Re: [talk-au] local traffic only

2019-11-11 Thread Andrew Harvey 
In an effort to try to document the outcome of this discussion, I've
updated
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Australian_Tagging_Guidelines#Local_Traffic_Only
though
if any one still feels this isn't the best way to tag this feature, please
speak up.

On Mon, 11 Nov 2019 at 10:26, Ian Sergeant  wrote:

> What does "official" mean?  It's official, in that the signs are placed by
> the local council.  However they are not enforceable, because no law
> (regulation, etc) gives them a legal meaning.
>
> There is no definitive list of street signs that are advisory vs
> enforceable.  But the RMS has a partial list on their website, and the
> definitive is the Australian Road Rules (as in various state legislation).
>
> Councils use them to discourage local streets for through use.  They
> advise drivers that they aren't a main road - and they may have traffic
> calming, etc on them and be otherwise unsuited in design for through use.
> They aren't used at all in many (most?) council areas.
>
> In some cases, they may also have a reduced speed-limit on the same sign.
> That would be enforceable.
>
> It's pretty low value information to capture in OSM.  But the signs exist,
> so we can capture them - but a access restriction would be inappropriate.
> I've said before I agree with Andrew's proposed tagging for discouraged
> access.
>
> Ian.
>
> On Mon, 11 Nov 2019 at 06:38, Sebastian S.  wrote:
>
>> So the sign is put up by the council. Is it not an official sign?
>>
>> Could someone elaborate on the legal side mentioned here. E.g. is there
>> catalogue of street signs in the road rules and this one is not among them?
>>
>> Are people confusing lax enforcement of the sign with it having no legal
>> meaning?
>>
>> On 9 November 2019 11:37:49 am AEDT, Andrew Harvey <
>> andrew.harv...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Sat, 9 Nov 2019 at 02:24, Mateusz Konieczny 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 Why it would be irrelevant?

>>>
 access tag family is for legal access (with some space for officially
 discouraged access),
 access=destination is for "transit is illegal", not "local residents
 dislike transit traffic".

 OSM is not a place to add a nonexisting ban on transit traffic

>>>
>>> Yeah realised this later, see my other post in this thread at
>>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-au/2019-November/013188.html,
>>> which I suggested motor_vehicle:advisory=destination to tag a suggested or
>>> advised but maybe not legally enforceable destination only restriction.
>>>
>>> On Sat, 9 Nov 2019 at 01:55, Mateusz Konieczny 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 Is it "local traffic only" as in "resident only" or "no transit"?

 Is permission required to enter this area?

 AFAIK there is no tagging scheme for distinguishing "only with
 permission of
 homeowner" and "available to all residents of closed community".

>>>
>>> It just means this road is indented to be used if you're traveling to
>>> somewhere along this road, but not if you're just driving through as a
>>> shortcut.
>>>
>>> It's still public land, not private property.
>>>
>> ___
>> Talk-au mailing list
>> Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
>>
>
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] local traffic only

2019-11-11 Thread Warin 

On 09/11/19 01:51, Mateusz Konieczny wrote:

Is it "local traffic only" as in "resident only" or "no transit"?

Is permission required to enter this area?

No permission required.
Residents, their visitors, delivery vehicle going to the residents would 
all be allowed.


From where I have seen then they are to discourage transit traffic.

A search on austlit may give some results?



AFAIK there is no tagging scheme for distinguishing "only with 
permission of

homeowner" and "available to all residents of closed community".

7 Nov 2019, 12:21 by mapp...@consebt.de :

Hello List,

how do you map a 'local traffic only' sign as this one?
https://www.mapillary.com/map/im/FkY8gmlGX2NmhUARyveMQw

Following https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:access states
"...Note that "access only for residents" is private..."

Would this not break navigation in apps etc?

___



___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] local traffic only

2019-11-11 Thread osm.talk-au 
Well, the website of the Queensland Department of Transport and Main Roads 
website specifically lists “Local Traffic Only” as an official state level sign.

 

https://www.qld.gov.au/transport/safety/signs/instruction (see section “Local 
traffic restriction signs”)

 

 

From: Michael James  
Sent: Monday, 11 November 2019 09:20
To: OSM Australian Talk List 
Subject: Re: [talk-au] local traffic only

 

They existed prior to 1997 and were removed when the national rules were 
introduced that year.

 

It’s likely that local councils are unaware that they no longer have any legal 
purpose.

 

From: Sebastian S. mailto:mapp...@consebt.de> > 
Sent: Sunday, 10 November 2019 9:50 PM
To: talk-au@openstreetmap.org  ; Andrew 
Harvey mailto:andrew.harv...@gmail.com> >; Mateusz 
Konieczny mailto:matkoni...@tutanota.com> >
Cc: OSM Australian Talk List mailto:talk-au@openstreetmap.org> >
Subject: Re: [talk-au] local traffic only

 

So the sign is put up by the council. Is it not an official sign?

Could someone elaborate on the legal side mentioned here. E.g. is there 
catalogue of street signs in the road rules and this one is not among them?

Are people confusing lax enforcement of the sign with it having no legal 
meaning?

On 9 November 2019 11:37:49 am AEDT, Andrew Harvey mailto:andrew.harv...@gmail.com> > wrote:

On Sat, 9 Nov 2019 at 02:24, Mateusz Konieczny mailto:matkoni...@tutanota.com> > wrote:

Why it would be irrelevant?

 

access tag family is for legal access (with some space for officially 
discouraged access),

access=destination is for "transit is illegal", not "local residents dislike 
transit traffic".

 

OSM is not a place to add a nonexisting ban on transit traffic

 

Yeah realised this later, see my other post in this thread at 
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-au/2019-November/013188.html, 
which I suggested motor_vehicle:advisory=destination to tag a suggested or 
advised but maybe not legally enforceable destination only restriction.

 

On Sat, 9 Nov 2019 at 01:55, Mateusz Konieczny mailto:matkoni...@tutanota.com> > wrote:

Is it "local traffic only" as in "resident only" or "no transit"?

 

Is permission required to enter this area?

 

AFAIK there is no tagging scheme for distinguishing "only with permission of

homeowner" and "available to all residents of closed community".

 

It just means this road is indented to be used if you're traveling to somewhere 
along this road, but not if you're just driving through as a shortcut.

 

It's still public land, not private property. 

___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] local traffic only

2019-11-11 Thread Michael James 
As I have said in other forums

Websites are not the law, unless it is the legislation website.

From: osm.talk...@thorsten.engler.id.au 
Sent: Tuesday, 12 November 2019 2:59 AM
To: 'OSM Australian Talk List' 
Subject: Re: [talk-au] local traffic only

Well, the website of the Queensland Department of Transport and Main Roads 
website specifically lists “Local Traffic Only” as an official state level sign.

https://www.qld.gov.au/transport/safety/signs/instruction (see section “Local 
traffic restriction signs”)


From: Michael James mailto:mich...@techdrive.com.au>>
Sent: Monday, 11 November 2019 09:20
To: OSM Australian Talk List 
mailto:talk-au@openstreetmap.org>>
Subject: Re: [talk-au] local traffic only

They existed prior to 1997 and were removed when the national rules were 
introduced that year.

It’s likely that local councils are unaware that they no longer have any legal 
purpose.

From: Sebastian S. mailto:mapp...@consebt.de>>
Sent: Sunday, 10 November 2019 9:50 PM
To: talk-au@openstreetmap.org; Andrew Harvey 
mailto:andrew.harv...@gmail.com>>; Mateusz Konieczny 
mailto:matkoni...@tutanota.com>>
Cc: OSM Australian Talk List 
mailto:talk-au@openstreetmap.org>>
Subject: Re: [talk-au] local traffic only

So the sign is put up by the council. Is it not an official sign?

Could someone elaborate on the legal side mentioned here. E.g. is there 
catalogue of street signs in the road rules and this one is not among them?

Are people confusing lax enforcement of the sign with it having no legal 
meaning?
On 9 November 2019 11:37:49 am AEDT, Andrew Harvey 
mailto:andrew.harv...@gmail.com>> wrote:
On Sat, 9 Nov 2019 at 02:24, Mateusz Konieczny 
mailto:matkoni...@tutanota.com>> wrote:
Why it would be irrelevant?

access tag family is for legal access (with some space for officially 
discouraged access),
access=destination is for "transit is illegal", not "local residents dislike 
transit traffic".

OSM is not a place to add a nonexisting ban on transit traffic

Yeah realised this later, see my other post in this thread at 
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-au/2019-November/013188.html, 
which I suggested motor_vehicle:advisory=destination to tag a suggested or 
advised but maybe not legally enforceable destination only restriction.

On Sat, 9 Nov 2019 at 01:55, Mateusz Konieczny 
mailto:matkoni...@tutanota.com>> wrote:
Is it "local traffic only" as in "resident only" or "no transit"?

Is permission required to enter this area?

AFAIK there is no tagging scheme for distinguishing "only with permission of
homeowner" and "available to all residents of closed community".

It just means this road is indented to be used if you're traveling to somewhere 
along this road, but not if you're just driving through as a shortcut.

It's still public land, not private property.
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au