[talk-au] Shared Zones (Or, Living Streets in car parks?)

[Dian Ågesson]

Hey Graeme,

Spotting your change certainly reminded me of the shared zone signs I've 
been seeing, but not because it is tagged incorrectly. It's been on my 
to do list since I nearly got run over eating a Bunnings sausage over 
Xmas!

I think that this is a good example of a true "living street"; it would 
not have been a service road if not signed as a shared zone, and is 
intended to be shared space to encourage pedestrian traffic.

Similar examples I am familiar with include Fitzroy St, St Kilda at 
Acland Street; Kananook Creek Boulevard South in Frankston between 
Playne and Davey; and Hardware Lane, Melbourne, at the Bourke Street 
Carpark.

I have noticed that a lot of "true" living streets in Melbourne are busy 
roads that have been handed back to pedestrian traffic, or are in new, 
sterilised (soulless) places like Docklands.

Dian

On 2022-02-17 10:32, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote:

> This discussion started in response to something that I mapped.
> 
> I was clearing a note / Inspector issue nearby & wondered why this 
> street appeared differently on the map:
> 
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/216566993
> 
> Had a look & it was tagged as a service-alley which just didn't seem 
> right, but neither did =residential, so I changed it to =tertiary 
> (=unclassified may have been better?).
> 
> Question was raised as to whether it should be, so I've now changed it 
> to =living_street pending outcome of these discussions.
> 
> Here it is FYI:
> 
> https://goo.gl/maps/g3jpqjDQLgCktmfc7
> 
> https://goo.gl/maps/wNQyQo7RZRyg94pg8
> 
> So what do we think it should be?
> 
> Thanks
> 
> Graeme
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-au mailing list
> Talk-au at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-au/attachments/20220217/8369a1f5/attachment-0001.htm>