While these look fully public to me, the explanation is interesting and sounds valid:
All plowing and maintenance repairs are handled by the property owners. We pay taxes based on the roads acreage being included within our tax parcels. Wisconsin has many addresses located on private roads. If you have access to an app with property owners’ info included (such as “onX Hunt”) you can see that the roads are actually contained entirely on private deeded property. Some have easements for other property owners residences which is the case for Long View Lanes single residence.
I don’t want to mark these as private, since I don’t know what that will do for routing software and other services like Amazon deliveries etc. I’m wondering if there is some canonical tagging that is already decided for situations like this.
In similar circumstances here in RI, I’ve relied on access=permissive for a common-ish situation where a named service road connects several properties, but the property owners discourage non-residents. There’s occasionally a non-official “private” sign of some sort, even though it’s clear that public services like mail / trash pickup / plow service is expected to come through. I still expect that they want their rideshare, FedEx package or food deliveries to have access.
This from OSM guidelines on tagging roads: Note that it notes access, not ownership. Many privately owned roads are freely accessible for the general public without prior permission- in such case access=private would be wrong and it may be access=permissive if the owner can revoke this permission at their own discretion.
Would also be interested to hear from anyone with similar experiences!
Access Permissive does not change anything in CS, the street is still imported. Only access no/private/customers are excluded from import.
When I’ve had similar situations I either set the street as private, or sneaked in to run it early Sunday morning
