[Talk-ca] [OSM-talk] Bicycle boulevards

[Michael Barabanov]

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