Hi,
from what I understood, "access aisle" is an official term only in the
US, as described in the ADA standards
(https://www.access-board.gov/guidelines-and-standards/buildings-and-sites/about-the-ada-standards/guide-to-the-ada-standards/chapter-5-parking),
but it describes clearly (as least for a non native English speaker like
me) what is it.
For mapping accessibility paths for disabled persons, I think it is
quite important to have this information, so that its presence and
accessibility from e.g. the sidewalk, is well represented (with e.g.
tags describing kerbs). This picture [0] to me describes well the reason
this can be really useful.
To only have amenity=parking_space mapped wouldn't help in describing
and understanding the accessibility of the parking place from the
footpaths/sidewalks.
I'm not sure about the use of the egress areas, that seem to be less
related to access paths for disabled persons, and more related to areas
not usable by other cars...
Ale
[0]
https://www.access-board.gov/images/guidelines_standards/Buildings_Sites/guides/chapter5/5p15a.JPG
On 02/05/19 12:36, Tony Shield wrote:
Hi
[AA] is a Mapillary picture of a typical UK disabled parking bay, the
hatched area is a what I think you are calling an 'access aisle'.
Those particular disabled parking bays are legally designated and
enforced.
I see that tags amenity
<https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:amenity>=parking_space and
parking_space
<https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Key:parking_space&action=edit&redlink=1>=disabled
<https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Tag:parking_space%3Ddisabled&action=edit&redlink=1>
are not described in the wiki but to my mind an entry for
parking_space = disabled should meet the local space and marking
scheme so in the UK a parking_space=disabled would without further
definition include an egress space. If there is a wish to specifically
mark those hatched areas then I suggest the use of the word 'egress' .
[AA] https://www.mapillary.com/map/im/5PAU747rlUdNrCaDtUNDuA
Regards
TonyS999
On 02/05/2019 10:54, Volker Schmidt wrote:
I would consider what is here described as access aisle (according to
the photo [1]) part of the parking space. Here in Italy any parking
space for the disabled has a dedicated "access aisle" similar to the
photo.
If you want to achieve disabled (wheelchair) routing I would assume
it to be sufficient to map the disabled parking spaces within the car
park.
[1] https://mycloud.snowandsnow.us/index.php/s/F2mAATCQ54SzfcT
On Thu, 2 May 2019 at 11:31, Tony Shield <tony.shield...@gmail.com
<mailto:tony.shield...@gmail.com>> wrote:
Having today downloaded and read SN01360 [2] |I disagree with the
interpretation. In that document there is only one mention of
'aisle' it being an 'access aisle' in Section 5.4 paragraph
marked Off-Street Parking -" *Off-street parking*: bays should
be a minimum of 4800 mm long
by 2400 mm wide with additional space: (1) where bays are
parallel to the access aisle and access is available from the side an
extra length of at least 180 0mm, or (2) where bays are
perpendicular to the access aisle, an additional width of at least
1200 mm along each side.
I read that as saying the 'access aisle' is that which in OSM is
marked as 'parking _aisle', and it leads to a parking bay
designated for disabled users, the 'access aisle' is not
exclusively for the use of disabled users. I am of the opinion
that 'access' is misinterpreted to refer only to disabled users
which is a very restrictive interpretation of the usual
interpretation of access being for anybody. I think it is
something to be very careful about.
Usage in the UK supports my interpretation - I know of many car
parks where ordinary and disabled spaces are next to each other
and accessed by a single way which has no restrictions.
For parking bays I think that the tag:amenity=parking _space is
clear.
Regards
TonyS999
On 02/05/2019 08:21, Alessandro Sarretta wrote:
Hi Clifford,
On 02/05/19 00:13, Clifford Snow wrote:
Since the off loading area is called an access aisle, both in
the US and UK [2], it seem to me that it would be an
appropriate term to use. Would using highway=footway +
footway=access_aisle + wheelchair=yes be a more acceptable
tagging scheme? My concern is that just adding wheelchair=yes
to a footway doesn't get at the requirement for the width of
the access_aisle.
[1]
https://www.access-board.gov/guidelines-and-standards/buildings-and-sites/about-the-ada-standards/guide-to-the-ada-standards/chapter-5-parking
[2]
https://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/SN01360/SN01360.pdf
I'm really supporting your proposal for a highway=footway +
footway=access_aisle.
I would match this with a wheelchair=designated instead of a
wheelchair=yes, as suggested by Mateusz Konieczny.
Best,
Ale
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org <mailto:Tagging@openstreetmap.org>
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org <mailto:Tagging@openstreetmap.org>
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
