Probably a better fix is to put the road type to “highway under construction”

Hi, please do not mark these private all, it removes the intent of your change.

This was a bad edit. The road forks to two driveways as was previously indicated.

Street view helped me fix this :) Nice find!

Hi, and welcome to OSM! FYI-this should be a path, not a pedestrian street.

Please spell out "St" next time. Thanks!

Please spell out "St" next time. Thanks!

Hi, I recommend not using MassGIS as a source since it's not always accurate. I've been working on updating Nantucket based on firsthand surveying and also using the Nantucket GIS which doesn't show these track roads named.

There's definitely no gate. Nice find/add!

This should not have been set as overall access=private. Please do not make edits unless you have actual knowledge of the area.

Northbound rather

Hi, you deleted a sidewalk that I personally surveyed/walked on Rte1S side and changed foot=no.

If it's registered as a street with a name, it should be listed as such. A footway is not a "street". That reference says "generally wider" but that doesn't mean that's common mapping practice here as it even states: "Scope of this tag may overlap with highway=footway, which is generally used for narrower, often unnamed, pedestrian pathways and sidewalks. The distinction between the two may be region-specific."

I'll change it to access=destination as this seems the most appropriate for the situation.

I do not agree. If you click edit on Boardman Pl as it is currently set as a pedestrian street, you will see the access attributes automatically sets automotive=no.

Additionally, you will find Boardman Pl listed in the city's GIS:
https://www.axisgis.com/cambridgema

I did not see the sign on my survey just over two months back and a quick glance on StreetView shows the sign says the street name with private way under the name. It doesn't mean that access is restricted.

From the Wiki: "Note that it notes access, not ownership. Many privately owned roads are freely accessible for the public without prior permission- in such case access=private would be wrong and it may be access=permissive if the owner can revoke this permission at their own discretion. Privately owned roads can even be -depending on the legislation- public roads in the sense that the owner has a legal duty to allow the public access and is not free to revoke this permission (access=yes)."

Hello, I've edited Garden Lane back. There's no reason for the road change from residential to service or access=private. Thanks!

Good catch, but next time can you please spell out the complete name (Avenue)?

I would think the spot to the right still qualifies…maybe better suited as a pedestrian street now?

Hi, did you delete Palmer Ave here?