Talk:Tag:highway=living street

From OpenStreetMap Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search
  • I think the best way is to tag it as "highway=pedestrian" motorcar=yes "maxspeed=...", because it describes the reality nearly the best --Cbm 12:14, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Many of the comments miss the IMHO essential "bicycle=yes", motorcycle=yes - and they ignore the difference of tolerated motorcars/motorcycles, while the right of way is given to pedestrians and slow bicycles. There's no fixed, precise speed limit - thus the assumption of 7 km/h is a good guess. It should be taken into account for routing software. But it should not be written down within tags, if not required. "highway=living_street" includes all of the other stuff, while otherwise you have to write down every time:

  • highway=pedestrian
  • bicycles=yes
  • motorcycles=permissive
  • motorcars=permissive
  • maxspeed=7 km/h
  • psv=yes

... and maybe extra tags for right of way and parking. --Traut 15:01, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Comments before 2007-11-04

If we want this to be of relevance outside Germany (or any other specific country that has a similar classification) we need to avoid the automatic inference of a 7km/h limit or any other locally specific restriction. What's described is a street class more like pedestrian than residential (in that they certainly shouldn't be used in routes), and there may be a place for this. However, could we not also tag as pedestrian but with motorcar=yes and maxspeed=7? --Mackerski 14:02, 19 July 2007 (BST)

Currently, I am tagging a "Spielstrasse" in Germany with the following tags:

  • highway = residential
  • maxspeed = 7

I agree that this is not the full information, but it comes pretty close. I would like to know if other countries have something similar. If so, it might make sense to create this new tag. Otherwise, I would like to stick with the normal tags. We don't want to make it to confusing for routing applications for example. RalfZ 14:37, 19 July 2007 (BST)

I'd rather see highway=residential and then some extra tag - even livingstreet=yes - than invent yet another new value for highway= , which all renderers and routers would need to recognise. Morwen 14:39, 19 July 2007 (BST)
Mh. This is good and bad, because someone might think, not routing trough such a street is better then handling it as a normal residential street. Ramack 08:26, 18 August 2007 (BST)
I concur with Morwen and I'd even say: If different countries have their own versions of these areas - some with an associated speed limit, some with associated give-way rules, whatever - then why don't we start country-specific tagging here? Like keeping highway=residential (for compatibility) and then adding "de:wohnstrasse=yes" (whatever), and "nl:woonerf=yes" and what-have-you? Because a "Woonerf" is not exactly the same as a "Wohnstrasse" or "Spielstrasse"; why should we needlessly sacrifice precision and say they're the same? The sign suggested under "rendering" is a German sign anyway and nobody else will know it, so it could never be used if we try to use the same tag internationally. It's high time to start country-specific tagging anyway, we will need that in a lot of other areas as well. --Frederik Ramm 14:59, 19 July 2007 (BST)
I second Frederik here. Let's not invent completely new highway tags, just because parking might not be allowed here. Use highway=residential and add what's needed to clarify. That might well be a de:Spielstrasse=yes, but could also just clarify the restrictions: maxspeed=7 and parking=no (or something) seems to capture the essence pretty well IMHO. --spaetz 16:30, 19 July 2007 (BST)
For country-specific, can I suggest to use the country code in capitals - this would distinguish from the language-code used for name variants atm (which is in lowercase). Morwen 19:38, 19 July 2007 (BST)
With this tag it would be easy to see which streets need to wriggle :-) Dotbaz 20:32, 19 July 2007 (BST)
In switzerland we also know this Spielstrasse, but the tempo limit is maxspeed=20. While most residential streets are limited to maxspeed=30 there is also a difference with parking and the absolute antecedence of the pedestrians (means: children). --Andy 22:30, 19 July 2007 (BST)
In Spain it's called "Calle residencial", with the same traffic sign as in Germany (AFAIK, signs are unified in EU). I agree with Morwen in using a generic property tag (livingstreet=yes is fine to me), and I'd let international variants to be managed via the is_in key if needed. And, just to add confusion: Here we have the "Zona a 30" (30 area), as an intermediate between living street and normal residential street --Xuacu 03:41, 4 August 2007 (BST)
Living street sign is not a Vienna convention sign. It is introduced afterwards. Erkin Alp Güney (talk) 17:30, 25 November 2017 (UTC)

Sorry to say, but all the alternatives I've read so far would be just a hack. A "verkehrsberuhigter Bereich" is NOT highway=pedestrian! Pedestrianizations are only allowed to enter by car to load/unload stuff at certain hours, while VB is usually available for passing all the time (but only at very low speeds). So highway=pedestrian just doesn't fit, it's a completely different thing. Parking on VB *is* allowed on designated spaces, so parking=no is also wrong.

It seems that this concept of VB isn't unique to germany (at least switzerland and the netherlands have similiar). So what I would like to avoid is to have about "20" different tags for these streets. A renderer rule looking like: "DE:Wohnstrasse or NL:woonerf or CH:Spielstraße or ES:... or ..." doesn't look very appealing to me. This reminds me of "GB:motorway or DE:Autobahn or NL:... etc.", the concept is the same in lot's of countries, but the actual rules depend on local law. So renderers should have a knowledge of this *concept* (as rendering this "VB" stuff different than other residential streets makes *much* sense to me) not of the actual local consequences (speed limit, parking, ...).

I'm not voting against localized tagging, but there should be *good* reasons for it. Please keep in mind: Localized tags will make it *much* harder for renderers to do their job. Ulfl 01:01, 20 July 2007 (BST)

I think we should not add maxspeed=7 (or whatever) tag, if we have a livingstreet tag (may it be a highway=livingstreet or highway=residential&livingstreet=yes) but have some set of rules which say "in Germany livingstreet implies maxspeed=7 in Switzerland maxspeed=20, ..." Ramack 08:26, 18 August 2007 (BST)

I like the proposal. The traffic rules may vary, but the concept seems to exist in many countries. If the map qualifies a street, an application or a user can locally translate the tag into a meaning. I disagree with a special icon, because this would mean to start reproducing all traffic signs. Archimedeus 21:40, 2 October 2007 (BST)

Doesn't the UK have 'Home Zones'(ie 20mph limits) and 'Quiet Lanes', usally associated with trafic calming methods? ShakespeareFan00 23:20, 22 October 2007 (BST)

Voting ended

Is this the common procedure how a voting ends? The date was given as 2008-??-?? only and there's no summary about how many people voted which way. --Traut 12:09, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Comments and votes copied from the page after approval


I've included most of the former comments into an updated proposal and moved the former discussion to the discussion page. The only thing really left open was how to do the actual tagging. The alternatives mentioned are:

  • highway=residential, maxspeed=7 (just as done before)
  • I did this before, but I'm unhappy. Reason is that in Germany pedestrians do have priority over vehicles. Therefore regular through passing traffic should be excluded. Alternative tagging could be "highway=pedestrian" with "motorcar=yes" and "maxspeed=7". Vanagaudi 20:07, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
  • highway=residential, livingstreet=yes (I don't see real benefits to the proposal on this page, but as a drawback this adds a new concept)
  • highway=residential, de:wohnstrasse=yes (or nl:woonerf=yes or, ... - which makes the rendering / routing even harder)

Add comments here, especially further national differences would be interesting. -- Ulfl 18:17, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

  • Would it be better to use highway=residential with extra tags? Adding more values to highway= means that every renderer and router needs to be updated, when it's really still a highway=residential. (the first paragraph actually says that it's highway=residential + speed=? + parking=? + traffic_rules=?) Ojw 19:00, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
  • I would see this kind of street as a subset of highway=residential, so the highway=residential, livingstreet=yes (or a similar variation) would make the most sense to me. Gravitystorm 19:05, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
  • I agree, but living streets should be rendered differently from residential highways and excluded by routing engines for through passing traffic. I propose that living streets are a subset of "highway=pedestrian" or an own class "highway=living_street", whatever is a better choice for renderer and routers. Vanagaudi 20:15, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
  • Routing engines will ignore living streets all by themselves if they're tagged with maxspeed=7 Sircus 14:02, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
  • IMO, "highway=living_street" is the best solution for this type of street. It is a street, where cars are just tolerated, but it is definitely not "highway=pedestrian". So I strongly vote for "highway=living_street" as an own class. motp
  • This boils down to a new class of street and how to tag it. Using highway=living_street simply extends the current highway concept. Using highway=residential, livingstreet=yes would add a new *concept* here, namely to render things by depending on *two* tag rules. Unfortunately, for mappaint I know that this is currently not possible. So using two rules makes it actually more difficult for renderers! The drawback is that current renderers needs to be changed so they will render these streets at all. But I can change that easily within a short time. Ulfl 23:39, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
  • For what it's worth, in Norway we have been tagging such streets with highway=pedestrian, abutters=residential, motorcar=yes, motorcycle=yes, maxspeed=8. I think it would be nice to have a proper tag for this, but I see the problem with adding another highway class. I would support something like highway=pedestrian, livingstreet=yes. -Håkon 10:44, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
  • I agree with previous posters that the most appropriate thing here is highway=pedestrian, motorcar=yes, etc. This ensures a different rendering to highway=residential and (reasonably) accurately represents the difference between these streets and other residential streets without adding additional tags. As the author of a routing system based on OSM data, I'll need to cater for this case (I currently ignore highway=pedestrian for car routes), but that's only one line of code. Sircus 14:02, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
    • Why is it most appropriate to tag a living_street with highway=pedestrian and then to bend it with additional tags into something that comes close to highway=living_street?!? -- Ulfl 13:28, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
  • My opinion is that highway=residential, livingstreet=yes OR preferably the highway=pedestrian, motorcar=yes syntax can cover this. I think there are already enough highway types, so would rather see it 'adjusted' with additional tags. Also, for new users, the concept of highway=living_street might not be intuitive (but that could be because I've never heard of a "living street" before). I think 'residential' and 'pedestrian' on the other hand are more intuitive. -- Bjorn 23:02, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
  • Once the voting is complete. Please update OSM_tags_for_routing to let people implementing route-finding and navigation -programs know about the change. --MarcusWolschon 18:09, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
  • Tag it as "highway=pedestrian" "motorcar/motorcycle/...=yes" + "maxspeed=..." so you don't need any new tag-attribute --Cbm 20:15, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
    • For me in Germany: "highway=pedestrian" implies "motorcar/motorcycle/...=no" ! => therefor there is a big difference between a living_street and a pedestrian area => pedestrian area in Germany explicitly says no cars allowed. The only exception might be that residentials are allowed to drive in a pedestrian area. BUT: this is specialy indicated by some road signs. --MichaelK 11:24, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
      • both are "motor-vehicle-peaced" areas (de:verkehrsberuhigter Bereich). So to tag both as "highway=pedestrian" is the logical way, because they have the same base-elements. A real
        "pedestian precinct" (de: Fußgängerzone) is "motorcar=no"
        "living streets" (de: Wohnstraßen) is "motorcar=yes".


Voting stops: 2008-??-??

  • I approve this proposal. (I don't know if it's ok to vote for your "own proposal", but then you'll have a template). -- Ulfl 13:31, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
  • I approve this proposal. --Dennis de 14:20, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
  • I approve this proposal. -- sadam 14:48, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
  • I approve this proposal. Florianschmitt 14:56, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
  • I approve this proposal. --Raschu 15:43, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
  • I approve this proposal. SlowRider 17:42, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
  • I approve this proposal. -- motp 18:14, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
  • I approve this proposal. -- Polyglot 23:16, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
  • I approve this proposal. -- Shoragan 15:00, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
  • I approve this proposal. -- BroadwayLamb 15:12, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
  • I disapprove of this proposal. Gravitystorm 15:04, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
  • I disapprove of this proposal. Sircus 15:57, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
  • I disapprove of this proposal. -- Bjorn 23:02, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
  • I disapprove of this proposal. (I prefer a sub-tag like several others proposed) --Cohort 17:45, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
  • I disapprove of this proposal. highway=pedestrian, motorcar=yes, maxspeed=7/20/... should be enough. --MarcusWolschon 18:06, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
  • I disapprove of this proposal. highway=pedestrian, motorcar=yes/destination, maxspeed=7/8/... is enough. --Mikemenk 21:42, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
  • I approve this proposal. --Geoff 23:34, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
  • I approve this proposal. --Xylome 10:30, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
  • I disapprove of this proposal --EdoM (lets talk about it) 11:08, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
  • I disapprove this proposal. strongly approve a sub tag --Otih 11:24, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
  • I disapprove of this proposal. (I prefer a sub-tag like several others proposed) --PhilippeP 10:35, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
  • I approve this proposal. --Onion 12:00, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
  • I disapprove of this highway= tag (since it's a residential road with taggable extra attributes) -- Ojw 13:23, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
  • I approve this proposal. --Walley 08:47, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
  • I approve this proposal. Sven Anders 08:58, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
  • I approve this proposal. --Ckruetze 09:37, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
  • I disapprove the highway=living_street tag, but strongly approve a sub tag --Andy 10:45, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
  • I approve this proposal. Coldtobi 17:47, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
  • I disapprove the highway=living_street tag, even tough I was the original proposer ;-) I'm convinced, that highway=residential, living_street=yes would be better --ramack 18:48, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
  • I disapprove the highway=living_street tag, but would like to approve a sub tag such as living_street=yes -- fuesika 09:33, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
  • I approve this proposal. 10:14, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

If (even) the original proposer changed his mind, wouldn't it be appropriate to modify the proposal and do the voting all over again? I know that I voted favorably because I wanted a way to tag these streets. All of a sudden my city seems full of them, now that I know about it... Polyglot 07:33, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

  • I disapprove this proposal at this moment. Tag it as "highway=pedestrian" "motorcar/motorcycle/...=yes" + maxspeed=..." so you don't need any new tag-attribute --Cbm 20:10, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
  • I approve this proposal. --MichaelK 11:24, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
  • I approve this proposal. Akio 15:17, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
  • I approve this proposal. Xylome 10:43, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
  • I approve this proposal. -- Eckhart 16:12, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
  • I disapprove this proposal. --Gernot 17:44, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
  • I approve this proposal. -- TigerDuck 01:01, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
  • I approve this proposal. --Eimai 12:50, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Voting ended, proposal approved. -- Ulfl 02:40, 6 January 2008 (UTC)


"United States
Bicycle boulevard
20 mph
Administered at the city level and widely varying in nature. See wikipedia reference for excellent overview.
Bicycle boulevards"

That sounds like the description of Key:bicycle_road, but not like the description of living_street ... Does the USA have real living_streets? --MitteloberrheinischerWaldameisenschreck (talk) 11:04, 20 May 2018 (UTC)

Cars are generally allowed on 'bicycle boulevards' in the US so they do not qualify as 'Key:bicycle_road' which states "Any other vehicles are prohibited unless marked with an addition sign."

I don't asked for US bicycle roads, I asked for US living streets ...
Normally, in the rest of the world and therefore also in OSM, living streets are something totally different than bicycle road, but on this wiki page about living streets, the definition of the US living street sounds like the definition of rest-of-the-world-bicycle-roads ... This might be an error ...
(btw: in europe a lot of bicycle roads are allowed für cars, too, if a 2nd sign says this) --MitteloberrheinischerWaldameisenschreck (talk) 18:33, 22 May 2018 (UTC)

USA does not have living streets. It does not make sense to change the meaning of living streets. Living streets imply that children and other pedestrians have priority over motor vehicles and bicycles. In the USA, that is not the case. Pedestrians are expected to walk along the side of the road and only cross at intersections. Typically, people in the USA mis-use highway=living_street when the really mean highway=service service=driveway or just highway=residential. This idea of bicycle boulevards being equivalent to living streets is incorrect. There's plenty of other tags to describe Bicycle infrastructure. Living streets have extremely low speed limits (walking speed or values less than 20 kph), but typical speed limits on residential roads in the USA is 20 mph, 25 mph, or 30 mph (32 kph, 40 kph, 48 kph). The general idea with a living street is that children can play with balls in the street and not be in danger of getting hit by a motor vehicle or bicycle. I've reverted the bicycle boulevards addition to this page. --Dobratzp (talk) 17:43, 18 July 2018 (UTC)

I also did wonder about that paragraph on the page. Thanks for cleaning this up. --Westnordost (talk) 18:36, 18 July 2018 (UTC):
"walking speed or values less than 20 kph" - or 20 kph like in Poland Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 07:25, 19 July 2018 (UTC)