A lot of housing estates in Hampshire built over the past couple of decades feature only unadopted roads, paid for by residents and maintained by the developer or a management company. I don't know what the situation is currently, but for a long time HCC would not generally adopt roads in housing estates. I certainly wouldn't tag them as access=destination, as they are through routes for people without cars. I would also think that residents or the management company as applicable are free to put up signs forbidding through motor traffic if they wanted to.
Jon On Fri, 15 Nov 2024, 19:08 David Woolley, <[email protected]> wrote: > On 15/11/2024 18:38, Jon Pennycook wrote: > > From my point of view, a sign that says "Private Road Strictly No > Parking" > > implies that people are allowed to use it as a through route, just not to > > park there. For similar roads near me > > I would treat it as access=destination, if umgated, and access=private, > if gated. In general, if you are paying to maintain the road yourself, > and there are no covenants, or public rights of way, to the contrary, > you are not going to want non-payers to create wear and tear (and pose a > threat to pedestrians from your estate - I don't think you can enforce > traffic lights or zebra crossings under motoring legislation). > > Motor roads with permissive status are rare, although I'd suggest that > the roads around Regent's Park in London are permissive (they are > maintained by Crown Estates, not the council). > > _______________________________________________ > Talk-GB mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb >
_______________________________________________ Talk-GB mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
