[OSM-talk] Alleyways without RoW (Was: Private roads)

Chris Fleming me at chrisfleming.org
Thu Jul 19 16:20:29 BST 2007

Mike Collinson wrote:
> At 02:58 PM 12/07/2007, Stephen Gower wrote:
>> On Thu, Jul 12, 2007 at 02:30:46PM +0100, Simon Hewison wrote:
>>> It is quite a clear document, and differentiates between a public 
>>> footpath and a cycle track, bridleways and the like.
>>  OK, I haven't been precise in my language, I'll restate where I
>>  need clarification:
>>  There are urban alleyways around where I live, which connect one
>>  street to another.  They are not listed on the Definitive Map of
>>  rights of way in Oxfordshire (I've checked this in the library),
>>  therefore by the legal definition they are not footpaths.  Since
>>  they do not run along a carrageway, by the legal definition they
>>  are not footways.  I contend that it is just as legal to cycle
>>  along these alleys as walk along them (indeed, in some cases, they
>>  are marked as recommended routes on the County's cycle maps). 
>>  Despite not being legal footpaths, they are important routes, so
>>  they should be mapped on OSM.  Should they be tagged as
>>  highway=footway or with some other tag?
>>  However, there is one example I can think of with very obtrusive
>>  barriers which would prevent all but the most determined cyclist (I
>>  was determined when I mapped it!) Should this be labeled cycle=no,
>>  even though legally it is just the same as the other alleyways
>>  mentioned above?
>>  Help!
> In similar cases, I've taken the position that if there are no obstructions to cycling it,  it should appear as a cycleway.  By obstructions I mean: a sign saying No Cycling, steps, kissing gates/stiles etc.  If there are such obstructions, I map it as a footway.  Not legalistic perhaps, but practical.
I do much the same, provided that a "path" is wide enough to cycle on 
and easily pass other cyclists/pedestrians and that there are no signs 
forbidding cycling then I would tend to mark as a cycleway.

If a path looks like it may allow cycling or is too narrow to easily 
pass other bikes/pedestrians then I mark is as a footway and 
cycle=yes....To me this translates to something on a cycling map of 
Edinburgh that Spokes publish, where some of the routes are shown as 
cycling allowed, but cyclists may have to dismount.



More information about the talk mailing list