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