[Talk-us] NY/Connecticut state boundary near Glen Cove/Port Chester

2017-02-16 Thread Frederik Ramm
Hi, yesterday I repaired a hole in the NY/Connecticut state boundary here: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/46107026 It appears that individual city and county boundaries had, earlier, extended out to meet the state boundary in the middle of the water, and had now been changed to

Re: [Talk-us] Combined parking/bike lanes

2017-02-16 Thread Paul Johnson
On Thu, Feb 16, 2017 at 10:53 AM, John F. Eldredge wrote: > One thing that is an issue with many of the marked bike lanes in > Nashville, TN is that they aren't contiguous. You will come to a point > where the road narrows, such as for a bridge, and the bikes are forced to

Re: [Talk-us] Combined parking/bike lanes

2017-02-16 Thread John F. Eldredge
One thing that is an issue with many of the marked bike lanes in Nashville, TN is that they aren't contiguous. You will come to a point where the road narrows, such as for a bridge, and the bikes are forced to share a lane with motor traffic. This makes bike riding at rush hour a risky

Re: [Talk-us] Combined parking/bike lanes

2017-02-16 Thread Paul Johnson
On Thu, Feb 16, 2017 at 10:11 AM, Spencer Gardner wrote: > Good catch on the MUTCD language. I'm not opposed to tagging with a bike > lane and a parking lane, but then what should be used as the assumed width > of the bike lane? This has direct relevance for my

Re: [Talk-us] Combined parking/bike lanes

2017-02-16 Thread Spencer Gardner
Good catch on the MUTCD language. I'm not opposed to tagging with a bike lane and a parking lane, but then what should be used as the assumed width of the bike lane? This has direct relevance for my application, where I need to know how wide a bike lane is. Would you suggest an assumed width for

Re: [Talk-us] Combined parking/bike lanes

2017-02-16 Thread Paul Johnson
On Fri, Feb 3, 2017 at 12:00 PM, Spencer Gardner wrote: > The problem I see with that approach is that it doesn't distinguish > between a road with a striped bike lane next to a parking lane and a road > with the combined lane. > I'm not sure that's a distinction that

Re: [Talk-us] Combined parking/bike lanes

2017-02-16 Thread Spencer Gardner
No. That's not a mistake. My city uses this as a standard treatment in a number of locations. And as was mentioned earlier this facility type is also common in California. On Thu, Feb 16, 2017 at 9:49 AM, Paul Johnson wrote: > On Fri, Feb 3, 2017 at 11:11 AM, Spencer

Re: [Talk-us] Combined parking/bike lanes

2017-02-16 Thread Paul Johnson
On Fri, Feb 3, 2017 at 11:11 AM, Spencer Gardner wrote: > Hi all. Has anyone worked out a good tagging scheme for combined > bike/parking lanes? I'm not sure how common they are elsewhere but there > are a number of such facilities in my city. > > For reference, you can