Re: [OSM-talk-be] Fietsstraatzones in Leuven and a question about zones inside zones
In Geel there is also a Fietszone in the centre. I will update it later on too. I still have to check where the boundaries are. They are not in complete streets so have to verify it manually. Op zo 30 aug. 2020 om 14:50 schreef Jo : > Hi, > > I added the new fietsstraatzones in Leuven to the map. They will be in > vigor on September 1st. The legislator didn't create a separate sign, they > just decided that it's allowed use F111 on a ZONE sign... > > I do like to distinguish between the 'real' cycle streets and the > 'pretenders', so the ones inside zones and the ones connecting the zones, I > guess. I used BE:F111zone as the traffic_sign. I may have done something > silly though, as I removed the F4a from the traffic sign tag. > > If you search for F111 you get all. > If you search for F111zone you get all the ones inside the zones. > If you search for "F111 -F111zone" in JOSM, you get only the cyclestreets > with an actual cycle street sign. > > If you search for F4a you get all the streets inside the zone30, but the > cycle streets are not included in that. How do we want to work with zones > within zones? There are also parking zones... > > Should I have put traffic_sign=BE:F111;BE:F4a;BE:F1a ? > > Initially I didn't because both are limited to 30km/h, but now I'm > thinking I should have. > > What about the living_street ways? They are also inside the zone30 (and in > built-up area), but the traffic rules that apply are BE:F12a. Do we add > BE:F12a;BE:F4a;BE:F1a ? > > Jo > ___ > Talk-be mailing list > Talk-be@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be > ___ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
Re: [OSM-talk-be] Fietsstraatzones in Leuven and a question about zones inside zones
I added some A23 here and there around Leuven. It made me realise I don't have recent Mapillary images for many streets in Leuven to determine where exactly those school zone30 start and end... Time to go out and cycle to make more pictures, I guess. Jo On Mon, Aug 31, 2020 at 9:52 AM Tim Couwelier wrote: > F4a should remain yes, despite both implying the same speed limit, UNLESS > the local gov removed the F4a signs due to the 'fietszone' completely > overlapping with the 'zone 30'. > Ideally, for the 'zone 30', differentiate between 'normal' with F4a only > and 'school- zone 30' (F4a + A23) > > If there's living streets within, I'd say the restrictions 'stack': no > overtaking, 20 km/h. > There may actually be a slight nuance here - generally in case of possible > contradiction, the rule applies 'traffic sign takes priority over traffic > rules'. The speed limits in both fietszone and living_street are traffic > rules, but this might leave a loophole where 'zone 30' as a sign takes > priority. > > There used to be a loophole where a C43 70km/h would trump the 50km/h > speed limit in a built up area until the first intersection (extent of the > validity for the C43) but afaik that's been 'patched' in legislation now. > This might just be an unforeseen edge case opening another such loophole, > although I'm not 100% sure on this. > > > Sidenote: I think I agree with not making a seperate sign for this, but > just giving it a 'zonal' extent. If anything, F4a/b signs existing as such > is confusing. But then again, so were the original streetsigns as they were > semi-assumed to be zonal, but the law wasn't overly specific (and didn't > mention it being zonal). Readability, in database or map format, is far > better if you speak of 'zonal C43' and 'zonal F111' without having to know > another number for the same type of thing. > > Op zo 30 aug. 2020 om 14:50 schreef Jo : > >> Hi, >> >> I added the new fietsstraatzones in Leuven to the map. They will be in >> vigor on September 1st. The legislator didn't create a separate sign, they >> just decided that it's allowed use F111 on a ZONE sign... >> >> I do like to distinguish between the 'real' cycle streets and the >> 'pretenders', so the ones inside zones and the ones connecting the zones, I >> guess. I used BE:F111zone as the traffic_sign. I may have done something >> silly though, as I removed the F4a from the traffic sign tag. >> >> If you search for F111 you get all. >> If you search for F111zone you get all the ones inside the zones. >> If you search for "F111 -F111zone" in JOSM, you get only the cyclestreets >> with an actual cycle street sign. >> >> If you search for F4a you get all the streets inside the zone30, but the >> cycle streets are not included in that. How do we want to work with zones >> within zones? There are also parking zones... >> >> Should I have put traffic_sign=BE:F111;BE:F4a;BE:F1a ? >> >> Initially I didn't because both are limited to 30km/h, but now I'm >> thinking I should have. >> >> What about the living_street ways? They are also inside the zone30 (and >> in built-up area), but the traffic rules that apply are BE:F12a. Do we add >> BE:F12a;BE:F4a;BE:F1a ? >> >> Jo >> ___ >> Talk-be mailing list >> Talk-be@openstreetmap.org >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be >> > ___ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
Re: [OSM-talk-be] Fietsstraatzones in Leuven and a question about zones inside zones
F4a should remain yes, despite both implying the same speed limit, UNLESS the local gov removed the F4a signs due to the 'fietszone' completely overlapping with the 'zone 30'. Ideally, for the 'zone 30', differentiate between 'normal' with F4a only and 'school- zone 30' (F4a + A23) If there's living streets within, I'd say the restrictions 'stack': no overtaking, 20 km/h. There may actually be a slight nuance here - generally in case of possible contradiction, the rule applies 'traffic sign takes priority over traffic rules'. The speed limits in both fietszone and living_street are traffic rules, but this might leave a loophole where 'zone 30' as a sign takes priority. There used to be a loophole where a C43 70km/h would trump the 50km/h speed limit in a built up area until the first intersection (extent of the validity for the C43) but afaik that's been 'patched' in legislation now. This might just be an unforeseen edge case opening another such loophole, although I'm not 100% sure on this. Sidenote: I think I agree with not making a seperate sign for this, but just giving it a 'zonal' extent. If anything, F4a/b signs existing as such is confusing. But then again, so were the original streetsigns as they were semi-assumed to be zonal, but the law wasn't overly specific (and didn't mention it being zonal). Readability, in database or map format, is far better if you speak of 'zonal C43' and 'zonal F111' without having to know another number for the same type of thing. Op zo 30 aug. 2020 om 14:50 schreef Jo : > Hi, > > I added the new fietsstraatzones in Leuven to the map. They will be in > vigor on September 1st. The legislator didn't create a separate sign, they > just decided that it's allowed use F111 on a ZONE sign... > > I do like to distinguish between the 'real' cycle streets and the > 'pretenders', so the ones inside zones and the ones connecting the zones, I > guess. I used BE:F111zone as the traffic_sign. I may have done something > silly though, as I removed the F4a from the traffic sign tag. > > If you search for F111 you get all. > If you search for F111zone you get all the ones inside the zones. > If you search for "F111 -F111zone" in JOSM, you get only the cyclestreets > with an actual cycle street sign. > > If you search for F4a you get all the streets inside the zone30, but the > cycle streets are not included in that. How do we want to work with zones > within zones? There are also parking zones... > > Should I have put traffic_sign=BE:F111;BE:F4a;BE:F1a ? > > Initially I didn't because both are limited to 30km/h, but now I'm > thinking I should have. > > What about the living_street ways? They are also inside the zone30 (and in > built-up area), but the traffic rules that apply are BE:F12a. Do we add > BE:F12a;BE:F4a;BE:F1a ? > > Jo > ___ > Talk-be mailing list > Talk-be@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be > ___ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
[OSM-talk-be] Fietsstraatzones in Leuven and a question about zones inside zones
Hi, I added the new fietsstraatzones in Leuven to the map. They will be in vigor on September 1st. The legislator didn't create a separate sign, they just decided that it's allowed use F111 on a ZONE sign... I do like to distinguish between the 'real' cycle streets and the 'pretenders', so the ones inside zones and the ones connecting the zones, I guess. I used BE:F111zone as the traffic_sign. I may have done something silly though, as I removed the F4a from the traffic sign tag. If you search for F111 you get all. If you search for F111zone you get all the ones inside the zones. If you search for "F111 -F111zone" in JOSM, you get only the cyclestreets with an actual cycle street sign. If you search for F4a you get all the streets inside the zone30, but the cycle streets are not included in that. How do we want to work with zones within zones? There are also parking zones... Should I have put traffic_sign=BE:F111;BE:F4a;BE:F1a ? Initially I didn't because both are limited to 30km/h, but now I'm thinking I should have. What about the living_street ways? They are also inside the zone30 (and in built-up area), but the traffic rules that apply are BE:F12a. Do we add BE:F12a;BE:F4a;BE:F1a ? Jo ___ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
