UK - Unadopted Streets Excluded?


There are a couple of streets in Nottingham, UK, that appear excluded from CityStrides, although they are visible on the map. They are publicly accessible streets, but are recorded as “unadopted” in OSM, and I’m wondering if that’s the reason, and if they can somehow be included.

The streets are Thorneywood Rise, and Holly Gardens -


I obviously can’t include the CityStrides links, but here’s a link to the area on OSM.

Many thanks,


1 Like

The tag ‘unadopted’ has no information to find out what it should imply, the same with the tag ‘hgv’.
There is also a tag ‘note’ in there that says it’s a private road (text: “This is one of 2 private roads (Holly Gardens is the other) but was tarmaced by the council”). so it should by tagged as private maybe?

edit: doesn’t look private to me viewing it in google maps street view. Just another local street, (with some uphill running if you like it)

Thanks Patrick,

I completed them yesterday. No indication of being private - just badly/partially paved. But there must be an OSM property that is excluding them from CityStrides. I just can’t work out what it is.

1 Like

Very strange, the tag unadopted is not mentioned in James’s overpass query, so it shouldn’t matter. But since it’s not a valid tag, and was added seven years ago at the same time as the private note, I suggest just removing it to see if that helps. Or maybe @JamesChevalier has any input?

I was curious about the “privacy”. From OSM:

Clarification of the term “private”

Note that access=private is intended to indicate that access is restricted, not whether the object is privately owned or not. Use ownership=private or operator:type=private to record this kind of status. For example, a privately owned road with public access may be tagged like any other road with public access – without access=* tag, or with the explicit access=permissive.

Here’s a link to a past forum post on how OSM seems to contradict itself on what private means.

I’m confused as well!

Yeah of late I have changed some streets to access=yes where there is no physical access restrictions (nor aggressive keep out type signs) but added ownership=private if the road (in the UK at least) is not managed by the local authority. This is how I read OSM actually want you to classify such streets.

On a few other occasions have just marked them as private for motor vehicles (say if it there are signs saying can’t park on them) but otherwise on foot it leads to and/or is itself a designated public footpath so by definition can’t be universally private.

In general I only now think of a road as “private” on OSM if there is a physical gate preventing access to only those have valid reasons to pass through it - well if they can.