[Talk-ca] [OSM-talk] Bicycle boulevards
Michael Barabanov
michael.barabanov at gmail.com
Wed Jun 10 18:02:27 BST 2009
Can we use relations same way as for more complex cycle routes for this one?
On Wed, Jun 10, 2009 at 01:33:03PM +0200, Frederik Ramm (frederik at remote.org) wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Mario Salvini wrote:
> > Even in germany on these roads there are no additional rights-of-way in
> > comparison to "normal" cycleways (except that bicycles get the
> > officially allowance to drive next to each other and not just inline.
> > buts that's piece of cake ;) ). A normal cycleway with
> > motorcar/agricultural/...=yes/destination/... would be exactly the same.
>
> We're getting very much into national detail here but just to give an
> example, look at this aerial image (which is 100 metres from my office BTW):
>
> http://maps.google.de/maps?ll=49.007912,8.378746&spn=0.000729,0.001026&t=h&z=20
>
> The road going east-west is a former residential road with different
> lanes for each direction of travel, plus diagonal parking spaces in the
> middle. It is over 20 metres wide. This road has now been designated a
> "Fahrradstrasse" (cycle road). Motorized traffic is still allowed at
> "adequate speeds" (whatever that means).
>
> While I am not a big fan of endless tagging discussions, tagging the
> road above as "highway=cycleway, car=yes" strikes me as grossly misleading.
>
> Maybe it should simply retain highway=residential. After all, the
> "residentialness" of the road has not changed one bit since it was
> designated a cycle road.
>
> Bye
> Frederik
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-ca mailing list
> Talk-ca at openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
More information about the Talk-ca
mailing list