[Talk-us] [OSM-talk] Bicycle boulevards
baloo at ursamundi.org
Wed Jun 10 18:56:02 BST 2009
Frederik Ramm wrote:
> 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):
> 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).
I'm not convinced this is a national detail, as it's one that I brought
up given that they're a common fixture in Portland, Oregon; and Victoria
and Vancouver, BC. The fact you also have them in Germany strikes me as
further evidence that cycleroads are not a national detail, but rather
an international development in highway design.
> 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.
On the other hand, it's no longer as minor as a residential road, nor
has the same use as a residential road (as it's throughbound for cyclists).
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 260 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
More information about the Talk-us