of those bridge-like constructions over the sea, haha… Maybe they’re only in Asia?
osm.org/#map=14/35.1491/129.1294
osm.org/#map=13/22.6398/113.7931
osm.org/#map=15/14.4620/120.9455
Comment from Leowezy on 23 October 2015 at 19:21
I think they are mostly seen in asian countries where they were constructed in the last decades… but good idea to use OSM examples; here’s what I thought of ;D: osm.org/#map=16/52.9421/5.0643
Comment from histor on 23 October 2015 at 21:14
My browser shows the canals smaller as 20 m - but o.k.
To the motorway = you made a port at the coast, all ships go under the motorway to reach the port. So the bridge (as in Hamburg / Germany) has to be 42 m high - or more (newer bridges more as 50 m) - to let through seagoing ships. Do you want really such a monster in front of your town? Better then a road on a dyke and at the throughfare for the vessels a tunnel (500 m or so).
Comment from BMSOUZA on 24 October 2015 at 03:25
I really like this layout of city. Someday I think creating one like this…
Comment from Leowezy on 24 October 2015 at 09:59
@histor, that’s really something to think about you’re right… maybe I’ll look into creating tunnels instead of bridges, but I will still have to figure out if it works without creating to steep slopes.
Comment from histor on 24 October 2015 at 14:31
to the motorway = if you set a tunnel, you have 12 to 16 m deep of water for greater seagoing ships to your harbour, 5 to 8 m earth or sand over the tunnel and 5 m for the tunnel = means a ramp for 30 to 40 m differnce of level. At a degree of - let us say - 6 % (for 36 m level difference) you need a ramp of 600 m at each side. So your tunnel may be 500 m and at each inner side 70 % of the ramp = 2 * 420 m = 1,340 m. The outer 30 % of the ramps are under open sky and at the beginning of the tunnel the wall there is roundabout 13 m - there you can tagg a line with “natural = cliff” (see the motorway-tunnel at Latina in Latina).
Comment from Leowezy on 25 October 2015 at 15:03
Thanks histor, I will definetely use that mapping technique; probably I’ll leave the eastern portion with a bridge style, since there only small boats need to pass underneath, and then create a tunnel underneath the large river and harbour~