So in general, intersections are not supposed to be blocked, and it’s redundant to think about tagging such rules. For major intersections, it’s obvious (if not always obeyed…)
However in my area there are a few special cases, where extra attention is called to an intersection, maybe even a relatively minor crossing with a service road. Sometimes indicated with a traffic sign and sometimes with road markings. This is shown in Figure 3B-24 of the MUTCD 11th edition:
Good question – this is one of many big question marks on the MUTCD tagging guide. That means there isn’t a well-established tag for it so far, but there are a couple occurrences of keep_clear=* that might be contenders. You could follow that if you like it. Otherwise, if the sign is also present, you can map a traffic_sign=US:R10-7 node at the sign’s physical location.
I wonder if mappers in other countries already have a routine tag for intersections that have to remain clear. Apart from a tag that routers could consume somehow, there’s also a highly experimental road_marking=* tagging scheme that a hyperdetailed renderer could use to distinguish options B through D.
Oh I had forgotten or never saw that wiki page, thanks for the link! I’ve very much into mapping this type of thing so I’ll familiarize myself with it more.
I promote parking:restriction*=no_blocking , to be handled together with other =no_* rules. As you can see, “Do not block” is the MUTCD label. It describes the mandate and purpose more strongly.
In UK, white “keep clear” text is informational, not regulatory (cross-hatched yellow box junctions). This can be seen in the pair of keep_clear= on Haine Rd, Kent. They need to be distinguished. Way: Haine Road (886487213) | OpenStreetMap
Even more confusingly, (“school”) “no blocking” text can be printed on yellow zig-zag lines for the regulatory =no_stoppingFile:Traffic-signs-manual-chapter-5-2004-figure-22x05.svg - Wikimedia Commons
I hadn’t thought of parking restriction tagging. That would be a natural approach for the “Do Not Block Driveway” restrictions found in some states or unofficially in random places in just about every city. I’m not sure if keeping the intersection clear should really be conflated with keeping a driveway clear though.
It’s more than a reason. The parking tagging scheme does have a provision for No Stopping restrictions because stopping is a precursor to parking. But I don’t think the requirement to wait at the stop line before proceeding – effectively a prohibition against tailgating – is normally thought of as having anything to do with parking.
By the way, there’s an analogous prohibition against stopping on the tracks at a railroad crossing. Obviously that would never be a good idea, but some crossings near intersections have this sign to belabor the point. Otherwise, drivers get greedy and try to kiss the bumper of the next car that’s safely stopped beyond the crossing.
Guidance: If motor vehicle queues are likely to extend onto the tracks, a DO NOT STOP ON TRACKS (R8-8) sign (see Figure 8B-1) should be used.
Support: Locations where motor vehicles could queue onto the grade crossing include intersections where a STOP or YIELD sign is installed downstream of the grade crossing, where there is a downstream circular intersection, or where there is a pre-signal installed at the grade crossing.
The UK documentation suggestsparking:both:restriction=no_stopping. Presumably you’d have to cut out the portion of either roadway within the junction in order to apply this tag.
This recommendation wouldn’t make sense in the U.S., since waiting behind stopped traffic at a light or waiting for a chance to turn left isn’t equivalent to the stopping that a No Stopping sign refers to.
Seems wrong. UK still has rural clearway (may be default), Urban Clearway, and Red Route.
Above are elsewhere undocumented parking:*:vehicle_class= and parking:*:user=
The thing is, that absolutely doesn’t get the message across. No stopping as a restriction tends to imply a clearway. A clearway is no stopping, but you can still stop on it if cars in front of you make you stop.
With Yellow Box Junctions, you may be issued a PCN (Penalty Charge Notice), and this is a Civil Offence for entering the junction in a manner that would cause you to come to a stop due to the presence of stationary vehicles at your exit. I can’t really find any examples of this, so this appears to be uncharted territory OSM-wise.
You can learn more from https://www.yellowboxes.co.uk/. I think that it would be worth drafting up how to start tagging these junctions, and additionally how to tag the enforcement cameras for these junctions too, as it could be of real use for motorists in the UK to be aware of these junctions as there is usually no warning apart from some paint on the ground which is frequently difficult to see.
In absence of an OSM solution, someone appears to have created their own site https://boxjunction.uk, however OSM is a much more suitable format for this kind of data than some markers on a map.
I agree completely. Likewise, in the U.S., “Keep Clear” markings and “Don’t Block the Box” signs don’t have anything to do with parking regulations. The penalties can be more severe than an ordinary parking violation, up to demerits on the driver’s permanent record.
What do you think of the keep_clear=* key I suggested earlier?
“Keep Clear” is an informatory text in UK. That’s why I don’t recommend using this wording.
If not parking:*:restriction= , =no_blocking can be in restriction=, which is already used in amenity=parking
About a year ago, the road_marking proposal was approved, which includes a tag for restricted areas and an explicit example for box junctions (road_marking=restriction + pattern=crosshatch + reason=junction). While this primarily covers the marking itself (as separate geometry) rather than its meaning (on the road line), it could still address many use cases.
Actually, I could build upon this: keep_clear=yes signifying the existence of some keep clear marking keep_clear=advisory signifying the existence of a non-legally binding keep clear marking (in the UK: “KEEP CLEAR” written on the road, between two lines) keep_clear=mandatory signifying the existence of a mandatory by law keep clear marking (in the UK: box with yellow crosshatch markings)
Additionally, as @Supaplex030 mentioned, the physical area of the marking can be drawn as an area, I would say sharing a node with the roads that it would apply to for routing purposes, or just as a tag on a node along a highway.
I am not familiar with how enforcement for these is tagged in OSM so that would be a topic for me to revisit or for someone else to conceive.
In German (at least Austrian German, it could be different in Germany) there are two words for those two things:
“halten” = voluntarily stopping (and leaving the car) for a short time (max 10 minutes).
“anhalten” = involuntarily stopping (because red light, stop sign, car in front, …)
I guess, but I am no native english speaker, that no_stopping is the equivalent of no “halten”, while “do not block intersection” is about no “anhalten”.
