On 07.10.2013 19:08, John F. Eldredge wrote: > On 10/07/2013 11:59 AM, fly wrote: >> On 07.10.2013 18:48, John F. Eldredge wrote: >> >> >>> On some bridges that have a relatively narrow footway, I have seen signs >>> indicating that bicyclists must dismount. So, I think that it is useful >>> as a way of telling someone planning a cycle route "you will have to >>> move at walking speed on this section". >> As said above, I know these signs but I wonder if they are official. >> >> In Germany they are not and the have no judicial effect. You will always >> have to take care of pedestrians especially on a small way with mixed >> use. Maybe you might even have to stop or dismount. But if you are >> really only allowed to push you bicycle a bicycle=no or vehicle=no is >> needed. >> >> Router can work with footways or pathes and even steps and you do not >> need bicycle=dismount. >>
> Well, it may vary by jurisdiction, but I would not be surprised if it > were legally enforced in cases where riding the bicycle could be a > safety hazard to pedestrians, and in some cases to the cyclist as well. > I remember seeing such a "cyclists must dismount" on the narrow footway > of a bridge over the James River, in Richmond, Virginia, USA. Not only > was the footway narrow, but the railing between the footway and the > river was only a little over a meter tall. This is adequate for a > pedestrian, but a mounted cyclist could easily fall over the railing and > into the river. Unfortunately, I am about 600 miles from Richmond at the > present, so I can't show a photograph. Wonder if this sign would be needed if the footway would just be signed as footway (highway=path,foot=designated,vehicle=no) without any extras signs for bicycle ? cu fly _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
