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?
I donāt like the idea of running in cemeteries, but I have walked* in several. Itās very peaceful, and often very interesting.
Working on this one, in Granbury, TX.
*Walking activities are processed by CS.
Hello,
In the Google Sheet I see ['highway' !~ 'services']
Is this correct and intended? This tag is to be used on polygons and not streets. I believe the correct query should be ['highway' !~ 'service']
Please see:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway=service
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway=services
Itās entirely possible that I have it all wrong - Iām not good with Overpass query language at all - but it does seem like polygon Way records get returned, so I also have to purposefully exclude them.
For example, this query - overpass turbo - retrieves both of the highway=services Way records in Ludlow, MA. Iām somewhat certain that if I didnāt exclude the services tag, these odd records would make their way into CityStrides.
Perhaps a way to avoid that overall issue is to add ['area' != ' yes'] to the query?
Yes they would of course
Perhabs both should be excluded then. I see plenty of highway=service roads with names like āparking accessā, ādeliveries roadā etc.
Sometimes the same name is used for a certain type of facility which results in it appearing in different separate locations across the city:
Some of these can be fixed with access=private but some of these are publicly accessible
I moved us over to another thread, since weāre talking specifically about service roads & this seemed relevant.
I canāt think of a reason to keep highway=service roads in CityStrides, but since I havenāt done it yet I think itās worth playing around in Overpass Turbo to check those in various cities. I canāt recall if there were some cities with lots of mis-tagged service roads or somethingā¦
[timeout:900][out:json];
rel(CHANGE_THIS_TO_RELATION_ID);
map_to_area -> .a;
(
way(area.a)['name']['highway']['highway' = 'service'];
node(w)(area.a);
);
out;
For example - overpass turbo
Indeed. Running this on relation 2989158 which is the same city as in my previous examples shows thereās plenty of actual streets tagged as highway=service when they should be either highway=residential or highway=unclassified. Thatās a headache 
. In this situation I think it is better to keep the service roads in CS and try to add access=private or foot=no where it makes sense for those that shouldnāt be there
I definitely think highway=service should be included (when they have a name). There are so many examples of this in my neighboring cities where I have run and they all seem very much like any other āCityStride eligible streetsā
This caught my eye and I realized thereās some ambiguity in OSM for service roads. In my area, thereās loads of single lane ways to get to one or three houses, some private or not, some paved or not, some named or not. I most often see these labeled as āserviceā, since residentialās example looks nothing like these and āminor/unclassifiedā is described as an access road, non-residential.
From the wiki, Roads to individual dwellings would normally be tagged as [highway]=[service] (and likely [service]=[driveway]). If they have a name and are public, Iām counting it in my to-do list!
Named service are included in CS but named driveways are excluded, right?
Thatās correct!