I wondered if it has been considered to exclude OSM roads with highway=service?
I can see from overpass turbo that highway=services is an exclusion and so are some specific types of service roads.
but i would have thought most service roads should be exclude. It seems to be used for many things, from a road leading to a company building, to those inside a cemetery. these often fall in to a grey space of you might be allowed to be on them, but it is frowned upon.
The first requirement for a street to be on CityStrides is for the street to have a name. Very few service roads have names, so itās probably not a huge problem.
Personally, if it has a name and itās legal to run on, Iāll be running it anyway. Heck, I even run some streets / paths / ruts that are unnamed just becauseā¦
If it has a name, and is OK to run on, I often find it might be classified wrongly. I have changed several streets like that to e.g unclassified or residential in OSM
Interesting, wasnāt aware of the name rule.
This image shows a couple of examples.
Top left is basically the service road/car park of a home for a building, it so happens to be for a charity for domestic abuse, I imagine they really donāt want random men running around their building.
I had already changed the status to driveway. but have not checked and indeed it had the name or the organisation. on OSM I have removed the name, added the building and added the name to the building.
You can also see one of the cemeteries I mentioned, the roads do have names here, however Iām not really sure its right to by running around a cemetery, even if allowed access.
If itās a gated area with restricted access. I would draw the fence and the gates and give all lines within that area āprivateā or restricted.
The issue I have is that a lot of these service type roads have the name āAccess Roadā, so come over to CS as runable streetsā¦ When updating OSM, I have left that the same, but set the part of the road that is gated off as āprivateā, so only the section of the road that is truly accessible is left as is.
Iād say Access Road in this case is not the name, it should be the desciption instead. And no name at all
Service roads are pulled into the CityStrides map, whether they are named or not. Where they have been tagged as private would it be possible, @JamesChevalier , for those to be shaded grey, as per private residential roads?
Itās hard to distinguish between the thickness of a named residential street and a named service road on the CS map on a phone screen while running. Seeing a named white line makes me wonder why my pre-planned route isnāt collecting it, so I inevitably have to stop and double-check where Iām going. Seeing the named service road in grey would help considerably. Example below of Ingle Mews (in the London Borough of Islington, UK) which is private and gated in OSM but is hard to distinguish from any other named street in CS
Can you share a link to an example street in CityStrides? Un-named streets should not be present, so Iāll want to start there.
actually, after reviewing the screenshots, it sounds like you might be talking about the map and not the data in the CityStrides site. The map is generated by Mapbox, itās not from CityStrides data. I have some control over styling, but Iām not sure if I have control at the OSM tag level.
Well, that certainly answers a question I had which is a variation on the theme. I couldnāt understand why the MAP contained so many driveways, shopping center parking lots, and in my particular geography, an actual service road to a municipal water treatment plant. I was wondering why CityStrides [map] was showing so many ways that are private property and therefore shouldnāt be runnable, but now I know what we see on the map is [usually] a superset of the ways we need to run for a particular city. I am, however, finding it a nuisance to have to zoom in on all these little ways to verify that they donāt have a name, and are therefore unlikely to be in the CityStrides DATABASE. Rhetorically, why does MapBox think peoplesā private driveways (and some of these other odd-ball features) are worthy of display to the general public?
