Author: steve8[at]mdx.ac.uk
[Added to the original trac issue at 7.25pm, Saturday, 21st March 2009]

Done - initially only for residential and unclassified

Author: Claas Augner
[Added to the original trac issue at 7.28pm, Monday, 23rd March 2009]

Thank you! However, as most "access=permissive" tags apply to service roads, could you please include the latter, too?

Author: steve8[at]mdx.ac.uk
[Added to the original trac issue at 8.03pm, Thursday, 26th March 2009]

Claas

Gladly - will add destination and private to service too.
Could you help me test by giving a URL of one or two "service" examples that have permissive tag? And any destination ones if you have any?

Author: Claas Augner
[Added to the original trac issue at 12.36am, Saturday, 28th March 2009]

I must admit I've erred: As almost all service roads are either impasses or exclusively private, neither "access=permissive" nor "access=destination" does make any sense there at all. Nobody would probably allow strangers drive through one's private way (because if it's a shortcut, annoyingly many would use it) and nobody drives into an impasse, if it wasn't one's destination.

Must have mixed it up with footways, where "access=permissive" does make sense (in addition to: "no", "private" and, rarely if at all, "destination"), meaning "you may use this private footway at your own risk".

"access=destination" does indeed only apply to residential and unclassified (those that shall not be used as a shortcut).

Sorry for that.

P.S. I was just wondering whether it would make sense to have "access=no" rendered, but currently no proper example would cross my mind.

Author: Bob
[Added to the original trac issue at 4.10pm, Friday, 15th May 2009]

"access=destination" does indeed only apply to residential and unclassified (those that shall not be used as a shortcut).

I thing the correct tag for such streets - esp. in Germany "Anlieger frei" - is vehicle=destination since foot/horse access is still permitted even if you use the way as a short cut instead of sthg. residential. I.e. a general access=destination w/o allowing foot, horse explicitly is usually wrong.
Ref: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Road_Signs (Zusatzzeichen 1020-30)

Unfortunately the vehicle tag doesn't render yet.

Author: Vid the Kid
[Added to the original trac issue at 2.53am, Monday, 13th July 2009]

I have some valid example uses of "access=permissive":

Footway: http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=40.054687&lon=-83.070925&zoom=18&layers=B000FTF
This shortcut from the Kroger parking lot to the McDonald's is clearly permitted by the land owner, as the path is fenced off from the rest of the backyard through which it cuts.

Service: http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=39.952118&lon=-83.122563&zoom=18&layers=B000FTF
The intersection between Broad St (US 40) and Grener Ave has a few turn restrictions and no signal. As a result, when people access the south leg of Grener Ave, they use the signal at the Old Village Rd intersection and cut through some parking lots. There are no signs or speed bumps to discourage this.

Semi-entertaining tangent:
Actually, I've suggested to ODOT to relocate Grener Ave along this path as part of a planned US 40 corridor improvement project. They said they might consider it, but as part of another planned improvement project along I-270, since the realignment makes more sense in the context of improvements to the freeway interchange. I think both projects are stalled due to scarce funding.

Author: Claas Augner
[Added to the original trac issue at 12.28am, Monday, 17th August 2009]

Unfortunately the vehicle tag doesn't render yet.

Steve, could you please add rendering for "vehicle=private" and "motor_vehicle=private" (same rendering as "access=private")?

As "access=private" - like Bob says - theoretically forbids pedestrians and cyclists to use the way (which is - almost - never the case), removing rendering for "access=private" should be considered (in order to gain attention to the problem and support proper tagging), maybe in combination with an appropriate rule in JOSM's validator plugin.

Author: Claas Augner
[Added to the original trac issue at 12.55am, Monday, 17th August 2009]

Please don't mind my previous post. I'm afraid I have mixed two concerns up in it.

Nevertheless I guess having rendering rules for keys "vehicle" and "motor_vehicle" with values "destination", "permissive" and "private" (same as the corresponding rule for key "access") is, after all, not a bad idea.

Furthermore, as access declarations (apart from "access=no" and "access=yes") practically never apply to all road users, removing rendering for key "access" with any value (apart from "no") is still worth considering.

Currently, I would not intuitively fix streets with "access=destination" (for example) due to the missing "motor_vehicle=destination" rendering. Once it renders, I would at least fix it, if I knew the "problem". So once "access=*" does not render any more, I would be prone to make enquiries and then finally fix it.

Author: math1985
[Added to the original trac issue at 4.42pm, Sunday, 20th July 2014]

This issue is currently being discussed on Github: gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto#214
Therefore, I will close the issue here.