Proposal:Continuous crossings

From OpenStreetMap Wiki
Latest comment: 2 years ago by Osmuser63783 in topic Voting
Jump to navigation Jump to search
The Feature Page for the approved proposal Continuous crossings is located at Key:crossing:continuous
Archived proposal  –  please don't change the content of this page.

The content of this proposal has been marked as archived to avoid confusion with the current version of the documentation.

To check whether the displayed page corresponds to the version at the time of archiving (end of voting),
the original revision can be accessed here:  original  compare with current

Proposal:Continuous crossings

Continuous crossings
v · d
Proposal status: Approved (active)
Proposed by: Osmuser63783
Tagging: crossing:continuous=yes / no
Applies to: node node, way way
Definition: A path continues uninterrupted across a road.
Draft started: 2023-10-29
RFC start: 2023-10-31
Vote start: 2023-11-30
Vote end: 2023-12-14

Proposal

Rationale

There has been a lot of discussion on how to tag continuous footways, where a sidewalk continues uninterrupted across a side road.

A continuous footway

The closest, widely established tags we currently have are perhaps crossing=unmarked and crossing:markings=surface but typically they are used when the pedestrian or cyclist needs to cross a section of road (more precisely, the carriageway). In case of a continuous footway, it is cars that have to cross a section of the sidewalk. Therefore neither of the widely established tags captures the concept well.

Some mappers have used crossing=pavement to express the idea, but the British English term "pavement" is confusing to people who use a different variety of English. Spot checks found that most, if not all uses of this tag in the UK are for continuous sidewalks, but the tag has been used in France, the US and Australia to mean something more like crossing:markings=surface, i.e. a crossing that is marked only by a change in paving material (from the perspective of a car).

There is an abandoned, informal proposal from 2020 to use continuous_sidewalk=yes. In the discussion on the talk page it was questioned why an entirely new key was necessary, instead of fitting into the existing scheme for crossings.

I started a discussion in the community forum on the topic. Neither of the existing tags was favoured by mappers. Various alternatives were considered and eventually we settled on crossing:continuous=yes. This has several advantages:

  • it is not limited to sidewalks but can be used when a (segregated) cycleway, a footway other than a sidewalk, or even a pedestrian street continues uninterrupted across a road
  • instead of overloading crossing=* further, introducing a new key means it is orthogonal to other crossing tags such as crossing:markings=*

Tagging

A continuous crossing, also known (depending on location) as a continuous sidewalk, footway or cycleway, is a type of crossing design where a path (e.g. highway=path, highway=footway or highway=cycleway) continues uninterrupted across a road (e.g. highway=residential).

As a result, vehicles have to cross a section of footway or cycleway, instead of pedestrians or cyclists having to cross the road.

A continuous crossing may or may not have markings, tactile paving, a (typically flush, if it exists) kerb or any of the other properties commonly found on crossings. What matters for deciding whether a crossing is continuous or not is the overall visual impression: There is no, or very little change in surface for the pedestrian or cyclist. Their path continues without interruption, while from the perspective of a vehicle travelling along the crossing road, there is a clear break. Typically, this means at least a kerb (e.g. kerb=lowered) and an obvious surface change (e.g. from surface=asphalt to surface=paving_stones) and often also a rise in level (so the crossing also functions as a traffic_calming=table).

The tag can be used on nodes (with highway=crossing) or on ways (with footway=crossing). It has the same meaning on both.

Key Value Description Example
crossing:continuous yes A path continues uninterrupted across a road.
crossing:continuous no The path is interrupted as it meets the road.

In some cases, it may not be obvious which of the two highways is the "path" and which one is the "road" (e.g. when a very wide highway=cycleway meets a highway=pedestrian). In such cases, the value of the highway=* key can be put in crossing:continuous=*, to indicate which of the two highways continues without interruption, e.g. crossing:continuous=cycleway. However, the tag is only for pedestrian and cycle crossings. It is not intended for use on road intersections.

Examples

Example Tagging

A continuous footway. A very detailed approach to mapping this situation would be:

In this example the change in level for vehicles on the side road is very subtle, so the crossing probably does not qualify as a traffic_calming=table.

The give way lines could be mapped separately.

In practice many mappers would likely omit some of these tags. Simply tagging the crossing as highway=crossing and crossing:continuous=yes should not be considered "wrong" but merely a less detailed description.

Both the footway and the cycleway continue uninterrupted across the side road. Although there is a minor rise in level for the cycleway, there are tactile pavings on the footway (on the right) and the paving stones on the footway look subtly different, the overall visual impression is still that the footway and cycleway continue and it is the side road that is interrupted.

If the footway and cycleway are mapped as a single way (highway=path with bicycle=designated, foot=designated and segregated=yes), then a very detailed method of mapping this situation could be:

Again, many mappers would likely omit some of these tags.

Note: The tagging suggestions above are for illustration only, to show situations where crossing:continuous=yes could be used.

Other examples

  • Example of continuous crossing in France ("trottoir traversant").
    Example of continuous crossing in France ("trottoir traversant").
  • Example of continuous crossing in London.
    Example of continuous crossing in London.

Counterexamples

Notes on usage

A sidewalk continues across a private driveway. Most mappers would leave this node untagged
  • When the road that crosses a continuous sidewalk is a minor service road, such as a driveway or a car park entrance, there is community consensus that this is not worth tagging explicitly; instead the node should simply be left without any tags.
  • Although this tag should be used whenever this visual design is present, its legal implications differ around the world. Continuous crossings may or may not imply pedestrian priority over vehicles. Similarly, when used for sidewalks crossing side roads, they may or may not imply that vehicles entering the main road from the side road have to give way to vehicles on the main road. Data consumers will need to infer any implications for traffic rules based on the jurisdiction.

Rendering

When a footway meets a road (as an example), renderers typically draw a continuous road on top of the footway, creating a gap in the footway. If the tag crossing:continuous=yes is present, they could instead show a gap in the road and a continuous footway.

Features/Pages affected

External discussions

Comments

Please comment on the discussion page or in the community forum.

Voting

Latest comment: 2 years ago39 comments36 people in discussion
Voting closed

Voting on this proposal has been closed.

It was approved with 32 votes for, 1 vote against and 1 abstention.

Thank you all for your comments.

Retrieved from "https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Proposal:Continuous_crossings&oldid=2863953"