[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - (Obligatory vs. optional cycletracks)
colin.smale at xs4all.nl
Mon Dec 22 10:18:03 UTC 2014
In NL I think it is similar to Germany. The definition of the sign is
"verplicht fietspad" i.e. compulsory cycle track. When the cycle track
runs adjacent to a road the intention is clear, but the sign is
interestingly also used for cycle paths through the middle of the
countryside with no adjacent road. One might interpret this as "you MUST
follow this path, even if it goes in the wrong direction for you"....
In Dutch law a "snorfiets" (light motorbike with pedals, max. 25 km/h)
is equivalent to a bicycle, but a proper moped (max. 45 km/h) is a
different class of vehicle. A "snorfiets" (called a "mofa" in OSM - is
that a German term?) must follow the same rules as cycles. In some areas
a moped is expected to use cycle tracks (the round blue sign shows both
a cycle and a moped) but in other areas mopeds must follow the roads.
There is also a "non-mandatory cycle track" which is a path on which it
is permitted to cycle. "Snorfietsen" can use these paths as well of
course, but only in in pedal mode (unless they are electric).
On 2014-12-22 10:54, Frederik Ramm wrote:
> what is the legal situation in different countries - is Germany one
> of a very small number of countries that has this concept of "if there
> is a certain type of cycleway than cyclists must not use the road", or
> is this quite common?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Tagging