lanes - is "parking allowed" a parking lane?

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
15 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

lanes - is "parking allowed" a parking lane?

Tobias Zwick
Hello all

First of all, in the past, we have explored many edge cases for the
lanes-tag in various discussions and I am happy that for the most part,
it seems to be quite well defined by now. However, there is one edge
case which is not uncommon at all but still unclear or awkward to tag.
Look at this:

https://westnordost.de/misc/2or1lanes.jpg

It is a residential road marked clearly for 2 lanes, so it seems obvious
to tag it with lanes=2. But on the other hand, you'll notice that there
are parking cars on the right side that effectively render the right
lane unusable. These parking cars would (currently) be tagged I believe as

parking:lane:right=parallel
parking:lane:right:parallel=on_street

And the wiki states

 > And the following lanes should be excluded:
 > [...] Parking lanes [...]

So here is an ambiguity in the documentation. On the one hand, if the
road has marked lanes, the number of marked lanes should be tagged, on
the other hand, there are these kind of "parking lanes" which do not
have their own space marked as a parking lane but simply absorb the
space assigned to normal car traffic. In OSM tagging, these are also
"parking:lane"s as far as I know.

We need to dissolve this ambiguity by defining a way how to distinguish
between these two cases:

https://westnordost.de/misc/parallel_parking_lane.png
(1) a dedicated parallel parking lane. This lane should not count as a
lane in the lanes-tag.
(2) (parallel) parking is allowed (and used). This should be irrelevant
for the lane count.

My suggestion would be
(1) parking:lane:*:parallel = lane
(2) parking:lane:*:parallel = on_street

Maybe especially those who recently involved themselves with parking
lane tagging out and about and its documentation could also state their
point of view here. According to the wiki edit history, looks like at
least Mateusz Konieczny, Supaplex030 and Minh Nguyễn were active.
What do you think?

There is also at least one data consumer I know about that is using
parking lane information and displays it visually,
https://github.com/dabreegster/abstreet it would be good to know how
they interpret and visualize the data.

Cheers
Tobias

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: lanes - is "parking allowed" a parking lane?

Supaplex

I'm not sure if your first case (https://westnordost.de/misc/2or1lanes.jpg) should be mapped as parallel parking at all or if it's illegal parking and should actually be no_parking or no_stopping (maybe depends on the local legislation or permanence of the situation)? I recently discussed a similar case with another mapper: Here it was about de facto parallel parking in a living_street outside of designated parking areas, which is illegal at least according to the traffic regulations in force here (which is even indicated by a sign at this street!). See this picture: https://www.mapillary.com/map/im/0kZ-LZX4-J36J5xov_UBvw

In this situation I argued for "map what is on the ground" and for mapping the situation as de facto parallel parking (the cars have been parked there for years, as can be seen on aerial photographs). My counterpart was against this. In the meantime, the situation has been resolved by the fact that the public order office has distributed parking tickets several times and the street is no longer permanently, but only sporadically, parked :)

But I am not sure whether there is a basic consensus on how to deal with contradictions between de facto and de jure situations like this in OSM? In my opinion, this should be clarified at first.

I am currently also working on parking lane analyses (see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:Supaplex030/Parkplatzanalyse_Neuk%C3%B6lln, sry for german language at present) and therefor differentiate between (1) on_street, (2) half_on_street and (3) on_kerb/shoulder/lay_by/street_side parking (for street side parking see the current proposal under vote: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/parking%3Dstreet_side).

I think a distinction between "on_street" and "lane", as you suggested, is unnecessary or too error-prone. Already when differentiating between on_street (= lane) and street_side parking I noticed that these cases are sometimes difficult to distinguish, especially when there are kerb extensions. Wouldn't it be better to simply distinguish between marked and unmarked parallel parking lanes and work with width:* values (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:width#Width_of_streets) instead of lane information?

Cheers,
Alex / Supaplex030


Am 19.11.20 um 15:17 schrieb Tobias Zwick:
Hello all

First of all, in the past, we have explored many edge cases for the lanes-tag in various discussions and I am happy that for the most part, it seems to be quite well defined by now. However, there is one edge case which is not uncommon at all but still unclear or awkward to tag. Look at this:

https://westnordost.de/misc/2or1lanes.jpg

It is a residential road marked clearly for 2 lanes, so it seems obvious to tag it with lanes=2. But on the other hand, you'll notice that there are parking cars on the right side that effectively render the right lane unusable. These parking cars would (currently) be tagged I believe as

parking:lane:right=parallel
parking:lane:right:parallel=on_street

And the wiki states

> And the following lanes should be excluded:
> [...] Parking lanes [...]

So here is an ambiguity in the documentation. On the one hand, if the road has marked lanes, the number of marked lanes should be tagged, on the other hand, there are these kind of "parking lanes" which do not have their own space marked as a parking lane but simply absorb the space assigned to normal car traffic. In OSM tagging, these are also "parking:lane"s as far as I know.

We need to dissolve this ambiguity by defining a way how to distinguish between these two cases:

https://westnordost.de/misc/parallel_parking_lane.png
(1) a dedicated parallel parking lane. This lane should not count as a lane in the lanes-tag.
(2) (parallel) parking is allowed (and used). This should be irrelevant for the lane count.

My suggestion would be
(1) parking:lane:*:parallel = lane
(2) parking:lane:*:parallel = on_street

Maybe especially those who recently involved themselves with parking lane tagging out and about and its documentation could also state their point of view here. According to the wiki edit history, looks like at least Mateusz Konieczny, Supaplex030 and Minh Nguyễn were active.
What do you think?

There is also at least one data consumer I know about that is using parking lane information and displays it visually,
https://github.com/dabreegster/abstreet it would be good to know how they interpret and visualize the data.

Cheers
Tobias

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: lanes - is "parking allowed" a parking lane?

Minh Nguyen-2
In reply to this post by Tobias Zwick
Vào lúc 06:17 2020-11-19, Tobias Zwick đã viết:

> Hello all
>
> First of all, in the past, we have explored many edge cases for the
> lanes-tag in various discussions and I am happy that for the most part,
> it seems to be quite well defined by now. However, there is one edge
> case which is not uncommon at all but still unclear or awkward to tag.
> Look at this:
>
> https://westnordost.de/misc/2or1lanes.jpg
>
> It is a residential road marked clearly for 2 lanes, so it seems obvious
> to tag it with lanes=2. But on the other hand, you'll notice that there
> are parking cars on the right side that effectively render the right
> lane unusable. These parking cars would (currently) be tagged I believe as
>
> parking:lane:right=parallel
> parking:lane:right:parallel=on_street
>
> And the wiki states
>
>  > And the following lanes should be excluded:
>  > [...] Parking lanes [...]
>
> So here is an ambiguity in the documentation. On the one hand, if the
> road has marked lanes, the number of marked lanes should be tagged, on
> the other hand, there are these kind of "parking lanes" which do not
> have their own space marked as a parking lane but simply absorb the
> space assigned to normal car traffic. In OSM tagging, these are also
> "parking:lane"s as far as I know.
>
> We need to dissolve this ambiguity by defining a way how to distinguish
> between these two cases:
>
> https://westnordost.de/misc/parallel_parking_lane.png
> (1) a dedicated parallel parking lane. This lane should not count as a
> lane in the lanes-tag.
> (2) (parallel) parking is allowed (and used). This should be irrelevant
> for the lane count.
>
> My suggestion would be
> (1) parking:lane:*:parallel = lane
> (2) parking:lane:*:parallel = on_street
>
> Maybe especially those who recently involved themselves with parking
> lane tagging out and about and its documentation could also state their
> point of view here. According to the wiki edit history, looks like at
> least Mateusz Konieczny, Supaplex030 and Minh Nguyễn were active.
> What do you think?
>
> There is also at least one data consumer I know about that is using
> parking lane information and displays it visually,
> https://github.com/dabreegster/abstreet it would be good to know how
> they interpret and visualize the data.

I'm not intimately familiar with the highway engineering standards and
driving rules in Vienna Convention countries, but I wonder if case (2)
is (literally) an edge case where we can tag it as a parking lane but
not count it separately in lanes=*. After all, the roadway doesn't have
any purpose-built infrastructure for parking, even if that's what people
are doing.

For high-resolution renderers, maybe we need some variation on
lane_markings=* to indicate that the parking lane specifically is
unmarked. Or maybe a way to explicitly indicate that two lanes overlap.
There are other cases of overlapping lanes, like turning movements that
overlap with bike lanes [1] and often require turning vehicles to sneak
around vehicles going straight. [2]

[1]
https://nacto.org/publication/urban-bikeway-design-guide/intersection-treatments/combined-bike-laneturn-lane/
[2]
https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-2003-may-27-me-wheel27-story.html "You
can drive side by side for a mile in the same lane, as long as it’s
large enough."

--
[hidden email]


_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: lanes - is "parking allowed" a parking lane?

Andrew Harvey-3
In reply to this post by Tobias Zwick
The way I understood the tagging guidelines was that if there was nobody parked there, could you drive along the lane as usual. If you can't then I wouldn't include it as lanes=* and only tag it as parking:lane. If you can drive along it when vacant, but you can still legally park there then I'd include it as lanes=* and also tag parking:lane.

It's common that during peak hour the lane is used by traffic, but off-peak it's available for parking.

On Fri, 20 Nov 2020 at 01:22, Tobias Zwick <[hidden email]> wrote:
Hello all

First of all, in the past, we have explored many edge cases for the
lanes-tag in various discussions and I am happy that for the most part,
it seems to be quite well defined by now. However, there is one edge
case which is not uncommon at all but still unclear or awkward to tag.
Look at this:

https://westnordost.de/misc/2or1lanes.jpg

It is a residential road marked clearly for 2 lanes, so it seems obvious
to tag it with lanes=2. But on the other hand, you'll notice that there
are parking cars on the right side that effectively render the right
lane unusable. These parking cars would (currently) be tagged I believe as

parking:lane:right=parallel
parking:lane:right:parallel=on_street

And the wiki states

 > And the following lanes should be excluded:
 > [...] Parking lanes [...]

So here is an ambiguity in the documentation. On the one hand, if the
road has marked lanes, the number of marked lanes should be tagged, on
the other hand, there are these kind of "parking lanes" which do not
have their own space marked as a parking lane but simply absorb the
space assigned to normal car traffic. In OSM tagging, these are also
"parking:lane"s as far as I know.

We need to dissolve this ambiguity by defining a way how to distinguish
between these two cases:

https://westnordost.de/misc/parallel_parking_lane.png
(1) a dedicated parallel parking lane. This lane should not count as a
lane in the lanes-tag.
(2) (parallel) parking is allowed (and used). This should be irrelevant
for the lane count.

My suggestion would be
(1) parking:lane:*:parallel = lane
(2) parking:lane:*:parallel = on_street

Maybe especially those who recently involved themselves with parking
lane tagging out and about and its documentation could also state their
point of view here. According to the wiki edit history, looks like at
least Mateusz Konieczny, Supaplex030 and Minh Nguyễn were active.
What do you think?

There is also at least one data consumer I know about that is using
parking lane information and displays it visually,
https://github.com/dabreegster/abstreet it would be good to know how
they interpret and visualize the data.

Cheers
Tobias

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: lanes - is "parking allowed" a parking lane?

Graeme Fitzpatrick
In reply to this post by Tobias Zwick



On Fri, 20 Nov 2020 at 00:22, Tobias Zwick <[hidden email]> wrote:

https://westnordost.de/misc/2or1lanes.jpg

It is a residential road marked clearly for 2 lanes, so it seems obvious
to tag it with lanes=2. But on the other hand, you'll notice that there
are parking cars on the right side that effectively render the right
lane unusable.

So what happens when somebody wants to drive the other way - & by the direction those parked cars are facing, they must?

Also, what do the signs mean above the parked cars - Red X & white left-pointing arrow on a blue background? Anything relevant to parking?

Thanks

Graeme


_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: lanes - is "parking allowed" a parking lane?

Tobias Zwick
In reply to this post by Andrew Harvey-3
Okay, but the data consumer won't know how you reached that decision (to
count it or not). So whoever attempts a visualization of the data will
have no idea whether to put the parking lane next to the rest of the
street or put it "on top" (see
https://westnordost.de/misc/parallel_parking_lane.png )

This is not only an issue with visualization, also routers will want to
know if parking cars effectively reduce the usable width of the road by
the width of a car, or not.

This is why I initially stated that I see the need to distinguish these
cases.

On 19/11/2020 23:17, Andrew Harvey wrote:

> The way I understood the tagging guidelines was that if there was nobody
> parked there, could you drive along the lane as usual. If you can't then
> I wouldn't include it as lanes=* and only tag it as parking:lane. If you
> can drive along it when vacant, but you can still legally park there
> then I'd include it as lanes=* and also tag parking:lane.
>
> It's common that during peak hour the lane is used by traffic, but
> off-peak it's available for parking.
>
> On Fri, 20 Nov 2020 at 01:22, Tobias Zwick <[hidden email]
> <mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote:
>
>     Hello all
>
>     First of all, in the past, we have explored many edge cases for the
>     lanes-tag in various discussions and I am happy that for the most part,
>     it seems to be quite well defined by now. However, there is one edge
>     case which is not uncommon at all but still unclear or awkward to tag.
>     Look at this:
>
>     https://westnordost.de/misc/2or1lanes.jpg
>     <https://westnordost.de/misc/2or1lanes.jpg>
>
>     It is a residential road marked clearly for 2 lanes, so it seems
>     obvious
>     to tag it with lanes=2. But on the other hand, you'll notice that there
>     are parking cars on the right side that effectively render the right
>     lane unusable. These parking cars would (currently) be tagged I
>     believe as
>
>     parking:lane:right=parallel
>     parking:lane:right:parallel=on_street
>
>     And the wiki states
>
>       > And the following lanes should be excluded:
>       > [...] Parking lanes [...]
>
>     So here is an ambiguity in the documentation. On the one hand, if the
>     road has marked lanes, the number of marked lanes should be tagged, on
>     the other hand, there are these kind of "parking lanes" which do not
>     have their own space marked as a parking lane but simply absorb the
>     space assigned to normal car traffic. In OSM tagging, these are also
>     "parking:lane"s as far as I know.
>
>     We need to dissolve this ambiguity by defining a way how to distinguish
>     between these two cases:
>
>     https://westnordost.de/misc/parallel_parking_lane.png
>     <https://westnordost.de/misc/parallel_parking_lane.png>
>     (1) a dedicated parallel parking lane. This lane should not count as a
>     lane in the lanes-tag.
>     (2) (parallel) parking is allowed (and used). This should be irrelevant
>     for the lane count.
>
>     My suggestion would be
>     (1) parking:lane:*:parallel = lane
>     (2) parking:lane:*:parallel = on_street
>
>     Maybe especially those who recently involved themselves with parking
>     lane tagging out and about and its documentation could also state their
>     point of view here. According to the wiki edit history, looks like at
>     least Mateusz Konieczny, Supaplex030 and Minh Nguyễn were active.
>     What do you think?
>
>     There is also at least one data consumer I know about that is using
>     parking lane information and displays it visually,
>     https://github.com/dabreegster/abstreet
>     <https://github.com/dabreegster/abstreet> it would be good to know how
>     they interpret and visualize the data.
>
>     Cheers
>     Tobias
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     Tagging mailing list
>     [hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>
>     https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>     <https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Tagging mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: lanes - is "parking allowed" a parking lane?

Tobias Zwick
In reply to this post by Graeme Fitzpatrick
For the smart (the white car), the same rules apply as if it was
overtaking the parked cars, it may only pass once the other side is free.

The signs on the right say "no stopping", arrow to the left means "no
stopping starts here", arrow to the right means "...and ends here". They
are just there temporarily, there is some construction or something like
that.

Maybe it is difficult to see in the perspective the photo was taken, but
actually none of the parking cars is parking there illegaly. At the
sections where stopping is forbidden, there are no parking cars.

Tobias

On 19/11/2020 23:22, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote:

>
>
>
> On Fri, 20 Nov 2020 at 00:22, Tobias Zwick <[hidden email]
> <mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote:
>
>
>     https://westnordost.de/misc/2or1lanes.jpg
>     <https://westnordost.de/misc/2or1lanes.jpg>
>
>     It is a residential road marked clearly for 2 lanes, so it seems
>     obvious
>     to tag it with lanes=2. But on the other hand, you'll notice that there
>     are parking cars on the right side that effectively render the right
>     lane unusable.
>
>
> So what happens when somebody wants to drive the other way - & by the
> direction those parked cars are facing, they must?
>
> Also, what do the signs mean above the parked cars - Red X & white
> left-pointing arrow on a blue background? Anything relevant to parking?
>
> Thanks
>
> Graeme
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Tagging mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: lanes - is "parking allowed" a parking lane?

Tagging mailing list
In reply to this post by Tobias Zwick
with
- one lane driveable by full-size vehicles
- one parking lane

And tag it as:
lanes=1
parking:lane:both=parallel (judging from what is visible about left side)

Additional detail that I am generally not tagging may specify
for example:

parking:lane:right:parallel=on_street
parking:lane:left:parallel=on_kerb (judging from what is visible on photo)

Tagging whatever parking lane has just allowed parking that fully block it
or is it explicitly marked as parking lane can go into new tag (if not
covered by an existing tagging).

For example I would consider
as lanes=1, not lanes=3

-------------------------------------------------

This gets trickier with:

- illegal parking that nevertheless is accepted, widespread and typical, de facto changing
number of available lanes

For example street that in theory is lanes=2 but due to how people park and lack of need for two lanes,
it is de facto lanes=1 (cars driving over marked centerline as theoretical lanes are blocked
by cars)

- lane that switches between parking lane and driveable lane depending on
hour/day (lanes:conditional solves this)

- lane that switches between parking lane and driveable lane depending on
how many people park there

Nov 19, 2020, 15:17 by [hidden email]:
Hello all

First of all, in the past, we have explored many edge cases for the lanes-tag in various discussions and I am happy that for the most part, it seems to be quite well defined by now. However, there is one edge case which is not uncommon at all but still unclear or awkward to tag. Look at this:

https://westnordost.de/misc/2or1lanes.jpg

It is a residential road marked clearly for 2 lanes, so it seems obvious to tag it with lanes=2. But on the other hand, you'll notice that there are parking cars on the right side that effectively render the right lane unusable. These parking cars would (currently) be tagged I believe as

parking:lane:right=parallel
parking:lane:right:parallel=on_street

And the wiki states
And the following lanes should be excluded:
[...] Parking lanes [...]

So here is an ambiguity in the documentation. On the one hand, if the road has marked lanes, the number of marked lanes should be tagged, on the other hand, there are these kind of "parking lanes" which do not have their own space marked as a parking lane but simply absorb the space assigned to normal car traffic. In OSM tagging, these are also "parking:lane"s as far as I know.

We need to dissolve this ambiguity by defining a way how to distinguish between these two cases:

https://westnordost.de/misc/parallel_parking_lane.png
(1) a dedicated parallel parking lane. This lane should not count as a lane in the lanes-tag.
(2) (parallel) parking is allowed (and used). This should be irrelevant for the lane count.

My suggestion would be
(1) parking:lane:*:parallel = lane
(2) parking:lane:*:parallel = on_street

Maybe especially those who recently involved themselves with parking lane tagging out and about and its documentation could also state their point of view here. According to the wiki edit history, looks like at least Mateusz Konieczny, Supaplex030 and Minh Nguyễn were active.
What do you think?

There is also at least one data consumer I know about that is using parking lane information and displays it visually,
https://github.com/dabreegster/abstreet it would be good to know how they interpret and visualize the data.

Cheers
Tobias

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging


_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: lanes - is "parking allowed" a parking lane?

Tagging mailing list
In reply to this post by Tobias Zwick

In most if not all of the United States, the cars *would* be parked
illegally: most places have a law stating that you can't park on the
side of the road if doing so would obstruct traffic.  For example, from
the Spokane Municipal Code:

> It is unlawful for any person to park, or leave parked, a vehicle
> upon any street or highway within the City unattended in a position
> that it constitutes an obstruction to traffic

--
Mark

On Thu, 19 Nov 2020 23:58:27 +0100
Tobias Zwick <[hidden email]> wrote:

> For the smart (the white car), the same rules apply as if it was
> overtaking the parked cars, it may only pass once the other side is
> free.
>
> The signs on the right say "no stopping", arrow to the left means "no
> stopping starts here", arrow to the right means "...and ends here".
> They are just there temporarily, there is some construction or
> something like that.
>
> Maybe it is difficult to see in the perspective the photo was taken,
> but actually none of the parking cars is parking there illegaly. At
> the sections where stopping is forbidden, there are no parking cars.
>
> Tobias
>
> On 19/11/2020 23:22, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > On Fri, 20 Nov 2020 at 00:22, Tobias Zwick <[hidden email]
> > <mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote:
> >
> >
> >     https://westnordost.de/misc/2or1lanes.jpg
> >     <https://westnordost.de/misc/2or1lanes.jpg>
> >
> >     It is a residential road marked clearly for 2 lanes, so it seems
> >     obvious
> >     to tag it with lanes=2. But on the other hand, you'll notice
> > that there are parking cars on the right side that effectively
> > render the right lane unusable.
> >
> >
> > So what happens when somebody wants to drive the other way - & by
> > the direction those parked cars are facing, they must?
> >
> > Also, what do the signs mean above the parked cars - Red X & white
> > left-pointing arrow on a blue background? Anything relevant to
> > parking?
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> > Graeme
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Tagging mailing list
> > [hidden email]
> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
> >  
>
> _______________________________________________
> Tagging mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging


_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: lanes - is "parking allowed" a parking lane?

dieterdreist
In reply to this post by Tagging mailing list
Am Fr., 20. Nov. 2020 um 09:45 Uhr schrieb Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging <[hidden email]>:
with
- one lane driveable by full-size vehicles
- one parking lane


really? And if vehicles would be parking on both sides (without the explicit roadside parking area that is present in this case), you would tag it as lanes=0 and 2 parking lanes only?
IMHO these are 2 lanes, clearly marked on the ground. I do not see a reason for one lane to be seen as parking lane only.

 

This gets trickier with:

- illegal parking that nevertheless is accepted, widespread and typical, de facto changing
number of available lanes


yes, this is a significant issue on a few arterial roads around here. People parking in the second row while entering shops, effectively reducing a 2 lane road to 1 lane.
Although not legal, both are typically permanent phenomena in certain areas, you could go there every day during business hours and find the lanes obstructed or blocked.
Also very typical in front of every school at the start and end of school (as well as parents obstructing sidewalks with their cars at these times).

Cheers
Martin

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: lanes - is "parking allowed" a parking lane?

Tagging mailing list



Nov 20, 2020, 11:03 by [hidden email]:
Am Fr., 20. Nov. 2020 um 09:45 Uhr schrieb Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging <[hidden email]>:
with
- one lane driveable by full-size vehicles
- one parking lane


really? And if vehicles would be parking on both sides (without the explicit roadside parking area that is present in this case), you would tag it as lanes=0 and 2 parking lanes only?
This seems unlikely, with 0 lanes it would mean that cars inside are blocked
and unable to leave.

It is not impossible, but is it a typical situation anywhere?

I even mentioned two variants of "two parking lanes":
- two parking lanes on road, one driveable lane, no road markings - I would tag as lanes=1

- two marked lanes, cars parking illegally on both sides, resulting in single usable lane
(cars driving over centerline) - is it possible to have this happen legally?
And illegal de-facto parking is problematic in general

IMHO these are 2 lanes, clearly marked on the ground. I do not see a reason for one lane to be seen as parking lane only.
Even if it is both de facto pernament parking lane and parking in this way is legal?

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: lanes - is "parking allowed" a parking lane?

dieterdreist
Am Fr., 20. Nov. 2020 um 11:28 Uhr schrieb Mateusz Konieczny <[hidden email]>:
This seems unlikely, with 0 lanes it would mean that cars inside are blocked
and unable to leave.


that's not the meaning of "lanes", lanes=0 would mean that there are no traffic lanes. (this is what the wiki says about "lanes").

 
I even mentioned two variants of "two parking lanes":
- two parking lanes on road, one driveable lane, no road markings - I would tag as lanes=1


parking "lanes" are not counting as "lanes", because parked vehicles are not "traffic".
I agree for your example that I would tag this as lanes=1 as well.

 
And illegal de-facto parking is problematic in general


yes, maybe we should rather tag the police station as corrupt or lazy or both, than focussing on all the problematic, tolerated, illegal parking ;-)


IMHO these are 2 lanes, clearly marked on the ground. I do not see a reason for one lane to be seen as parking lane only.
Even if it is both de facto pernament parking lane and parking in this way is legal?


as long as cars do not have to stop in order to pass each other, yes. I agree the width of the road is restricted, but if opposite traffic can continuously pass, it is 2 lanes according to the current wiki ("how many traffic lanes there are on a highway.")
Another question that comes to mind, now that we have removed the requirement for road markings. In a situation where 3 lanes are marked, but vehicles ignore the marked lanes and actually drive in 4 lanes, would you tag this as 3 or 4 lanes?

Cheers
Martin

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: lanes - is "parking allowed" a parking lane?

Tagging mailing list



Nov 20, 2020, 11:47 by [hidden email]:
Am Fr., 20. Nov. 2020 um 11:28 Uhr schrieb Mateusz Konieczny <[hidden email]>:
This seems unlikely, with 0 lanes it would mean that cars inside are blocked
and unable to leave.


that's not the meaning of "lanes", lanes=0 would mean that there are no traffic lanes. (this is what the wiki says about "lanes").
With two parking lanes and 0 traffic lanes cars would be unable to leave, as both lanes would
be filled with cars and there would be no space to drive.

If there are two parking lanes and there is still space for a single driving lane
then it would be lanes=1 
IMHO these are 2 lanes, clearly marked on the ground. I do not see a reason for one lane to be seen as parking lane only.
Even if it is both de facto pernament parking lane and parking in this way is legal?


as long as cars do not have to stop in order to pass each other, yes. I agree the width of the road is restricted, but if opposite traffic can continuously pass, it is 2 lanes according to the current wiki ("how many traffic lanes there are on a highway.")
I would also tag as lanes=2

But what about case raised by Tobias where there is no space for that?
Another question that comes to mind, now that we have removed the requirement for road markings. In a situation where 3 lanes are marked, but vehicles ignore the marked lanes and actually drive in 4 lanes, would you tag this as 3 or 4 lanes?
No idea. I would probably treat marking as overriding and tag 3 and invent new tag for de facto lane
count.

And probably also petition local government to redraw too wide lanes if that would be
applicable.

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: lanes - is "parking allowed" a parking lane?

Tobias Zwick
In reply to this post by Tagging mailing list
You stated how you would tag that, which I'd summarize as

 > Any parking on the street surface is subtracted from the lanes as the
 > lanes-tag first and foremost indicates the number of usable lanes, not
 > the number of marked lanes

Ok, so apparently there is no consensus on that if there are marked
lanes, it's always the marked lanes that first and foremost should be
counted.

But let's not fall in the trap that everybody states how he tags it and
in the end we can agree that we cannot agree. We have a problem to
solve, let's identify it and find a solution together. I'd say, the core
of it is:

How to tag if usable lanes deviate from marked lanes?


And the solution we are aiming at should fulfill at least these criteria:

1. that the street layout can be interpreted correctly and completely
    (for data visualization, f.e. JOSM lanes plugin, abstreet, renderers
     ...)
2. that the effective usable width of the street for car traffic can be
    ascertained (for routers)

---

The criteria above were already in my head when I wrote the second half
of my intial post: When do usable lanes deviate from marked lanes?
-> When there are cars not parking in an own dedicated parking lane but
just at one side of the street. Hence, this example:

https://westnordost.de/misc/parallel_parking_lane.png

If these situations are tagged like this...

(1)
lanes = 2
parking:lane:right = parallel
parking:lane:right:parallel = lane

(2)
lanes = 2
parking:lane:right = parallel
parking:lane:right:parallel = on_street

..., both criteria are fulfilled, given the definition for lanes is:
"if marked, number of marked lanes. Dedicated and marked parking lanes
don't count" (adding "dedicated and marked" to wiki definition).

For visualization, the lanes tag can then be directly used. Routers will
want to additionally look at the parking lanes tag to see whether the
effectively usable road is being narrowed by parking lanes with
on_street or half_on_kerb and subtract that from the usable width.

I further suggested this solution because of its separation of concerns:
Lanes is then just the marked lanes, no need to factor in possible
parking lanes into that one tag and estimate whether the parking cars
subtract enough of lane space to decrease it by one.

So, the definition of parking lanes go into the parking:lane tag,
including where it is located. Well, and that's already how it is done,
so that's not a real change.

The change here would be to find a tag the describes "parking lane is on
street surface but has its own space/lane". Alex noted that he found
that the "lane" value might have a different meaning already. I'll look
into that and come up with an alternative.

Tobias

On 20/11/2020 09:16, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging wrote:

> I would describe https://westnordost.de/misc/2or1lanes.jpg 
> <https://westnordost.de/misc/2or1lanes.jpg> as road
> with
> - one lane driveable by full-size vehicles
> - one parking lane
>
> And tag it as:
> lanes=1
> parking:lane:both=parallel (judging from what is visible about left side)
>
> Additional detail that I am generally not tagging may specify
> for example:
>
> parking:lane:right:parallel=on_street
> parking:lane:left:parallel=on_kerb (judging from what is visible on photo)
>
> Tagging whatever parking lane has just allowed parking that fully block it
> or is it explicitly marked as parking lane can go into new tag (if not
> covered by an existing tagging).
>
> For example I would consider
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:Barton_St_view_E_between_South_Park_Rd_and_Brown_St,_Macclesfield.jpg 
> <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:Barton_St_view_E_between_South_Park_Rd_and_Brown_St,_Macclesfield.jpg>
> as lanes=1, not lanes=3
>
> -------------------------------------------------
>
> This gets trickier with:
>
> - illegal parking that nevertheless is accepted, widespread and typical,
> de facto changing
> number of available lanes
>
> For example street that in theory is lanes=2 but due to how people park
> and lack of need for two lanes,
> it is de facto lanes=1 (cars driving over marked centerline as
> theoretical lanes are blocked
> by cars)
>
> - lane that switches between parking lane and driveable lane depending on
> hour/day (lanes:conditional solves this)
>
> - lane that switches between parking lane and driveable lane depending on
> how many people park there
>
> Nov 19, 2020, 15:17 by [hidden email]:
>
>     Hello all
>
>     First of all, in the past, we have explored many edge cases for the
>     lanes-tag in various discussions and I am happy that for the most
>     part, it seems to be quite well defined by now. However, there is
>     one edge case which is not uncommon at all but still unclear or
>     awkward to tag. Look at this:
>
>     https://westnordost.de/misc/2or1lanes.jpg
>
>     It is a residential road marked clearly for 2 lanes, so it seems
>     obvious to tag it with lanes=2. But on the other hand, you'll notice
>     that there are parking cars on the right side that effectively
>     render the right lane unusable. These parking cars would (currently)
>     be tagged I believe as
>
>     parking:lane:right=parallel
>     parking:lane:right:parallel=on_street
>
>     And the wiki states
>
>         And the following lanes should be excluded:
>         [...] Parking lanes [...]
>
>
>     So here is an ambiguity in the documentation. On the one hand, if
>     the road has marked lanes, the number of marked lanes should be
>     tagged, on the other hand, there are these kind of "parking lanes"
>     which do not have their own space marked as a parking lane but
>     simply absorb the space assigned to normal car traffic. In OSM
>     tagging, these are also "parking:lane"s as far as I know.
>
>     We need to dissolve this ambiguity by defining a way how to
>     distinguish between these two cases:
>
>     https://westnordost.de/misc/parallel_parking_lane.png
>     (1) a dedicated parallel parking lane. This lane should not count as
>     a lane in the lanes-tag.
>     (2) (parallel) parking is allowed (and used). This should be
>     irrelevant for the lane count.
>
>     My suggestion would be
>     (1) parking:lane:*:parallel = lane
>     (2) parking:lane:*:parallel = on_street
>
>     Maybe especially those who recently involved themselves with parking
>     lane tagging out and about and its documentation could also state
>     their point of view here. According to the wiki edit history, looks
>     like at least Mateusz Konieczny, Supaplex030 and Minh Nguyễn were
>     active.
>     What do you think?
>
>     There is also at least one data consumer I know about that is using
>     parking lane information and displays it visually,
>     https://github.com/dabreegster/abstreet it would be good to know how
>     they interpret and visualize the data.
>
>     Cheers
>     Tobias
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     Tagging mailing list
>     [hidden email]
>     https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Tagging mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: lanes - is "parking allowed" a parking lane?

Tobias Zwick
 > Alex noted that he found that the "lane" value might have a different
 > meaning already. I'll look into that and come up with an alternative.

I did this now, I looked for in which situations ...

parking:lane:*:parallel = lane
parking:lane:*:parallel = on_lane
parking:lane:*:parallel = in_lane

... were used. The tag (and the parking lane tag in general, anyway) is
used only very few times in relation to the number of streets. It is
still quite new. Together, less than 1% of all parallel parking lanes
are tagged like that.
But for what it's worth, "on_lane" is the most popular of the above
(probably because of its consistency with "on_street" and "on_kerb") and
most of the times were used to describe situations like this:

https://www.google.de/maps/@49.0056633,8.4349157,120m/data=!3m1!1e3

So, parking is on the street itself (not on kerb, not street side) but
has its own marked lane.

In any case, whatever if someone used "street_side" as a value for the
parallel parking lane or "on_lane", "on_kerb", "lay_by" or
"painted_area_only", its all the same as in that it does define an own
dedicated space for parking cars as opposed to "on_street" and
"half_on_kerb".

And in the end, what will give the most precision in measuring the
drivable space (criteria #2) is to look at the width or est_width tag.
No need to let the lanes tag duplicate this information but less precise.
If the lanes tag was used for that, then it would become eventually
obsolete because it wouldn't carry any original information that cannot
be recorded more precisely and less subjectively with another tag. On
the other hand, data consumers attempting a visualization (criteria #1)
need the information how many lanes are tagged.
So, I am going ahead an will add these two words to the documentation of
the lanes key.

Cheers
Tobias

On 20/11/2020 14:03, Tobias Zwick wrote:

> You stated how you would tag that, which I'd summarize as
>
>  > Any parking on the street surface is subtracted from the lanes as the
>  > lanes-tag first and foremost indicates the number of usable lanes, not
>  > the number of marked lanes
>
> Ok, so apparently there is no consensus on that if there are marked
> lanes, it's always the marked lanes that first and foremost should be
> counted.
>
> But let's not fall in the trap that everybody states how he tags it and
> in the end we can agree that we cannot agree. We have a problem to
> solve, let's identify it and find a solution together. I'd say, the core
> of it is:
>
> How to tag if usable lanes deviate from marked lanes?
>
>
> And the solution we are aiming at should fulfill at least these criteria:
>
> 1. that the street layout can be interpreted correctly and completely
>     (for data visualization, f.e. JOSM lanes plugin, abstreet, renderers
>      ...)
> 2. that the effective usable width of the street for car traffic can be
>     ascertained (for routers)
>
> ---
>
> The criteria above were already in my head when I wrote the second half
> of my intial post: When do usable lanes deviate from marked lanes?
> -> When there are cars not parking in an own dedicated parking lane but
> just at one side of the street. Hence, this example:
>
> https://westnordost.de/misc/parallel_parking_lane.png
>
> If these situations are tagged like this...
>
> (1)
> lanes = 2
> parking:lane:right = parallel
> parking:lane:right:parallel = lane
>
> (2)
> lanes = 2
> parking:lane:right = parallel
> parking:lane:right:parallel = on_street
>
> ..., both criteria are fulfilled, given the definition for lanes is:
> "if marked, number of marked lanes. Dedicated and marked parking lanes
> don't count" (adding "dedicated and marked" to wiki definition).
>
> For visualization, the lanes tag can then be directly used. Routers will
> want to additionally look at the parking lanes tag to see whether the
> effectively usable road is being narrowed by parking lanes with
> on_street or half_on_kerb and subtract that from the usable width.
>
> I further suggested this solution because of its separation of concerns:
> Lanes is then just the marked lanes, no need to factor in possible
> parking lanes into that one tag and estimate whether the parking cars
> subtract enough of lane space to decrease it by one.
>
> So, the definition of parking lanes go into the parking:lane tag,
> including where it is located. Well, and that's already how it is done,
> so that's not a real change.
>
> The change here would be to find a tag the describes "parking lane is on
> street surface but has its own space/lane". Alex noted that he found
> that the "lane" value might have a different meaning already. I'll look
> into that and come up with an alternative.
>
> Tobias
>
> On 20/11/2020 09:16, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging wrote:
>> I would describe https://westnordost.de/misc/2or1lanes.jpg 
>> <https://westnordost.de/misc/2or1lanes.jpg> as road
>> with
>> - one lane driveable by full-size vehicles
>> - one parking lane
>>
>> And tag it as:
>> lanes=1
>> parking:lane:both=parallel (judging from what is visible about left side)
>>
>> Additional detail that I am generally not tagging may specify
>> for example:
>>
>> parking:lane:right:parallel=on_street
>> parking:lane:left:parallel=on_kerb (judging from what is visible on
>> photo)
>>
>> Tagging whatever parking lane has just allowed parking that fully
>> block it
>> or is it explicitly marked as parking lane can go into new tag (if not
>> covered by an existing tagging).
>>
>> For example I would consider
>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:Barton_St_view_E_between_South_Park_Rd_and_Brown_St,_Macclesfield.jpg 
>> <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:Barton_St_view_E_between_South_Park_Rd_and_Brown_St,_Macclesfield.jpg>
>>
>> as lanes=1, not lanes=3
>>
>> -------------------------------------------------
>>
>> This gets trickier with:
>>
>> - illegal parking that nevertheless is accepted, widespread and
>> typical, de facto changing
>> number of available lanes
>>
>> For example street that in theory is lanes=2 but due to how people
>> park and lack of need for two lanes,
>> it is de facto lanes=1 (cars driving over marked centerline as
>> theoretical lanes are blocked
>> by cars)
>>
>> - lane that switches between parking lane and driveable lane depending on
>> hour/day (lanes:conditional solves this)
>>
>> - lane that switches between parking lane and driveable lane depending on
>> how many people park there
>>
>> Nov 19, 2020, 15:17 by [hidden email]:
>>
>>     Hello all
>>
>>     First of all, in the past, we have explored many edge cases for the
>>     lanes-tag in various discussions and I am happy that for the most
>>     part, it seems to be quite well defined by now. However, there is
>>     one edge case which is not uncommon at all but still unclear or
>>     awkward to tag. Look at this:
>>
>>     https://westnordost.de/misc/2or1lanes.jpg
>>
>>     It is a residential road marked clearly for 2 lanes, so it seems
>>     obvious to tag it with lanes=2. But on the other hand, you'll notice
>>     that there are parking cars on the right side that effectively
>>     render the right lane unusable. These parking cars would (currently)
>>     be tagged I believe as
>>
>>     parking:lane:right=parallel
>>     parking:lane:right:parallel=on_street
>>
>>     And the wiki states
>>
>>         And the following lanes should be excluded:
>>         [...] Parking lanes [...]
>>
>>
>>     So here is an ambiguity in the documentation. On the one hand, if
>>     the road has marked lanes, the number of marked lanes should be
>>     tagged, on the other hand, there are these kind of "parking lanes"
>>     which do not have their own space marked as a parking lane but
>>     simply absorb the space assigned to normal car traffic. In OSM
>>     tagging, these are also "parking:lane"s as far as I know.
>>
>>     We need to dissolve this ambiguity by defining a way how to
>>     distinguish between these two cases:
>>
>>     https://westnordost.de/misc/parallel_parking_lane.png
>>     (1) a dedicated parallel parking lane. This lane should not count as
>>     a lane in the lanes-tag.
>>     (2) (parallel) parking is allowed (and used). This should be
>>     irrelevant for the lane count.
>>
>>     My suggestion would be
>>     (1) parking:lane:*:parallel = lane
>>     (2) parking:lane:*:parallel = on_street
>>
>>     Maybe especially those who recently involved themselves with parking
>>     lane tagging out and about and its documentation could also state
>>     their point of view here. According to the wiki edit history, looks
>>     like at least Mateusz Konieczny, Supaplex030 and Minh Nguyễn were
>>     active.
>>     What do you think?
>>
>>     There is also at least one data consumer I know about that is using
>>     parking lane information and displays it visually,
>>     https://github.com/dabreegster/abstreet it would be good to know how
>>     they interpret and visualize the data.
>>
>>     Cheers
>>     Tobias
>>
>>     _______________________________________________
>>     Tagging mailing list
>>     [hidden email]
>>     https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Tagging mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Tagging mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging