Hi Guys
While investigating I cam across this company who have a product line
which uses these terms and shows pictures - they have an exemplar from
Greenwich which I believe to be in London.
site is - http://www.rediweldtraffic.co.uk/products/cycle-lane-products/
TonyS999
On 16/06/2020 23:21, Mateusz Konieczny via Talk-GB wrote:
Do you have a photo of such feature?
https://i1.wp.com/bicilonatours.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/barcelona-cr-urgell.png
link is dead
Jun 16, 2020, 20:21 by [email protected]:
Full disclosure - I’m currently working for London Cycling
Campaign on a project to bring data from the Transport For London
Cycling Infrastructure Database to OSM.
As part of this the question arose as to how to tag cycle
facilities that are give more protection and comfort than a
painted lane on the road but not as much as a fully protected lane
with, say, a 50cm concrete kerb separating cyclists from motor
traffic.
This was raised here -
https://github.com/cyclestreets/tflcid-conversion/issues/23
There are may types of ‘hybrid’, ‘partial, or ‘soft’ separation.
The London COVID-19 ‘StreetScape’ programme is bring a lot of
this type of infrastructure to London’s streets very quickly.
Looking at OSM Wiki and previous discussions it doesn’t appear
that there is a definitive way to record these. And indeed,
looking at the recent infrastructure and how it has been entered
to OSM by users it is not happening consistently as a result.
My view on this is that the greatest distinction is between a
painted lane and a track (that has some form of protection). The
difference between the different types of track is less than
between no protection at all and ’something’.
Given the multitude of different ways of giving some protection to
cyclists I wonder whether it is better to treat them all as
variants of track (since they all offer much greater protection
than a lane but vary in comfort level - in my view in this order
of comfort).
cycleway:track=kerb
cycleway:track=rubber_kerb_wand
cycleway:track=rubber_kerb
cycleway:track=concrete_barrier
cycleway:track=plastic_barrier
cycleway:track=stepped
cycleway:track=wandorca
cycleway:track=wand
cycleway:track=orca
There may be more I've forgotten.
This would mean that routing engines would see either lane or
track at the basic level, but the routing engine designer could
then add further refinement using info about the type of track (in
combination perhaps with the size/speed of the road it was
alongside) if that info was available. The detail of the precise
type of infra is relevant (rather than just simply tagging these
with a generic tag such as ‘part protected’ or ‘hybrid’ since it
may be that some types of infra prove more successful or have
safety issues and there is a desire to identify locations where
they are present (eg the concrete or water filed barriers prevent
informal crossing of the road by pedestrians)
Since this infra is being rolled out quickly and in volume (both
in London and internationally - though London, due to the
fragmented local authorities seems to be doing it in far more
varied ways than other places) there is a benefit to establishing
this now
_______________________________________________
Talk-GB mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
_______________________________________________
Talk-GB mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
