[Tagging] Mapping cycle tracks as separate geometries, but still know they are tracks?

[Mateusz Konieczny]

As a separate line, you'd potentially have this:
highway=* +        cycleway:*=lane + sidewalk=* for the parts around    junctions

lanes are not eligible to be mapped as separate ways


"As a single line, a normal scenario will be this: (...) cycleway:*=track"
I would not suggest that mapping this as tag on road is "normal" 
in contrast to mapping it as a separate lines.


For the question itself, if one uses

highway=path segregated=yes foot=designated bicycle=designated
footway=sidewalk cycleway:surface/footway:surface/surface etc

for separate way, then one may look at footway=sidewalk tags

Though it does not apply where there is solely cycleway along road,
where pedestrians are forbidden to use it/

Aug 10, 2022, 15:11 by balchen at saint-etienne.no:

> Hi everyone.
>  
>  I'm currently preparing to map a new cycle track that was recently    completed. We're lucky enough that someone has filmed this with a    drone: > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5sevJH7AXxU
>  
>  The design manual for cycle tracks states they must be elevated from    the carriageway, and optionally with a sidewalk that is even more    elevated, and must be ramped down to the carriageway level at every    junction and be marked as a cycle lane. Also, the design manual    states that it must be placed behind bus stops.
>  
>  What this video shows is going to be a typical setup in Norway in    the time to come, so I thought I'd prepare a mapping guide for    OSM-NO.
>  
>  Cycle tracks can be mapped with the carriageway on a single line, or    as a separate line.
>  
>  As a single line, a normal scenario will be this:
>  
>  > highway=* +      cycleway:*=lane + sidewalk=* >  for the parts around    junctions
>  > highway=* +      cycleway:*=track + sidewalk=*>   for the middle parts
>  > highway=*        + cycleway:left/right=track + sidewalk:left/right>  > for    the non-bus stop-side and>  > highway=cycleway + sidewalk=*>      for the bus stop-side
>  
>  As a separate line, you'd potentially have this:
>  
>  > highway=* +        cycleway:*=lane + sidewalk=*>  for the parts around    junctions
>  > (2x) highway=cycleway + sidewalk=*>  for the middle parts>  
>  Either scheme is fine, depending on what mappers want to do, so that    is NOT what this question is about :)
>  
>  The downside of the second approach is we are not "allowed" to tag    the > highway=cycleway>  as a track.
>  
>  The reason it would be valuable to tag > highway=cycleway>  as a track in this    instance is that a track has requirements for separation from other    mode types that are more similar to a cycle lane than to an actual    bike path (at least in Norway). So you'll be significantly safer on    a bike path than you will be on a cycle track, and marginally safer    on a cycle track than in a cycle lane. For that reason, it'd be nice    to know if what we have is a track or a path.
>  
>  For those who are interested, the requirement is 3 m separation    between bike path and carriageway when the speed limit is > 50    kph, 1.5 m separation when the speed limit is <= 50 kph, and    optionally separation can be achieved with a ~1 m proper fence if    there isn't enough room for those separation distances.
>  
>  Compared to a cycle track, where the separation requirement is a 10    cm kerb (which is only an obstacle from the carriageway    perspective), regardless of speed limit. 
>  
>  I would be much more comfortable sending my kids out on a bike path    than on a cycle track, and I'd rate the track and the lane as    practically the same when it comes to my kids. Obviously the 3 m/1.5    m/fence will keep them out of danger even if they veer or fall, but    the 10 cm drop down the kerb won't.
>  
>  So, my question is:
>  
>  How could we tag separately drawn cycleway tracks so that we know    they are tracks?
>  
>  Cheers,
>  
>  Jens
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20220810/e90c2cf9/attachment.htm>