[Tagging] Two side-of-road parking questions

Paul Allen pla16021 at gmail.com
Fri Jul 24 14:18:14 UTC 2020

On Fri, 24 Jul 2020 at 15:00, Matthew Woehlke <mwoehlke.floss at gmail.com>

> On 24/07/2020 08.19, Paul Allen wrote:
> > The image in the wiki for parking lanes matches
> > what I expect of it.  As in this situation near me:
> > https://goo.gl/maps/WUZKmhQTDSRsgnDx7 on the right
> > of the road are double yellow lines, which mean "no parking
> > or waiting at any time" (but there are exceptions) and on
> > the left is a single yellow line which means "parking and
> > waiting permitted some of the time" (though there are
> > exceptions and provisions and it gets complicated).  The
> > left is a parking lane, as I understand it.  There are no
> > parking spaces marked.
> AFAIK there is nothing exactly like that in the US. People do park on
> streets (note 5th, 4th and 3rd Avenues, as previously mentioned), and
> there is sometimes signage regulating this.

Sounds like the same thing,  Near enough.  Especially if some streets
have signs saying "no parking at any time."

> Actually, this might answer one of my prior questions; is =marked
> supposed to be used for stretches that alternate between parking allowed
> and parking forbidden?

The wiki is a little unclear, but I take it to mean whether or not there are
road markings for each parking space.  But if there are markings, I'd
say it was a parking lot. Depends on context, though.  If it's a little
on the kerb, parking lane.  If it's a road marking, parking lot.  That's
my rule of thumb, not a solid rule I'd apply in all cases.

> BTW, this is what NYC apparently considers a "parking lane":
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RJv4oleZAhQ

That's a "floating parking lane," according to the video.  Looks to me like
a parking lot adjoining a road at one side and adjoining a cycle lane at
the other.  I say this because of what is visible at the left of that
"floating parking lane" - an obstacle.  Even with no vehicles parked
there, through traffic would be obstructed.  Difficult to be sure, from the
video, though.  I'm glad I don't have anything like that around here,
otherwise I'd have to figure out how to map it.

> Based on this discussion, it seems to me that that is *not* a "parking
> lane" as OSM uses it.

That's not a parking lane how I'd use it.  I don't speak for OSM.  Other
mappers may (and almost certainly will) interpret it differently.

> That said, I think the US definition may be "a lane which is for
> parking, rather than through traffic, and which may be intermittently
> present" (e.g. the above video). However, I am much *less* convinced
> that it is useful to model them that way, at least in the current state
> of things.

Was there through traffic in the parking lane itself in the above video?

> > Yeah, but the spaces don't render.  Oh wow!  I just checked one of your
> > later examples and parking spaces now render.  I'd given up on hoping
> that
> > they would render.  Doesn't fix the example I'm thinking of, though -
> it's
> > clearly a pregnant bulge that is for parking, but no spaces are marked.
> Ah, yes, that would be an issue. Not sure what was with the not
> rendering, unless you happened to look at it soon enough after I
> uploaded the changes. There does seem to be a variable delay between the
> database changing and the rendered tiles being regenerated.

I'm used to delays.  Last weekend the delay was several hours.  I'm talking
about parking spaces not rendering ever, as far as I could tell.  Looks like
carto implemented it when I wasn't looking.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20200724/c4f4a634/attachment.htm>

More information about the Tagging mailing list