Hi, Photos to come, meanwhile I think St Andrews Crt is the cycle route, not the footpath, the 50metres through park is cycleway. I think its the 50m of park that Sebastian will dispute but best have the photos as hard evidence before discussing. Thanks Tony

I think you need the psv=yes if you have access=no ?

Hi, "access changed to private as signage indicates access to residents only" it would save others lots of time if you gave more info on the signage, whether visible on mapillary or you have to go there in person, the wording of the sign too,

Hi Sebastian, I took some Mapillary photos. I will discuss this further when the photo uploads are done, probably on talk_au

And then there's Kings Domain too

Hi, I did see your Botanic Gardens link but some lie in Government house which may share the same prohibition

Hi. Do you have any no bicycle signs or footway only signs?

Hi, I have recorded Mapillary images. There is no signage prohibiting transit traffic. The access=destination should be removed. See comment https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-au/2022-March/016036.html

Please discuss at talk au, if I dont hear from you I assume its OK to revert this and similar cases
Thanks
Tony
https://www.mapillary.com/app/?lat=-38.456087457862026&lng=145.25094882914004&z=17&pKey=353381520063445

https://www.mapillary.com/app/?lat=-38.456047769098&lng=145.24980862796&z=17&pKey=5422344284442260

Hi, in case you are not monitoring talk-au, letting you know that I have posted on the use of access=destination.

Hi. This is where changeset comments are helpful. With this and previous edits and reversions its very hard for me to work out what you have done. Ideally the changeset comment should say what you have done and why. We, including me, are all guilty of this to some extent.

thanks

Hi, I think you are saying that there is a bike route but there is no permitted path for this section of the route. It doesn't sound right but you might be right. I hope to get out and inspect it but it won't be for a week or more. Thanks for the replies. Tony

Thinking it through further, the wiki for access=destination could do with more detail.
There are the roads with zero or 1 outside connection, I would argue that access=destination is a nonsense.

There are estates like here where its very unlikely that anyone would want to use it as a shortcut and the body corporate would not bother to prohibit transit. There are examples, I think it was one of yours where the estate was a wedge between 2 major roads and there was a through connection and it was signposted somehow prohibiting through traffic.

So far I have only asked for your reasons for your decision. They may well have asserted "Transit traffic forbidden", by signage or otherwise. I don't know. Do I see a better tag? You could just leave out the access=destination. It may not be better, it may be. At this point I'm just asking the question.

I may be misinterpreting it but there is bicycle signage and there is a note referring to the signage in previous edits.

The signage is, I think, for the section between the end of St Andrews and the end of McKay . You say Reserve Rd but maybe you mean Bluff or Cheltenham? I don't think you would see the signage from either Bluff or Cheltenham.

Did you visit location 671174716, v3 before you re-tagged it? There is signage. There is even a note about the signage.

thanks

thanks

Same comment from me. If changing paths to footways, it would be better if your comment reflected the change and the reason for it.
Thanks