Proposal:Pedestrianised road

The Feature Page for the approved proposal Pedestrianised road is located at Tag:highway=pedestrian

Pedestrianised road
Proposal status:	Approved (active)
Proposed by:	*
Tagging:	highway=pedestrian Data item
Applies to:	*
Definition:	*
Statistics:
Rendered as:	*
Draft started:
Proposed on:	*
RFC start:	*
Vote start:	2006-09-20
Vote end:	2006-10-05

Status: Part of Map Features#Highway

Use of this tag is documented at: Tag:highway=pedestrian

Old proposal/voting page (Historical interest only)

For town centres and civic areas, where wide expanses of hard surface are provided for pedestrians to walk between shops.

Vehicles may be allowed in during the evenings to unload merchandise, but are often prevented from entering normally by bollards

Cyclists may try to use these features, leaving behind a trail of irate pedestrians, but are not supposed to be there (rules may vary by country).

The "footpath" tag is a bit inappropriate for such things.

Usage

Key: highway Value: pedestrian

Example illustration:

Another photo here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Bedford_Shopping_Centre_-_Feb_2004.jpg

Suggested osmarender of a pedestrianised area: http://tom.acrewoods.net/files/osm/precinct.png

Votes

Please vote here. (Sign can made via ~~~~)

• I approve this proposal. Sven Anders 08:11, 15 September 2006 (BST)

• I approve this proposal. scoid 08:23, 15 September 2006 (BST)

• I approve this proposal. Wollschaf 10:11, 15 September 2006 (BST)

• I approve this proposal. TomChance 11:16, 15 September 2006 (BST)

• I approve this proposal. Welshie 12:26, 15 September 2006 (BST)

• I approve this proposal. Ben. 13:00, 15 September 2006 (BST)

• I approve this proposal. (Wouldn't voting be easier with a template for approve/reject) Bruce89 13:36, 15 September 2006 (BST)

• I disapprove this proposal. (I 95% agree with this valuable proposal but feel pedestrian is a synonym for footway and so confusing, why not precinct?) Ewmjc 04:02, 19 September 2006 (BST)

New Voting (Ends 06-10-04)

I would suggest that we start new voting. Please make a new vote with the following answers:

• I disapprove this proposal.~~~~ ( I don't like it at all)
• I approve this proposal.~~~~ (Means: I likepedestrian and /or precinct)
• I vote for pedestrian~~~~
• I vote for precinct~~~~

Please vote here:

• I approve this proposal. Sven Anders 11:25, 20 September 2006 (BST)
• I approve this proposal. Welshie 11:55, 20 September 2006 (BST)
• I approve this proposal. Wollschaf 15:15, 20 September 2006 (BST)
• I approve this proposal. Ben. 16:16, 20 September 2006 (BST)
• I approve this proposal (and prefer pedestrian since that's what we call them, but I'm not too bothered either way) TomChance 19:28, 20 September 2006 (BST)
• I approve this proposal. I vote for precinct. 80n 08:26, 21 September 2006 (BST)
• I vote for precinct MikeCollinson 00:55, 22 September 2006 (BST)
• I approve this proposal. I slightly prefer pedestrian, as I take a precinct to mean a custom-built shopping area and thus it does not cover pedestrianised standard streets. Nickw 11:37, 30 September 2006 (BST)
• I approve this proposal, though I need another vote to make a distinction between pedestrianised road and precinct, to undeline the historic development.scoid 12:59, 1 October 2006 (BST)
• I approve this proposal. Rw 14:23, 8 October 2006 (BST) I prefer pedestrian and am unfamiliar with precinct in this context (in North American usage)
• I approve this proposal, I vote for pedestrian (voting late, but this does not seem to have been moved to Map Features yet). Matthew Newton 02:13, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
• I approve this proposal, also late but with the same remark as above Cimm 15:57, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
• I approve this proposal, voting only for pedestrian --blk 17:55, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
• I approve this proposal, a late vote, only for pedestrian, precinct doesn't exactly cover the same meaning imho -- Johndrinkwater 23:31, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Vote Ended

Well the vote has ended. There is/was a few points on the discussion page that havn't really developed, but should this be moved to the Features page? or is "pedestrianised" a good enough idea to be considered? Ben. 04:39 18th December 2006 (UTC)

Moving Page now....Sven Anders 13:01, 18 December 2006 (UTC)