David, the Lambeth map you're working from just uses levels to classify "bikeability". Level 1 is described as "...routes, paths and crossings plus shared space...".

This doesn't mean that a way with "Level 1 bikeability" is part of an actual cycle route. Cycle routes that are selected to be displayed on the map are highlighted in green, red or blue, as explained in a separate info box on the map.

I wouldn't consider osm.org/relation/8846995 to be a route, just a cycleway.

Mac

Hi,
Just to let you know, a lot of your recent "access" values have trailing numbers (e.g. "private2" or "customer22") and so are showing up as mispellings at https://www.keepright.at/report_map.php?zoom=13&lat=51.31058&lon=-0.28509&layers=B0T&ch=0%2C220&show_ign=0&show_tmpign=0

Hi Martin. I have deleted this relation now. It was indeed created by mistake.

Regards,
Mac

Hi Peter, the pre-existing footway can be cut/split at the start +/or end of the named section as necessary, and then the relevant section can be named.

I've just done this now and removed the duplicate footway,

Regards, Mac

Update: The 2 modal filters in this changeset area got started on today. Likely to finish tomorrow but both still open to motorists overnight.

The Gore Road and Ufton Road work was done today. For motorists, Gore Rd is now a 'no entry' from Lauriston Rd but is oneway for exit onto Lauriston.

Hi,

There are 3 lines of footways where osm.org/way/813457083 is. It looks odd, and seems like it might not be how it was intended to be mapped.

Regards, Mac

Hi LondonCycling_CIDProject,

According to osm.wiki/Key:bicycle%20parking, the correct value for this bicycle_parking type is the plural "wall_loops", not "wall_loop".

Hi Mike. I was around there about 2 weeks this is indeed open, and probably has been open for some time. I've now remove the access=no.

Regards,
Mac

Thanks. I should be able to survey all of these on the 11th.

Hi. There's nothing to suggest that this has ever been a shared footway and the north end of this way did end where the painted cycle lane ended prior to more recent changes at the miniroundabout. I think it's safe to assume that this was initially just a cycle lane that got wrongly mapped as a separate way.

I've done some amendments to just tag the road with cycle lane tagging instead and tried to keep the separate footway to where it's physically separated.

However at the south of here at Portal Way it gets a bit confusing on the ground, as there are toucan crossings that don't seem to have obvious cycleways on both sides of the crossings as would be expected.

Thanks for that. I'm surprised that the raft of changes here could be implemented yet. I know how the final layout will operate here, but I think I might need to survey if that's how this will operate from Monday.

Hi, this is now corrected. Thanks for pointing it out.

Now amended, including the night-time access restriction at the entrance from Garrad's Rd. Also added similar restrictions on other sideroads nearby.

Hi. Are you sure this road is one-way?

There has been no entry from the east end of the road segment, which would explain the 'marked as likely oneway by improveosm.org'. However this segment of road has itself been two-way.

Thanks Jon. I've reverted this to a oneway cycle track again as it's definitely a separated oneway contraflow track.

Mac

Hi, I was wondering if the turn restriction at osm.org/relation/10813264 should be "no_u_turn" instead of "only_u_turn"?

Hi, I was wondering if the turn restriction at osm.org/relation/10876648 should be "no_u_turn" instead of "only_u_turn"?

Hi Mike,

I've remapped the New Cross → Highbury route. [BTW, the note + opening_hours in the route_master (osm.org/relation/10028999) is no longer accurate.]

I didn't however create a ‘New Cross Gate - Highbury & Islington’ route master, as I'd personally consider these routes to just be route variants of the 'Crystal Palace - Highbury & Islington' route.

Regards,
Mac

Yes, all is back to how it should be now. There were a few 'dirty tiles' at a couple of zoom levels that still showed 'ghost' sections of the errant cycleways, so I've used JOSM's 'Force tile rendering' to get these tiles to re-render 'clean'.

Mac

Bernard, I've figured out what has happened here.

osm.org/node/6302908670 got moved (from just south of osm.org/node/6302908669) to where it's now located (the moved node is also now merged with another cycleway)..

The node used to be where the segregated cycleway becomes a shared use cycleway just before it meets Forest Road.

I have left it as it is at the moment, just in case you wanted to check out the anomaly again.

Mac