Eliminate most crosswalks about pybna HOT 7 CLOSED

I agree that the crosswalks are visually misleading for viewers. This case would only be where a bicycle path or multiuse path crosses a street with no signal, correct? Is there a risk of losing many viable crossings labeled for pedestrians that bikes might also use?

If "bicycle=yes" or "designated" is required, perhaps "cycleway=crossing" should be another permissible alternative. I recognize that "cycleway=crossing" is defined to be reserved for separated bike crossings, but it seems logical that the "cycleway=crossing" tag would accompany a path labeled "highway=cycleway."

from pybna.

The signalization wouldn't really matter. This change would require appropriate tagging for any off-street cycleway with the crossing noted as a separate feature in OSM.

For example, this trail crossing at North Superior St would not be impacted:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/515427982#map=18/47.66577/-117.39340
because the line is tagged highway=cycleway and already makes a continuous connection across the road.

In fact, now that I'm looking for an example where this would have an impact I can't really find a good example. The original concern was that someone might draw the crosswalk line as a separate feature in OSM, something like this:

_______________________highway=crossing___________________
___highway=path__|_____crossing=footway__|____highway=path

<----------------o------------------------o----------------->

In this case, you'd have a problem where the two highway=path lines don't connect unless the crossing=footway line was also included. So the change I'm suggesting would require tagging like this:

_______________________highway=crossing___________________
_______________________crossing=footway___________________
___highway=path__|_____crossing=footway__|____highway=path

<----------------o------------------------o----------------->

cycle=crossing would be another good tag to include. So the change I'm proposing would require that any roadway crossing intended to be used as a crossing for bicycles in the network have one of the following tags if the crossing is drawn as its own separate line feature in OSM:
bicycle=yes
bicycle=designated
cycleway=crossing

from pybna.

Got it, thanks for the additional detail. Let's move ahead with the change then.

from pybna.

@Bikingman can you take a crack at this? So you know what we're talking about here's an image that shows some of these crosswalks that don't need to be part of the BNA:

I think the only code change required is in the SQL operations. Probably makes most sense to add something in 50_insert.sql that limits the features being inserted by checking if it's a crossing that doesn't qualify.
https://github.com/tooledesign/pybna/blob/dev/pybna/sql/importer/roads/50_insert.sql

from pybna.

Happy to dive in, @spencerrecneps - I'll create a pull request off a new branch when I've got an update together.

from pybna.

Hey @spencerrecneps, I've added a pull request to eliminate most crosswalks from the osm importer. #59. Let me know if you have any questions.

from pybna.

Closed via #59

from pybna.