Hi @VLD282

While there are no firm guidelines in the wiki which support @Derick Rethans emphasis here, it might be worth considering when it might be useful to added separate sidewalks and when it might be better to tag them as sidewalk=$side and sidewalk:$side:surface=* on the way representing the road.

If you have a road with reasonably spaced formal crossing points, usually a major road, then adding separate sidewalks *and* crossings can be very useful for pedestrian routing. If care is taken to capture all the accessibility features like kerb height and tactile paving, this is also useful for routing applications for users with mobility and visual impairments. The nearby A404 Harrow Road is a good example of this.

In the case of Bathurst Gardens, which is a quiet residential street, pedestrians can cross safely at any point. It is also a street where the houses are pre-motor car terraces (very common in towns and cities in the UK), so there are few or no driveways intersecting the sidewalks. With separate sidewalks here and no crossing points or intersection driveways, a pedestrian router will make crossing the street from number 90 to number 87 take a "scenic" route adding half a kilometre via the crossing at the Wrottesley Road end ( https://www.openstreetmap.org/directions?engine=graphhopper_foot&route=51.533842%2C-0.226386%3B51.533575%2C-0.226327 ). This became even worse moving towards the junction with College Road, as the separate sidewalks you added were not connected to the mapped crossing at that end (fixed pro tem in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/161455611 ). If you are adding separate sidewalks, please also remember to update the tags on the parent highway.

In this case, I feel that these sidewalks should be removed, however I am not in the habit of deleting the work of other active users without discussion and will not do so unless you or someone else from Meta's mapping team are satisfied that this is reasonable.