![]()
![]()
![]()
Yeah, I dunno what is happening on Dzirnavu. Bike traffic lights have been pre-installed as if cycle lanes would go both ways, but currently there is nothing built and not even construction anywhere except that rebuilt section. I guess the plan is to connect them at ... some point?
Also can I just rant about Riga traffic light timings in general. I cycled Dzirnavu both ways and a few other lanes/tracks. I had green light may be 2 times out of like 20+ lights. It's basically every single gaddamn light. And people are surprised why everyone keeps running red lights.
HellMap said:
Also can I just rant about Riga traffic light timings in general. I cycled Dzirnavu both ways and a few other lanes/tracks. I had green light may be 2 times out of like 20+ lights. It's basically every single gaddamn light. And people are surprised why everyone keeps running red lights.
At the moment I can't ride as fast as I usually do, and I found that if you go at about 12 km/h almost every light is green. Could it be that lanes are designed with this kind of speed in mind? =)
markalex said:
I'm still not over other supposed bike lanes on Dzirnavu, like reported here: https://lasi.lv/par-svarigo/latvija/riga-taps-cetri-jauni-velojoslu-posmi.45021
You are implying that they are all supposedly finished, but I don't think they actually are. For example, south section of Dzirnavu iela has a similar cycle light but no lanes drawn yet. I think they are installing traffic lights and "hard" infrastructure before making road paint and final bollards/deliniators. ![]()
Yeah, that was my mistaken assumption: three other streets were updated within mentioned timeline, so I thought something was done on Dzirnavu too.
And I thought I was going crazy in not that supposed new infra is the same exact one as was before.
When I started this retagging, I had this doubt in the back of my mind, like maybe I should, in case if bollards would magically appear one day, we all will live happy ever after.
So far, my fears didn't realise. On the contrary: infra it seems being actively made only worse.
Today I was at Ludzas, and on the large part of stretch from Daugavas to Mazā Kalna painted lane is just not there.
![]()
I don't know why. Place where it starts doesn't seem "hard cut" to imply intentionality, but I also have hard time believing that it's just normal wear and tear.
![]()
Yeah, cars drive over it regularly to the point that I don't even go there anymore because it feels like any other street at this point
It has a massive sidewalk. And it literally has another lane for parking. If anyone actually cared, they could have made an amazing wide cycleway here. Instead, this was nothing but stat padding for "look, we "built" cycle infrastructure". I know it's cliche to say, but I wish some of these project planner would be forced to use their own garbage.
update on the cycleways on dzirnavu street
the city council is drawing them, but they are unprotected
All I see when looking at this is cars that will be parked on lines.
Like Rīgas Meža/Nometņu ielu velojoslas
I mean, there better be bollards then
it looks like there are now (unprotected) cycle lanes in both directions on dzirnavu uninterrupted from tērbatas until the end of the street (minus the part under the railway bridge for rail baltica)
just had to edit the part of the lāčplēša street cycleways from skolas until brīvības street because they were named for some reason??? they aren't after the brīvības intersection, so this is defo wrong
I expected there to be just "Lāčplēša iela", and this be some half baked attempt of having routers to show names of streets. But no, whole full "Lāčplēša ielas velojoslas", and it even was edited at some time :man_facepalming:
yea i don't get that either
Had a quick look in overpass. Latvia has significantly more places where street continues into cyclepath with the same name, than I expected it to be.
But also we have a bunch of ways with names like "Berģi - Baltezers - Ādaži" which should also be cleaned.
Also, as a sidenote, I recently discovered fairwaymapper's semi-open overpass servers. This is such a relief when your queries run on first try every time =)
Almost all cycleways with non-street names need to be transferred to routes.
But yes, Latvia has a lot of cycleways with street names because we have street line data available, so it can be mapped over footways, tracks, proposed ways, etc.
I was looking through those named cycleways today, and stumbles upon 10 named promenades at Ventspils. For example, https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/694265800
Intuitively, it feels wrong. Like numbers only should probably be a ref rather than name. But I don't know, maybe local indeed call them just by the number. Thought?
Even if there are numbers posted somewhere, it's still a ref
Sure, posted doesn't change anything.
But, in theory at least, "just" numbers can be still used as names.
Like a can at least imagine where somebody would say something along "let's got by 8, 9 is all in puddles" (instead of 8th promenade and 9th promenade, I mean).
And of course, I have no idea if it's the case here, nor argue that it is =)
What I mean is that a name will never really be a plain number. At best, it will be something like "Pirmais" and it would not be a literal digit. Typically it will be something like "2. līnija" for street name. I can imagine it being something like "1. celiņš", but it should be exceedingly rare where this isn't just a description.
Last updated: Oct 26 2026 at 11:30 UTC