Access and other tags for a particular Restricted Byway

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
9 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Access and other tags for a particular Restricted Byway

Bob Hawkins
I wished to attach an image of road signs in Shiplake, Oxfordshire, but was informed the file was too large.
In the absence of the image, the two signs read as follows: 1. In white on blue: Oxfordshire County Council/No vehicles beyond this point except for access.  2. In white on green: RESTRICTED BYWAY/PRIVATE ROAD/NO vehicle access except for residents.  I should appreciate views on the correct and complete treatment for access, motor_vehicle and vehicle keys, or anything else in this case, bearing in mind routing.  I find it difficult to know how to tag Restricted Byways correctly, often.  The Way is 25506222.
With regards
Bob Hawkins 

Virus-free. www.avast.com

_______________________________________________
Talk-GB mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Access and other tags for a particular Restricted Byway

David Woolley
On 29/09/17 13:56, Bob Hawkins wrote:

> In the absence of the image, the two signs read as follows: 1. In white
> on blue: Oxfordshire County Council/No vehicles beyond this point except
> for access.

motor_vehicle=destination

>              2. In white on green: RESTRICTED BYWAY/PRIVATE ROAD/NO
> vehicle access except for residents.  I should appreciate views on the

motor_vehicle=private

My reasoning, the first one allows all comers, as long as they are
visiting.  The second one requires explicit permission, either from the
land covenants or from a resident.

_______________________________________________
Talk-GB mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Access and other tags for a particular Restricted Byway

Andy Townsend
On 29/09/2017 14:06, David Woolley wrote:
>
>>              2. In white on green: RESTRICTED BYWAY/PRIVATE ROAD/NO
>> vehicle access except for residents.  I should appreciate views on the
>
> motor_vehicle=private

Does the sign really mean "no vehicle access" or "no motor vehicle access"?

As I understand it a restricted byway is normally "vehicle=yes;
motor_vehicle=no" and I'd normally tag them like that.  Of course there
may be other restrictions (e.g. traffic regulation orders) in effect at
a particular time.

Best Regards,

Andy

PS: for images I'd normally add them to an image hosting site like
imgur.com and link to the result from the email.

_______________________________________________
Talk-GB mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Access and other tags for a particular Restricted Byway

Philip Withnall
In reply to this post by David Woolley
On Fri, 2017-09-29 at 14:06 +0100, David Woolley wrote:

> On 29/09/17 13:56, Bob Hawkins wrote:
>
> > In the absence of the image, the two signs read as follows: 1. In
> > white
> > on blue: Oxfordshire County Council/No vehicles beyond this point
> > except
> > for access.
>
> motor_vehicle=destination
>
> >              2. In white on green: RESTRICTED BYWAY/PRIVATE
> > ROAD/NO
> > vehicle access except for residents.  I should appreciate views on
> > the
>
> motor_vehicle=private
>
> My reasoning, the first one allows all comers, as long as they are
> visiting.  The second one requires explicit permission, either from
> the
> land covenants or from a resident.
It would be good if this were added as an example on the wiki, if one
doesn’t exist already.

Philip
_______________________________________________
Talk-GB mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

signature.asc (849 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Access and other tags for a particular Restricted Byway

Bob Hawkins
David
I should have made it clearer: the two signs of which I wrote are one above the other at the start of the one Restricted Byway – that, perhaps, is the complication.
Bob

Virus-free. www.avast.com

_______________________________________________
Talk-GB mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Access and other tags for a particular Restricted Byway

sk53.osm
One simple rule of thumb: if the postman & delivery drivers go that way it's <access>=destination not <access>=private.

"Private" roads, better called unadopted roads often get mapped with access=private in the first instance. This is better reserved for places where access is clearly limited by a gate or other barrier, as usually the class of users regarded as entitled to use the road is broader than the owners. See discussion of "The Park Estate" a few months back.

Jerry

On 29 September 2017 at 16:27, Bob Hawkins <[hidden email]> wrote:
David
I should have made it clearer: the two signs of which I wrote are one above the other at the start of the one Restricted Byway – that, perhaps, is the complication.
Bob

Virus-free. www.avast.com

_______________________________________________
Talk-GB mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb



_______________________________________________
Talk-GB mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Access and other tags for a particular Restricted Byway

Bob Hawkins
Jerry
I thank you for your helpful reply.
One of my difficulties with Restricted Byways is the use of motor_vehicle=no as shown in Robert Whittaker’s table, http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:Rjw62/PRoW_Table.  I use vehicle=yes in almost all cases, but there are properties on Restricted Byways, as in this case, where I judge that tag to be inappropriate, to say the least.
Bob

Virus-free. www.avast.com

_______________________________________________
Talk-GB mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Access and other tags for a particular Restricted Byway

Philip Barnes
On Fri, 2017-09-29 at 18:59 +0100, Bob Hawkins wrote:
Jerry
I thank you for your helpful reply.
One of my difficulties with Restricted Byways is the use of motor_vehicle=no as shown in Robert Whittaker’s table, http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:Rjw62/PRoW_Table.  I use vehicle=yes in almost all cases, but there are properties on Restricted Byways, as in this case, where I judge that tag to be inappropriate, to say the least.

Hi Bob
I had never seen page, it does seem very misleading. Vehicle is an odd tag, as a vehicle normally includes a bike. Those restrictions kind of apply to public access by motor_vehicles.

There are two sorts of access when applied to rights of way, those defined by the designation and what we have a right to do. But then there are private rights too. You cannot put a blanket motor_vehicle=no on a right of way, other than a byway it should not have yes but rights of way (footpaths/bridleways/restricted byways) will often form access to properties or fields. 

Each needs a case by case survey, any can be motor_vehicle=private or destination.

Phil (trigpoint)

_______________________________________________
Talk-GB mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Access and other tags for a particular Restricted Byway

Andy Townsend
On 29/09/2017 19:40, Philip Barnes wrote:
>
>
> Each needs a case by case survey, any can be motor_vehicle=private or
> destination.

I don't think that's what
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:Rjw62/PRoW_Table is trying to
say - it's saying "there are no motor vehicle rights granted by the
existence of a restricted byway sign" whereas "there are non-motorised
vehicle rights".  I probably wouldn't use "=designated" where it says
(though I know many people do), but other than that I'd agree with what
it says.  The access column is labelled "Minimum Access Tags", so it is
just a minimum.

Re "vehicle", strictly speaking you can legally drive a coach and four
down a restricted byway.  Most of the time you won't physically be able
to, of course, but that's the difference between what's legal and what's
practical.

Best Regards,

Andy


_______________________________________________
Talk-GB mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb