I'll raise you bicycle=designated ;; width=0.15 ;; in City of Sydney two years ago even... old South Sydney Council playing funny buggers with the regulations to make cycling lawful either side of a major road where the lane-width footpath was breached by a cul-de-sac.
NSW's specifications for bicycle infrastructure areā¦ interesting. But far too often they've resulted in sub-standard infrastructure due to engineering allowances, and the habit of building transport or commuter infrastructure as shared leisure paths with meandering that reduces the practicable speed well below the design maximum of 30 km/h. There are redesignated footpaths I prefer to some RMS bicycle "infrastructure." Lane-width footpaths without side streets for example. One concrete tagging example: I'm happy with the eventual results of the editing over the difference between https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/174743358 and https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/183802804 The former is designated and pleasant to ride on (more so than Lenthall) The latter is a standard footpath narrowed to duckboard width by obstructions, but legal to ride on because of how Shared Use Path regulations work. bicycle=designated/yes/permissive for the lawful right to cycle smoothness, width, for the path quality People seem to be in general agreement on what infrastructure constitutes track sidewalk / footpath cycleway even if it is a summation of who uses it for what, how wide, how it was designed, etc. Sam. On 4 April 2016 at 09:25, Ian Sergeant <inas66+...@gmail.com> wrote: > Well, for NSW at least there are some guidelines for what constitutes > a cycleway.. > > > http://www.rms.nsw.gov.au/business-industry/partners-suppliers/documents/technical-manuals/nswbicyclev12aa_i.pdf > > In other states, that permit cycling on footpaths, it also makes sense > to distinguish what is a footpath on which you are permitted to cycle, > from a shared path. > > So, its not just a cultural habit. It's a tagging style that conveys > the nature of the facility. > > Thinking of Botany Bay Council in particular, here. highway=footway, > bicycle=designated, width=.7 > > Ian. > > On 3 April 2016 at 13:01, Sam Russell <g.samuelruss...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On 3/09/2015 1:35 PM, Chris wrote: > >> Hello, I am new to this group and have a question about pedestrian and > >> bicycle shared paths. I can't find anything in the archives. > >> > >> In NSW, shared paths fall into two broad categories: > > > > You're confusing highway= and bicycle=yes / bicycle=designated which > relate > > to render hinting and the lawful uses with the physical infrastructure. > > > > > > bicycle=yes can be on stairs. dirt. It is a lawful right to use, ie: > the > > road related area extended from or towards a Shared Use Path sign, Sep > Path > > sign, Cycleway sign (bicycle only), council reserve / park non-road > related > > area (IANAL on that one) etc. > > > >> (1) Sidewalk footpaths that have been designated as shared paths. In > > > > Tag the material features and let routing software figure it out > > > > width=0.6 or width=0.8 or width=1 or width=1.2 > > > > smoothness=excellent; good; intermediate; bad > > > > surface=concrete etc. > > > > maxspeed=50 ; 40 ; 10 > > > > maxspeed:advisory=10 > > > > maxspeed:practical=5;10;15 > > > > incline=up;down;15%;etc > > > > traffic_calming=bollard;chicane > > > > steps=yes > > > > ramp:bicycle=no > > > > > > I've noticed that people have a cultural habit of tagging highway=footway > > for paths narrower than 1.5m constructed as footpaths and later > designated, > > whereas paths >=1.5m regardless tend to stay as highway=cycleway when > > tagged. > > > > > > thanks, > > Sam. > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > 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