[Tagging] Access=no for bus lanes

José G Moya Y. josemoya at gmail.com
Sat Jun 9 11:05:54 UTC 2018

I think bike/charriot/horse/motorbike access should not be taked for
granted in bus lanes, as you said.

In my city, bikes are forbidden in bus lanes. They are too narrow to allow
a bus overpass a bycicle, and not all bycicles are faster than a bus.

In Madrid, bikes should use the rightmost lane that is not a bus lane; if
there are more non-bus lanes in the street, leftmost non-bus lane will be
considered a 30kph "shared" lane (and the other ones 50kph lanes).


El sáb., 9 de junio de 2018 11:14, Neil Matthews <ndmatthews at plus.net>

> I quite often find "access=no", replaced by "motor_vehicle=no" by armchair
> editors -- I think they want to make sure that horses can use the bus lanes?
> Neil
> On 08/06/2018 13:18, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
> 2018-06-08 10:44 GMT+02:00 François Lacombe <fl.infosreseaux at gmail.com>:
>> it's written that dedicated bus lanes should get access=no and I find
>> this too restrictive.
>> Such lanes can also be accessible by cabs, bikes or by foot.
>> It's sounds to be a mean to prevent cars only to take those lanes actually
> for bus _lanes_ access=no will typically make sense, for bus _roads_ (i.e.
> only busses allowed on the road, but there might be other non-lanes
> included in the highway, like sidewalks) I have sometimes found this
> applied by error, because mappers forgot about the pedestrians.
> Cheers,
> Martin
> _______________________________________________
> Tagging mailing listTagging at openstreetmap.orghttps://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
> _______________________________________________
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20180609/2480d07d/attachment.html>

More information about the Tagging mailing list