Interesting...where did you find that? Kansas Cyclist seems to be under a different impression.
On Sun, 2011-09-11 at 02:12 -0500, Toby Murray wrote: > Re: Kansas > > "Every person riding a bicycle upon a roadway shall be granted all of > the rights and shall be subject to all of the duties applicable to the > driver of a vehicle ..." > > Toby > > On Sep 9, 2011 10:00 PM, "Paul Johnson" <ba...@ursamundi.org> wrote: > > On Fri, 2011-09-09 at 23:55 -0400, Anthony wrote: > >> On Fri, Sep 9, 2011 at 11:52 PM, Paul Johnson <ba...@ursamundi.org> > wrote: > >> > On Fri, 2011-09-09 at 23:43 -0400, Anthony wrote: > >> >> On Fri, Sep 9, 2011 at 11:00 PM, Peter Dobratz > <pe...@dobratz.us> wrote: > >> >> >> Do you think it makes more sense to tag the apartment > complexes as > >> >> >> access=destination or access=private? The complexes are not > usually private. > >> >> > > >> >> > I'd even consider not putting access restrictions on them at > all, > >> >> > unless there is some rule that you shouldn't be using them as > a > >> >> > through street. What if you are walking or on a bicycle? > >> >> > >> >> What about jurisdictions like New Jersey, which have this law: > >> >> > >> >> New Jersey 39:4-66.2 "Except for emergency vehicles and motor > vehicles > >> >> being operated at the direction of a law enforcement officer, no > >> >> person shall drive a motor vehicle on public property, except > public > >> >> roads or highways, or private property, with or without the > permission > >> >> of the owner, for the purpose of avoiding a traffic control > signal or > >> >> sign." > >> > > >> > That's a pretty normal consideration and most routers avoid > cutting > >> > through service/living_street situations as is (though explicit > tagging > >> > is never bad). > >> > > >> >> Would such private ways, which could be used to avoid a stop > sign, be > >> >> access=permissive, motor_vehicle=destination? I don't know. I > >> >> thought access=destination was only to be used for rights of > way. And > >> >> I think if I were coding a router I'd avoid using an > access=permissive > >> >> as a through street anyway. But maybe that's my > >> >> learned-to-drive-in-New-Jersey bias. > >> > > >> > I wouldn't consider it permissive by bicycle in such a > circumstance, > >> > because most (all?) places in the US consider bicycles vehicles > except > >> > when operated in extremely limited circumstances (effectively > making a > >> > cyclist act like a pedestrian), since pedestrians are normally > exempt > >> > from intersection signals if their trip takes them down a > contiguous > >> > sidewalk that doesn't cross the street. > >> > >> The NJ law in question is regarding driving a *motor* vehicle on > >> public property, though. That law doesn't apply to bicycles, though > I > >> can't say for certain that there isn't another law which does. > > > > Not being familiar with the NJ situation, it is true in Oregon and > > Oklahoma, but not in Kansas (as bicycles aren't considered vehicles > in > > that state for some reason). > > > > _______________________________________________ > Talk-us mailing list > Talk-us@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
