[OSM-talk] [tagging] access=license

Andrew MacKinnon andrewpmk at gmail.com
Sun May 25 07:25:45 BST 2008


On Sat, May 24, 2008 at 7:07 PM, Charles Basenga Kiyanda
<kiyanda2 at uiuc.edu> wrote:
>
>>> Parking lots of this kind are common enough (in inner cities) that
>>> they have
>>> their own official traffic sign (number 9 at [1]), but there's
>>> currently no
>>> good way to tag them.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> We have similar (but more complex signs as the tend to include the
>> parking permit zone as well).
>>
>>
> Are you talking about restrictions by which you need a permit of a
> certain zones and the zone you get is based on the address of residence?
> If that is the case, then it's also very, very common in Montreal,
> Quebec. In any case, a tag like what is propsed could easily be used for
> parkings which require any type of permits, whether delivered by the
> city or a private company. Maybe it would be possible to extend the
> scheme to have something like
>
> amenity = parking
> access = permit
> permit_delivered_by = city/company xyz/...

Perhaps there should be some distinction between parking with permits
only for residents or employees (like Montreal above) and parking
where a daily/weekly/monthly/annual permit is available to anyone for
a fee.

e.g.
access=residents
access=employees
access=customers (customer parking at a store)
access=permit (permit available for purchase)
access=public (parking available by the hour or for free to anyone)

Of course, we could simply use access=private for access=residents and
access=employees, since these parking spaces are not generally
available to the public.

There are many lots here (in Toronto) where one pays a monthly fee to
park which MUST be distinguished from lots that are limited to
residents only and also from lots where parking is available for an
hourly fee.




More information about the talk mailing list