[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - crossing=priority

[Graeme Fitzpatrick]

On Mon, 14 Dec 2020 at 06:37, stevea <steveaOSM at softworkers.com> wrote:

> This is problematic to my thinking.  In California (my state), at an
> UNCONTROLLED intersection (no traffic_signal, stop sign, other traffic
> control device...), for example where the sidewalk "would continue to
> another sidewalk on the other side of the roadway," pedestrians ALWAYS have
> the right-of-way (over all vehicles) when they indicate it.  How do they
> indicate it?  By lifting one foot to step towards / into the intersection
> (from the sidewalk).  Drivers must (by law) stop short of entering the
> intersection to allow the pedestrian to cross, once a pedestrian has so
> entered the crossing (even it if is unmarked or "invisible").
>

Australia goes even a bit further in that pedestrians always have
right-of-way, regardless of crossings (marked or unmarked) or not.

https://roadsafety.transport.nsw.gov.au/stayingsafe/pedestrians/needtoknow/index.html

" Drivers must give way to pedestrians crossing the road into which their
vehicles are turning. You must also give way to pedestrians if there is a
danger of colliding with them, even if there is no marked pedestrian
crossing.

Thanks

Graeme
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20201214/73bfd0c9/attachment.htm>