[OSM-talk] Cycle lanes

[Andy Allan]

I think a lot of the physical cycleway tagging is ambiguous at the
moment, especially with the cycleway= tag. I think cycleway=track was
intended only for adding to highway=* (not highway=cycleway), but I
would advise that all off-road cycle paths, including those on
sidewalks, are drawn as a separate way with highway=cycleway instead.
If the way is tagged with highway=cycleway I don't think it needs
cycleway=track, btw.

I'm going to put together a guide for how to tag cycle paths, since
I've been contacted by a few other groups who are finding our tagging
insufficient for their needs (such as shared use vs segregated paths),
and I hope that'll clear things up a bit.

Certainly the easiest for now is that if it's not on the road, it's a
highway=cycleway.

Cheers,
Andy

On Mon, Mar 24, 2008 at 7:48 AM, Mike Collinson <mike at ayeltd.biz> wrote:
> At 07:32 AM 24/03/2008, Lars Aronsson wrote:
>
>  >It's common in Sweden to have wide sidewalks divided into half
>  >footway, half cycleway.  This can happen on either or both sides
>  >of the street. Should this be tagged as highway=*;cycleway=lane?
>  >Technically speaking it isn't a lane because it's above the curb.
>  >
>  >How can I indicate which (or both) sides of the street it applies
>  >to? If it's only on one side, how can I indicate this?
>  >
>  >The page [[Proposed features/Sidewalk]] proposes sidewalk=right.
>  >Should this be used for cycleway too?  A user comment on that page
>  >mentions cycleway:right=lane.  Is that a common use, that needs to
>  >be documented?
>  >
>  >The page [[Cycleway]] instead talks of lane_left and lane_right.
>  >
>  >The same page also mentions the "width" key, but what are some
>  >useful values for this key?  In the case of two wide sidewalks
>  >that allow bikes, some separating grass, and double street lanes,
>  >should the width be the total width (in metres) from wall to wall?
>
>  As a cyclist currently in Stockholm, I personally draw a separate way and label it highway=cycleway, cycleway=track, foot=yes, surface=paved.
>
>  The main rationale for that is that it is a separate track rather than a painted lane division on someone else's road.  Sometimes the track is right next to the road, sometimes separated by a grass verge and sometimes it wanders off into the woods.
>
>  But my main reason for doing that is safety.  I *much* prefer riding these cycleways than on lanes marked on the road and deliberately plan my routes according.  Drawing a separate way makes them very obvious on the map using existing tagging.  I can also easily see where they change side of a road and if they have sections where they merge into the normal road as a lane or just disappear.
>
>  That is my personal opinion, I'm interested it what others think.
>
>  Mike
>
>  PS Here is a work-in-progress example:
>
>  Good:  The southbound Sankt Eriksgatan sidewalk cycleway really is a separate track over the bridge and really does abruptly end at Aströmergatan. As a bonus, it is clearly shown as one-way.
>
>  Bad:  An east-west sidewalk cycleway begins at the corner of Fridhemsgatan and Drottingholmvägen, but is difficult to see because of the rendering.
>
>  http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=59.33395&lon=18.02934&zoom=17&layers=B0FT
>
>
>
>
>
>  _______________________________________________
>  talk mailing list
>  talk at openstreetmap.org
>  http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
>