Some uncertainty around streets in Folsom, CA

https://citystrides.com/cities/3855 has some neighborhoods that are tagged in a questionable way, based on an email someone sent me.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/10523156 and ~all the other streets in Hillcrest are marked as access=private but also foot=yes

My street query will see access=private and skip it. Is there another known/expected set of OSM tags which will accomplish the same thing and also make it through my query? My fallback could be to add a third part to the query, but my (limited) understanding suggests that would further decrease its performance.

If access vehicle is no and foot is yes, what should general access be? Yes or no? Since there seems to be no agreed answer I set yes, as in in access allowed, but not vehicles. The opposite view would be access = no, but pedestrians allowed. But that’s really the same thing, only CS differs. So I choose general yes to get it into CS

Hhmmm, yeah … :thinking:

Tag:access=private - OpenStreetMap Wiki says:

The access=private tag is indicating that the object is not to be used by the public.

Then later on Tag:access=private - OpenStreetMap Wiki discusses ownership a bit. Based on this section, it feels a bit wrong to have acces=private here (and several other communities I’ve come across) but I don’t know offhand what other set of tags would convey the idea of “not public but we’ll have at you happily if we see you here” :rofl: